Source: https://www.scribd.com/doc/46998729/Negotiable-Instruments-Law
Timestamp: 2017-12-17 09:00:28
Document Index: 177636878

Matched Legal Cases: ['Art. 1249', '§ 5', '§23', '§124', 'arty 1', '§ 66', '§84', 'Art 1231', 'arty 1', 'Art 568', 'Art 567', 'Art 568', 'Art 570', 'Art 571', 'Art 569', 'Art 572', 'Art 1518', 'Art 1512', 'Art 1518', 'Arts 1513', 'ART-1']

Negotiable Instruments Law | Negotiable Instrument | Business Law
Uploaded by Miguel Ancheta
2. Negotiable Instruments Law (Act No.
• Written contract for the payment of money, by its form intended as substitute for money and intended to pass from hand to hand to give the HDC the right to hold the same and collect the sum due. Instruments are negotiable when they conform to all the requirements prescribed by the NIL (Act 2031, 03 February 1911). Although considered as medium for payment of obligations, negotiable instruments are not legal tender (Sec. 60, New Central Bank Act, R.A. 7653); Negotiable instruments shall produce the effect of payment only when they have been encashed or when through the fault of the creditor they have been impaired. (Art. 1249, CC) BUT a CHECK which has been cleared and credited to the account of the creditor shall be equivalent to a delivery to the creditor of cash. Negotiable Contains all the requisites of Sec. 1 of the NIL Transferred by negotiation HDC may have better rights than transferor Prior parties warrant payment Transferee has right of recourse against intermediate parties Non-negotiable Does not contain all the requisites of Sec. 1 of the NIL Transferred by assignment Transferee acquires rights only of his transferor Prior parties merely warrant legality of title Transferee has no right of recourse
money • • •
- a promise to pay
4.1. Promissory note
4.2. Bill of exchange
- an order made by one person to another to pay money to a third person. • unconditional order in writing addressed by one person to another signed by the person giving it • requiring the person to whom it is addressed to pay on demand or at a fixed or determinable future time a sum certain in money to order or to bearer (Sec. 126, NIL). → Check: bill of exchange drawn on a bank payable on demand. Promissory Note Unconditional promise Involves 2 parties Maker primarily liable Only 1 presentment Bill of Exchange Unconditional order Involves 3 parties Drawer only secondarily liable Generally 2
1. 2. 3. • • Drawer - person who gives the order to pay. Drawee - addressee of the order. Payee - person to whom the payment is to be made.
Indorser - the payee of an instrument who transfers it to another by signing it at the back thereof Indorsee - person to whom the indorser negotiates the instrument, who, by such negotiation, becomes the holder of the instrument.
1. “ORDER OR PROMISE TO PAY” a. PROMISSORY NOTE: i. PROMISE TO PAY: should be express on the face of the instrument ii. Word "promise" is not absolutely necessary. Any expression equivalent to a promise is sufficient. iii. Mere acknowledgment of a debt insufficient b. BILLS OF EXCHANGE: i. Order - command or imperative direction; the instrument, by its nature, demanding a right. ii. Words which are equivalent to an order are sufficient. iii. A mere request or authority to pay does not constitute an order. iv. Although the mere use of polite words like "please" does not of itself deprive the instrument of its characteristics as an order, its language must clearly indicate a demand upon the drawee to pay. 2. “UNCONDITIONAL” a. The promise or order to pay, to be unconditional, must be unqualified. b. Sec. 3, NIL: “An unqualified order or promise to pay is unconditional…though coupled with: i. “An indication of a particular fund out of which reimbursement is to be made, or a particular account to be debited with the amount • UNCONDITIONAL: Mere indication of the particular fund out of which reimbursement is to be made, or an indication of a particular account to be debited with the amount ii. “A statement of the transaction which gives rise to the instrument. • UNCONDITIONAL: Mere recital of the transaction or consideration for which the instrument was issued • However, the fact that the condition appearing on the instrument has been fulfilled will not convert it into a negotiable one. iii. But an order or promise to pay out of a particular fund is not unconditional • CONDITIONAL: when reference to the fund clearly indicates an intention that such fund alone should be the source of payment
1 Requisites of Negotiability1
1.1. Must be in Writing and Signed by the Maker
1. 2. No person liable on the instrument whose signature does not appear thereon. One who signs in a trade or assumed name liable to same extent as if he had signed in his own name. (Sec. 18, NIL) Signature of party may be made by duly authorized agent; no particular form of appointment necessary. (Sec. 19, NIL) "In writing" - includes print; written or typed Signature, binding so long it is intended or adopted as the signature of the signer or made with his authority.
