Case Digest (G.R. No. 97626)
Facts:
In Rommel’s Marketing Corporation vs. Philippine Bank of Commerce, G.R. No. 97626, decided on March 14, 1997 under the 1987 Constitution, private respondent Rommel’s Marketing Corporation (RMC), represented by its President Romeo Lipana, maintained two current accounts (Nos. 53-01980-3 and 53-01748-7) at the Pasig Branch of Philippine Bank of Commerce (PBC), since absorbed by Philippine Commercial International Bank. Between May 5, 1975 and July 16, 1976, RMC’s secretary, Irene Yabut, deposited a total of ₱304,979.74 in cash but the funds were credited instead to Account No. 53-01734-7 of her husband, Bienvenido Cotas. Yabut prepared an original deposit slip showing Cotas’s name and account number and a duplicate slip with the account number but leaving the name blank. Bank teller Azucena Mabayad machine-validated both slips despite the incomplete duplicate, returned the duplicate to Yabut, and detached the depositor’s portion of the original for bank records. Yabut then completCase Digest (G.R. No. 97626)
Facts:
- Parties and Background
- Rommel’s Marketing Corporation (RMC) maintained two current accounts (Nos. 53-01980-3 and 53-01748-7) with Philippine Bank of Commerce (PBC, now PCIB). From May 5, 1975 to July 16, 1976, RMC, through its president Romeo Lipana’s secretary Irene Yabut, deposited cash totaling ₱304,979.74.
- Instead of crediting RMC’s accounts, Yabut’s deposits were posted to Bienvenido Cotas’s account (her husband’s). PBC teller Azucena Mabayad machine-validated both original and duplicate deposit slips, even though the duplicate slips lacked the depositor’s name. Yabut later filled in “RMC” and altered the account numbers on the duplicates to mislead RMC.
- Procedural History
- RMC filed Civil Case No. 27288 before the Pasig RTC to recover ₱304,979.74. The trial court found PBC and teller Mabayad negligent and awarded:
- ₱304,979.72 plus legal interest;
- 14% as exemplary damages;
- 25% of total as attorney’s fees; and
- Costs.
- On appeal, the CA affirmed but eliminated exemplary damages and the 25% attorney’s fees, instead awarding RMC ₱25,000 attorney’s fees plus costs.
Issues:
- What was the proximate cause of RMC’s loss of ₱304,979.74:
- The negligence of PBC and its teller in validating incomplete deposit slips?
- The negligence of RMC in entrusting large sums to a dishonest employee and failing to check bank statements?
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)