Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Beja
Specom Notes 2016 I Cases| Doctrine| Digest| Outline
Judge Macumbal
(6) In cases where the money Clearly, the specific provision of R.A.
deposited or invested in the subject 6770, a later legislation, modifies the
matter of the litigation. law on the Secrecy of Bank Deposits
(R.A. 1405) and places the office of the
In short, petitioner is fishing for information so Ombudsman in the same footing as
it can determine the culpability of private the courts of law in this regard
respondent and the amount of damages it can
recover from the latter.
It does not seek recovery of the very money The issue is whether petitioner
contained in the deposit. The subject matter may be cited for indirect contempt for
of the dispute may be the amount of her failure to produce the documents
P999,000.00 that petitioner seeks from requested by the Ombudsman. And
private respondent as a result of the latters whether the order of the Ombudsman
alleged failure to inform the former of the to have an in camerainspection of the
discrepancy; but it is not the P999,000.00 questioned account is allowed as an
deposited in the drawers account. exception to the law on secrecy of
bank deposits (R. A. No. 1405).
The case of the herein petitioner does not fall
under any of the foregoing exceptions to We rule that before an in
warrant a disclosure of or inquiry into the camera inspection may be allowed,
ledgers/books of account of Allied Checking
Account.
1. there must be a pending case before
the complaint filed by herein petitioner a court of competent jurisdiction.
against Allied Banking Corporation
before the Philippine Clearing House 2. Further, the account must be clearly
Corporation (PCHC) Arbitration identified, the inspection limited to
Committee is not one for bribery or the subject matter of the pending
dereliction of duty of public officials case before the court of competent
much less is there any showing that jurisdiction.
the subject matter thereof is the
money deposited in the account in 3. The bank personnel and the account
question holder must be notified to be present
during the inspection, and such
inspection may cover only the account
The money depositied in Account No. identified in the pending case.
0111-018548 is not the subject matter
of the litigation in the Arbicom case for In the case at bar, there is yet no
as clearly stated by petitioner itself, it pending litigation before any court of
is the alleged violation by respondent competent authority. What is existing
of the rules and regulations of the is an investigation by the office of the
PCHC Ombudsman.
delivery by him is presumed until the any portion of the monetary instrument,
contrary is proved. (Emphasis property or proceeds is located outside the
supplied.) Philippines, the petition may be filed in the
regional trial court in Manila or of the judicial
region where any portion of the monetary
instrument, property, or proceeds is located,
The doctrine that the at the option of the petitioner.
deposit represented by a
managers check automatically Sec. 4. Contents of the
passes to the payee is petition for civil forfeiture. - The
inapplicable, because the petition for civil forfeiture shall
instrument although accepted be verified and contain the
in advance remains following allegations:
undelivered. Hence,
respondents should have been
(a) The name and
informed that the deposit had
address of the respondent;
been left inactive for more than
10 years, and that it may be
(b) A description
subjected to escheat
with reasonable
proceedings if left unclaimed.
particularity of the
5. SALVACION VS. CENTRAL BANK
monetary instrument,
property, or proceeds,
and their location; and
institution or non bank financial The Constitution and the Rules of Court
institution upon order of any
competent court in cases of prescribe particular requirements attaching to
violation of this Act, when it search warrants that are not imposed by the
has been established that
AMLA with respect to bank inquiry orders. A
there is probable cause that
the deposits or investments constitutional warrant requires that the judge
are related to an unlawful personally examine under oath or affirmation
activity as defined in
the complainant and the witnesses he may
Section 3(i) hereof or a
money laundering offense produce,[82] such examination being in the
under Section 4 hereof, form of searching questions and answers.
except that no court order [83]
shall be required in cases Those are impositions which the legislative
involving unlawful activities did not specifically prescribe as to the bank
defined in Sections 3(i)1, (2) inquiry order under the AMLA, and we cannot
and (12).
