Sie sind auf Seite 1von 2

35 METROBANK vs. BA FINANCE  The car was stolen.

On Bitanga’s
CORP. AND MALAYAN INS. CO., INC., claim, Malayan Insurance issued a
G.R. No. 179952 | Dec. 4, 2009 | Carpio check payable to the order of "B.A.
Morales Finance Corporation and Lamberto
DIGESTED BY: Oreiro, Zafariah Lloren B. Bitanga" for ₱224,500, drawn against
China Banking Corporation. The
TOPIC: Liability of Indorsers check was crossed with the notation
"For Deposit Payees’ Account Only."
DOCTRINE/S:  Without the indorsement or authority
Where an instrument is payable to the order of his co-payee BA Finance, Bitanga
of two or more payees or indorsees  who are deposited the check to his account
not partners, all must indorse unless the with the Asianbank Corporation, now
one indorsing has authority to indorse for merged with Metropolitan Bank.
the others.  Bitanga subsequently withdrew the
entire proceeds of the check.
EMERGENCY RECIT:  In the meantime, Bitanga’s loan
Bitanga obtained a loan from BA Finance, to became past due, but despite
secure which he mortgaged his car, which demands, he failed to settle it.
he insured with Malayan Insurance. The car  BA Finance eventually learned of the
was stolen. Malayan Insurance issued a loss of the car and of Malayan
check payable to the order of BA Finance Insurance’s issuance of a crossed
Corp. and Lamberto Bitanga The check was check payable to it and Bitanga, and
crossed with the notation “For Deposit of Bitanga’s depositing it in his
Payees Account Only”. Without the account at Asianbank and withdrawing
indorsement or authority of his co-payee BA the entire proceeds thereof.
Finance, Bitanga deposited the check to his  BA Finance thereupon demanded the
account with the Asianbank, now payment of the value of the check
Metrobank. Bitanga subsequently withdrew from Asianbank but to no avail,
the entire proceeds of the check. Bitanga prompting it to file a complaint before
failed to settle the loan. BA Finance RTC of Makati for sum of money and
eventually learned of the loss of the car, the damages against Asianbank and
crossed check and of Bitanga’s depositing it Bitanga, alleging that it is entitled to
in his account at Asianbank and the entire proceeds of the check.
withdrawing the proceeds thereof. BA
 RTC holding that Asianbank was
Finance demanded the payment of the
negligent in allowing Bitanga to
check from Asianbank but to no avail. The
deposit the check to his account and
Supreme Court ruled that Asianbank and
to withdraw the proceeds thereof,
Bitanga jointly and severally liable to BA
without his co-payee BA Finance
Finance.
having either indorsed it or authorized
him to indorse it in its behalf. It found
FACTS:
Asianbank and Bitanga jointly and
 Lamberto Bitanga obtained from BA severally liable to BA
Finance Corporation a ₱329,280 loan Finance following Sec. 41 of the NIL.
to secure which, he mortgaged his car
 CA affirmed the decision of the RTC.
to respondent BA Finance.
 Bitanga thus had the mortgaged car
ISSUE/S:
insured by respondent Malayan
1. W/N BA Finance has a cause of
Insurance Co. which issued a policy
action against Metrobank. YES
stipulating that: Loss, if any shall
2. W/N Metrobank is liable to BA
be payable to BA FINANCE CORP.
Finance for the FULL value of the
check. YES
HELD: indorsements considering that the
1. YES. [Read Doctrine] Bitanga alone act of presenting the check for
endorsed the crossed check, and payment to the drawee is an
Metrobank allowed the deposit and assertion that the party making the
release of the proceeds thereof, presentment has done its duty to
despite the absence of authority of ascertain the genuineness of prior
Bitanga’s co-payee BA Finance to indorsements.
endorse it on its behalf.
Accordingly, one who credits the
Clearly, Metrobank through its proceeds of a check to the
employee, was negligent when it account of the indorsing payee is
allowed the deposit of the crossed liable in conversion to the non-
check, despite the lone endorsement indorsing payee for the ENTIRE
of Bitanga, ostensibly ignoring the amount of the check.
fact that the check did not, it bears
repeating, carry the indorsement of It bears noting that in Metrobank’s
BA Finance. cross-claim against Bitanga, the trial
court ordered Bitanga to return to
As has been repeatedly petitioner the entire value of the
emphasized, the banking business is check ─ ₱224,500.00 ─ with interest
imbued with public interest such that as well as damages and cost of suit.
the highest degree of diligence and Metrobank never questioned this
highest standards of integrity and aspect of the trial court’s disposition,
performance are expected of banks yet it now prays for the modification
in order to maintain the trust and of its liability to BA Finance to only
confidence of the public in general in one-half of said amount. To pander
the banking sector. Undoubtedly, BA to Metrobank’s supplication would
Finance has a cause of action certainly amount to unjust
against Metrobank. enrichment at BA Finance’s
expense. Metrobank’s remedy—
2. A collecting bank, Asianbank in this which is the reimbursement for the
case, where a check is deposited full amount of the check from the
and which indorses the check upon perpetrator of the irregularity — lies
presentment with the drawee bank, with Bitanga.
is an indorser. This is because in
indorsing a check to the drawee WHEREFORE, the Decision of the Court of
bank, a collecting bank stamps the Appeals dated May 18, 2007 is AFFIRMED
back of the check with the phrase with MODIFICATION in that the rate of
"all prior endorsements and/or lack interest on the judgment obligation of
of endorsement guaranteed” and, for ₱224,500 should be 6% per annum,
all intents and purposes, treats the computed from the time of extrajudicial
check as a negotiable instrument, demand on September 25, 1992 until its full
hence, assumes the warranty of an payment before finality of judgment;
indorser. Without Asianbank’s thereafter, if the amount adjudged remains
warranty, the drawee bank (China unpaid, the interest rate shall be 12% per
Bank in this case) would not have annum computed from the time the
paid the value of the subject check. judgment becomes final and executory until
Metrobank, as the collecting bank or fully satisfied.
last indorser, generally suffers the
loss because it has the duty to
ascertain the genuineness of all prior

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen