Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 123 views

    38 Pecson-vs-Pecson

    Uploaded by

    Ruby Santillana
    The Supreme Court ruled that Emerenciano Pecson, not his sisters, was the rightful owner of the two certificates of public convenience and the Fargo truck. The certificates and truck were registered under Emerenciano's name alone with the Bureau of Public Works and Public Service Commission, and the sisters failed to prove their ownership. While the sisters may have helped Emerenciano obtain the certificates, he was the legal owner recognized by the regulatory agencies. The court also approved the sale of the certificates and truck from Emerenciano to the A.L. Ammen Transportation Company since it was properly registered, and the sisters' remedy was a damages claim against Emerenciano, not invalidation of the sale.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    38 Pecson-vs-Pecson

    Uploaded by

    Ruby Santillana
    123 views1 page
    The Supreme Court ruled that Emerenciano Pecson, not his sisters, was the rightful owner of the two certificates of public convenience and the Fargo truck. The certificates and truck were registered under Emerenciano's name alone with the Bureau of Public Works and Public Service Commission, and the sisters failed to prove their ownership. While the sisters may have helped Emerenciano obtain the certificates, he was the legal owner recognized by the regulatory agencies. The court also approved the sale of the certificates and truck from Emerenciano to the A.L. Ammen Transportation Company since it was properly registered, and the sisters' remedy was a damages claim against Emerenciano, not invalidation of the sale.

    Original Title

    38 Pecson-vs-Pecson.docx

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The Supreme Court ruled that Emerenciano Pecson, not his sisters, was the rightful owner of the two certificates of public convenience and the Fargo truck. The certificates and truck were registered under Emerenciano's name alone with the Bureau of Public Works and Public Service Commission, and the sisters failed to prove their ownership. While the sisters may have helped Emerenciano obtain the certificates, he was the legal owner recognized by the regulatory agencies. The court also approved the sale of the certificates and truck from Emerenciano to the A.L. Ammen Transportation Company since it was properly registered, and the sisters' remedy was a damages claim against Emerenciano, not invalidation of the sale.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    123 views1 page

    38 Pecson-vs-Pecson

    Uploaded by

    Ruby Santillana
    The Supreme Court ruled that Emerenciano Pecson, not his sisters, was the rightful owner of the two certificates of public convenience and the Fargo truck. The certificates and truck were registered under Emerenciano's name alone with the Bureau of Public Works and Public Service Commission, and the sisters failed to prove their ownership. While the sisters may have helped Emerenciano obtain the certificates, he was the legal owner recognized by the regulatory agencies. The court also approved the sale of the certificates and truck from Emerenciano to the A.L. Ammen Transportation Company since it was properly registered, and the sisters' remedy was a damages claim against Emerenciano, not invalidation of the sale.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 1

    Pecson et. al. v. Pecson et. al., G.R. No.

    48003 (June 19, 1947) Issue:

    Doctrine: Who is entitled to the two certificates of Public Convenience? Who owns the
    said Fargo Truck? BOTH Emerenciano Pecson
    The statute describes the condition under which certificates of public
    convenience are granted (sections 16, et al., Com. Act No. 146) and the Held:
    limitations therein as to the qualifications of grantees necessarily prohibited the
    recognition or enforcement of any private arrangements the grantee may have It is registered with the Bureau of Public Works in the name of Emerenciano
    made with other undisclosed or unknown associates, what with the provision Pecson. It was also registered in the Public Service Commission as part of his
    penalizing individuals who shall engage in any public service without having equipment for the abovementioned lines. Plaintiffs failed to prove ownership
    previously obtained the corresponding certificate. thereof, the decision indicating no proof of their dominion over the same.

    Facts: The sisters had in some way helped Emerenciano to secure those certificates or
    that they had a "bastardo" connection1 therewith, as impliedly admitted by
    Emerenciano Pecson was the holder of two certificates of public convenience. appellant, does not after the legal situation that, in the eyes of the law and of the
    The first, for the Legaspi-Daraga line, was acquired by purchase from Joaquin Commission, the owner of the certificates was Emerenciano Pecson. Appellant
    Oropeza with the approval of the Public Service Commission in 1924. The had a right to rely on the records of the Commission.
    second was issued upon application to that Commission in 1928 for the
    The plaintiffs, having allowed Emerenciano to register, and publicly to manage
    L.D. Lockwood, President of Alacto, visited Albay, Emerenciano Pecson offered and conduct the lines in his own name, should not be heard to complain against
    to sell his transportation business to the said Alacto (A.L. Ammen one who dealt with him in the belief that he was the owner, unless of course
    Transportation Company). The sale was agreed for P5,500 including the two there was fraudulent connivance between Emerenciano and the Alatco, or some
    certificates of public convenience and one "Fargo" truck. It was stipulated by other inequitable combination repugnant to the law. Their remedy is obviously
    Pecson that the four other trucks used by him in said lines were not included a suit for damages against him.
    because his sisters might have some claims.
    Appellant's right is furthermore reinforced by the fact that the transfer to it by
    Lockwood returned to Camarines Sur, where he later found out from Atty. Emerenciano was expressly approved by the Commission.
    Imperial protesting against the sale on the grounds that his clients, the sister of
    Emerenciano , were the owners of the transportation business.

    Lockwood came to Manila and examined the records of the Public Service
    Commission. He found that all the certificates were in the name of Emerenciano,
    and that the Commission had never approved any sale, mortgage or lease or
    encumbrance in favor of his sisters. Lockwoods application (for public Service
    Commission) was granted in spite of the opposition filed by the clients of Atty.
    Imperial.

    Emerenciano's sisters instituted an action in court for the the principal purpose
    of which is to annul the sale made by Emerenciano Pecson to the Alacto, and to
    get certificates of public convenience for the two lines. They averred ownership
    of both certificates and of the "Fargo" truck. GRANTED

    You might also like