Scribd
Upload
444 views1 page

Malting Doctrine

This document outlines the key differences between corporate officers and regular employees. It states that dismissal of regular employees falls under the jurisdiction of labor arbitrators, while dismissal of corporate officers falls under regular courts. Corporate officers are elected or appointed by directors or stockholders and specifically mentioned in corporate bylaws, while employees occupy no official office. The nature of the relationship and controversy must both be considered to determine if a dismissal dispute is intra-corporate and under RTC jurisdiction.

Uploaded by

KJPL_1987
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
444 views1 page

Malting Doctrine

This document outlines the key differences between corporate officers and regular employees. It states that dismissal of regular employees falls under the jurisdiction of labor arbitrators, while dismissal of corporate officers falls under regular courts. Corporate officers are elected or appointed by directors or stockholders and specifically mentioned in corporate bylaws, while employees occupy no official office. The nature of the relationship and controversy must both be considered to determine if a dismissal dispute is intra-corporate and under RTC jurisdiction.

Uploaded by

KJPL_1987
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/ 1

MALTING DOCTRINE

1. Dismissal of regular employees falls under the jurisdiction of LA; while that of corporate officers
falls within the jurisdiction of the regular courts
2. The term “corporate officers” refers only too those expressly mentioned in the Corporation Code
and By-Laws; all other officers not so mentioned are deemed “employees”
3. Corporate officers are elected or appointed by the directors or stockholders, and those who are
given that character either by the Corporation Code of by the corporation’s by laws. Employees
are not
4. The Corporation Code specifically mentions only the following corporate officers, to wit:
president, secretary and treasurer and such other officers as may be provided for in the by-laws.
5. The Board of Directors can no longer create corporate offices because the power of the Board of
Directors to create corporate office cannot be delegated.
6. Distinction between corporate officer and an employee – an “office” is created by the charter of
the corporation and the “corporate officer” is elected by the directors or stockholders. On the
other hand, an “employee” occupies no office and generally is employed not by the action of the
directors or stockholders but by the managing officer of the corporation who also determined the
compensation to be paid to such employee
7. The status of an employee as director and stockholder does not automatically convert his
dismissal into an intra-corporate dispute
8. Two elements to determine whether a dispute is intra-corporate or not:
a. Status or relationship of the parties (relationship test) and
b. Nature of the question that is the subject of their controversy (Nature of Controversy
Test)
The better policy in determining which body has jurisdiction over the case would be to consider
not only the status of the relationship of the parties but also the nature of the question that is the
subject of their controversy. In the absence of any one of these factor, the RTC will not have
jurisdiction
9. The criteria do not depend on the service performed but on the manner of creation of office.

You might also like