find sufficient legal basis to apply them to
To ensure compliance with this Act, the Section 11 of the AMLA. Simply put, a bank
Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas (BSP) may inquire inquiry order is not a search warrant or
into or examine any deposit of investment
with any banking institution or non bank warrant of arrest as it contemplates a direct
financial institution when the examination is object but not the seizure of persons or
made in the course of a periodic or special
property.
examination, in accordance with the rules of
examination of the BSP
6
Nielgem S. Beja
Specom Notes 2016 I Cases| Doctrine| Digest| Outline
Judge Macumbal
o Refers to any entity w/c is or the receipt of deposits of any kind, and
holds itself out as being all entities regularly conducting such
engaged or proposes to operations shall be considered as
engage primarily in the banking institutions and shall be
business of investing, subject to the provisions of this Act, of
reinvesting or trading in the Central Bank Act, and of other
securitites pertinent laws
- Securities
o This shall include ...
commercial papers What is prohibited by law?
evidencing - For investment companies to lend
indebtedness funds
of any person, o Obtained from the public
financial or through receipts of deposit
non-financial o w/c is a function of banking
entity institutions
irrespective of
maturity Case at bar:
issue, - the funds supposedly lent
endorsed, - have not been shown to have been
sold, obtained from the public by way of
transferred or deposits
in any - hence, the banking law does not
manner apply
conveyed to
another Promissory note
o w/ or - no proof that the PN was just a ploy
w/o
recour The deed of CM and continuing undertaking
se - were duly acknowledged before the
o such notary public
as PN - no evidence re that the
- Hence, the transaction between transactions entered were ploys
the parties is not of LOAN but
purchase of
o RECIEVABLES AT A
2. The surrender of 2 heavy equipments
DISCOUNT
- Question of fact
o W/c is w/in the purview of
Investing,
Baas et.als allegations
reinvesting or - Parties already had a verbal
trading in securities understanding
w/c is an - Wherein Asia pacific actually
INVESTMENT agreed to consider the petitioners
COMPANY account closed
- Asia Pacific is authorized to - And the principal obligation fully
perform paid
o And does not constitute a - In exchange for the ownership of
violation of the gen. the two equipments
Banking act
Sec.2. Only entities duly authorized by SC
the Monetary Board of the Central - These are mere allegations
Bank may engage in the lending of - No evidence
funds obtained from the public through
8
Nielgem S. Beja
Specom Notes 2016 I Cases| Doctrine| Digest| Outline
Judge Macumbal
o Protective remedy of
The respondents withdrew their motion for rehabilitation was never
reconsideration in 2005 intended to be a refuge of a
- Hence, it has already become final debtor guilty of fraud
- The latest petition was filed 10
months after the assailed order RTC must continue to the proceedings against
was issued the 3 respndents against section 40 of the
- Only 60 days is allowed Gen. Banking law
In addition, when respondents moved for the Section 40 requirement for grant of loans or
suspension of proceedings in the RTC on the other credit accommodations
basis of the 2006 decision for the Should such statements prove to be
rehabilitation false or incorrect in any material detail,
- They waived the defects there was the bank may terminate any loan or
in the service if summons credit accommodation granted on the
- And were deemed to have basis of said statements and shall have
submitted themselves voluntarily the right to demand immediate
to the jurisdiction of the RTC repayment or liquidation of the
obligation.
