210427429-nego.pdf12345 (dragged) 2

1
NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENTS NOTES BASED ON AGBAYANI’S BOOK AND ATTY. MERCADO’S LECTURES Page 187 of 190 BY: MA. ANGELA LEONOR C. AGUINALDO ATENEO LAW 2D BATCH 2010 Whether BPI could lawfully limit the negotiability of the certified checks to a period less than what is provided by the statute of limitations doesn’t seem material. The limitation imposed by the bank as to the time would adversely only affect the payee Vidal but in this case, Vidal actually refused to accept the checks. But as to Araneta and Tuazon, the conditions specified in the certification and the prevailing regulations of the bank were the law of the case. Not only this, but they were aware of and abided by those reghulations and practice, as instanced by the fact that the parties presented testimony to prove those regulations and practice. And that Araneta knew that Vidal hadn’t cashed the checks within 90 days is not, and couldn’t successfully be, denied. In these circumstances, the stipulation that the defendant or seller shall not hold the buyer responsible for the loss of the checks is unconscionable and void insofar as this would stretch Tuazon’s liability for more than 90 days. 191 EQUITABLE PCI BANK V. ONG 502 SCRA 119 FACTS: Sarande deposited a check with her account. After getting assurance that the said check had been cleared, she issued two checks in the same amount as of the proceeds of the check. One of the checks issued was given to Ong. Thereafter, Ong instead of depositing the check given, had a manager’s check issued to him in the same value of the check. This she tried to deposit but she received a notice that the bank has stopped payment of the check. Despite her demands to make good the value of her check, she was refused. HELD: PCI should be held liable. It had certified the check and since certification is equivalent to acceptance, the bank as drawee bank is bound on the instrument upon certification and it is immaterial to such liability in favor of the plaintiff who is a holder in due course whether the drawer had funds or not with the bank or the drawer was indebted to the bank for more than the amount of the check as the certifying bank had the same liabilities as acceptor. It may be true that the check which was paid to her had no funds to support it, nonetheless, as a holder in due course, the bank cannot interpose the defense of want of consideration because that defense is only personal. Therefore, when the check was accepted and certified, there was already a valid consideration. Furthermore, what was issued was a manager’s check. It stands in the same footing as a certified check. Where a check is certified by a bank on which it is drawn, the certification is equivalent to acceptance. Sec. 188. Effect where the holder of check procures it to be certified. - Where the holder of a check procures it to be accepted or certified, the drawer and all indorsers are discharged from liability thereon. EFFECT WHERE HOLDER OBTAINS CERTIFICATION ! When the certification is obtained by the holder, the drawer and the indorsers are discharged ! The certification has the same effect as if the holder has drawn the money redeposited it and taken a certificate of deposit for it ! Only the indorsers at the time of the certification are discharged REASON FOR THE RULE ! The moment that the check is certified, the funds ceased to exist to be under the control of the original depositrors and pass under the control of the person who procures the certification of the check drawn in his favor EFFECT WHERE CERTIFICATION OBTAINED BY OTHERS ! Where the certification is obtained by the drawer, even when the drawer procures the certification at the instance of the payee ! Where the certification is obtained by a person who is neither the holder nor drawer Sec. 189. When check operates as an assignment. - A check of itself does not operate as an assignment of any part of the funds to the credit of the drawer with the bank, and the bank is not liable to the holder unless and until it accepts or certifies the check. CERTIFICATION OPERATES AS ASSIGNMENT OF FUNDS ! When the holder procures the check to be certified, the check operates as an assignment of a part of the funds to the credit of the drawer with the bank DURATION OF TRANSFER OF FUND

Upload: christian-lemuel-tangunan-tan

Post on 21-Jul-2016

2 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

DESCRIPTION

n,n

TRANSCRIPT

NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENTS NOTES

BASED ON AGBAYANI’S BOOK AND ATTY. MERCADO’S LECTURES

Page 187 of 190

BY: MA. ANGELA LEONOR C. AGUINALDO

ATENEO LAW 2D BATCH 2010

Whether BPI could lawfully limit the negotiability of the certified checks to a period less than what is provided by the statute of limitations doesn’t seem material. The limitation imposed by the bank as to the time would adversely only affect the payee Vidal but in this case, Vidal actually refused to accept the checks. But as to Araneta and Tuazon, the conditions specified in the certification and the prevailing regulations of the bank were the law of the case. Not only this, but they were aware of and abided by those reghulations and practice, as instanced by the fact that the parties presented testimony to prove those regulations and practice. And that Araneta knew that Vidal hadn’t cashed the checks within 90 days is not, and couldn’t successfully be, denied. In these circumstances, the stipulation that the defendant or seller shall not hold the buyer responsible for the loss of the checks is unconscionable and void insofar as this would stretch Tuazon’s liability for more than 90 days. 191 EQUITABLE PCI BANK V. ONG

502 SCRA 119

FACTS: Sarande deposited a check with her account. After getting assurance that the said check had been cleared, she issued two checks in the same amount as of the proceeds of the check. One of the checks issued was given to Ong. Thereafter, Ong instead of depositing the check given, had a manager’s check issued to him in the same value of the check. This she tried to deposit but she received a notice that the bank has stopped payment of the check. Despite her demands to make good the value of her check, she was refused. HELD: PCI should be held liable. It had certified the check and since certification is equivalent to acceptance, the bank as drawee bank is bound on the instrument upon certification and it is immaterial to such liability in favor of the plaintiff who is a holder in due course whether the drawer had funds or not with the bank or the drawer was indebted to the bank for more than the amount of the check as the certifying bank had the same liabilities as acceptor. It may be true that the check which was paid to her had no funds to support it, nonetheless, as a holder in due course, the bank cannot

interpose the defense of want of consideration because that defense is only personal. Therefore, when the check was accepted and certified, there was already a valid consideration. Furthermore, what was issued was a manager’s check. It stands in the same footing as a certified check. Where a check is certified by a bank on which it is drawn, the certification is equivalent to acceptance. Sec. 188. Effect where the holder of check procures it to be

certified. - Where the holder of a check procures it to be accepted or certified, the drawer and all indorsers are discharged from

liability thereon.

EFFECT WHERE HOLDER OBTAINS CERTIFICATION ! When the certification is obtained by the holder, the drawer and the

indorsers are discharged ! The certification has the same effect as if the holder has drawn the

money redeposited it and taken a certificate of deposit for it ! Only the indorsers at the time of the certification are discharged REASON FOR THE RULE ! The moment that the check is certified, the funds ceased to exist to be

under the control of the original depositrors and pass under the control of the person who procures the certification of the check drawn in his favor

EFFECT WHERE CERTIFICATION OBTAINED BY OTHERS ! Where the certification is obtained by the drawer, even when the

drawer procures the certification at the instance of the payee ! Where the certification is obtained by a person who is neither the

holder nor drawer Sec. 189. When check operates as an assignment. - A check of itself

does not operate as an assignment of any part of the funds to the credit of the drawer with the bank, and the bank is not liable to the

holder unless and until it accepts or certifies the check.

CERTIFICATION OPERATES AS ASSIGNMENT OF FUNDS ! When the holder procures the check to be certified, the check operates

as an assignment of a part of the funds to the credit of the drawer with the bank

DURATION OF TRANSFER OF FUND