Case Digest (G.R. No. 134436)
Facts:
Metropolitan Bank and Trust Company v. Joaquin Tonda and Ma. Cristina Tonda, G.R. No. 134436, August 16, 2000, the Supreme Court, Gonzaga‑Reyes, J., writing for the Court. Petitioner Metrobank filed a Rule 45 petition for review on certiorari seeking to set aside the Court of Appeals decision that dismissed a criminal complaint for violation of P.D. No. 115 (Trust Receipts Law) in relation to Art. 315(1)(b) of the Revised Penal Code against spouses Joaquin and Ma. Cristina Tonda (the Tondas).In 1990 the Tondas, acting as officers of Honey Tree Apparel Corporation (HTAC) and personally, obtained commercial letters of credit from Metrobank and executed eleven trust receipts to secure the release of imported textile materials with a principal value of P2,803,000.00. HTAC withdrew the fabrics under those trust receipts but failed to settle the trust‑receipt obligations on maturity. Metrobank made repeated demands and on August 10, 1992 issued a final demand advising that obligations had grown to P4,870,499.13.
When the Tondas did not comply, Metrobank filed a complaint/affidavit with the Rizal Provincial Prosecutor on November 9, 1992 for violation of P.D. 115 in relation to Art. 315(1)(b). The assistant prosecutor recommended dismissal on February 12, 1993 for lack of essential elements of estafa, and the provincial prosecutor approved this recommendation on May 18, 1993. Metrobank elevated the matter to the Department of Justice (DOJ). On June 1, 1994 Undersecretary Ramon S. Esguerra (acting Secretary) reversed the provincial prosecutor and directed filing of the appropriate information against the Tondas.
The Tondas moved for reconsideration. The acting Justice Secretary Demetrio G. Demetria denied reconsideration in a Letter‑Resolution dated April 7, 1995, and Justice Secretary Teofisto T. Guingona, Jr. denied a subsequent motion on July 12, 1995. The Tondas then filed a special civil action for certiorari and prohibition in the Court of Appeals (CA-G.R. SP No. 38113) seeking to annul the DOJ resolutions and obtained relief: the Court of Appeals (Third Division) granted the petition and ordered dismissal of the criminal complaint. The CA concluded that the Tondas had deposited P2.8 million intended to cover the trust receipts, that Metrobank had acknowledged receipt, and that Metrobank had not shown prima facie estafa or damage.
Metrobank sought review in the Supreme Court by pe...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Did Metrobank have standing to file the petition and do the issues raised present questions of law properly reviewable under Rule 45?
- Did the Court of Appeals err in reversing the Department of Justice's finding of probable cause and dismissing the complaint for violation of P.D. No. 115 in relation to Art. 315(1)(b)?
- Were the deposits and settlement negotiations (the purported P2.8 million deposit) sufficient to extinguish the Tondas' trust‑receipt obligations so as to negate criminal liability?
- Was there proof that Metrobank suffered damage or that the Tondas acted with fraud or deceit as require...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)