1.2. Must contain an Unconditional Order or Promise to Pay Suggested Mnemonics: UP MaSCoT’S PaWN: Unconditional order and Promise, payable in Money, Signed by maker, Certainty as to Time, Sum and Parties, in Writing, include words of Negotiability.
METROPOLITAN BANK v. CA (1991) The treasury warrants in question are not NIs. They are payable from a particular fund, to wit, Fund 501. The indication of Fund 501 as the source of the payment to be made on the treasury warrants makes the order or promise to pay "not unconditional" and the warrants themselves nonnegotiable.
2.) No time for payment is expressed; 3.) Where an instrument is issued, accepted, or indorsed when overdue, it is, as regards the person so issuing, accepting, or indorsing it, payable on demand. Demand instruments: Holder may call for payment any time; maker has an option to pay at any time, and the refusal of the holder to accept payment will terminate the running of interest, if any, but the obligation to pay the note remains. 2. at a fixed time o Only on the stipulated date, and not before, may the holder demand its payment. o Should he fail to demand payment, the instrument becomes overdue but remains valid and negotiable. It is merely converted to a demand instrument. at a determinable future time o Determinable future time, if expressed to be payable (Sec. 4, NIL): 1.) At a fixed period after date of sight; 2.) On or before a fixed or determinable future time specified therein; 3.) On or at a fixed period after the occurrence of a specified event which is certain to happen, though the time of happening be uncertain. o If payable upon a contingency, both negotiable, and the happening of the event does not cure the defect.
1.3. Sum Payable must be Certain
1. Sec. 2, NIL: The sum payable is a sum certain, even if: a. With interest; b. By stated installments; c. By stated installments with acceleration clause; d. With exchange, whether at a fixed rate or at the current rate; or e. With costs of collection or attorney's fee. A sum is certain if from the face of the instrument it can be mathematically computed. A stipulation to pay a higher rate of interest if the note is not paid or a lower rate if it is paid on or before maturity does not render the instrument non-negotiable.
1.4. Must be Payable in Money
1. 2. Capable of being transformed into money. NON NEGOTIABLE: an instrument which contains an order or promise to do an act in addition to the payment of money BUT If the order or promise gives the holder an election to require something to be done in lieu of payment of money, an instrument otherwise negotiable would not be affected thereby. (Sec. 5, NIL) → But if the option is with the maker or person primarily liable, instrument is NOT negotiable. Kind of current money does not affect negotiability. Since the value of the note can by a simple mathematical computation be expressed in the value of the lawful money of the latter country (Incitti v Ferrante, 1933, US Jur) Obligations in foreign currency may be discharged in Philippine currency based on the prevailing rate at the time of payment, pursuant to RA 8183 (Asia World Recruitment v NLRC, 1999).
1.5. Time of Payment must be Certain
• • 1. Purpose: Informing the holder of the instrument of the date when he may enforce payment thereof. An instrument may be payable: on demand (Sec. 7. NIL) 1.) Expressed to be payable on demand, or at sight, or on presentation;
Effect of acceleration provisions o If option (absolute or conditional) to accelerate maturity is on the maker, still NEGOTIABLE. § Maker may pay earlier than the date fixed but this option, if exercised, would be a payment in advance of a legal liability to pay. It is still payable on the date fixed, and holder has no right to enforce payment against the maker before such date. o If option to accelerate is on the holder: § If option can be exercised only after the happening of a specified event/act over which he has no control (conditional), still NEGOTIABLE. § If option is unconditional, time of payment is rendered uncertain, NOT negotiable. o Other instances where instrument still NEGOTIABLE:
§ § 5.
When option given to the holder to accelerate the maturity of an installment note upon failure of the maker to pay any installment when due. Acceleration, automatic upon default. Acceleration by operation of law.
