Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
Answer: c. He may enforce payment for the full amount thereof against all
parties liable thereon. An ordinary holder cannot enforce payment against a
party who has a defense.
Answer: a. Joseph can collect from Jeff. Joseph delivered his title through a
holder in due course and was not a part a party to any fraud or illegality
affecting the instrument. Hence, Joseph is subrogated to the rights of a
holder in due course. Jeff cannot raise the personal defense of complete and
undelivered.
6. Dan, a holder in due course, came to Nick, the maker, for collection of
payment. In order for Nick to escape liability, which defense can he
interpose against Dan.
a. Failure of consideration
b. Want of delivery but complete instrument
c. Fraud in essecontractus
d. Spoliation
7. Joey upon hearing that his best friend is in need of money issued a check
payable to his best friend Romel. Romel, for consideration, indorsed it
to Dondy, an ordinary holder. The following are all correct, except:
a. Joey cannot be liable to Dondy.
b. Romel was a holder for value.
c. Romel should be liable to Dondy.
d. If Dondy is a holder in due course, Joey can be held liable to Dondy.
Answer: b. Romel was a holder for value. Love and affection does not
constitute value.
a. He can hold the instrument free from defect of title of prior parties.
b. He can hold the instrument free from personal defenses.
c. He can hold the instrument free from real defenses.
d. He can enforce payment of the instrument for the full amount thereof
against all parties liable thereon.
Answer: c. He can hold the instrument free from real defenses. A Real
defense is available even against a holder in due course.
9. Amer made a promissory note indicating that Nassief is the maker and is
payable to order of Amer. Amer forges Nassief’s signature. Amer
indorses the note to Norsad and Norsad to Ahmed, the present holder.
12. Gloria makes a promissory note for Three Million to the order of
Benigno. To secure benigno’s debt to Mar of Two million, he pledges the
nore to Mar as a security.
A) Mar may recover Three Million, holding the surplus One million for
Benigno, if the note matured.
B) If Gloria has defense of failure of consideration against Benigno,
Mar can collect Two Million if he is a holder in due course.
Answer: a. Both statements are true. Mar is deemed a holder for value to the
extent of his lien.
14. Mahal signed a promissory note for P500, 000 as maker, and payable to
bearer, delivered to Belo in payment for Mahal’s scheduled medical
operation that will make her tall. Later, Mahal was informed that it is
impossible to make her tall. However, Belo has already delivered the
note to Haden upon the terms of payment of P 300, 000 and the balance
in a month. Haden received notice of the defect. Which is true?
a. Haden can collect P 500, 000 because he is a holder in due course entitle
to the full amount of the instrument.
b. Haden must pay the balance before he can collect for the full amount.
c. Haden is a holder in due course to the extent of P300, 000, the amount
paid by him.
d. Haden cannot collect because of the failure or absence of consideration.
Answer: c. Haden is a holder in due course to the extent of P300, 000, the
amount paid by him. Sec. 54 of the NIL provides that, where the transferee
receives notice of any infirmity in the instrument or defect in the title of the
person negotiating the same before before he has paid the full amount agreed
to be paid therefore, he will be deemed a holder in due course only to the extent
of the amount paid by him.
Answer: c. Where a holder took instrument for value and in good faith. This
constitutes a condition of a holder in due course.
FORGERY
1. Forgery is the counterfeit-making or fraudulent alteration of writing and
may consist in the signing of another’s name or the alteration of an
instrument in the name, amount, description of the person and the like,
with intent thereby to –
a. defraud
b. dishonor
c. confound
d. alter
2. What kind of defense is forgery under Section 23 of the Negotiable
Instrument Law?
a. Forgery can be presumed and the burden of proof lies on the party
alleging forgery.
b. Forgery is a real defense which means that it could be raised
against any holder, including a holder in due course.
c. Section 23 purports to declare neither the instrument totally void
nor the genuine signatures thereon inoperative.
d. Forgery is a real or absolute defense except a holder in due course
as provided in Section 58.
3. One of the various kinds of forgery is Simple forgery.
Statement A: It occurs when a person signs the name of another
without the authority of the person whose signature
it purports to be.
Statement B : Simple forgery also occurs when the person to whom
the instrument has been delivered impersonated the
real person named as payee and signs his name.
a. Both statements are true.
b. Both statements are false.
c. Only statement A is true.
d. Only statement B is true.
