Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 104 - Powers V Marshall

    Uploaded by

    Joshua Rivera
    135 views1 page
    The BOT of an international school planned to construct new buildings and renovate existing ones due to increasing enrollment. They needed to raise $35 million and intended to do so through capital notes, prepayment certificates, and a development fee collected over 12 years. Parents protested the development fee requirement for re-enrollment. The court held that the BOT was authorized to impose the fee. The school's by-laws granted the BOT power to act lawfully on the corporation's behalf. A presidential decree also authorized the BOT to determine reasonable fees for students to maintain educational standards, which they did in consultation with the Secretary of Education.

    Original Description:

    Corpo Case Digests

    Original Title

    104_Powers v Marshall

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    The BOT of an international school planned to construct new buildings and renovate existing ones due to increasing enrollment. They needed to raise $35 million and intended to do so through capital notes, prepayment certificates, and a development fee collected over 12 years. Parents protested the development fee requirement for re-enrollment. The court held that the BOT was authorized to impose the fee. The school's by-laws granted the BOT power to act lawfully on the corporation's behalf. A presidential decree also authorized the BOT to determine reasonable fees for students to maintain educational standards, which they did in consultation with the Secretary of Education.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    135 views1 page

    104 - Powers V Marshall

    Uploaded by

    Joshua Rivera
    The BOT of an international school planned to construct new buildings and renovate existing ones due to increasing enrollment. They needed to raise $35 million and intended to do so through capital notes, prepayment certificates, and a development fee collected over 12 years. Parents protested the development fee requirement for re-enrollment. The court held that the BOT was authorized to impose the fee. The school's by-laws granted the BOT power to act lawfully on the corporation's behalf. A presidential decree also authorized the BOT to determine reasonable fees for students to maintain educational standards, which they did in consultation with the Secretary of Education.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 1

    Powers v.

    Marshall (L-48064, May 9, 1988)

    Facts:

    Marshall, president of the BOT of the International School, Inc., addressed to the parents a program to
    construct new buildings and remodel existing ones to accommodate the increasing enrollment in the
    school, and that it was necessary to raise P35Million for this purpose. The BOT intended to raise the funds
    primarily through subscriptions to capital notes and prepayment certificates, and any deficiency would be
    covered by collecting a so-called "development fee" for 12 school years.

    The school superintendent, Snyder, acting under instructions from the BOT, wrote a letter to the parents
    of returning students, enclosing an Application for Admission which specifically advised that the payment
    of the development fee was a pre-requisite for re-enrollment.

    The plaintiffs, who are associate members of the school, protested against the imposition of the
    development fee. They requested the BOT to suspend the implementation of the requirement as a pre-
    requisite to final enrollment or re-enrollment for the school year 1975-1976. They filed a complaint for
    injunction against the school.

    Issue:

    Whether or not the BOT was authorized to adopt the imposition of a development fee against the students

    Held:

    Yes. Section 2 of Article 3 of the By-Laws grants the BOT the to do such acts as may be lawfully exercised
    or performed by the corporation, subject to applicable laws. On the other hand, P.D. No. 732 granting
    certain rights to the school, expressly authorized the BOT upon consultation with the Secretary of
    Education and Culture, to determine the amount of fees which may be reasonably imposed upon its
    students, to maintain or conform to the school standard of education.

    Here, such consultation had been made with the Secretary who expressed his conformity with the
    reasonableness of the assessment to carry out its development program. The expansion of the school
    facilities, is an ordinary business transaction well within competence of the BOT to act upon. Being directly
    related to the purpose of elevating its standard, which is ordained by P.D. No. 732, the expansion cannot
    result in any fundamental change in the kind of activity being conducted by the school that might require
    the consent of the members composing it. Since the collection of the development fee had been approved
    by the BOT, it was a valid exercise of corporate power, and said assessment was binding upon all the
    members of the corporation.

    You might also like