This case has been cited 1 times or more.
|
2004-04-14 |
YNARES-SATIAGO, J. |
||||
| Although each case must be judged in light of its attendant circumstances, jurisprudence has evolved several guiding principles for the application of these tests. For instance, considering that it transacted with its Philippine counterpart for seven years, engaging in futures contracts, this Court concluded that the foreign corporation in Merrill Lynch Futures, Inc. v. Court of Appeals and Spouses Lara,[55] was doing business in the Philippines. In Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Japan Airlines ("JAL"),[56] the Court held that JAL was doing business in the Philippines, i.e., its commercial dealings in the country were continuous despite the fact that no JAL aircraft landed in the country as it sold tickets in the Philippines through a general sales agent, and opened a promotions office here as well. | |||||