11. A holder in due course holds the instrument free from any defect of title
of prior parties and free from defenses available to prior parties among
themselves. An example of such a defense is –
a. duress amounting to forgery
b. fraud in inducement
c. alteration
d. fraud in esse contractus
13. In case the bill is originally payable to bearer, the drawee may debit the
drawer’s account in spite of the forged instruments. The reason is that:
a. the forged instruments is necessary to the title of the holder.
b. the drawee can recover from the holder.
c. the forged instruments is not necessary to the title of the holder.
The drawee cannot recover from the holder.
d. the drawee cannot recover from the holder since the forged
instrument is necessary to the holder.
14. The following are precluded from raising the defense of forgery except:
a. The forger as he cannot raise his own malfeasance as a defense
b. The indorsees and persons negotiating the instrument by delivery
as they do not warranted that the instrument is genuine and in all
respects what it purports to be.
c. Those who are barred by estoppels or by their own negligence from
raising the defense of forgery.
d. The acceptor with respect to the signature of the drawer as he
admits the existence of the drawer, the genuineness of his
signature, and his capacity and authority to draw the instrument.
FORGERY
a. wholly inoperative
b. unenforceable
c. invalid
d. none of the above
a. bank is liable
b. drawee bank bears the loss
c. drawee bank considered as paying out of its funds
d. b&c
e. all of the above
4. In the case of PNB vs. CA, for bearer instrument the signature of payee or
holder is
6. In the case of PNB vs. CA, for order instruments the signature of its rightful
order is
8. In the case of Samsung vs. FEBTC, drawee who has paid upon the forged
signature bears the loss except when
a. drawee’s negligence
b. negligence can be traced on the part of the drawer
c. a&b
d. none of the above
a. does not end with the drawee bank and pass liability back through the
collection chain to the party who took from the forger and to the
forger himself
b. ends with the drawee bank
c. does not end with the drawee bank and collect reimbursement
d. a&c
12. Forge is real defense when
a. it can be presumed
b. could be raised against any holder, including a holder in due course
c. raised against a holder
d. none of the above
a. dishonor of checks
b. counterfeit and alteration
c. counterfeit-making or fraudulent alteration of writing and may consist
i n the si g n in g of an othe r’s n ame or th e alte ra ti on of an i
n strume n t in the name, amount, description of the person and the
like, with intent thereby to defraud
d. none of the above
15. In the case of Samsung vs. FEBTC, condition which bars a party from
setting up the defense of forgery
a. guilty of negligence
b. guilty of fraud
c. a&b
d. none of the above
The drawer does not promise to pay the bill absolutely, his liability to the
holder, or to any subsequent indorser, who may be compelled to pay it,
is only secondary. His liabilities are conditional and he engages to pay
the bill only after certain conditions are complied with.
6. In no. 5 case, supposed W, the payee, altered the bill which was
originally P1,000 to P1,500 and is accepted by Y for P1,500, how much is
Y liable to A, a holder in due course – for P1,000 or P1,500?
a. Y should be liable to A for P1,500 because it is the tenor of his
acceptance.
b. Y should be liable to A for P1,000 only because the collectible
debt is only P1,000
c. Y should be liable to A for P1,500 because Y, as an acceptor,
assented to the alteration.
d. Y should be liable to A for P1,000 only because a holder in due
course may enforce payment of a materially altered
instrument according to its original tenor only.
Upon being sued by A, M cannot say that the agreement between him
and P was to pay only P300. Neither can he allege that P is a non
existent or fictitious person. He is also precluded from setting up such
defense as minority, insanity, or ultra vires act of corporation.
13. R draws on W a bill for P500 payable 30 days after sight. Upon
presentment for payment, W paid the bill without proper acceptance.
Is R discharged from his obligation?
a. Yes. Because there is no debt anymore.
b. No. Because payment by the drawee may not be considered as
equivalent of acceptance.
c. Yes. Because payment amount to more than an acceptance.
d. No. Because payment by the drawee does not imply assent to
his obligation.
