Case Digest (G.R. No. L-26001)
Facts:
Philippine National Bank v. Court of Appeals and Philippine Commercial and Industrial Bank, G.R. No. L-26001, October 29, 1968, the Supreme Court En Banc, Concepcion, J., writing for the Court.The petitioner, Philippine National Bank (PNB), sued respondent Philippine Commercial and Industrial Bank (PCIB) to recover P57,415.00 arising from a purportedly forged Government Service Insurance System (GSIS) check. The complaint was dismissed by the Court of First Instance of Manila; the Court of Appeals affirmed that dismissal; PNB sought review by certiorari in the Supreme Court.
The parties stipulated that on or about January 15, 1962 Augusto Lim deposited GSIS Check No. 645915-B for P57,415.00 in his current account at PCIB’s Padre Faura branch. The PCIB forwarded the check that same day for clearing through the Central Bank to the PNB, the drawee bank. The PNB did not return the check the next day or thereafter, but paid the amount to PCIB and debited the GSIS account at PNB. On January 31, 1962 the GSIS, having discovered forgery of the signatures of its officers on the check, demanded and received re-credit of the amount from PNB; PNB then, on February 2, 1962, demanded reimbursement from PCIB, which refused.
Additional operative facts: the check named Mariano D. Pulido as payee, purportedly indorsed to Manuel Go and then to Augusto Lim; the PCIB stamped on the back of the check the warranty: “All prior indorsements and/or Lack of Endorsement Guaranteed, Philippine Commercial and Industrial Bank, Padre Faura Branch, Manila.” More than two months earlier (November 13, 1961) GSIS had notified PNB that the check had been lost and requested stoppage of payment; PNB acknowledged receipt of that notice.
PNB advanced six assignments of error on appeal: (1) PCIB’s negligence in not detecting the forgery; (2) that the indorsements were forged; (3) liability of PCIB by reason of its warranty on the back of the check; (4) that “clearing” is not “acceptance” under the Negotiable Instruments Law; (5) that because the check was not ac...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Was the PCIB negligent in failing to discover the forgery and thus liable to PNB?
- Are the indorsements on the check forged, and does that affect PNB’s right to recover?
- Does the warranty stamped by PCIB on the back of the check make PCIB liable to PNB for the forged drawer’s signatures?
- Is “clearing” equivalent to “acceptance” under the Negotiable Instruments Law so that PNB’s payment constitutes an acceptance entitling it to recovery?
- Did the PNB have the right to reimbursement from PCIB given that th...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)