1. Simex vs.

CA - The banking system is an indispensable instutution in the modern world and plays a
G.R. No. 88013 March 19, 1990 vital role in the economic life of every civilized nation. For business entities like the
petitioner, the bank is a trusted and active associate that can help in the running of their
Doctrine: A bank may be held liable for damages by reason of its unjusitifed dishonor of affairs, not only in the form of loans when needed but more oftern in the conduct of their
a check, which caused damage to its client’s credit standing. The bank must record every day-to-day transactions like the issuance or encashment of checks.
single transaction accurately, down to the last centavo, and as promptly as possible. This
has to be done if the account is to reflect at any given time the amount of money the - The depositor expects the bank to treat his account with the utmost fidelity whether
depositor can dispose of as he sees fit, confident that the bank will deliver it as and to such account consists only of a few hundred pesos or of millions. The bank must record
whomever he directs. The bank is a fiduciary of the depositor’s money. every single transaction accurately, down to the last centavo, and as promptly as
possible. This has to be done if the account is to reflect at any given time the amount of
money the depositor can dispose of as he sees fit, confident that the bank will deliver it as
and to whomever he directs. A blunder on the part of the bank, such as the dishonour of
Facts:
a check without good reason, can cause the depositor not a little embarrassment if not
- Petitioner, Simex International is a privated corporation engaged in the also financial loss and perhaps even civil and criminal litigation.
exportation of food products. It buys these products from various local
suppliers and then sells them abroad. Most of its exports are purchased by
petitioner on credit.
- The petitioner was a depositor of the respondent bank and maintained a
checking account in its branch. Petitioner deposited to its account in the said
bank the amount of Php. 100,000.00 this increasing its balance as of that date to
Php. 190, 380.74. Subsequently, the petitioner issued several check against its
deposit but was surprised to learn later that they had been dishonored for
insuffiencent funds.
- As a consequence for the issuance of a bouncing check, California
Manufacturing, one of petitioner’s customers, thereatened prosecution if the
dishonored check issued to it was not made good. It also withheld delivery of
the petitioner’s order. Similar threats were also sent by Malabon Long Life
Trading and by G and U Enterprises.
- The petitioner complained with the responded bank whereby investigation
disclosed that the sum of Php. 100,000.00 deposited by petitioner had not been
credited to it. Such error was rectified eventually by respondent bank.
- Petitioner demanded reparation from the respondent bank for its gross and
wanton negligence. Such demand however was not met which prompted Simex
to file a complaint in the CFI of Rizal claiming for moral damages in the sum of
Php. 1,000,000.00 and exemplary damages in the sum of Php 500,000.00 plus
25% attorney’s fees and costs.
- CFI decided that moral and exemplary damages were not called for under the
circumstances but only nominal damages should be attributed to petitioner.
The CA affirmed in toto.

Issue: W/N respondent bank can be held liable for negligence by reason of its unjustified
dishonor of a check? YES.

Held: