Lopez feud: Gabby camp presses Piki ouster
The board of Lopez Inc. has asked a local court to dismiss a complaint filed by Federico “Piki” Lopez and lift an injunction blocking his removal as president.
In a filing before the Mandaluyong Regional Trial Court Branch 209, the majority faction argued that Piki’s ouster as president was valid under the company’s bylaws.
The defendants in the case are Rafael Lopez, Miguel Ernesto Lopez, Eugenio “Gabby” Lopez III, Martin Lopez, Maria Eugenia Brown and Maria Amina Amado.
The defendants sought to dissolve the writ of preliminary injunction issued on March 16 and implemented on March 26, which barred enforcement of board resolutions removing Piki.
They also asked the court to dismiss Piki’s complaint dated March 10 and cancel the P10-million injunction bond he posted.
Damages
Further, the group urged the court to order Piki to pay at least P1 million in moral damages and another P1 million in attorney’s fees and litigation costs.
The filing reiterated that five of seven directors, led by Gabby, voted on Feb. 27 to remove Piki, citing loss of trust and confidence in his leadership.
According to the board, this loss of trust stemmed from Piki’s alleged failure to disclose material transactions involving key subsidiaries, particularly First Gen Corp.
It cited transactions involving billions of pesos, including a P50-billion sale of a 60-percent stake in gas-related subsidiaries to a third party.
The filing also referenced a subsequent P75-billion acquisition by First Gen of a 40-percent stake in hydropower assets, which it said was not disclosed beforehand.
Transparency
Defendants said they learned of these transactions only after media reports circulated, rather than through internal disclosures.
The defendants argued that such nondisclosure violated expectations of transparency from the president of the group’s holding company.
It added that the issue was not the transactions themselves, but the supposed failure to inform Lopez Inc. of developments affecting a major subsidiary.
The filing described a pattern of nondisclosure and opaque management, which it said eroded confidence in Piki’s ability to lead.
Citing jurisprudence, the defendants argued that corporate officers serve at the pleasure of the board and may be removed even without cause.
They rejected Piki’s claim that his removal was arbitrary, saying the board acted within its authority under the amended bylaws.
The case stems from a deepening rift within the Lopez family over control of the conglomerate’s holding firm.
Earlier, Piki’s camp claimed that his ouster was mainly revenge for his refusal to inject another P2 billion into ABS-CBN Broadcasting Corp., which Gabby used to lead.
The court has yet to rule on the motion to lift the injunction and on the merits of Piki’s petition seeking reinstatement.
