Title
Valle Verde Country Club, Inc. vs. Africa
Case
G.R. No. 151969
Decision Date
Sep 4, 2009
Corporate governance dispute: VVCC board's holdover directors invalidly filled vacancies post-term expiration, violating Corporation Code provisions.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 151969)

Key Dates

– February 27, 1996: Annual stockholders’ meeting; nine directors elected for one-year term
– 1997–2001: Requisite quorum for stockholders’ meetings not obtained; board holds over
– September 1, 1998: Jaime C. Dinglasan resigns; Eric Roxas elected by board October 6, 1998
– November 10, 1998: Eduardo Makalintal resigns; José Ramirez elected by board March 6, 2001
– January 23, 2002: RTC nullifies Ramirez’s election (Civil Case No. 68726)
– June 3, 2003: SEC nullifies Roxas’s election (SEC Case No. 01-99-6177)
– September 4, 2009: Supreme Court decision

Applicable Law

– 1987 Philippine Constitution (general corporate governance principles)
– Corporation Code of the Philippines (Batas Pambansa Blg. 68):
 • Section 23: Directors hold office for one year until successors are elected and qualified
 • Section 29: Vacancies other than by stockholder removal or term expiration may be filled by remaining directors (if quorum); vacancies by term expiration must be filled by stockholders

Legal Issue

Whether the remaining directors, still constituting a quorum and serving in a hold-over capacity, may elect a new director to fill the vacancy caused by the resignation of a hold-over director whose one-year term has already expired.

Analysis

  1. Term vs. Tenure and Hold-Over Doctrine
    – “Term” is the period an officer may claim the office as of right and is fixed by statute. Once one year elapses, a director’s term expires.
    – “Tenure” is the actual period an incumbent holds office; it may extend beyond the term due to hold-over when no successor has been elected and qualified.
    – Under Section 23, directors’ one-year term expires one year post-election; any continuation thereafter is hold-over, not an extension of the original term.

  2. Vacancy Arising from Term Expiration
    – Makalintal’s term expired in 1997; his continued service until November 1998 was hold-over.
    – A vacancy resulting from term expiration occurred in 1997, irrespective of the later resignation date.
    – Section 29 mandates that vacancies by term expiration must be filled by stockholders in a regular or special meeting, not by the board.

  3. Limited Authority of Remaining Directors
    – Section 29 authorizes board-appointed successors only for vacancies “other than by … expiration of term” and only for the unexpired term of the predecessor.
    – No unexpired term existed after Makalintal’s term lapsed; thus, remaining directors lacked authority to elect Ramirez.

  4. Stockholder Primacy and Corporate Governance
    – The board derives its powers from stockholders; annual elections ensure directors’ accountability and legitimacy.
    – Allowing the board to fill vacancies caused by term expiration would undermine stockholders’ exclusive right to elect directors for each annual t

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster—building context before diving into full texts.