The negotiability or non-negotiability of an instrument is determined from the face of the instrument itself. The duty of the court in such case is to ascertain, not what the parties may have secretly intended but what is the meaning of the words they have used. Traders Royal Bank v. CA (1997) The language of negotiability which characterize a negotiable paper as a credit instrument is its freedom to circulate as a substitute for money. Hence, freedom of negotiability is the touchtone relating to the protection of holders in due course, and the freedom of negotiability is the foundation for the protection which the law throws around a holder in due course. • • • Postal money order, not negotiable, because it does not contain words of negotiability. Where words "or bearer" printed on a check are cancelled by the drawer, instrument not negotiable. Bearer instrument may be negotiated by mere delivery. o When instrument is payable to bearer (Sec. 9, NIL): a. Expressed to be so payable - ex: "I promise to pay the bearer the sum…." b. Payable to a person named therein or bearer – ex. "Pay to A or bearer." c. Payable to the order of a fictitious person or non-existing person, and such fact was known to the person making it so payable - ex: "Pay to John Doe or order." d. Name of payee does not purport to be the name of any person - ex: "Pay to cash;" "Pay to sundries." e. Only or last indorsement is an indorsement in blank. ANG TEK LIAN v. CA (1950)
Provisions extending time of payment o General rule: Negotiability not affected. Effect is similar with that of an acceleration clause at the option of the maker. § Negotiability not affected, even if the holder is given the option to extend time of payment by mere inaction or indulgence for an indefinite time depending on his will, because with or without this provision, the holder may always choose to be indulgent. o Exception: Where a note with a fixed maturity provides that the maker has the option to extend time of payment until the happening of contingency, instrument NOT negotiable. The time for payment may never come at all.
1.6. Must be Payable to Order or to Bearer/ Must contain Words of Negotiability
• words of negotiability - serve as an expression of consent that the instrument may be transferred. o But the instrument need not follow the language of the law; any term which clearly indicates an intention to conform with the legal requirements is sufficient. SALAS v CA (1990) Among others, the instrument in order to be considered negotiable must contain the so-called "words of negotiability — i.e., must be payable to "order" or "bearer"". Under Section 8 of the Negotiable Instruments Law, there are only two ways by which an instrument may be made payable to order. There must always be a specified person named in the instrument and the bill or note is to be paid to the person designated in the instrument or to any person to whom he has indorsed and delivered the same. CALTEX v. CA (1992) •
A check drawn payable to the order of cash is a check payable to bearer, and the bank may pay it to the person presenting it for payment without the drawer's indorsement. A check payable to bearer is authority for payment to the holder. Where the check is in the ordinary form and is payable to bearer, so that no indorsement is required, a bank, to which it is presented for payment, need not have the holder identified, and is not negligent in failing to do so. Order Instrument, negotiation requires delivery and indorsement of the transferor. o When instrument is payable to order: Drawn payable to the order of a specified person or to him or his order (Sec. 8, NIL).
the interest runs from the date of the instrument. when instrument contains a promise or order to do any act in addition to the payment of money.17) A. 6) A. C. D." the instrument is payable only to the person designated therein and is therefore non-negotiable. G. Sale of Securities 2 B. Omissions Not Affecting Negotiability (Sec. E. from the issue thereof An undated instrument is considered dated as of time issued.7. Sum expressed in words takes precedence over sum in numbers. same with indorsers. Payee • When negotiating. Maker and drawer • Sign the instrument at the lower right-hand corner. (Campos. Parties must be designated with Certainty a. TRANSFER 1. the note contains a provision that in case that it would not be paid at maturity. B. gives holder Election. two kinds of judgment by confession: Judgment by cognovit actionem Confession relicta verificatione 1. or Gives holder election to require something to be done in lieu of payment of money. In common law. he is to be deemed an indorser “I promise to pay” when signed by two or more persons is deemed to be jointly and severally signed Chapter III. as cited in Consolidated Plywood Industries v IFC Leasing. • 4.o Without the words "to order" or "to the order of. . F. Rules (Sec. or across the top. Authorizes sale of collateral securities. 2. C. BUT where words are so ambiguous or uncertain. Drawee • Name usually at the lower left-hand corner. 5)2 1. (if in addition to money – not NI) • Negotiability affected. the holder may treat it as either at his election When the capacity of signatory is not clear. PNB v. he must be named or indicated with reasonable certainty. NIL): 1. E. (de la Victoria v. D. with intent to transfer title to the payee and recognize him as holder thereof. sign at the back. If it is not clear in what capacity the person signed. • If instrument addressed to drawee. 4. 3. the "maker authorizes any attorney to appear and confess judgment thereon. without specification of the starting date. Such judgment note B. Burgos) NI incomplete and revocable until delivery for the purpose of giving effect thereto as between (Sec. Non-dating of the instrument Non-specification of value given. Delivery means transfer of possession of instrument by the maker or drawer. of Construction 2 Provisions Not Affecting Negotiability. a. said person is considered an indorser 3. Authorizes confession of judgment if instrument not paid at maturity. Written provisions prevail over printed provisions Where the instrument is ambiguous as to whether it is a note or a bill. It noted that it is in derogation of the constitutional safeguards (a day in court). confession of Judgment. or that any value had been given Non-specification of place where it is drawn or place where it is payable Bears a seal Designation of particular kind of currency in which payment is to be made b. (Sec. reference to the figures should be made Where interest is stipulated." The Court ruled that said judgment note is illegal and inoperative as such is against public policy. MANILA OIL REFINING (1922) In this case. Delivery and Issuance A. immediate parties Suggested Mnemonic: WEJy S: Waives. and if undated. Waives the benefit of any law intended for the advantage or protection of the obligor. 1987) can only be valid if given express legislative sanction. 16.