Answer: D; Sec. 5
Answer: C
c. Which of the following is negotiable?
a. “I promise to pay B or order P20,000 if he will pass the Bar exams
on 2013.” (Sgd.) A
b. “I promise to pay B or order P20,000 in four instalments.” (Sgd. A)
c. “I promise to pay B or order P20,000, 30 days after the death of his
father.” (Sgd.) A
d. “I promise to pay B, P20,000.” (Sgd.) A
Answer: C
e. Which of the following instruments is not negotiable for the reason that
the instrument is not payable at a determinable future time?
a. “On the death of X. I promise to pay to the order of B P1,000.” (Sgd)
A
b. “On or before October 30, 2015, I will promise to pay B or his order
P10,000.” (Sgd A)
c. Sixty days after sight, I promise to pay to the order of B P5.000.”
(Sgd.) A
d. “Ten days before the death of X, I promise to pay B or his order
P10,000.” (Sgd. ) A
Answer: D
Answer: A
e. A certificate of stock is not a negotiable instrument because it lacks the
requirement of:
a. The instrument must be in writing and signed by the maker or
drawer.
b. It must contain an unconditional promise or order to pay a sum
certain in money.
c. It must be payable to bearer or order.
d. It must be payable on demand, or at fixed determinable future time.
Answer: B
Answer: A
Answer: D
e. “I promise to pay to bearer, Juan dela Cruz, the sum of P20,000..” (Sgd.)
Jose dela Cruz. The promissory note is:
a. Negotiable promissory note payable on demand
b. Negotiable promissory note payable to order
c. Negotiable promissory note payable to bearer
d. Non-negotiable
Answer: D
Answer: B
1st rule: The maturity date of the above promissory note will be counted
30 days from date of the instrument.
2nd rule: The maturity date of the above bill of exchange will be counted
30 days from the date the instrument is accepted by Y.
a. Both rules are wrong.
b. Both rules are correct.
c. 1st rule is correct, 2nd rule is wrong.
d. 1st rule is wrong, 2nd rule is correct.
Answer: D
4. X draws a check against his current account with Mayaman Bank in favor of
Y. Although X does not have sufficient funds, the bank honors the check
when it is presented for payment. Apparently, X has conspired with the
bank’s bookkeeper so that his ledger card would show that he still has
sufficient funds. The bank files an action for recovery of the amount paid to
Y because the case presented has no sufficient funds. Can Mayaman Bank
recover from Y?
A. YES, the bank can recover from Y, the latter being not a holder in due
course.
B. YES, the bank can recover from Y there being no sufficient funds on the
account of the drawer.
C. NO, the bank cannot recover from Y, the former being a drawee-
acceptor.
D. NO, the bank cannot recover from Y, the former being negligent.
Answer: C.
Reason: When the bank honored the check, it became an acceptor. As
acceptor, the bank became primarily and directly liable to payee/holder Y.
Answer A.
Reason: Portia is the maker of PN, thus she is primarily liable to Shylock, a
holder in due course. The presence of special indorsements on the PN does
not detract the fact that the bearer instrument is always negotiable by mere
delivery.
Answer C.
Reason: Romeo is not liable to Shylock because his signature was
forged. He can raise the defense of forgery.
Answer C
Reason Sec. 69 NIL. The agent or broker who negotiates an instrument
without indorsement incurs all liabilities prescribed to a general
indorser unless he discloses the name of his principal and the fact that
he is only acting as an agent.
Answer: D
Reason: A person negotiating an instrument warrants that he has NO
knowledge of any fact which would impair the validity of the instrument
or render it useless.
12. Can a collecting bank debit the account of the depositor when the check
indorsed to it were forged?
Answer: B
Reason: When checks deposited had forged indorsements and the
collecting bank as a consequence of such forgery, was made to pay the
drawee bank, the collecting bank can debit the account of the depositor for
his breach of warranty. (Jai-alai Corp. of the Phil V. BPI, G.R. No. L-39432,
August 6, 1975)
13. Brad indorsed a check to Angelina. Julie stole the check from Angelina,
forged the latter’s signature and indorsed it to Pitt. Holly Bank encashed the
check upon presentment thereof by Pitt. Is the bank liable?
A. YES, it is the primary duty of the bank to know that the check was duly
endorsed by the original payee.
B. YES, the bank who encashed a stolen check always bears the loss.
C. NO, the bank is only bound to know the signature of the drawee, not of
the payee
D. NO, the bank can raise the defense of forgery since the payee’s
signature was forged.
Answer: A.
