GR L 7154; (October, 1954) (Digest)
G.R. No. L-7154 October 23, 1954
PACIFIC MICRONISIAN LINE, INC., petitioner, vs. N. BAENS DEL ROSARIO, Acting Commissioner of the Workmen’s Compensation Commission and ALFONSA PELINGON, respondents.
FACTS
On September 2, 1952, respondent Alfonsa Pelingon filed a claim for compensation with the Workmen’s Compensation Commission for the death of her husband, Luceno Pelingon, initially against Luzon Stevedoring Co., Inc. The Commission, believing Pacific Far East Line, Inc. was an agent of petitioner Pacific Micronesian Line, Inc., served notice on an official of Pacific Far East Line, who forwarded it to petitioner. Petitioner, a foreign corporation not licensed to do business in the Philippines and without an office or authorized agent in the country, filed a special appearance to dismiss the claim for lack of jurisdiction. The referee and later the Acting Commissioner upheld jurisdiction, reasoning that petitioner, by contracting through a local agent for employment, had submitted to local jurisdiction and that the Commission had a duty to uphold compensation rights of Filipino citizens. Petitioner then filed this petition for prohibition to restrain the Commission from exercising jurisdiction.
ISSUE
Whether the service of process made by the Workmen’s Compensation Commission on the Pacific Far East Line, Inc., alleged to be an agent of petitioner, is sufficient to confer jurisdiction upon the Commission over petitioner, a foreign corporation not licensed to do business in the Philippines.
RULING
No. The Workmen’s Compensation Commission has no jurisdiction over petitioner. Under Section 14, Rule 7 of the Rules of Court, service of summons upon a private foreign corporation is valid only if the corporation is “doing business in the Philippines.” The phrase “doing business” implies carrying on a continued business or a substantial part of the corporation’s ordinary business within the state, not merely isolated, occasional, or casual acts. Petitioner, a foreign corporation, never sent its ships to the Philippines, nor transported nor solicited passengers or cargo to and from the Philippines. The contract of employment of the deceased, executed through a local agent, was an isolated act incidental to its business and not indicative of a purpose to engage in business in the Philippines. Therefore, petitioner was not “doing business” in the Philippines. Consequently, service of process upon an alleged agent was invalid and could not confer jurisdiction. The provisions of the Workmen’s Compensation Act (Section 5, Act No. 3428 ) making remedies under the Act exclusively applicable to injuries received outside the Philippines were merely directory and applied only if stipulated in the contract, which was not the case here. The petition for prohibition is granted, and the proceedings before the Commission are dismissed.