Aboitiz Equity Ventures, Inc. v. Victor Chiongbian
G.R. No. 228363, July 1, 2019
FACTS:
Victor Chiongbian filed a complaint for damages against Aboitiz Equity Ventures, Inc. (AEV),
alleging that he was unjustly deprived of employment benefits due to AEV's intervention in his
employment with City Savings Bank (CSB). Chiongbian argued that although he was formally
employed by CSB, AEV exercised control over the bank’s operations and personnel matters,
including his termination.
AEV denied liability, claiming that it had a separate and distinct juridical personality from CSB,
and that Chiongbian was never its employee. AEV maintained that any claims for damages
should be directed at CSB, an independently organized and registered banking corporation.
ISSUE:
Whether AEV, as a parent or affiliated company of CSB, can be held liable for acts allegedly
committed by CSB, despite their separate juridical personalities.
RULING
The Supreme Court ruled in favor of Aboitiz Equity Ventures, Inc. (AEV) and dismissed the
complaint for damages. The Court emphasized that AEV and City Savings Bank (CSB) are
separate juridical entities, each with its own legal personality. Mere corporate affiliation or
parent-subsidiary relationship does not automatically render the parent company liable for the
acts of the subsidiary.
Chiongbian failed to establish that CSB was merely an instrumentality or alter ego of AEV, or
that AEV acted with fraud, malice, or bad faith in relation to his employment. Without clear
and convincing evidence to justify piercing the corporate veil, AEV cannot be held accountable
for CSB’s employment decisions. The doctrine of separate juridical personality must therefore
be respected.