Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Pbcom v. Ca PDF
Pbcom v. Ca PDF
SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME269
695
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156cbef82d3b88381f1003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False
1/22
8/27/2016
SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME269
FIRST DIVISION.
696
696
2/22
8/27/2016
SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME269
that the petitioner bank, thru its teller, had the last clear
opportunity to avert the injury incurred by its client, simply by
faithfully observing their selfimposed validation procedure.
Same Same Same Considering the fiduciary nature of their
relationship with their depositors, banks are duty bound to treat
the accounts of their clients with the highest degree of care.In the
case of banks, however, the degree of diligence required is more
than that of a good father of a family. Considering the fiduciary
nature of their relationship with their depositors, banks are duty
bound to treat the accounts of their clients with the highest degree
of care.
Same Same Same A blunder on the part of the bank, such as
the failure to duly credit him his deposits as soon as they are
made, can cause the depositor not a little embarrassment if not
financial
697
697
3/22
8/27/2016
SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME269
698
4/22
8/27/2016
SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME269
699
5/22
8/27/2016
SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME269
700
band but the name of the account holder was left bank.
PBCs teller, Azucena Mabayad, would, however, validate
and stamp both the original and the duplicate of these
deposit slips retaining only the original copy despite the
lack of information on the duplicate slip. The second copy
was kept by Irene Yabut allegedly for record purposes.
After validation, Yabut would then fill up the name of RMC
in the space left blank in the duplicate copy and change the
account number written thereon, which is that of her
husbands, and make it appear to be RMCs account
number, i.e., C.A. No. 53019803. With the daily
remittance records also prepared by Ms. Yabut and
submitted to private respondent RMC together with the
validated duplicate slips with the latters name and
account number, she made her company believe that all the
while the amounts she deposited were being credited to its
account when, in truth and in fact, they were being
deposited by her and credited by the petitioner bank in the
account of Cotas. This went on in a span of more than one
(1) year without private respondents knowledge.
Upon discovery of the loss of its funds, RMC demanded
from petitioner bank the return of its money, but as its
demand went unheeded, it filed a collection suit before the
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156cbef82d3b88381f1003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False
6/22
8/27/2016
SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME269
701
Defendants
counterclaim is hereby dismissed for lack of
2
merit.
7/22
8/27/2016
SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME269
702
8/22
8/27/2016
SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME269
703
9/22
8/27/2016
SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME269
704
Q:
A:
Q:
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156cbef82d3b88381f1003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False
10/22
8/27/2016
SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME269
Q:
A:
Q:
A:
Q:
A:
Q:
A:
_______________
9
Original or duplicate.
705
705
11/22
8/27/2016
SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME269
11
12
Sangco, Torts and Damages, Vol. I, 1993 ed., p. 8, citing Prosser, Law
706
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156cbef82d3b88381f1003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False
12/22
8/27/2016
SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME269
Q:
A:
Q:
You did not know that any one in the bank tellers or
cashiers validated the blank deposit slip?
A:
Q:
A:
Yes, sir.
13
14
15
16
707
13/22
8/27/2016
SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME269
18
708
14/22
8/27/2016
SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME269
LBC Air Cargo, Inc. v. Court of Appeals, 241 SCRA 619, 624 [1995],
Ibid., citing Pantranco North Express, Inc. v. Baesa, 179 SCRA 384
709
15/22
8/27/2016
SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME269
SCRA 761, 767 [1994] Bank of the Phil. Islands v. Court of Appeals,
supra, note 16 at 71.
22
183 SCRA 360, 367 [1990], cited in Bank of the Phil. Islands v.
Intermediate Appellate Court, 206 SCRA 408, 412413 [1992] City Trust
Banking Corp. v. Intermediate Appellate Court, 232 SCRA 559, 564
[1994] Metropolitan Bank and Trust Company v. CA, supra.
710
710
RMC, the latter would have discovered the loss early on,
such cannot be used by the petitioners to escape liability.
This omission on the part of the private respondent does
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156cbef82d3b88381f1003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False
16/22
8/27/2016
SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME269
not change the fact that were it not for the wanton and
reckless negligence of the petitioners employee in
validating the incomplete duplicate deposit slips presented
by Ms. Irene Yabut, the loss would not have occurred.
Considering, however, that the fraud was committed in a
span of more than one (1) year covering various deposits,
common human experience dictates that the same would
not have been possible without any form of collusion
between Ms. Yabut and bank teller Mabayad. Ms. Mabayad
was negligent in the performance of her duties as bank
teller nonetheless. Thus, the petitioners are entitled to
claim reimbursement from her for whatever they shall be
ordered to pay in this case.
The foregoing notwithstanding, it cannot be denied that,
indeed, private respondent was likewise negligent in not
checking its monthly statements of account. Had it done so,
the company would have been alerted to the series of
frauds being committed against RMC by its secretary. The
damage would definitely not have ballooned to such an
amount if only RMC, particularly Romeo Lipana, had
exercised even a little vigilance in their financial affairs.
This omission by RMC amounts to contributory negligence
which shall mitigate the23 damages that may be awarded to
the private respondent under Article 2179 of the New
Civil Code, to wit:
x x x. When the plaintiffs own negligence was the immediate and
proximate cause of his injury, he cannot recover damages. But if
his negligence was only contributory, the immediate and
proximate cause of the injury being the defendants lack of due
care, the plaintiff may recover damages, but the courts shall
mitigate the damages to be awarded.
_______________
23
SCRA 353, 368 [1987] Del Prado v. Manila Electric Co., 52 Phil. 900, 906
[1929] Rakes v. Atlantic Gulf and Pacific Co., 7 Phil. 359, 375 [1907].
711
711
17/22
8/27/2016
SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME269
DISSENTING OPINION
PADILLA, J.:
I regret that I cannot join the majority in ruling that the
proximate cause of the damage suffered by Rommels
Marketing Corporation (RMC) is mainly the wanton and
reckless negligence of the petitioners employee in
validating the incomplete duplicate deposit slips presented
by Ms. Irene Yabut (Decision, p. 15). Moreover, I find it
difficult to agree with the ruling that petitioners are
entitled to claim reimbursement from her (the bank teller)
for whatever they shall be ordered to pay in this case.
It seems that an innocent bank teller is being unduly
burdened with what should fall on Ms. Irene Yabut, RMCs
own employee, who should have been charged with estafa
or estafa through falsification of private document.
Interestingly, the records are silent on whether RMC had
ever filed any crimi
712
712
nal case against Ms. Irene Yabut, aside from the fact that
she does not appear to have been impleaded even as a
party defendant in any civil case for damages. Why is RMC
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156cbef82d3b88381f1003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False
18/22
8/27/2016
SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME269
713
19/22
8/27/2016
SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME269
714
20/22
8/27/2016
SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME269
715
21/22
8/27/2016
SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME269
Copyright2016CentralBookSupply,Inc.Allrightsreserved.
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156cbef82d3b88381f1003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False
22/22