method of GEMPESAW v CA (1993) Every contract on a negotiable instrument is incomplete and revocable until delivery of the instrument to the payee for the purpose of giving effect thereto. and not for the purpose of transferring the property in the instrument PRESUMPTION OF DELIVERY 1. F. to the payee who takes it as a holder. and may be negotiated by delivery • a person who negotiates by mere delivery is liable only to his immediate transferee. NIL) blank – specifies no indorsee. as to kind of title transferred: a. in which case he is liable only to those who take title through his indorsement (Sec 40. absent an express prohibition against assignment or transfer written in the face of the instrument. Where the instrument is no longer in the possession of a party whose signature appears thereon. The first delivery of the instrument.C. so that any subsequent party may be forewarned that ceases to be negotiable. sale or transfer of instrument 2. as to manner of future negotiation(Sec.30. • the holder may convert a blank indorsement into a special indorsement by writing over the signature of the indorser in blank any contract consistent with the character of the indorsement An order instrument may be converted into a bearer instrument by means of a blank indorsement. unless the instrument is an originally bearer instrument. A non-NI may not be negotiated. must be made by or under the authority of the party making / drawing / accepting/indorsing delivery may be shown to have been conditional. the restrictive indorsee acquires the right to receive 3.1. But a bearer instrument remains as such whether it has been indorsed specially or in blank. But okay to indorse residue of partially paid instrument) (Sec. If payable to BEARER. Negotiation • • When an instrument is transferred from one person to another as to constitute the transferee the holder thereof. • A special indorser is liable to all subsequent holders. Kinds of Indorsements (Sec. if payable to ORDER. NIL) 3. without additional words. (Sec. NIL) Indorser generally enters into two contracts (Implied contracts by Indorser): 1. a valid and intentional delivery by him is presumed until the contrary is proved 2. However. the prohibition to transfer or negotiate must be written in express words at the back of the instrument. D. The signature of the indorser. negotiated by delivery. 35. 2. CA (1993) A NI may. but it may be assigned or transferred. indorsement of such indorsee is necessary to further negotiation. • • special – specifies the person to whom/to whose order the instrument is to be payable.31. is called issuance of the instrument. It is the liability of the indorser which is affected. if it is in the hands of a HDC. the maker is liable to him regardless of any proof of the lack of valid delivery. the presumption is conclusive 3. 33) 1. o In this kind of restrictive indorsement. instead of being negotiated. b. Date is not an essential element of negotiability 2. instrument so indorsed is payable to bearer. to be effectual. there can be no valid and binding contract and no liability on the instrument. negotiated by indorsement of holder + delivery (Sec. a remote party other than holder in due course delivery. E. to pay instrument in case of default of maker Indorsement must be of entire instrument (can’t be indorsement of only part of amount payable. PRESUMPTION AS TO DATE 1. Without the initial delivery of the instrument from the drawer of the check to the payee. nor can it be to two or more indorsees severally. NIL) SESBREÑO v. ALSO be assigned or transferred. restrictive – such indorsement either: 1) prohibits further negotiation of instrument. NIL): a. complete in form. is sufficient indorsement. or for a special purpose only. Camposes: Should an undelivered instrument come into the hands of a holder in due course. 2. Indorsement . • • • The indorsement must be written on the instrument itself or on a paper attached thereto (allonge). 32. An undated instrument is considered to be dated as of the time it was issued 2.
