Title
Jai-Alai Corporation of the Philippines vs. Bank of the Philippine Islands
Case
G.R. No. L-29432
Decision Date
Aug 6, 1975
Bank debited petitioner's account for forged checks; Supreme Court ruled in favor of bank, citing petitioner's negligence in accepting checks with forged endorsements.

Case Digest (G.R. No. L-29432)
Expanded Legal Reasoning Model

Facts:

  • Parties and Background
    • Jai-Alai Corporation of the Philippines (petitioner) deposited ten checks with a total face value of P8,030.58 in its current account at the Bank of the Philippine Islands (respondent) between April 2, 1959, and May 18, 1959.
    • The checks were drawn by various entities (§ Delta Engineering Service, Enrique Cortiz & Co., Luzon Tinsmith & Co., Roxas Manufacturing, Inc.) and payable to Inter-Island Gas Service, Inc. or order/bearer.
  • Source and Nature of Checks
    • The petitioner had acquired the checks from Antonio J. Ramirez, a sales agent of Inter-Island Gas and a regular bettor at jai-alai games.
    • Upon deposit, the respondent temporarily credited the amounts to petitioner’s account per a printed clause on deposit slips, reserving the right to charge back any item until actual receipt of funds.
  • Discovery of Forgery and Consequences
    • In late July 1959, Inter-Island Gas discovered the indorsements on the checks (by its cashiers Santiago Amplayo and Vicenta Mucor) and the corporate rubber stamp were forged.
    • Inter-Island Gas notified petitioner, respondent, drawers, and drawee-banks and filed criminal charges against Ramirez (later dropped).
    • In response to a letter from Inter-Island Gas dated August 31, 1959, respondent’s cashier informed petitioner it would debit its account for the checks once returned by drawee-banks.
    • The drawee-banks returned the checks and demanded reimbursement from the respondent, who paid them and debited petitioner’s account accordingly. The petitioner refused to accept the debited checks.
  • The Dishonored Check Incident and Subsequent Action
    • On October 8, 1959, petitioner’s check for P135,000 was dishonored due to insufficient funds after netting the P8,030.58 debit from the forged checks.
    • Petitioner filed suit against the respondent in the Court of First Instance, which dismissed the complaint; the Court of Appeals affirmed the dismissal.
    • Petitioner elevated the case by filing a petition for review before the Supreme Court.

Issues:

  • Whether respondent had the right to debit petitioner’s account for the total value of checks with forged indorsements more than three months after crediting them.
  • Whether respondent was estopped from claiming non-credit of P8,030.58 since drawee-banks paid the respondent and the respondent received the funds in due course.
  • Assuming the debit was improper, whether petitioner is entitled to damages against respondent.

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.