Title
Tan vs. Philippine Commercial International Bank
Case
G.R. No. 152666
Decision Date
Apr 23, 2008
Marciano Tan, MTT's VP, issued checks for a $430K LC; dishonored checks led to criminal charges. SC acquitted Tan, ruling bus surrender extinguished liability under B.P. Blg. 22.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 152666)

Facts of the Case

The genesis of the case is rooted in a transaction where MTT applied for a 360-day Usance Letter of Credit (LC) from PCIB to import four tourist buses valued at approximately US$430,000. As a condition for the LC, MTT issued post-dated checks to PCIB, totaling P4,300,000. While five of these checks were honored, the sixth check, dated January 1991, was dishonored due to insufficient funds. Following dishonor, PCIB sought payment not only for the check but also for an exchange differential due to fluctuations in the peso-dollar rate, which MTT later contested as a mistaken agreement.

Legal Proceedings

In light of the dishonored check and subsequent payments, PCIB filed criminal charges against Marciano Tan for nine counts of violating B.P. Blg. 22. The trial court convicted Tan but absolved him of civil liability, as it deemed that liabilities solely belonged to MTT, the corporate entity, rather than Tan personally. The trial court sentenced him to 30 days for each violation. Tan appealed this decision to the Court of Appeals, which upheld the trial court's ruling, leading to the petition for review.

Elements of the Offense

For a conviction under B.P. Blg. 22, the prosecution must prove three essential elements: (1) that the accused issued a check for value, (2) that the accused had insufficient funds or credit at the time of issuance, and (3) that the check was subsequently dishonored. The prosecution bears the burden of proving the accused's knowledge of insufficient funds at the time of issuing the check.

Knowledge of Insufficiency

The law establishes a prima facie presumption of knowledge concerning insufficient funds for the accused if certain conditions are met. Specifically, if a check is dishonored and notice of dishonor is received, the accused must make payment or arrangements for payment within five banking days to rebut this presumption. Failure to do so can result in a conviction.

Court's Analysis

The Supreme Court evaluated whether appellant had adequately rebutted the presumption of knowledge regarding the dishonored check. Tan argued that his obligations were extinguished when he surrendered the buses to PCIB, which had a substantial estimated value. The Court noted that by accepting the buses as payment, PCIB effectively satisfied the monetary obligations represented by the dishonored checks.

Ruling

The Supreme Court found merit in the petition. It noted that the value of the surrendered buses exceeded

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur is a legal research platform serving the Philippines with case digests and jurisprudence resources.