|
This has
reference to Securities and Exchange Commission’s (SEC)
authority or power to suspend, or revoke, after proper
notice and hearing, the franchise or certificate of
registration of corporations, partnerships or
associations upon any of the grounds provided by law.
(See: Section5 (m) of the Securities Regulation Code of
2000 (SRC.)
Pursuant
to existing rules, one finds the grounds for revoking
or suspending the certificate of registration of a
company, after proper notice and hearing by the
Commission particularly in Section 6 (l) of Presidential
Decree No. 902-A, as amended. The most common of which
are fraud in procuring the certificate of registration
of a company and the failure to file the required
reports in appropriate forms as determined by the
Commission within the prescribed period. Other legal
grounds for revocation of corporate franchise are
serious misrepresentation as to what the corporation can
do to the prejudice of the general public, refusal to
comply with any lawful order of the SEC, continuous
inoperation for a period of at least five (5) years and
failure to file by- laws, within the required period set
bylaw, which is within thirty (30) days from the
approval of the articles of incorporation by the SEC.
The
fraud mentioned above as one of the grounds for
revocation of a certificate of registration refers to
fraud attendant in the registration of the corporation,
partnership or association and the same must be
contained or connected with the documents presented to
the Commission. Also, fraud from the legal point of view
is deceptive practice to induce another to part with his
property or surrender some legal rights to accomplish
the end desired. As commonly used, the word implies
deceit, deception, artifice or trickery.
Misrepresentation, on the other hand, is a
representation, which is not true, a false
representation. ([SEC Case 3628. February 7, 1991.]
Gregorio Fule, complainant, vs. Onapal Phil.,
Commodities Inc., et al., respondents.)
In a
specific SEC case, it was ruled that “the
misrepresentations committed by a corporation and its
responsible founders, officers and trustees are
reprehensible indeed, but what is more abominable is
that its modus operandi of target as quarry the poor and
marginalized of our countrymen, giving millions of them
false and unattainable hopes of instant fortune in
exchange for a seemingly paltry amount. Moreover,
considering the number of people that had been
victimized by the scheming of the people involved, the
great extent of the effect of the serious
misrepresentation cannot be diminished. This monstrous
chicanery reflects on the moral depravity of the people
behind the erring company and those perpetrating this
debauched modus operandi, and to allow this organized
scam to persist would be an offense of the government to
its people as it is tantamount to suffering a disease
pervade the body of our society.” [SEC Administrative
Case 08-99-0005. April 13, 2000.] In the Matter of
Diamond Star Global Foundation Inc.)
Accordingly, such acts of the officers and trustees of
the subject corporation constitutes serious
misrepresentation as to what the corporation can do or
is doing to the damage and prejudice of the public, in
direct violation of the rule of law.
As
stated above the procedure requires that suspension,
cancellation or revocation of corporate franchise or
registration can only be effected by the SEC on grounds
provided by law and only after proper notice and
hearing. Hearing on suspension, the body shall conduct
cancellation or revocation of corporate franchise or
registration, board, committee or officer as may be
created or designated by the Commission for the purpose.
(SEC Opinion dated 6-6-1994). The SEC has its own
internal rules as approved in December 2006.
With
reference to a refusal to comply or defiance against any
lawful order of the SEC restraining acts amounting to
grave violation of corporation’s franchise is as
follows: A situation where it can be gleaned or would
show that incorporators or officers of a corporation
unjustifiably refused to obey a Commission directive
despite the passage of more than sufficient time to do
so. Such patent failure would leave the Commission no
recourse but to impose the appropriate sanction of
revocation of certificate of registration. (Ibid.) |