i. whether condition has been fulfilled or not Any person to whom an instrument so indorsed is negotiated will hold the same/proceeds subject to rights of person indorsing conditionally b. Furbee. NIL).Where a person. though he does not thereby automatically become a HDC (Furbee v. BPI vs CA (2007) The transaction [in Sec. Other Rules on Indorsement 1. conditional – additional condition annexed to indorser’s liability.. in addition. after which. Negotiation by Joint or Alternative Payees or Indorsees . a party required to pay the instrument may disregard the condition. NIL] is an equitable assignment and the transferee acquires the instrument subject to defenses and equities available among prior parties. would in effect be negotiating the check to such bank. 3.Where instrument payable to the order of two or more payees or indorsees not partners. however. 49. as holder of the legal title. unless the one indorsing has authority to endorse for the others Unindorsed instruments – Sec 49. Thus. the right to have the indorsement of the transferor and also the right. upon no other condition than the failure of prior parties to do so. c. Absolute – One by which the indorser binds himself to pay. “without recourse”) (Sec. to maintain legal action against the maker or acceptor or other party liable to the transferor. when indorsement is actually made. 4. Transfer remains a negotiation and transferee can still be a holder capable of acquiring a title free from defenses of prior parties.e. is that a valid transfer of ownership of the negotiable instrument in question has taken place. and make payment to the indorsee or his transferee. Indorsement by Collecting Bank . • But this does not mean that the transferee only has the rights of an assignee. transfer vests in transferee: a. b) Bring any action thereon that indorser could bring c) Transfer his rights as such indorsee. such title as transferor had therein. The underlying premise of this provision. NIL Where holder of instrument transfers for value without indorsing. NIL) o o Where an indorsement is conditional. if the transferor had legal title. and of due notice to him of such failure Joint . unconditional other classifications: . 41. unless the one indorsing has authority to endorse for the others (Sec. b. not otherwise a party to the instrument. places thereon his signature in blank before delivery. unqualified 2. qualified • constitutes indorser as mere assignor of title (eg. 38.2. NIL) Irregular . b. but all subsequent indorsees acquire only title of first indorsee under restrictive indorsement non-restrictive 2) a. b. subject to defenses and equities available to prior parties o ex: transferee can sue the transferor. In most cases. (Sec. 1936) right to have indorsement of transferor. 39. note that Sec. as to kind of liability assumed by indorser a.: a) receive payment of inst. 52 must be met at the time of the negotiation. he becomes a holder or possibly a HDC o For purposes of determining whether or not the transferee becomes a HDC after securing the transferor’s indorsement. the bank is acting as a mere collecting agent. but he can no longer transfer his rights as such indorsee where the form of the indorsement does not authorize him to do so. as to presence/absence of express limitations put by indorser upon primary obligor’s privileges of paying the holder: a. all must indorse. 3.holder deposits check with a bank other than the drawee. or 3) vests title in indorsee in trust for another o rights of indorsee in restrictive ind.all must indorse. the transferee acquires such title and. 5. he is liable as indorser 3.payment and bring any action thereon as any indorser. since he would have to indorse the check before the bank will accept it for deposit. (Gempesaw v CA 1993) constitutes indorsee as agent of indorser. • It relieves the qualified indorser of his liability to pay the instrument should the maker be unable to pay at maturity. b.