The stay order
- Defers all actions or claims against According to section 40
the corporation Banks have the right to annul any credit
- From the date of its issuance accommodation or load
- Until the dismissal of the petition or - And demand the immediate
termination of the rehab payment
proceedings - From borrowers proven to be guilty
of fraud
The RTC may proceed to hear the civil case - Petitioners are entitles to the
filed by banco in so far as Arollado is immediate payment of the 194M
concerned and damages
- -if there is no ground to go after JP RTC should also see if JP is liable against the
- Note: that a creditor can demand Trust receipts law
payment from the surety solidarily
liable w/ the corporation seeking
rehabilitation 3. Spouses Panlilio vs Citibank NA
- For it is for the benefit of her minor - the gross interest rate was 16.25%
children - per annum at the time Amalia
made her investment
To open the ITF, Amalia had to sign the ff.:
1. Relationship opening form 1. Amalia signed some documents when
2. Investor Profiling questionnaire she made the investment (Directional
Investment management agreement
After a month, (DIMA) and Term investment
- Amalia called lee application (TIA)
- Telling lee that he wanted to invest
worth 3M - key features of what she signed
After deciding where to invest was that CITIBANK is clear from any
- Amalia brought to CB a PCIB check obligation to guarantee the
- Worth 3M principal and interest of the
- Amalia learned that 2.1 M of the investment
3M - absent fraud or negligence of the
- Was placed by CB in a LONG TERM CB
COMMERCIAL PAPER (LTCP) - it also stated that the risks shall be
o A debt instrument that paid assumed by the investor (amalia)
a high interest
o Issued by the coporation CB
C&P homes - claims that it sent regular
o The rest of the money was confirmations of investment (COI)
placed in two PRPN (peso o one page computer
repriceable Prom. Note: CB generated doc
product) o informing the customer of
In trust for Amalias the investment earlier made
children w/ the bank
Amalia
But allegations defer as to whether amalia - claims that after she recievd the
instructed lee to place the money in the LTCP first coi
of C&P - she demanded the investment in
the LTCP be withdrawn
LTCP - and be placed in a PRPN
- Is an evidence of indebtedness - w/c CB denies that Amalia made
- w/ a maturity of period of more such demands
than 365 days
- issued by a corporation to any then, amalia talked w/ Colet (another ee)
person or entity - to sell the LTCP
- it is in effect a loan obtained by a - and their other investments
corporation (as borrower) - despite the knowledge that selling
- from the investing public (as will be difficult due to crisis
lender) - the spouses signed 3 Sales order
- this is an instrument that slip w/c they left to Colet
investment banks can legally buy
on behalf of their clients Amalia made some formal demands for the
- upon the clients express withdrawal of her investment (1998)
instructions - the investment was made in 1997
- for investment purposes - CB denied stating that the maturity
- they usually have higher yields date is on 2003
than most investment inst. - And that it was not a deposit
- Hence, its return to investors was
Case at bar: not guaranteed by the bank
The LTCP issued by C&P
11
Nielgem S. Beja
Specom Notes 2016 I Cases| Doctrine| Digest| Outline
Judge Macumbal
12
Nielgem S. Beja
Specom Notes 2016 I Cases| Doctrine| Digest| Outline
Judge Macumbal
13
Nielgem S. Beja
Specom Notes 2016 I Cases| Doctrine| Digest| Outline
Judge Macumbal
14
Nielgem S. Beja
Specom Notes 2016 I Cases| Doctrine| Digest| Outline
Judge Macumbal
delegates of the PRCI to the 20th Asian b. the bank had on file pictures of its
Racing Conference in Sydney. depositors
16
Nielgem S. Beja
Specom Notes 2016 I Cases| Doctrine| Digest| Outline
Judge Macumbal
it would only be when a demand to The law simply imposes on the bank
pay had been made and was a higher standard of integrity and
subsequently refused that a borrower performance in complying with its
could be considered in default, obligations under the contract of
simple loan, beyond those required of
- and the lender could obtain non-bank debtors under a similar
the right to collect the debt contract of simple loan.
or to foreclose the
mortgage.1wphi1 Hence,
Guaria Corporation would
The fiduciary nature of banking does
not be in default without the
not convert a simple loan into a trust
demand.
agreement because banks do not
accept deposits to enrich depositors
but to earn money for themselves. The
8. Consolidated bank vs CA law allows banks to offer the lowest
possible interest rate to depositors
while charging the highest possible
LC diaz instructed its messenger to interest rate on their own
withdraw from solid bank. borrowers. The interest spread or
differential belongs to the bank and
17
Nielgem S. Beja
Specom Notes 2016 I Cases| Doctrine| Digest| Outline
Judge Macumbal
not to the depositors who are was negligent in not returning the
not cestui que trust of banks. If passbook to Calapre. The burden was
depositors are cestui que trust of on Solidbank to prove that there was
banks, then the interest spread or no negligence on its part or its
income belongs to the depositors, a employees.
