[No. 19441.

March 27, 1923]

FUA CUN (alias Tua Cun), plaintiff and appellee, vs.

RICARDO SUMMERS, in his capacity as Sheriff ex-oficio
of the City of Manila, and the CHINA BANKING
CORPORATION, defendants and appellants.

1. BANKING CORPORATION; SHARES OF STOCK; LIEN

OF CORPORATION UPON THE SAME.—A banking
corporation has no lien upon its own stock for the
indebtedness of the stockholders even when the by-laws
provide that the shares shall be transferable only upon the
books of the corporation and that no such transfer shall be
made if the holder of the shares is indebted to the
corporation.

2. ID.; ID.; EFFECT OF PART PAYMENT OF

SUBSCRIPTION; SPECIAL AGREEMENT.—In the
absence of special agreement to the contrary, a subscriber
for a certain number of shares of stock does not, upon
payment of one-half of the subscription price, become
entitled to the issuance of certificates for one-half the
number of shares subscribed for; the subscriber's right
consists only in an equity entitling him to a certificate for
the total number of shares subscribed for by him upon
payment of the remaining portion of the subscription
price.

3. ID.; ID.; ASSIGNMENT OF EQUITY.—An equity in

shares of stock may be assigned, the assignment becoming
effective as between the parties and as to third parties
with notice.

4. ID.; ID.; ID.; PRIORITY OF LIEN.—An attachment levied

upon assigned rights or interests in an action against the
assignor after the attaching creditor has received notice of
the assignment creates no lien as against the assignee.

5. ID.; ID.; ID.; CHATTEL MORTGAGE.—Whether in this

jurisdiction an equity in shares of stock may properly be
made the subject of a chattel mortgage, quære, but such
chattel mortgage will at least operate as a conditional
equitable assignment.
APPEAL from a judgment of the Court of First Instance of
Manila. Imperial, J.
The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
Araneta & Zaragoza for appellants.
Canillas & Cardenas for appellee.

OSTRAND, J.:

It appears from the evidence that on August 26, 1920, one

Chua Soco subscribed for five hundred shares of stock

706

706 PHILIPPINE REPORTS ANNOTATED

Fua Cun vs. Summers and China, Banking Corporation

of the defendant Banking Corporation at a par value of

P100 per share, paying the sum of P25,000, one-half of the
subscription price, in cash, for which a receipt was issued
in the following terms:

"This is to certify, That Chua Soco, a subscriber for five hundred

shares of the capital stock of the China Banking Corporation at
its par value of P100 per share, has paid into the Treasury of the
Corporation, on account of said subscription and in accordance
with its terms, the sum of twenty-five thousand pesos (P25,000),
Philippine currency.
"Upon receipt of the balance of said subscription in accordance
with the terms of the calls of the Board of Directors, and
surrender of this certificate, duly executed certificates for said five
hundred shares of stock will be issued to the order of the
subscriber.
"It is expressly understood that the total number of shares
specified in this receipt is subject to sale by the China Banking
Corporation for the payment of any unpaid subscriptions, should
the subscriber fail to pay the whole or any part of the balance of
his subscription upon 30 days' notice issued therefor by the Board
of Directors.
"Witness our official signatures at Manila, P. I., this 25th day
of August, 1920.
(Sgd.) "MERWIN WEBSTER
"Cashier
(Sgd.) "DEE C. CHUAN
"President"

On May 18, 1921, Chua Soco executed a promissory note in

favor of the plaintiff Fua Cun for the sum of P25,000
payable in ninety days and drawing interest at the rate of 1
per cent per month, securing the note with a chattel
mortgage on the shares of stock subscribed for by Chua
Soco, who also endorsed the receipt above mentioned and
delivered it to the mortgagee. The plaintiff thereupon took
the receipt to the manager of the defendant Bank and
informed him of the transaction with Chua Soco, but was
707

VOL. 44, MARCH 27, 1923 707

Fua Cun vs. Summers and China Banking Corporation

told to await action upon the matter by the Board of

Directors.
In the meantime Chua Soco appears to have become
indebted to the China Banking Corporation in the sum of
P37,731.68 for dishonored acceptances of commercial paper
and in an action brought against him to recover this
amount, Chua Soco's interest in the five hundred shares
subscribed for was attached and the receipt seized by the
sheriff. The attachment was levied after the defendant
bank had received notice of the fact that the receipt had
been endorsed over to the plaintiff.
Fua Cun thereupon brought the present action
maintaining that by virtue of the payment of the one-half
of the subscription price of five hundred shares Chua Soco
in effect became the owner of two hundred and fifty shares
and praying that his, the plaintiff's, lien on said shares, by
virtue of the chattel mortgage, be declared to hold priority
over the claim of the defendant Banking Corporation; that
the defendants be ordered to deliver the receipt in question
to him; and that he be awarded the sum of P5,000 in
damages for wrongful attachment.
The trial court rendered judgment in favor of the
plaintiff declaring that Chua Soco, through the payment of
the P25,000, acquired the right to two hundred and fifty
shares fully paid up, upon which shares the plaintiff holds
a lien superior to that of the defendant Banking
Corporation and ordering that the receipt be returned to
said plaintiff. From this judgment the defendants appeal.
Though the court below erred in holding that Chua Soco,
by paying one-half of the subscription price of five hundred
shares, in effect became the owner of two hundred and fifty
shares, the judgment appealed from is in the main correct.
The claim of the defendant Banking Corporation upon
which it brought the action in which the writ of attachment
was issued, was for the non-payment of drafts accepted by
Chua Soco and had no direct connection with the shares of
stock in question. At common law a cor
708

