Segundo Seangio vs. Baguio Country Club, Inc., et al.

[SEC-SICD * CASE NO. 2927. December 2, 1987.] SEGUNDO SEANGIO , petitioner , vs . BAGUIO COUNTRY CLUB, INC., ET AL. , respondents . D E C I S I O N The instant Petition seeks to: (1) direct the respondent Baguio Country Club Corporation to grant honorary life membership to the petitioner Segundo Seangio; (2) Order respondent corporation to refund and/or to credit petitioner for the excess monthly dues he had paid; (3) award petitioner actual, moral and exemplary damages, attorney's fees and litigation expenses. LLpr Petitioner alleges that he has been a regular member of the Baguio Country Club continuously over thirty five (35) years; that as such, he should be considered as an honorary life member and no longer required to pay monthly dues pursuant to Article 9 of the Amended Rules and Regulations of the Club. On the other hand, respondent corporation claims that the petitioner cannot be allowed honorary membership since he had been suspended from membership at least four times: on September 18, 1959, December 17, 1960, February 21, 1961 and October 15, 1970 and therefore petitioner cannot claim continuous regular membership for more than 35 years. A perusal of the evidence would indicate that this is so. Thus, the main issue presented in this case is whether or not petitioner's regular membership in the Corporation could still be considered continuous, despite the suspensions meted on him for delinquency in the payment of dues. Phrased differently, did the suspensions interrupt the counting of the required 35 years' continuous membership and thus disqualify petitioner to the grant of honorary life membership? Or does suspension refer only to the rights and privileges and not the membership itself? We like to think and share respondent's view that the answer to the first question should be in the affirmative, i.e., suspension disrupts the continuity of membership and thus disqualify petitioner to the grant of honorary life membership. The following pertinent provisions of the Corporation's Rules and Regulations aptly state to support this view, to wit: ARTICLE 9. Honorary Life Membership Honorary Life Membership in the Baguio Country Club applies to those who have been regular members of the club continuously for 35 years or more. They are not required to pay monthly dues. ARTICLE 2. Regular Membership All club members shall be considered and continue as member until their resignations have been accepted or they have been suspended or expelled in accordance with these rules and regulations. LibLex The two aforecited provisions leave no room for doubt that resignation, suspension and expulsion are three specific grounds which disrupt an otherwise continuous regular membership, otherwise we see no point in including the word suspended or suspension in the said provision. If suspension were intended to refer only to the cessation of the suspended member's right to enjoy the privileges and facilities of the corporation, without disrupting the running of the required 35 years' continuous membership, it could have been easily and conveniently provided for in no uncertain terms in the corporation's Rules and Regulations. It stands to reason that the absence of such an unequivocal provision in the rules indubitably rules out petitioner's overstretched interpretation that the phrase "discontinuity of membership" means stripping the suspended member only of his right to enjoy the privileges and the facilities of the club and not really to discontinue or interrupt regular membership in the club. To uphold this view would be to alter, complicate and confuse the clear and ordinary meaning of the terms used in Article 2, that membership continues until the member is suspended and thus contravene the very essence of the article involved. Indeed a classic example of how the rules on statutory construction and interpretation is violated with impunity. It is to be noted that the suspension and reinstatement of a member as well as the granting of an Honorary Life Membership is left to the better discretion of the Board of Directors according to the rules and regulations of the Club. Considering that there has been no showing in evidence that the board had abused its discretion in suspending the petitioner, we see no reason for the Commission to disturb the board of directors' findings by ordering the said board to grant petitioner, who had been suspended at least three times, the coveted "Honorary Life Membership" status in the Club. Perhaps, exhaustion of intra-corporate remedies as provided for in the rules of the club would have been a better move taken by the petitioner. In the light of the foregoing, the reliefs prayed for by petitioner are hereby denied as the instant petition should be, as it is hereby dismissed for lack of merit. LibLex SO ORDERED. (SGD.) BERNARDO T. ESPEJO Hearing Officer