The endorser whose endorsement was struck out.agent should make it plain that he is signing in behalf of a principal otherwise he may be made personally liable (Sec 20.42. something more than mere possession by persons who are not payees or indorsers of the instrument is necessary to authorize payment to them in the absence of any other facts from which the authority to receive payment may be inferred. 1990) Chapter IV. 8. o It is incomplete when it is wanting in any material particular or particular 7. 48. That it is complete and regular upon its face 1. Requisites to become a holder in due course (Sec. no notice of Infirmity at time of Negotiation. (3) it took the same in good faith and for value. 3. except where indorsement bears date after maturity of the instrument. NIL) Indorsement by Agent . Holder (Sec.1. when so signing. Continuation of Negotiable Character . COMPLETE o An instrument is complete if it contains all the requisites for making it a negotiable one. HDC is one who has taken the instrument under the following conditions: 6.deemed prima facie to be payable to the bank or corporation of which he is such officer. retains its negotiability unless it has been paid or restrictively indorsed to prevent further negotiation (Sec. and all endorsers subsequent to him. (2) it became the holder thereof before it was overdue. Regular. NIL) o The Negotiable Instruments Law provides that where any person is under obligation to indorse in a representative capacity. HDC under Sec 52 HDC under Sec 58 : A holder who derives title to the instrument through a HDC has all the rights of the latter even though he himself satisfies none of the requirements of due course holding (Campos & Campos) HDC under Sec 59 (presumption): every holder is deemed prima facie to be a holder in due course c. 47. 2.Every negotiation deemed prima facie effected before instrument was overdue. NIL) 1. NIL) . the latter had no notice of any infirmity in the instrument or defect in the title of the previous indorser. payment to him in due course discharges instrument 5. 4.Transferees in this situation do not enjoy the presumption of ownership in favor of holders since they are neither payees nor indorsees of such instruments… Thus. Complete. o Place (Sec. NIL) Indorsement of bearer inst. not Overdue. CA (1990) The indorsee was a HDC. even if it may have blanks as to non-essentials. o Where an instrument payable to bearer is indorsed specially.Holder may strike out indorsements not necessary to his title. sue thereon in his own name 2. (FRANCISCO v CA. or GROCI: Good faith and value. although overdue. or the bearer thereof. it may nevertheless be further negotiated by delivery o Person indorsing specially liable as indorser to only such holders as make title through his indorsement 3. he may indorse in such terms as to negative personal liability.Every indorsement is presumed prima facie made at place where instrument is dated o Where instrument drawn or indorsed to person as cashier (Sec. HOLDER IN DUE COURSE 1. 51.46. should indicate that he is merely signing in behalf of the principal and must disclose the name of his principal. NIL) . b. RIGHTS OF HOLDER (Sec. no Infirmity. An agent. NIL) . may be negotiated by either the indorsement (1) of the bank or corporation or (2) of the officer. having taken the instrument under the following conditions: (1) it is complete and regular upon its face. Presumption as to Indorsement o Time (Sec. 191) • • Definition: Payee or indorsee of a bill or note who is in possession of it. are relieved from liability on the instrument (Sec. Three Kinds of DUE COURSE Holding a. otherwise he shall be held personally liable. 3 .An NI.52)3 SALAS v. Cancellation of Indorsements . complete and Regular. suggested mnemonics: GROIN: Good faith and value. not Overdue. and (4) when it was negotiated to the indorsee.45.
The date.proper to be inserted in a NI without w/c the same will not be complete. The sum payable. Instruments with fixed maturity but subject to acceleration: ultimate date of maturity is the date of maturity for the purpose of determining whether a purchaser is a HDC c. HOLDER FOR VALUE . 2000) ii. 3) Only evidence of the clearest and most convincing kind will suffice for that purpose. Non-acceptance i. 125. Section 24 of the NIL provides the presumption of consideration. 3. Date of Maturity 1) “payable after sight”—date of presentment 2) Payable on the occurrence of a specified event—date is fixed by happening of event An instrument is not invalid for the reason only that it is ANTE-DATED OR POST-DATED provided not done for an illegal or fraudulent purpose.12. Occurs when drawee refuses accept the order of the drawer stated in the bill ii. (Sec. NIL) i. The ff. 2. a holder who negotiates it after an unreasonable length of time after its issue b.3. PEOPLE (2004) 1) Under Section 28 of the Negotiable Instruments Law (NIL). BAYANI VS. is considered a material alteration (Sec.27. May occur before the date maturity of the bill b. “OVERDUE” a. a. The number or the relations of the parties. 3. (Travel-On Inc v CA.26. v. either for principal or interest.any consideration sufficient to support a simple contract. to as of of . Such presumption cannot be overcome by the petitioner’s bare denial of receipt of the [consideration]. NOTE: An overdue instrument is still negotiable. PRESUMPTION – Every NI is deemed prima facie issued for valuable consideration. That he took it in good faith AND for value: 1. NIL) i. 53. (Sec. The time or place of payment. and every person whose signature appears thereon to have become a party thereto for value (Sec. An 3. Rights of HDC of instrument that has been materially altered o enforce payment thereof according to its original tenor IF not a party to the alteration. iv. absence or failure of consideration is a matter of defense only as against any person not a holder in due course. NIL): i. In case of demand instruments. he is deemed a HFV to the extent of his lien (Sec. NIL) 3. 24. cannot be HDCs: (Sec. Occurs when the party primarily liable fails to pay at the date of maturity ii. if such was the fact 1. Non-payment 2. NIL) and (b) Where the holder has a lien on the instrument. A holder who became such after the date of maturity of the instrument (instrument is overdue). Material Particulars o What are material particulars? A change in the ff. the holder is deemed a HFV in respect to all parties who become such prior to that time (Sec. ii.(a) Where value has at any time been given for the instrument. In actions based upon a negotiable instrument. Applicable only to bills exchange iii. ii. but it is subject to the defense existing at the time of the transfer. NIL) i. That he became the holder of it before it was overdue and without notice that it had been previously dishonored. VALUE .2. for consideration is imported and presumed from the fact that it is a negotiable instrument. Undated instruments: Prima facie presumption that it was negotiated before it was overdue (Sec 45) d. 2) Moreover. The medium or currency in which payment is to be made. 124. Or which adds a place of payment where no place of payment is specified. DISHONOR a. vi. it is unnecessary to aver or prove consideration. NIL). The presumption exists whether the words "value received" appear on the instrument or not (Ong v People. 1992) b. iii. The person to whom an instrument so dated is delivered acquires the title thereto as of the date of delivery.
