This case has been cited 4 times or more.
|
2012-02-01 |
PEREZ, J. |
||||
| It has also been discussed in MAM Realty Development Corporation v. NLRC[47] that: x x x A corporation being a juridical entity, may act only through its directors, officers and employees. Obligations incurred by them, acting as such corporate agents, are not theirs but the direct accountabilities of the corporation they represent. True, solidary liabilities may at times be incurred but only when exceptional circumstances warrant such as, generally, in the following cases: | |||||
|
2010-06-29 |
CARPIO MORALES, J. |
||||
| There is solidary liability when the obligation expressly so states, when the law so provides, or when the nature of the obligation so requires. MAM Realty Development Corporation v. NLRC,[5] on solidary liability of corporate officers in labor disputes, enlightens: x x x A corporation being a juridical entity, may act only through its directors, officers and employees. Obligations incurred by them, acting as such corporate agents are not theirs but the direct accountabilities of the corporation they represent. True solidary liabilities may at times be incurred but only when exceptional circumstances warrant such as, generally, in the following cases: | |||||
|
2007-03-16 |
|||||
| In MAM Realty Development Corporation v. NLRC,[5] the Court stated:A corporation is a juridical entity with legal personality separate and distinct from those acting for and in its behalf and, in general, from the people comprising it. The general rule is that obligations incurred by the corporation, acting through its directors, officers and employees, are its sole liabilities. There are times, however, when solidary liabilities may be incurred but only when exceptional circumstances warrant such as in the following cases: | |||||
|
2005-08-25 |
AZCUNA, J. |
||||
| When a director, trustee or officer is made, by specific provision of law, personally liable for his corporate action.[15] | |||||