Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
Course Outline
Atty. Maria Zarah R. Villanueva-Castro
I. PRELIMINARY CONSIDERATIONS
A. Governing laws
D. Promissory note
E. Bill of exchange
H. Negotiability
CASES: Phil. Educ. Co., Inc. vs. Soriano, 39 SCRA 587; Tibajia, Jr. vs. CA, 223 SCRA
163; Philippine Airlines vs. CA, 181 SCRA 557
CASES: Metropolitan Bank & Trust Company vs. CA, Feb. 18, 1991, 194 SCRA 169;
Caltex Phils. vs. CA, 212 SCRA 448
CASES: Ang Tek Lian vs. CA, 87 Phil. 383; PNB vs. Rodriguez, G.R. No. 170325,
September 26, 2008
CASES: Philippine National Bank vs. Manila Oil Refining & By-Products Company,
43 Phil 445
CASES: Republic Planters Bank vs. CA, 216 SCRA 738; Sps. Evangelista vs.
Mercator Finance Corp., et al, August 21, 2003; Ilano vs. Hon. Espanol, G.R. No.
161756, 16 December 2005
III. NEGOTIATION
A. Modes of transfer
CASES: Read again: Sesbreño vs. CA, 222 SCRA 466; Consolidated Plywood Inc. vs.
IFC Leasing 149 SCRA 448
D. Concept of delivery
CASES: De la Victoria vs. Hon. Burgos, 245 SCRA 374; Development Bank of Rizal
vs. Sima Wei, 219 SCRA 736
E. Indorsement
1. Concept
2. How made (Sec. 31 & 32, NIL)
3. Kinds:
a. Special and blank (Sec. 34 & 35, NIL)
b. Conditional (Sec. 39, NIL)
c. Qualified (Sec. 38, NIL)
d. Restrictive (Sec. 36 & 37, NIL)
4. Other rules on indorsement
a. Indorsement of an instrument payable to bearer (Sec. 40, NIL)
b. Where instrument is payable to two or more persons (Sec. 21,
NIL)
c. Instrument is drawn or indorsed to a person as cashier (Sec. 42,
NIL)
d. Where name of payee or indorsee is misspelled (Sec. 43, NIL)
e. Indorsement in a representative capacity (Sec. 44, NIL)
f. Presumption as to time of indorsement (Sec. 45, NIL)
g. Place of indorsement (Sec. 46, NIL)
h. Striking out of indorsement (Sec. 48, NIL)
i. Transfer of an order instrument without indorsement (Sec. 49,
NIL)
CASES: Metropol (Bacolod) Financing vs. Sambok Motors Co., et al., 120 SCRA
864); Gempesaw vs. CA, 218 SCRA 622
IV. HOLDERS
CASES: De Ocampo vs. Gatchalian, 03 SCRA 596; Yang vs. CA, G.R. No. 138074,
August 15, 2003; Mesina vs. IAC, 145 SCRA 497
V. LIABILITY OF PARTIES
CASES: Philippine National Bank vs. Picornell, et al, 46 Phil 716; Astro Electronics
vs. Roxas, et al., September 23, 2003; Garcia vs. Dionisio, December 8, 2003;
Crisologo-Jose vs. CA, Sept. 15, 1989; Sadaya vs. Sevilla, 19 SCRA 924; Travel-On
vs. CA, 210 SCRA 352; Agro-Conglomerates Inc. vs. CA, 348 SCRA 350; Gonzales
vs. RCBC, 29 November 2006; Ang vs. Associated Bank, 05 September 2007; Far
East vs. Gold Palace Jewelry, G.R. No. 168274, August 20, 2008; Patrimonio v.
