Scribd Logo
Încărcați

Bine ați venit la Scribd!

  • Lim Tanhu vs Ramolete: Common-law wife denied share of deceased partner's assets

    Încărcat de

    Rap Patajo
    61 vizualizări1 pagină
    This case involves a dispute over the assets of a partnership between the alleged widow of a deceased partner, Respondent Tan, and the surviving partners including Petitioner Lim Tanhu. Respondent Tan claims she is entitled to 1/3 of the partnership's capital, profits, and assets acquired during its operation as the widow of partner Tee Hoon Lim Po Chuan. However, Petitioners argue that Respondent was just the common-law wife of Tee Hoon while his legitimate wife and children are still living. The Court held that Respondent does not have a legal right to the company's assets since she signed an agreement acknowledging payment of P40,000 to end her common-

    Descriere originală:

    Titlu original

    Lim Tanhu vs Ramolete.docx

    Drepturi de autor

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Formate disponibile

    DOCX, PDF, TXT sau citiți online pe Scribd

    Vi se pare util acest document?

    Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

    Raportați acest document
    This case involves a dispute over the assets of a partnership between the alleged widow of a deceased partner, Respondent Tan, and the surviving partners including Petitioner Lim Tanhu. Respondent Tan claims she is entitled to 1/3 of the partnership's capital, profits, and assets acquired during its operation as the widow of partner Tee Hoon Lim Po Chuan. However, Petitioners argue that Respondent was just the common-law wife of Tee Hoon while his legitimate wife and children are still living. The Court held that Respondent does not have a legal right to the company's assets since she signed an agreement acknowledging payment of P40,000 to end her common-

    Drepturi de autor:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Descărcați ca DOCX, PDF, TXT sau citiți online pe Scribd
    Indicator pentru conținut neadecvat
    61 vizualizări1 pagină

    Lim Tanhu vs Ramolete: Common-law wife denied share of deceased partner's assets

    Încărcat de

    Rap Patajo
    This case involves a dispute over the assets of a partnership between the alleged widow of a deceased partner, Respondent Tan, and the surviving partners including Petitioner Lim Tanhu. Respondent Tan claims she is entitled to 1/3 of the partnership's capital, profits, and assets acquired during its operation as the widow of partner Tee Hoon Lim Po Chuan. However, Petitioners argue that Respondent was just the common-law wife of Tee Hoon while his legitimate wife and children are still living. The Court held that Respondent does not have a legal right to the company's assets since she signed an agreement acknowledging payment of P40,000 to end her common-

    Drepturi de autor:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Descărcați ca DOCX, PDF, TXT sau citiți online pe Scribd
    Indicator pentru conținut neadecvat
    din 1

    Lim Tanhu vs Ramolete

    66 SCRA 425 | August 29, 1975

    J. Barredo

    Facts:

    Respondent Tan alleges that she is the widow of Tee Hoon Lim Po Chuan, a partner &
    manager of Glory Commercial Company working alongside other partners such as Petitioner
    Lim Tanhu and others. Respondent Tan also alleges that the petitioners through fraud and
    machination took management of the partnership and used the funds of the partnership to
    purchase lands and buildings in the several cities and municipalities.

    That she is entitled to the share of 1/3 not only in the capital and profits of the partnership but
    also in the other assets, both real and personal, acquired by the partnership with funds of the
    latter during its lifetime.

    According to the Petitioners, Respondent was merely the common-law wife of Tee Hoon
    and the legitimate wife is Ang Siok Tin, whom still living, and had four legitimate children with
    Tee Hoon. After Tee Hoon’s death, the partnership was dissolved and what corresponded to
    him we’re all given to his legitimate wife and children.

    Issue:

    Do respondent Tan have legal standing to claim her share from the company assets?

    Held:

    No, An agreement with Tee Hoon was shown and signed by Tan Put that she received
    P40,000 for her subsistence when they terminated their relationship of common-law marriage
    and promised not to interfere with each other’s affairs since they are incompatible and not in
    the position to keep living together permanently. Hence, this document not only proves that
    her relation was that of a common-law wife but had also settled property interests in the
    payment of P40,000.

    S-ar putea să vă placă și