Docsity
Docsity

Prepare for your exams
Prepare for your exams

Study with the several resources on Docsity


Earn points to download
Earn points to download

Earn points by helping other students or get them with a premium plan


Guidelines and tips
Guidelines and tips

Case Digest for CCCI VS ELIZAGUE, Assignments of Law of Torts

A summary of Facts, Issue and Ruling of the case of CCCI vs Elizague

Typology: Assignments

2021/2022

Uploaded on 08/06/2023

hazel-joy-valencia
hazel-joy-valencia 🇵🇭

1 document

1 / 2

Toggle sidebar

This page cannot be seen from the preview

Don't miss anything!

bg1
Cebu Country Club, Inc. (CCCI) et al., v. Elizagaque,
G.R. No. 160273, January 18,$2008
FACTS:
Cebu Country Club, Inc., is a domestic corporation operating as a non-profit
and non-stock private membership club.
San Miguel Corporation, a special company proprietary member of CCCI,
designated respondent Ricardo Elizagaque, its Senior Vice President and
Operations Manager for the Visayas and Mindanao, as a special non-
proprietary member.
In 1996, Elizagaque filed with CCCI an application for proprietary
membership, but such an application was disapproved by the Board of CCCI.
The Articles of Incorporation of CCCI provides for the procedure for admission
of new members, which includes, among others, Article 1 Section 3(c)
After the expiration of the aforesaid thirty (30) days, if no objections
have been filed or if there are, the Board considers the objections
unmeritorious, the candidate shall be qualified for inclusion in the
"Eligible-for-Membership List"
On March 1, 1978, Section 3(c) was amended to read as follows:
(c) After the expiration of the aforesaid thirty (30) days, the Board may,
by unanimous vote of all directors present at a regular or special
meeting, approve the inclusion of the candidate in the "Eligible-for-
Membership List".
Since the CCCI kept silent on the letter of consideration made by
Elizagaque, he filed with the RTC Branch 71 of Pasig City a complaint for
damages on December 23, 1998. RTC favored Elizagaque and
ordered CCCI to pay damages.
On appeal by CCCI, the Court of Appeals in its decision dated
February 14, 2001, affirmed the decision of the RTC on the ground that CCCI
acted in bad faith in exercising their right to approve or disapprove
proprietary membership
ISSUE:
Whether or not Cebu Country Club is liable for damages for the disapproval of
Elizagaque’s application for proprietary membership?
RULING:
Yes. CCCI is liable.
pf2

Partial preview of the text

Download Case Digest for CCCI VS ELIZAGUE and more Assignments Law of Torts in PDF only on Docsity!

Cebu Country Club, Inc. (CCCI) et al., v. Elizagaque, G.R. No. 160273, January 18, 2008 FACTS:

  • Cebu Country Club, Inc., is a domestic corporation operating as a non-profit and non-stock private membership club.
  • San Miguel Corporation, a special company proprietary member of CCCI, designated respondent Ricardo Elizagaque, its Senior Vice President and Operations Manager for the Visayas and Mindanao, as a special non- proprietary member.
  • In 1996, Elizagaque filed with CCCI an application for proprietary membership, but such an application was disapproved by the Board of CCCI.
  • The Articles of Incorporation of CCCI provides for the procedure for admission of new members, which includes, among others, Article 1 Section 3(c) “After the expiration of the aforesaid thirty (30) days, if no objections have been filed or if there are, the Board considers the objections unmeritorious, the candidate shall be qualified for inclusion in the "Eligible-for-Membership List"
  • On March 1, 1978, Section 3(c) was amended to read as follows:

(c) After the expiration of the aforesaid thirty (30) days, the Board may, by unanimous vote of all directors present at a regular or special meeting, approve the inclusion of the candidate in the "Eligible-for- Membership List".

  • Since the CCCI kept silent on the letter of consideration made by Elizagaque, he filed with the RTC Branch 71 of Pasig City a complaint for damages on December 23, 1998. RTC favored Elizagaque and ordered CCCI to pay damages.
  • On appeal by CCCI, the Court of Appeals in its decision dated February 14, 2001, affirmed the decision of the RTC on the ground that CCCI acted in bad faith in exercising their right to approve or disapprove proprietary membership ISSUE: Whether or not Cebu Country Club is liable for damages for the disapproval of Elizagaque’s application for proprietary membership? RULING: Yes. CCCI is liable.

In rejecting the respondent’s application for proprietary membership, the court find that petitioners violated the rules governing human relations, the basic principles to be observed for the rightful relationship between human beings, and for the stability of social order. The trial court and the Court of Appeals aptly held that petitioners committed fraud and evident bad faith in disapproving the respondent’s applications. This is contrary to morals, good custom, or public policy. Hence, petitioners are liable for damages pursuant to Article 19 in relation to Article 21 of the same Code. It bears stressing that the amendment to Section 3(c) of CCCI’s Amended By-Laws requiring the unanimous vote of the directors present at a special or regular meeting was not printed on the application form respondent filled and submitted to CCCI. What was printed thereon was the original provision of Section 3(c) which was silent on the required number of votes needed for admission of an applicant as a proprietary member. Petitioners explained that the amendment was not printed on the application form due to economic reasons. The Court find this excuse flimsy and unconvincing. Such an amendment, aside from being extremely significant, was introduced way back in 1978 or almost twenty (20) years before the respondent filed his application. The petition is DENIED. The challenged Decision and resolution of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. CV No. 71506 are AFFIRMED with modification in the sense that (a) the award of moral damages is reduced from P2,000,000.00 to P50,000.00; (b) the award of exemplary damages is reduced from P1,000,000.00 to P25,000.00; and (c) the award of attorney’s fees and litigation expenses is reduced from P500,000.00and P50,000.00 to P50,000.00 and P25,000.00, respectively.