Napoleon, G.R. No. 187769, June 4, 2014
VI. DEFENSES
C. Personal defenses:
1. Ante-dating or post-dating (Sec. 12, NIL)
2. Insertion of wrong date (Sec. 13, NIL)
3. Filling-up blanks beyond authority (Sec. 14, NIL)
4. Want of delivery of a complete instrument (Sec. 16, NIL)
5. Absence or failure of consideration (Sec. 28, NIL)
6. Simple fraud, duress, intimidation, force or fear, illegality of
consideration, breach of faith (Sec. 55, 56 & 57, NIL)
CASES: Salas vs. CA, January 22, 1990; Philippine National Bank vs. CA, 256 SCRA
491; International Corporate Bank vs. CA, 05 September 2006; Associated Bank vs.
CA, January 31, 1996; Jai-Alai vs. BPI, 66 SCRA 29; Republic vs. Ebrada, July 31,
1975; Philippine National Bank vs. Quimpo, March 14, 1988; Gempesaw vs. CA,
February 9, 1993; Philippine Commercial International Bank vs. Court of Appeals,
350 SCRA 446; MWSS vs. CA, 143 SCRA 20; Ilusorio vs. CA, 393 SCRA 89; Samsung
Construction vs. Far East Bank, 15 August 2004; Metrobank vs. Cabilzo, 06
December 2006; Bank of America vs. Philippine Racing Club, G.R. No. 150228, July
20, 2009
1. Promissory notes
a. Presentment for payment (Sec. 70, NIL)
b. Notice of dishonor (Sec. 89, NIL)
2. Bills of exchange
a. Presentment for acceptance (Sec. 143, NIL)
i. How made (Sec. 132-135 & 137, NIL)
ii. Time to accept (Sec. 136, NIL)
iii. Rule when incomplete bill is accepted (Sec. 138, NIL)
iv. Kinds of acceptance (Sec. 139-142, NIL)
b. If dishonored by non-acceptance:
i. Notice of dishonor (Sec. 89, NIL)
1. Concept of presentment
2. Requisites for sufficiency (Sec. 72, NIL)
a. Date of presentment (Sec. 71, NIL)
i. Rule in determining maturity date (Sec. 85, NIL)
ii. Rule in computing time (Sec. 86, NIL)
iii. Rule if payable at a bank (Sec. 75, NIL)
b. Place of presentment (Sec. 73 NIL)
i. Rule if payable at a special place (Sec. 70, NIL)
c. Presentment to the party primarily liable
A. How presentment made (Sec. 74, NIL)
B. Rule in case party primarily liable is already dead (Sec. 76,
NIL)
C. Presentment to partners (Sec. 77, NIL)
D. Presentment to joint debtors (Sec. 78, NIL)
3. Instances where presentment is excused (Sec. 79 & 82, NIL)
4. When delay in presentment excused (Sec. 81, NIL)
D. Notice of dishonor
CASES: Far East Realty Investment, Inc. vs. CA, 166 SCRA 256; Wong vs. CA,
February 2, 2001; International Corporate Bank vs. Sps. Gueco, February 12, 2001;
Far East Realty vs. CA, October 5, 1988; State Investment House vs. CA, 217 SCRA
32; Asia Banking Corporation vs. Javier, 44 Phil 777; Nyco Sales Corporation vs. BA
A. Concept of discharge
IX. CHECKS
D. Kinds of check
1. Cashier’s and manager’s check (See BSP Circulars 259, series of 2000
& 291, series of 2001)
2. Certified check (Sec. 187-189, NIL)
3. Crossed check (Art. 541, Code of Commerce)
a. Effects of crossing a check
4. Memorandum and traveller’s check
CASES: New Pacific Timber vs. Hon. Seneris, December 19, 1980; PNB vs. National
City Bank of New York, 63 Phil 711; Bataan Cigar vs. CA, 230 SCRA 648; Stelco
Marketing Corporation vs. CA, June 17, 1992; State Investment House vs. CA, 175
SCRA 311; Papa vs. A.U. Valencia, 284 SCRA 643; Villanueva vs. Nite, G.R. No.