QR Link

Title
Republic of the Philippines vs. Bloomberry Resorts and Hotels,
Inc.

Case Ponente Decision Date

G.R. No. 224112 CARANDANG, Sep 2, 2020
J

The Supreme Court denies the Petition for Review on Certiorari

and lifts the freeze order against Bloomberry Resorts and Hotels,
Inc., ruling that the case has become moot and academic as more
than six months had already elapsed since the issuance of the
freeze order and there was no evidence of their participation in
money laundering activities.

Case Digest (G.R. No. 224112)

Facts:

In February 2016, US$81,000,000.00 was transferred to the

Philippine Banking System from the account of Bangladesh
Bank with the Federal Reserve Bank of New York.

Bangladesh Bank sought the assistance of Bangko Sentral ng

Pilipinas regarding the loss of funds and requested an
:
 immediate inquiry and help for the recovery of the money.

The funds were transferred to the Banco de Oro (BDO) Account

No. 6280225150 of BRHI.

The funds were eventually transferred to PhilRem Service

Corporation's account upon instructions from a certain William
So Go.

PhilRem then delivered a portion of the funds to BRHI's BDO

account.

The AMLC issued a freeze order against BRHI's BDO account,

believing it to be related to unlawful activity.

The Court of Appeals granted the freeze order but limited its
duration to 30 days due to BRHI being a legitimate business
entity.

The AMLC also !led an application for bank inquiry, which was
granted by the CA.

BRHI claimed that the funds deposited in their account were

legitimate and used for their casino operations.

They argued that they were not aware of any unlawful activity
and that the funds were deposited in the regular course of
business.

The Court of Appeals later lifted the freeze order, stating that the
AMLC failed to establish that the funds in BRHI's account were
acquired through unlawful means.

The CA found that the funds were already used in the normal
and regular operation of BRHI's casino business and were not
tainted with irregularity or illegality.

Issue:

Whether the CA erred in lifting the freeze order against BRHI.

:
 Ruling:

The case has become moot and academic because the freeze
order can only be e"ective for a maximum period of six months,
and more than six months had already elapsed since the
issuance of the freeze order.

Ordering the re-freezing of the account would be unfair to BRHI,

as it has not been proven that they participated in money
laundering activities.

Ratio:

The freeze order issued by the AMLC against BRHI's BDO

account was lifted by the Court of Appeals.

The Supreme Court ruled that the case has become moot and
academic because the freeze order can only be e"ective for a
maximum period of six months, and more than six months had
already elapsed since the issuance of the freeze order.

The Court also stated that ordering the re-freezing of the account
would be unfair to BRHI, as it has not been proven that they
participated in money laundering activities.

The CA found that the funds in BRHI's account were already

used in the normal and regular operation of their casino
business and were not tainted with irregularity or illegality.

Therefore, the Supreme Court denied the Petition for Review on

Certiorari and lifted the temporary restraining order issued by
the Court.
: