- Petitioner
- California Manufacturing Company
- Respondent
- Advanced Technology System
- Citation
- G.R. No. 202454
- Court
- Supreme Court
- Division
- First Division
- Ponente
- Sereno, J.
- Decided
- April 25, 2017
Summary
CMCI leased a Prodopak machine from ATSI but defaulted on rental payments totaling P443,729.39. CMCI argued legal compensation applied because PPPC owed it mobilization funds and claimed ATSI and PPPC were alter egos controlled by the Spouses Celones. All three court levels rejected this defense. The Supreme Court affirmed that piercing the corporate veil requires more than interlocking ownership - it needs complete domination of corporate affairs. The Court found no fraud or wrongdoing and ruled that legal compensation under Article 1279 requires liquidated debts, which CMCI failed to establish given the uncertain amount of PPPC's alleged obligation. The decision reinforces the principle of separate corporate personality and strict requirements for legal compensation between different juridical entities.