situation that Congress certainly did
not intend in enacting Section 2 of RA
8791. Solidbank is bound by the negligence
Solidbanks rules on savings account of its employees under the principle
require that the deposit book should of respondeat superior or command
be carefully guarded by the depositor responsibility. The defense of
and kept under lock and key, if exercising the required diligence in the
possible. When the passbook is in the selection and supervision of employees
possession of Solidbanks tellers during is not a complete defense in culpa
withdrawals, the law imposes on contractual, unlike in culpa aquiliana
Solidbank and its tellers an even
higher degree of diligence in
safeguarding the passbook.
This is a case of culpa contractual,
where neither the contributory
Rules on savings account provide that negligence of the plaintiff nor his last
any person in possession of the clear chance to avoid the loss, would
passbook is presumptively its owner. If exonerate the defendant from liability.
the tellers give the passbook to the [31]
Such contributory negligence or last
wrong person, they would be clothing clear chance by the plaintiff merely
that person presumptive ownership of serves to reduce the recovery of
the passbook, facilitating unauthorized damages by the plaintiff but does not
withdrawals by that person. For failing exculpate the defendant from his
to return the passbook to Calapre, the breach of contract.
authorized representative of L.C. Diaz,
Solidbank and Teller No. 6 then the courts may reduce the award
presumptively failed to observe such of damages. In this case, L.C. Diaz was
high degree of diligence in guilty of contributory negligence in
safeguarding the passbook, and in allowing a withdrawal slip signed by its
insuring its return to the party authorized signatories to fall into the
authorized to receive the same. hands of an impostor. Thus, the liability
of Solidbank should be reduced.
SC SC :
- there was an implied sgency Issue 1 Right to Due Process
between oliver and Castro
- MB Director invited the
Oliver claims that the P4.5 million loan, petitioners to a conference
released on December 21, 1998, and o But they did not
the P1,396,310.45 loan, released on attend
January 5, 1999, were not acquired - They written explanations/
with her consent. Castro and PSBank, answers were considered in
on the other hand, countered that adopting the MB Resolution
these loans were obtained with Olivers - The letter re the companys
full consent. The Court finds that the side was also taken into
said loans were acquired with Olivers consideration
authority.
Hence, their right to due process was
not violated
The following are the things to
be followed re due process in
_______________________________________
the MB
_______________________________________
________ The right to a hearing, which
includes the right to present one's
Central Bank Act case and submit evidence in support
thereof;
22
Nielgem S. Beja
Specom Notes 2016 I Cases| Doctrine| Digest| Outline
Judge Macumbal
- Specifically, the BSPs supervisory Her allegations, then, call for the
and regulatory powers include: examination of the allegedly
- questionable loans. Whether these
- 4.1 The issuance of rules of loans are covered by the prohibition on
conduct or the establishment of self-dealing is a matter for the BSP to
standards of operation for uniform determine.