WHAT CONSTITUTES NOTICE OF DEFECT— To constitute notice of an infirmity in the instrument or defect in the title of the person negotiating the same.antecedent or pre-existing debt constitutes value. STA. in accordance with the stipulation. then value would have passed. GOOD FAITH a. the latter cannot be considered as withdrawn for the purpose of treating the bank as a HFV. v. It follows therefore. It is not necessary that he should know the particulars of the fraud. The burden is upon the defendant to show that notwithstanding the SUSPICIOUS CIRCUMSTANCES. o (So far. whether the instrument is payable on demand or at a future time. Holder acted in bad faith ii. (1961) . it acquired the check in actual good faith.) 2) ii. there has been no decision by the SC on this issue. judgment should be entered for the plaintiff upon the note. AL. of itself. upon the facts as found. The first debits are to be charged against the first credits.25. PAUL v. this fact together with other facts. Meritt) VICENTE R. is that the first payments apply to the oldest debts. NOT a Holder in GOOD FAITH i. the person to whom it is negotiated must have had actual knowledge of the infirmity or defect. The general rule as to the application of payments. § It is therefore sufficient that the buyer of a note had notice or knowledge that the note was in some way tainted with fraud. Gatchalian) o Purchase of an instrument at a DISCOUNT does not. there being no special facts to interfere. (Ham v. Holder must have taken the instrument in good faith and that at the time it was negotiated to him he had no notice of any infirmity in the instrument or defect in the title of the person negotiating it. (De Ocampo & Co. BAD FAITH . may be taken into account in deciding the issue of purchase in good faith. b. But if the sum had subsequently been checked out. MERCHANTS’ NATIONAL BANK OF ST. Holder had NOTICE OF DEFECT 1) ACTUAL KNOWLEDGE § SEC 56. 2. NIL) i.When the holder of a check deposits it with his bank (assuming it is not the drawee bank) and the bank credits it to his account. Bank credit as value . or knowledge of such facts that his action in taking the instrument amounted to bad faith. is the bank at this stage a HFV? o Majority View à first money in is presumed to be the first money paid out o Minority View à as long as the balance in the depositor’s account equals or exceeds the amount of the instrument deposited. knowledge that there was something wrong about the assignor’s acquisition of title is sufficient. b. Judgment reversed. MARIA SUGAR CO. (1914) The mere discounting of the note and placing the amount of said discount to the credit of the HFV would not then have constituted a transfer for value. v. However. ET.does not require actual knowledge of the exact fraud that was practiced. and. (Sec. if the instrument is pruchased at a heavy discount. constitute bad faith. GATCHALIAN. that the bank was a bona fide HFV without notice. DE OCAMPO & CO. SUSPICIOUS CIRCUMSTANCES a.
