ESQ LAW

07/02/2026

22/09/2025

𝐉𝐮𝐬𝐭𝐢𝐜𝐞 𝐢𝐧 𝐀𝐜𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧: 𝐒𝐮𝐩𝐩𝐨𝐫𝐭 𝐈𝐁𝐏’𝐬 𝐀𝐧𝐭𝐢-𝐂𝐨𝐫𝐫𝐮𝐩𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐈𝐧𝐢𝐭𝐢𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐯𝐞𝐬

The Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP) calls on members of the legal profession to take a stand for transparency, accountability, and ethical governance.

Through its Good Governance Council, the IBP is supporting investigations into corruption and governance-related concerns. We need lawyers who are ready to volunteer their time and expertise in monitoring, documentation, and legal support.

Your contribution will help uphold the rule of law — and will be credited under the Unified Legal Aid Service (ULAS).

📣 Be part of the change. Sign up today through the link below or through the QR code provided.

https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLScf9VIMlQSwyMjm5OFRuMdXj8wRW-QrcCvTGbdaScPm7jIFMg/viewform?usp=header

05/08/2025

Nilinaw ng na hindi ganap na exempted sa pagbabayad ng Value-Added Tax (VAT) ang mga negosyong nakarehistro sa Philippine Economic Zone Authority (PEZA).

Sa isang Desisyon na isinulat ni Associate Justice Japar B. Dimaampao, bahagyang pinagbigyan ng Ikatlong Dibisyon ng Korte Suprema ang claim ng Coral Bay Nickel Corporation (Coral Bay) para sa VAT refund.

Rehistrado sa PEZA ang Coral Bay, na isang domestic company na gumagawa at nag-e-export ng nickel at cobalt mixed sulfide. Humingi ito ng refund mula sa Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR) para sa hindi nagamit na input VAT na binayaran nito para sa mga kalakal at serbisyo na ginagamit sa labas ng PEZA zone (ecozone).

Karaniwang nagbabayad ang mga negosyo ng VAT sa mga produkto at serbisyo na kanilang binibili, na tinatawag na input VAT, at sa mga produktong kanilang ibinebenta, na tinatawag na output VAT, na kanilang ipinapasa sa kanilang mga kustomer.

Sa pagtatapos ng tax period, ibinabawas nila ang kanilang input VAT mula sa kanilang output VAT at babayaran ang pagkakaiba sa gobyerno.

Nabigo ang BIR na aksyunan ang refund claim ng Coral Bay na nag-udyok sa kumpanya na dalhin ang kaso sa Court of Tax Appeals (CTA).

Itinuring nito ang Coral Bay bilang ganap na exempted sa VAT. Kaya, ang mga pagbili nito ay itinuring na zero-rated, na ginagawa itong hindi karapat-dapat para sa isang refund ng VAT.

Binaliktad ng Korte Suprema ang CTA En Banc at nagpasya pabor sa Coral Bay.

Sa ilalim ng Republic Act No. 7916, o ang Special Economic Zone Act of 1995, as amended, exempted ang mga kumpanya ng PEZA sa pambansa at lokal na buwis, maliban sa buwis sa real property sa lupang pag-aari ng mga developer.

Gayunpaman, hindi kasama sa exemption na ito ang VAT.

Maaaring mag-claim ng zero-rated na VAT sa ilalim ng cross-border na prinsipyo ang mga kumpanyang nagpapatakbo sa loob ng ecozones na itinuturing ng batas bilang dayuhang teritoryo. Sinasabi ng prinsipyong ito na walang VAT na sinisingil sa mga produkto o serbisyo na nilalayon para gamitin sa labas ng nagbubuwis na bansa.

Sa kaso ng Coral Bay, sa labas ng ecozone nakonsumo ang mga binili nito pero sa loob ng teritoryo ng Pilipinas. Dahil napapailalim sila sa VAT, may karapatan ang Coral Bay sa refund para sa hindi nagamit na input VAT.

Basahin ang buong Press Release sa https://tinyurl.com/bdh64f22.

Basahin ang buong Desisyon sa https://tinyurl.com/bdz8sa8z

Sumunod sa Credit Attribution Policy ng SC PIO: https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/credit-attribution-policy/.

03/08/2025

🌿 Hello, August.
You don’t need a loud start to grow beautifully. 🌼
This month, choose presence over pressure, honesty over hustle, and gentleness over perfection.
Let each quiet moment remind you—you’re already becoming. ✨

01/08/2025

Official Statement of the Integrated Bar of the Philippines through the Office of the National Director for Communications

31/07/2025

The (SC) has clarified that being listed in a corporation’s General Information Sheet (GIS) is not enough to prove someone is a stockholder.

In a Resolution written by Associate Justice Ramon Paul L. Hernando, the SC’s First Division granted a motion for reconsideration of its earlier Decision and ruled that Ma. Christina Patricia C. Lopez (Christina) and John Rusty Lito Lopez (John Rusty) are not stockholders of LC Lopez and Conqueror, despite being listed in the companies’ GIS submitted to the Securities and Exchange Commission.

The case stemmed from special stockholders’ meetings held by the two companies to elect new board members. Christina and John Rusty sent proxies to participate, but the companies rejected them, stating that their principals were not registered stockholders. The meetings proceeded, and new directors were elected.

Christina and John Rusty challenged the elections before the Regional Trial Court (RTC), arguing that their exclusion invalidated the election due to a lack of quorum. The RTC ruled in their favor, relying on the GIS as proof of their stockholder status.

However, the Court of Appeals reversed the RTC’s decision, pointing out that their names did not appear in the companies’ stock and transfer books.

The SC initially upheld the RTC’s decision, considering the GIS and witness testimonies as sufficient evidence. Respondent board of directors, however, moved for reconsideration.

In granting the motion, the SC clarified that the stock and transfer book is the primary and official record of a corporation’s stockholders. A person must also present a stock certification issued in their name to prove ownership of shares.

Under Section 62 of the Revised Corporation Code, a transfer of shares is not valid—except between the parties—until it is properly recorded in the company's books.

The SC ruled that being listed in the GIS does not make one a stockholder, and that the stock and transfer book prevails.

Read the full text of the Press Release at https://tinyurl.com/35m52bke.

Read the full text of the Resolution at https://tinyurl.com/5n75bf7s.

Read the Dissenting Opinion of Associate Justice Ricardo R. Rosario at https://tinyurl.com/a5jwrd4d.

Copying of this content is subject to the SC PIO’s Credit Attribution Policy: https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/credit-attribution-policy/.