Title
Bank of the Philippine Islands vs. Intermediate Appellate Court
Case
G.R. No. 66826
Decision Date
Aug 19, 1988
BPI liable for unauthorized $1,000 withdrawal from Zshornack’s account; $3,000 safekeeping claim voided under Central Bank rules, P8,000 damages awarded.

Case Digest (G.R. No. 66826)
Expanded Legal Reasoning Model

Facts:

  • Parties and Procedural History
  • Rizaldy T. Zshornack filed a complaint on June 28, 1976 in the CFI of Rizal–Caloocan City against Commercial Bank and Trust Company of the Philippines (COMTRUST), alleging four causes of action.
  • In 1980, Bank of the Philippine Islands (BPI) absorbed COMTRUST by corporate merger and was substituted as party.
  • Account Relationships and Transactions
  • Zshornack maintained with COMTRUST, Quezon City Branch:
    • Dollar Savings Account No. 25-4109
    • Peso Current Account No. 210-465-29
  • First Cause of Action – Unauthorized Withdrawal:
    • On October 27, 1975, Assistant Branch Manager Virgilio V. Garcia processed an application for a US$1,000 dollar draft payable to Leovigilda D. Dizon, charged to Dollar Savings Account No. 25-4109; associated fees were charged to the Peso Current Account.
    • COMTRUST issued the draft drawn on Chase Manhattan Bank, New York, without naming the purchaser.
    • Upon discovery of the withdrawal, the bank claimed the peso equivalent had been paid to Zshornack’s brother, Ernesto, or that an agreement authorized the withdrawal to fund the peso account.
  • Second Cause of Action – Safekeeping Deposit:
    • On December 8, 1975, Zshornack delivered US$3,000 in cash to COMTRUST for safekeeping, acknowledged by Garcia in a signed receipt.
    • Upon demand for return on May 10, 1976, the bank sold US$2,000 on December 29, 1975 (P14,920) and US$1,000 on February 3, 1976 (P8,350), crediting proceeds to Zshornack’s peso account.
  • Decisions Below
  • The CFI ruled in favor of Zshornack on all causes of action except the third.
  • The IAC modified the CFI decision by absolving COMTRUST on the fourth cause and ordering:
    • Restoration of US$1,000 to the dollar savings account with interest per Central Bank Circular 343;
    • Return of US$3,000 (without interest);
    • Payment of P8,000 as litigation expenses and attorney’s fees.
  • BPI appealed, limiting issues to liability on the first and second causes and the award of damages.

Issues:

  • Is BPI liable for the unauthorized withdrawal of US$1,000 in the first cause of action?
  • Is Zshornack entitled to recover US$3,000 under the second cause of action for safekeeping?
  • Is the award of P8,000 for litigation expenses and attorney’s fees proper and reasonable?

Ruling:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Ratio:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Doctrine:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster—building context before diving into full texts.