Reason: The bank has the primary duty to know that check was duly
indorsed by the original payee and, where it pays the amount of the checks
to a third person who has forged the signature of the payee, the loss falls on
the bank who encashed the checks. A bank engaged in business is invested
with public interest and its duty to protect its clients and all persons who
transacts with it. (Traders Royal bank v. RPN, G.R. No. 138510, Oct. 10, 2002)
Answer: C
Reason: The drawer is merely secondarily liable. The indorser (Carrie in the
above case) warranted that upon due presentment, the checks were to be
accepted or paid, or both, according to their tenor, and in case they were
dishonored, she would pay the corresponding amount. After instrument is
dishonored by non-payment, indorsers cease to be secondarily liable. They
become principal debtors whose liability becomes identical to that of the
original obligor. (Tuason v. Heirs of Bartolome ramos, G.R. No. 156262, July
14, 2005)
Patrick Famillaran
1. The following are instances when a negotiable instrument is considered
to be dishonored except.
a) If it is not accepted when presented for acceptance.
b) If it is not paid when presented for payment at maturity.
c) If presentment is excused or waived and the instrument is past due
and unpaid.
d) All of the above.
Answer: D
Answer: C
Answer: C
Answer: A
5. The instrument without grace falls due on April 30, 2006 which is a
Sunday, when shall be the presentment for payment?
a) Any time before the maturity date.
b) April 30, 2006 for it is the maturity date.
c) May 1, 2006 for it is the next day after April 30, 2006 which falls on a
Sunday.
d) May 2, 2006.
Answer: D
Answer: B
Answer: G
Answer: A
Answer: C
Answer: C
Answer: B
12. The following are cases where notice of dishonor is not required to be given
to an indorser, except
a) Where the indorser is the person to whom the instrument is
presented for payment.
b) When the drawee is a fictitious person and the indorser was aware of
that fact at the time he indorsed the instrument.
c) When the holder is a holder in due course.
d) Where the instrument was made for his accommodation.
Answer: C
Answer: B
14. How shall a Notice of Dishonor be given to joint parties who are not partners?
a) You can give the Notice to any of the parties.
b) There should only be one specific person who shall accept the notice
for the partners.
c) Notice is not required to be given to all parties as long as it is given to
the majority of the parties.
d) Notice must be given to each of them unless one has the authority to
receive it for the others.
Answer: D
15. (1) A check is always drawn on a bank or banker and always payable on
demand.
(2) A bill of exchange may not be drawn on a bank and need not be drawn
against a deposit.
a) 1 is correct and 2 is wrong.
b) 1 is wrong and 2 is correct.
c) Both are correct.
d) Both are wrong.
Answer: C
1. The following are material alterations except:
a. Substituting the words “or bearer” for “Order”
b. Writing “protest waived” above a blank indorsement
c. Changing the date from which interest is to run
d. Changing “I promise to pay” to “we promise to pay
2. Any change in the instrument which affects or changes the the liability
of the parties in any way.
a. Material alteration
b. Immaterial alteration
c. Spoliation
d. Material particular
3. Changes in the following constitutes material alteration except
a. Date
b. Sum payable
c. Interest
d. Serial number
4. When the date of the instrument is in blank. The may fill the
blank by writing the date intended.
a. Payee
b. Drawee
c. Holder
d. Maker
5. What acts are necessary to complete an instrument?
a. Mechanical act of writing, and delivery
b. Mechanical act of writing, or delivery
c. Mechanical act of writing, and issuing
d. Mechanical act of writing, or issuing
6. In order that a person may have a prima facie authority to convert a
signature on a blank paper into a negotiable instrument and fill it up for
any amount, the following must be present. Except.
