WEST COAST LIFE INSURANCE CO. vs. GEO. N. HURD

WEST COAST LIFE INSURANCE CO. vs. GEO. N. HURD

G.R. No. 8527. March 30, 1914

Facts:

1.      The assistant prosecuting attorneys of the city of Manila filed an information in a criminal action in the Court of First Instance of that city against the plaintiff.

2.      the said plaintiffs West Coast Life Insurance Company, John Northcott, and Manuel C. Grey, conspiring and confederating together, did then and there willfully, unlawfully, and maliciously, and to the damage the Insular Life Insurance Company compose and print a large number of circulars, did publish and distributed, among other persons, to policy holders andprospective policy holders of the said Insular Life Insurance Company, a maliciousdefamation and libel in the Spanish language, to wit:

For some time past various rumors are current to the effect that the Insular Life Insurance Company is not in a good a condition as it should be at the present time, and that really it is in bad shape. Nevertheless, the investigations made by the representative of the "Bulletin" have failed fully to confirm these rumors. It is known that the Insular Auditor has examined the books of the company and has found that its capital has diminished, and that by direction of the said official the company has decided to double the amount of its capital, and also to pay its reserve fund. All this is true.’

Issue:

            Whether or not corporation, as such, may be proceeded against criminally and brought into court

Ruling:

It is contended that the court had no jurisdiction to issue the process in evidence against the plaintiff corporation; that the issuance and service thereof upon the plaintiff corporation were outside of the authority and jurisdiction of the court, were authorized by no law, conferred no jurisdiction over said corporation, and that they were absolutely void and without force or effect.

Section 5 of General Orders, No. 58, defines an information as "an accusation in writing charging a person with a public offense.’ Section 6 provides that a complaint or information is sufficient if it shows "the name of the defendant, or his name cannot be discovered, that he is described under a fictitious name with a statement that his true name is unknown to the informant or official signing the same.” These provisions, as well as those which relate to arraignment and counsel, and to demurrers and pleas, indicate clearly that the maker of the Code of Criminal Procedure had no intention or expectations that corporations would be included among those who would fall within the provisions thereof. The only process known to the Code of Criminal Procedure, or which any court is by that order authorized to issue, is an order of arrest. The Code of Criminal Procedure provides that "if the magistrate be satisfied from the investigations that the crime complained of has been committed, and there is reasonable ground to believe that the party charged has committed it, he must issue an order for his arrest. There is no authority for the issuance of any other process than an order of arrest. As a necessary consequence, the process issued in the case before us is without express authorization of statute.