application to all institutions or - These are not ordinary intra-
functions covered, taking into corporate matters; rather, they
consideration the distinctive involve banking activities which
character of the operations of are, by law, regulated and
institutions and the substantive supervised by the BSP
similarities of specific functions to
which such rules, modes or
standards are to be applied;
- the Central Monetary Authority,
- 4.2 The conduct of examination to through the Monetary Board, is vested
determine compliance with laws with exclusive authority to assess,
and regulations if the evaluate and determine the condition
circumstances so warrant as of any bank,
determined by the Monetary Board; - and finding such condition
to be one of insolvency, or
4.3 Overseeing to ascertain that that its continuance in
laws and Regulations are complied business would involve a
with; probable loss to its
depositors or creditors,
4.4 Regular investigation which - forbid bank or non-bank
shall not be oftener than once a financial institution to do
year from the last date of business in the Philippines;
examination to determine whether - and shall designate an
an institution is conducting its official of the BSP or other
business on a safe or sound basis: competent person as
Provided, That the receiver to immediately
deficiencies/irregularities found by take charge of its assets
or discovered by an audit shall be and liabilities
immediately addressed;
23
Nielgem S. Beja
Specom Notes 2016 I Cases| Doctrine| Digest| Outline
Judge Macumbal
24
Nielgem S. Beja
Specom Notes 2016 I Cases| Doctrine| Digest| Outline
Judge Macumbal
4. Central Bank vs CA
The respondent banks have shown no
necessity for the writ of preliminary PBP bank filed a complaint before the RTC
injunction to prevent serious damage. - - Against CB
- The serious damage contemplated by - the conservatorship was
the trial court was the possibility of the unwarranted, ill-motivated, illegal,
imposition of sanctions upon utterly unnecessary and
respondent banks, even the sanction unjustified; that the appointment of
of closure. the conservator was arbitrary;
- Under the law, the sanction of - that herein petitioners acted in bad
closure could be imposed upon a faith; that the CB-designated
bank by the BSP even without conservators committed bank
notice and hearing. frauds and abuses;
- The apparent lack of procedural - that the CB is guilty of promissory
due process would not result in the estoppel; and that by reason of the
invalidity of action by the MB. conservatorship, it suffered losses
- close now, hear later scheme is
grounded on practical and legal
considerations to prevent RTC: issued injunction/tro against CB
unwarranted dissipation of the
banks assets and as a valid PBP
exercise of police power to protect
Asked the court to LIFT the
the depositors, creditors,
stockholders, conservatorship
- and the general public. -
- The writ of preliminary injunction the actions of the Monetary Board under this
Section, Section 28-A, and the second paragraph of
cannot, thus, prevent the MB from
section 34 of this Act shall be final and executory,
taking action, by preventing the
submission of the ROEs and worse,
25
Nielgem S. Beja
Specom Notes 2016 I Cases| Doctrine| Digest| Outline
Judge Macumbal
- and can be set aside by a court only if - In other words, the same must be filed within
there is convincing proof, after hearing, ten (10) days from receipt of notice of the
that the action is plainly arbitrary and order placing the bank under conservatorship.
made in bad faith: Otherwise, the provision of the fifth paragraph
- Provided, That the same is raised in an of Section 29 of the Central.
appropriate pleading filed by the
stockholders of record representing the (2) As to actions for the second kind of damages
majority of the capital stock and for injunction to restrain the enforcement of
- within ten (10) days from the date the the CB's implementing resolutions, said fifth
receiver takes charge of the assets and paragraph of Section 29 of the Central Bank Act,
as amended, equally applies because the
liabilities of the bank or non-bank
questioned acts are but incidental to the
financial intermediary performing conservatorship. The purpose of the law in
quasi-banking functions or, requiring that only the stockholders of record
- in case of conservatorship or representing the majority of the capital stock
liquidation, within ten (10) days from may bring the action to set aside a resolution to
receipt of notice by the said majority place a bank under conservatorship is to ensure
stockholders of said bank or non-bank that it be not frustrated or defeated by the
financial intermediary of the order of its incumbent Board of Directors or officers who
may immediately resort to court action to
placement under conservatorship or
prevent its implementation or enforcement. It is
liquidation presumed that such a resolution is directed
principally against acts of said Directors and
officers which place the bank in a state of
The following requisites, therefore, must be present continuing inability to maintain a condition of
before the order of conservatorship may be set liquidity adequate to protect the interest of
aside by a court: depositors and creditors
27
Nielgem S. Beja
Specom Notes 2016 I Cases| Doctrine| Digest| Outline
Judge Macumbal
28
Nielgem S. Beja
Specom Notes 2016 I Cases| Doctrine| Digest| Outline
Judge Macumbal
29