a. The blank paper bears the name of the payee
b. The blank paper bears the signature of the maker or drawer
c. It was delivered by the person making the signature
d. It was delivered in order that the paper may be converted into a
negotiable instrument
7. When may blanks in the document be filled?
a. When an instrument is wanting in any material particulars
b. When an instrument is not delivered
c. When an instrument is negotiated
d. When an instrument is assigned
8. When an instrument is a mechanically incomplete but delivered
instrument, any person who becomes a party thereto after its
completion shall be liable to:
a. A holder in due course
b. Any holder
c. Maker
d. Indorser
9. It operate as a prima facie authority to fill up an instrument as such for
any amount
a. Indorsement
b. Signature
c. Blank paper
d. Delivery
10. Alteration by a stranger is called
a. Spoliation
b. Forgery
c. Mechanical act
d. Ultra vires act
11. This means the transfer of the possession of the instrument by the
maker or drawer with the intent to transfer title to the payee
a. Delivery
b. Issue
c. Assign
d. Transfer
12. ABC signs a piece of paper and delivers it to XYZ with the intention of
making the instrument negotiable
a. XYZ can fill it up for any amount
b. XYZ has implied authority to complete it
c. A and B
d. None of the above
13. It is the first delivery of the instrument complete in form to a person
who takes it as a holder
a. Assignment
b. Negotiation
c. Issuance
d. Indorsement
14. A signature on a blank paper delivered by the person making the
signature in order that the paper may be converted into a negotiable
instrument operates as a authority to fill it up as such for
any amount
a. Absolute
b. General
c. Special
d. Prima facie
15. The writing of the signature on a paper attached to the negotiable
instrument
a. Allonge
b. Procuration
c. Forgery
d. alteration
Reiner O. Querubin
1. An instrument “Payable to Angel Locsin or order the sum of P1, 000. Signed X”
is:
a. Non-negotiable
b. A bearer instrument since it is an instrument payable to the
order of a fictitious person.
c. Negotiable because it complies with the requisites of
negotiability.
d. A bearer instrument since the name of the payee does not
purport to be the name of any person.
9. Which of the following is not one of the requisites in order that an agent who
signs a negotiable instrument escapes personal liability?
a. Duly authorized
b. Such authorization must be in writing
c. Adding words to his signature indicating that he signs as an
agent
d. Disclosed his principal
10.
I promise to pay X or order P 1,000.
(Signed) Y
To : Z
11. An instrument with the words “I promise to pay” signed by two or more
persons give rise to:
a. No Liability
b. Joint Liability
c. Solidary Liability
d. Either Joint or Solidary Liability depending on the holder
14. If the signature is so placed upon the instrument that it is not clear in what
capacity the person intended to sign, he is deemed :
a. Not a party to the instrument
b. A maker or a drawer
c. Indorser
d. Holder in due course
(Source: Chan Wan vs. Tan Kim, G.R. No. L-15380, September 30,
1960, 109 Phil. 706)
3. Azalea has with her a postdated check in the amount of P10,000.00. Azalea
needs money so she asks Betty to discount her check. In return for Azalea’s
check, Betty issued a check in favor of Azalea less the agreed interest. Which of
the following statement is not correct?
a. Betty is a holder for value if Azalea already encashed the
check.
b. Betty is a holder for value when the check she issued
was impaired without her fault.
c. Betty is a holder for value if Azalea negotiated the check
to a third person who is a holder in due course.
d. Betty can never be a holder for value.
6. Which of the following is not a real defense and, therefore, may not
be set up against a holder in due course?
7. Angelo draws a bill for P10,000.00 with Budoy as payee and Xavier
as drawee. Budoy indorses the bill to Cathy, who fails to give a value
thereon. Cathy indorses the bill to Daniella who, on maturity date pay
the amount of P6,000.00 only. Five (5) days after such payment,
Daniella learns that Cathy did not give value for the instrument. Can
Daniella be considered a holder in due course?
8. Which of the following instrument is complete and regular upon its face?
a. No, because fraud was largely a factor for the issuance of the
check.
b. No, because it is Alfo who is indebted to Bugsy and therefore
the Bugsy should have inquire on the purpose for the issuance
of the check upon acquiring the knowledge that Alfo is
not drawer therein.
c. Yes, because Bugsy is not a party to the contract of sale
entered into by Alfo and Chevy.
d. Yes, because Bugsy acquires the instrument in good faith and
for value and regular on its face and in good faith and for
value.
13. Supposed Mary issues a note for P1,000.00 without placing her
signature and the name of the payee. Pedro stole the note, forged the
signature of Mary and named himself the payee thereon. Pedro
pledges the note to Annie, a holder in due course, to secure the
payment of his debt of P800.00. The note is indorsed and delivered by
Pedro to Annie. Can Annie may recover from the instrument?
a. No, because Ben refused to say how and why the check was
passed to him by Amy.
b. No, because from the moment the check was stolen, no one
outside of Reema can be termed a holder in due course as the
latter had not indorsed it in due course.
c. Yes, because Ben acquired the check in good faith and for
value.
d. Yes, because Ben had no knowledge that the check was stolen
by Amy.