Title
Macalalag vs. People
Case
G.R. No. 164358
Decision Date
Dec 20, 2006
A woman is convicted for issuing bounced checks as loan security, despite partial payments and a reduced interest agreement, under Batas Pambansa Blg. 22.
Font Size

Case Digest (G.R. No. 164358)

Facts:

  • Theresa Macalalag borrowed two loans of P100,000.00 each from Grace Estrella on July 30, 1995, and October 16, 1995, with a 10% monthly interest rate.
  • Macalalag made regular interest payments until she found the rates burdensome and requested a reduction.
  • Estrella agreed to a reduced interest rate of 6% per month, and Macalalag executed Acknowledgment/Affirmation Receipts on April 16, 1996, and May 1, 1996, promising to pay the total loan amount of P200,000.00 within two months.
  • Macalalag also agreed to pay P100,000.00 as liquidated damages and P40,000.00 as attorney's fees in case of breach.
  • To secure the loans, she issued two checks (Check No. C-889835 and No. 889836) for P100,000.00 each on June 30, 1996.
  • The checks were dishonored due to a closed account, and Estrella sent a notice of dishonor to Macalalag.
  • Estrella filed two criminal complaints for violation of Batas Pambansa Blg. 22, leading to Criminal Cases No. 76367 and No. 76368.
  • Macalalag pleaded "not guilty" but admitted her debt and the issuance of the checks during the trial.
  • She claimed to have paid P355,837.98, which Estrella contended was applied to interest.
  • On February 5, 2001, the MTCC found Macalalag guilty, imposing a fine of P100,000.00 for each check and civil indemnity of P200,000.00.
  • The RTC affirmed the MTCC's decision, and the Court of Appeals modified the ruling, convicting her of one count related to the second check only.

Issue:

  • (Unlock)

Ruling:

  • The Court affirmed Macalalag's liability for one count of violation of Batas Pambansa Blg. 22 concerning the dishonor of the second check.
  • The Court ruled that the stipulated interest rates were unconscionable and reduced them to 12% per annum.
  • The Court held that payments mad...(Unlock)

Ratio:

  • The Supreme Court emphasized that the elements of violation of Batas Pambansa Blg. 22 were present: issuance of checks, knowledge of insufficient funds, and subsequent dishonor.
  • The law is strict regarding checks issued without sufficient funds, and lack of criminal intent is irrelevant.
  • The Court recogn...continue reading

Jur is an AI-powered legal research platform in the Philippines for case digests, summaries, and jurisprudence. AI-generated content may contain inaccuracies; please verify independently.

© 2024 Jur.ph. All rights reserved.