708 PHILIPPINE REPORTS ANNOTATED

Fua Cun vs. Summers and China, Banking Corporation
poration has no lien upon the shares of stockholders for any
indebtedness to the corporation (Jones on Liens, 3d ed., sec.
375) and our attention has not been called to any statute
creating such lien here. On the contrary, section 120 of the
Corporation Act provides that "no bank organized under
this Act shall make any loan or discount on the security of
the shares of its own capital stock, nor be the purchaser or
holder of any such shares, unless such security or purchase
shall be necessary to prevent loss upon a debt previously
contracted in good faith, and stock so purchased or
acquired shall, within six months from the time of its
purchase, be sold or disposed of at public or private sale, or,
in default thereof, a receiver may be appointed to close up
the business of the bank in accordance with law."
Section 35 of the United States National Banking Act of
1864 contains a similar provision and it has been held in
various decisions of the United States Supreme Court that
a bank organized under that Act can have no lien on its
own stock for the indebtedness of the stockholders even
when the by-laws provide that the shares shall be
transferable only on the books of the corporation and that
no such transfer shall be made if the holder of the shares is
indebted to the corporation. (Jones on Liens, 3d ed., sec.
384; First National Bank of South Bend vs. Lanier and
Handy, 11 Wall., 369; Bullard vs. National Eagle Bank, 18
Wall., 589; First National Bank of Xenia vs. Stewart and
McMillan, 107 U. S., 676.) The reasons for this doctrine are
obvious; if banking corporations were given a lien on their
own stock for the indebtedness of the stockholders, the
prohibition against granting loans or discounts upon the
security of the stock would become largely ineffective.
Turning now to, the rights of the plaintiff in the stock in
question, it is argued that the interest held by Chua Soco
was merely an equity which could not be made the subject
of a chattel mortgage. Though the courts have

709

VOL. 44, MARCH 27, 1923 709

Fua Cun vs. Summers and China, Banking Corporation

uniformly held that chattel mortgages on shares of stock

and other choses in action are valid as between the parties,
there is still much to be said in favor of the defendants'
contention that the chattel mortgage here in question
would not prevail over liens of third parties without notice;
an equity in shares of stock is of such an intangible
character that it is somewhat difficult to see how it can be
treated as a chattel and mortgaged in such a manner that
the recording of the mortgage will furnish constructive
notice to third parties. As said by the court in the case of
Spalding vs. Paine's Adm'r. (81 Ky., 416), in regard to a
chattel mortgage of shares of stock:

"These certificates of stock are in the pockets of the owner, and go

with him where he may happen to locate, as choses in action, or
evidence of his right, without any means on the part of those with
whom he proposes to deal on the faith of such a security of
ascertaining whether or not this stock is in pledge or mortgaged
to others. He finds the name of the owner on the books of the
company as a subscriber of paid-up stock, amounting to 180
shares, with the certificates in his possession, pays for these
certificates their full value, and has the transfer to him made on
the books of the company, thereby obtaining a perfect title. What
other inquiry is he to make, so as to make his investment certain
and secure? Where is he to look, in order to ascertain whether or
not this stock has been mortgaged? The chief office of the
company may be at one place to-day and at another tomorrow.
The owner may have no fixed or permanent abode, and with his
notes in one pocket and his certificates of stock in the other—the
one evidencing the extent of his interest in the stock of the
corporation, the other his right to money owing him by his debtor,
we are asked to say that the mortgage is effectual as to the one
and inoperative as to the other,"

But a determination of this question is not essential in the

present case. There can be no doubt that an equity in

710

710 PHILIPPINE REPORTS ANNOTATED

Fua Cun vs. Summers and China Banking Corporation

shares of stock may be assigned and that the assignment is

valid as between the parties and as to persons to whom
notice is brought home. Such an assignment exists here,
though it was made for the purpose of securing a debt. The
endorsement to the plaintiff of the receipt above mentioned
reads:

"For value received, I assign all my rights in these shares in favor

of Mr. Tua Cun.
"Manila, P. L, May 18, 1921.
(Sgd.) "CHUA Soco"

This endorsement was accompanied by the delivery of the

receipt to the plaintiff and further strengthened by the
execution of the chattel mortgage, which mortgage, at
least, operated as a conditional equitable assignment.
As against the rights of the plaintiff the defendant bank
had, as we have seen, no lien unless by virtue of the
attachment. But the attachment was levied after the bank
had received notice of the assignment of Chua Soco's
 interests to the plaintiff and was therefore subject to the
rights of the latter. It follows that as against these rights
the defendant bank holds no lien whatever.
As we have already stated, the court erred in holding the
plaintiff as the owner of two hundred and fifty shares of
stock; "the- plaintiff's rights consist in an equity in five
hundred shares and upon payment of the unpaid portion of
the subscription price he becomes entitled to the issuance
of certificate for said five hundred shares in his favor."
The judgment appealed from is modified accordingly,
and in all other respects it is affirmed, with the costs
against the appellant Banking Corporation. So ordered.

Araullo, C. J., Street, Malcolm, Avanceña, Villamor,

Johns, and Romualdez, JJ., concur.

Judgment modified.
711

VOL. 44, MARCH 27, 1923 711

Navas L. Sioca vs. Garcia,

© Copyright 2020 Central Book Supply, Inc. All rights reserved.