Scribd
Upload
629 views2 pages

George v. Holy Trinity College, Inc.

1) Petitioner sued respondent Holy Trinity College for failing to pay 4.6 million pesos owed under a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) to fund a performance tour of the college's dance and choir group in Europe. 2) Respondent argued it was not a party to the MOA and the college president lacked authority to enter into the agreement. 3) The Supreme Court ruled the college president had apparent authority as her role in organizing the group implied consent from the board, and the college benefited from the group's activities, so it was bound by the agreement.

Uploaded by

amareia yap
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
629 views2 pages

George v. Holy Trinity College, Inc.

1) Petitioner sued respondent Holy Trinity College for failing to pay 4.6 million pesos owed under a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) to fund a performance tour of the college's dance and choir group in Europe. 2) Respondent argued it was not a party to the MOA and the college president lacked authority to enter into the agreement. 3) The Supreme Court ruled the college president had apparent authority as her role in organizing the group implied consent from the board, and the college benefited from the group's activities, so it was bound by the agreement.

Uploaded by

amareia yap
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 2

Petitioner claimed that the second-party

George v. Holy Trinity College, Inc. assignor/respondent and the foundation-grantor


have not paid and refused to pay their obligation
under the MOA. Petitioner prayed that they be
G.R. No. 190408, 20 July 2016 ordered to solidarily pay the amount of
P4,624,705.00 representing the principal amount
FACTS: mentioned in the Agreement, moral, exemplary,
and actual damages, legal fees, and cost of suit.
The Holy Trinity College Grand Chorale and Dance
Company (the Group) was organized in 1987 by In their Answer with Counterclaim, respondent
Sister Teresita Medalle (Sr. Medalle), the President argued that the MOA on which petitioner based its
of respondent Holy Trinity College in Puerto cause of action does not state that respondent is a
Princesa City. The Grand Chorale and Dance party. Neither was respondent obligated to pay the
Company were two separate groups but for the amount of P4,624,705.00 for the European Tour of
purpose of performing locally or abroad, they were the Group nor did it consent to complying with the
usually introduced as one entity. The Group was terms of the MOA. Respondent asserted that the
composed of students from Holy Trinity College. thumbmark of Sr. Medalle was secured without her
consent. Respondent maintained that since it was
In 2001, the Group was slated to perform in not a party to the MOA, it is not bound by the
Greece, Italy, Spain and Germany. Edward provisions stated therein. The RTC ruled in favor of
Enriquez (Enriquez), who allegedly represented Sr. petitioner. The Court of Appeals relieved
Medalle, contacted petitioner Benjie B. Georg to respondent of any liability for petitioner’s monetary
seek assistance for payment of the Group’s claims.
international airplane tickets. Petitioner is the
Filipino wife of a German national Heinz Georg. ISSUE:
She owns a German travel agency named
DTravellers Reiseburo Georg. Petitioner, in turn, Whether respondent is liable under the MOA.
requested her brother, Atty. Benjamin Belarmino,
Jr. (Atty. Belarmino), to represent her in the
RULING:
negotiation with Enriquez. Enriquez was referred to
petitioner by Leonora Dietz (Dietz), another Filipino-
German who has helped Philippine cultural groups Between the two parties, we are inclined to give
obtain European engagements, including financial credence to petitioner.
assistance.
Respondent claims that Sr. Medalle was not
A Memorandum of Agreement with Deed of authorized by the corporation to enter into any loan
Assignment (MOA) was executed between agreement thus the MOA executed was null and
petitioner, as first party-assignee; the Group, as void for being ultra vires. Petitioner invokes, as
second-party assignor and S.C. Roque Group of refutation, the doctrine of apparent authority.
Companies Holding Limited Corporation and S.C.
Roque Foundation Incorporated, as foundation- Sr. Medalle, as President of Holy Trinity, is clothed
grantor. Under the said Agreement, petitioner, with sufficient authority to enter into a loan
through her travel agency, will advance the agreement. As held by the trial court, the Holy
payment of international airplane tickets amounting Trinity College’s Board of Trustees never contested
to P4,624,705.00 in favor of the Group on the the standing of the Dance and Chorale Group and
assurance of the Group represented by Sr. Medalle had in fact lent its support in the form of sponsoring
through Enriquez that there is a confirmed financial uniforms or freely allowed the school premises to
allocation of P4,624,705.00 from the foundation- be used by the group for their practice sessions.
grantor, S.C. Roque Foundation (the Foundation).
The second-party assignor assigned said amount in The doctrine of apparent authority provides that a
favor of petitioner. Petitioner paid for the Group’s corporation will be estopped from denying the
domestic and international airplane tickets. agent’s authority if it knowingly permits one of its
officers or any other agent to act within the scope of
an apparent authority, and it holds him out to the
public as possessing the power to do those acts.

The existence of apparent authority may be


ascertained through (1) the general manner in
which the corporation holds out an officer or agent
as having the power to act or, in other words, the
apparent authority to act in general, with which it
clothes him; or (2) the acquiescence in his acts of a
particular nature, with actual or constructive
knowledge thereof, whether within or beyond the
scope of his ordinary powers.

In this case, Sr. Medalle formed and organized the


Group. She had been giving financial support to the
Group, in her capacity as President of Holy Trinity
College. Sr. Navarro admitted that the Board of
Trustees never questioned the existence and
activities of the Group. Thus, any agreement or
contract entered into by Sr. Medalle as President of
Holy Trinity College relating to the Group bears the
consent and approval of respondent. It is through
these dynamics that we cannot fault petitioner for
relying on Sr. Medalle’s authority to transact with
petitioner.

Finding that Sr. Medalle possessed full mental


faculty in affixing her thumbmark in the MOA and
that respondent is hereby bound by her actions, we
reverse the ruling of the Court of Appeals.

You might also like