Republic of the Philippines REGIONAL TRIAL COURT National Capital Judicial Region Branch 43, Quezon City

TONY STARK, Plaintiff, -versusCivil Case No. D-08290 For: Moral Damages

PREMIUM BANK, Defendant. x - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -x

ANSWER

DEFENDANT PREMIUM BANK, represented by MIRANDA DE GUIA, through the undersigned counsel, respectfully states that:

1. For expediency and simplicity defendants admit the allegations in paragraph 1,2,3,4,8,9,11 and of the complaint; 2. Defendant also admit the allegation in paragraph 5 of the Complaint in dishonouring the check issued by the plaintiff on the ground that the account of the plaintiff was close but specifically denies that it is valid ground for the plaintiff to claim for moral damages against the defendant; the truth of the matter being those hereinafter averred in the special and affirmative defences; 3. Defendant admits the allegation in paragraph 6 and that the defendant received Summons from this Honorable Court on December 27, 2012 requiring him to submit his responsive pleading within ten (10) days from the receipt thereof or until January 6, 2013; hence, this answer; 4. Defendant specifically denies the allegation in paragraph 7, wherein, it seems to appear that what made him humiliated and embarrassed was not because of the fact that the check he issued was dishonoured due to his close account but due to the complaint he received which was filed not by the defendant but by the car dealer; 5. The defendant specifically denies the allegations in paragraph 10 of the complaint, the truth of the matter being those hereinafter averred in the special and affirmative defenses; 6. The defendant also denies the allegation in paragraph 12, the act of the defendant in declaring the plaintiffs account as a close account is justifiable and without any indication that it was a wilful act which intended to besmirch the reputation of the plaintiff.

SPECIAL AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES

7. Defendant hereby repleads and incorporate all the foregoing allegations insofar as they are relevant hereto and further alleges that 8. That the account was declared close due to financial banks customary procedures during annual report. It is customary for a bank to make certain policies which involves on how their clients will account and use their deposited amount of money during its year-end annual report season. 9. It has been a practice that in every fourth quarter of the year (October, November, and December) our bank implements a limit on the amount of money which a client could withdraw in every bank transaction on a month for the purpose of coping up with its internal and external adjustments of its accounts regarding to the annual report which they are mandated to accomplish. A bank transaction more than the limited amount prescribed would temporarily declare the account of the client as a close account. 10. In the case at bar, the check amounting to two million two hundred pesos (Php 2,200,000) issued by the plaintiff was deposited by the car dealer on November 29, 2012 which falls to fourth quarter of the year wherein the defendant has customarily implemented a limited amount of One million pesos (Php 1,000,000) per bank transaction on a month which its client could avail. 11. Every banking institution is very strict regarding to this matter to protect the company and the clients as well. The banks, as financial institutions, have that objective and aspiration to build up a stronger impression to its clients to gain their confidence and trust by doing so this kind of internal measures. Moreover, it is not the intention of the company to humiliate person because all the acts made by the bank is in accordance with law. 12. The cause of action alleged is not a ground for recovery of moral damages. The complaint filed by the plaintiff was so self-serving that just because his bank account was closed, wherein it was validly closed due to bank policies, which in return denied to honor his issued check for luxurious car, he would immediately claim for a moral damages. It is not a tantamount as what is provided by the law. 13. Furthermore, in order that an award of moral damages can be justified, the claimant must be able to satisfactorily prove that he has suffered such damages and that the injury causing it has sprung from any of the cases listed in Article 2219 and 2220 of the Civil Code.1

14. Article 2219 of the Civil Code provides that Moral damages may be recovered in the following and analogous cases: (a) A criminal offense resulting in physical injuries; (b) Quasi-delicts causing physical injuries; (c) Seduction, abduction, rape or other lascivious acts; (d) Adultery or concubinage; (e) Illegal or arbitrary detention or arrest; (f) Illegal search; (g) Libel, slander or any other form of defamation; (h) Malicious prosecution; (i) Acts mentioned in Article 309; (j) Acts and actions referred to in Articles 21, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 32, 34, and 35.
1

B.F Metal Corporation vs Lomotan, 551 SCRA 618

15. In the case at bar, the defendant sturdily states that NONE of the aboved-mention in the preceding paragraph qualifies the contention of plaintiff to recover moral damages against the defendant. Thus, the act of the bank was not an act of humiliation against the plaintiff but it is merely an act due to a Standard Operating Procedure which a banking institution like the defendant usually undertakes.

16. The defending party would also like to assert that the plaintiff did not conform with the requirements as what is provided under Rule 7 Sec. 1 par. 2 of the Rules of Court wherein it is required that the names of the parties shall be indicated in the original complaint or petition as what is stated below: RULE 7 Sec. 1 (paragraph 2) of the Rules of Court xxx The title of the action indicates the names of the parties. They shall all be named in the original complaint or petition; but in subsequent pleadings, it shall be sufficient if the name of the first party on each side be stated with an appropriate indication when there are other parties. xxx

PRAYER WHEREFORE, premises duly considered, it is respectfully prayed before this Honorable Court that the judgement be rendered DISMISSING the complaint for lack of merit and lack of cause of action Other relief and remedies just and equitable in the premises are likewise prayed for. Quezon City, Metro Manila, January 4, 2013.

ADRIEL C. MAGPILE ACMOS Law Office Counsel for the Defendant 59 Sct. Ybardolaza St. South Triangle, Quezon City Tel. Nos. 987-2345 Doc. No. 107 Page No. 21 Book No. 43 Series of 2013

REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES IN THE CITY OF QUEZON; S.C;

VERIFICATION AND CERTIFICATION

WE, THE PREMIUM BANK, under oath, state the following: 1. That I am the plaintiff in the above captioned case; 2. That I have caused the preparation of the foregoing complaint, the contents of which are true of my own knowledge and honest belief and other available records; and 3. I hereby certify that I have not commenced any other action or proceeding involving the same issue in any court or adminitrative body and if I should learn that a similar action or proceeding has been filed or is pending before any court, tribunal or any agency, I will notify the honorable court within 5 days from such notice. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, we have hereunto set our hand this 4th day of January 2013 here at Quezon City.

PREMIUM BANK -Affiant-

SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this 4th day of January 2013 here at Quezon City, Metro Manila.

ADRIEL C. MAGPILE ACMOS Law Office Counsel for the Defendant 59 Sct. Ybardolaza St. South Triangle, Quezon City Tel. Nos. 987-2345

Doc. No. 107 Page No. 21 Book No. 43 Series of 2013

Republic of the Philippines City of Quezon; s.c.;

AFFIDAVIT OF REPRESENTATION OF BUSINESS ENTITY

I, MR MAXIMO OLIVEROS, the CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER of Premium Bank Inc., with an office address at 8741 Paseo de Roxas corner Villar St., Makati City is submitting this affidavit to the Court as evidence of the authority of MR. MIRANDA DE GUIA, Vice President for Administration of the Premium Bank Inc. to represent the Premium Bank Inc. before the Civil Case No. D-08290. In accordance with the Articles of Organization, Operating Agreement and by-laws of the entity, the representative named above has been designated as the entitys representative named for purposes or representing the entity in Court proceedings. Dated: January 2, 2013 MAXIMO OLIVEROS Affiant SUSCRIBED AND SWORN BEFORE ME this 2nd day of January,2013 at Quezon City, Manila.

ATTY. JESSE MAE OLIVA Notary Public Until December 31, 2013 Roll no. 51078

Doc. No. 112 Page No. 26 Book No. 40

Series of 2013