title DEFECTIVE when (Sec. …The fact is that it acquired possession of the instrument under circumstances that should have put it to inquiry as to the title of the holder who negotiated the check to it. Consequently. RULE à In such cases. § Just as a purchaser of a negotiable instrument is not put on inquiry. 1. . NIL): a. it being sufficient to show that the defendant had notice that there was something wrong about the assignor’s acquisition of title. CONSTRUCTIVE NOTICE (ex. The burden was. the payee is declared guilty of gross negligence amounting to legal absence of good faith and as such the consensus of authority is to the effect that the holder of the check is not a holder in good faith. or fraudulent circumstances o o NOTICE of infirmity or defect – a. In case the goods sold turn out to be defective. although he did not have notice of the particular wrong that was committed. STATE INVESTMENT HOUSE v. NOTE: Consolidated Plywood v. the buyer usually issues a note payable to the seller to cover the purchase price. force or fear or other unlawful means OR for an illegal consideration.4. That at time it was negotiated to him. IFC: A FINANCING COMPANY that is the indorsee of a note issued by a buyer payable to the seller of goods is NOT a holder in good faith as to the buyer. Negligence on the part of the plaintiff. doctrine of lis pendens) is insufficient to charge a purchaser of a NI with notice. actual knowledge of the infirmity or defect OR knowledge of such facts that his action in taking the instrument amounted to bad faith (Sec. c. CA à rule not applied 3. instrument / signature obtained by fraud. but are to be considered merely as evidence bearing on the question of bad faith. or suspicious circumstances sufficient to put a prudent man on inquiry. pursuant to a previous arrangement with the seller. it cannot recover the purchase price of the goods from the buyer. nor is he affected by the doctrine of lis pendens. notice of defenses disclosed by public records. it is not necessary to prove that the defendant knew the exact fraud that was practiced upon the plaintiff by the defendant’s assignor. a finance company pays the full price of the property sold and the note is indorsed to it by the seller. subrogating it to the right to collect the price from the buyer. therefore. he had no notice of : any infirmity in instrument any defect in title of person negotiating. placed upon it to show that notwithstanding the suspicious circumstances. IAC (1989) A check with 2 parallel lines in the upper left hand corner means that it could only be deposited and may not be converted to cash. the tendency of the courts is to protect the buyer against the finance company in the event that the goods sold turn out to be defective. INSUFFICIENT NOTICE i. NIL) b. 2) 3) 4) In installment sales. such circumstance should put the payee on inquiry and upon him devolves the duty to ascertain the holders’ title to the check or the nature of his possession. Salas v. duress. Failing in this respect. YANG v. 55. IFC à rule applied. CA (2003) … in accepting the cross checks and paying cash for them. neither is he charged with notice of defenses or equities disclosed by public records. 2. the subsequent holder could not be considered in good faith and thus.In order to show that the defendant had knowledge of such facts that his action in taking the instrument amounted to bad faith. Notice to an AGENT is chargeable against the principal. It would seem that it was the intent of the Negotiable Instruments Act to harmonize this disagreement by adopting the latter test. or b. Many times. despite the warning of the crossing. not a holder in due course. it acquired the check in actual good faith. instrument is negotiated in breach of faith. The finance company will be subject to the defense of failure of consideration and cannot recover the purchase price from the buyer. FINANCING COMPANY 1) Consolidated Plywood v.56. will not of themselves prevent a recovery. iii. One line of cases had adopted the test of the reasonably prudent man and the other that of actual good faith.
57. against all parties liable (Sec. B. where defense is not his own) – presumption in favor of holder 6. NIL) such defective title (i.57. Due 3.However. NIL) free from defenses available to prior parties among themselves (Sec. A restrictive indorsement which prohibits further negotiation will not prevent the indorsee from being a HDC. 51. 5.2. NI is subject to same defenses as if it were non-negotiable.54. General Rule: In the hands of any holder other than a HDC. NIL) holds instrument free of any defect of title of prior parties (Sec. Who is Deemed HDC (burden of proof) (Sec. ALFRED BERWIN & CO. RIGHT of a transferee who receives NOTICE of any infirmity or defect BEFORE he has PAID THE FULL amount for the instrument i. Qualified. The disadvantage of … not being a holder in due course is that the negotiable instrument is subject to defenses as if it were non-negotiable. Only a HDC may enforce payment on the PN. One such defense is absence or failure of consideration. Under the NIL4 1. 4 Suggested Mnemonics: REFS: Receive and Enforce payment. NIL) may enforce payment of instrument for full amount.52 C.1. Exception: A holder who derives title through a HDC and who is NOT himself A PARTY TO ANY FRAUD or illegality has all rights of such former holder in respect to all parties prior to the latter EVEN though he himself does not satisfy Sec.57. Free from any defect of title and defenses. Thus. A conditional indorsement does not deprive the conditional indorsee or subsequent holder of the rights of a HDC. and for the purpose of lending his name to some other person) is liable on the instrument. General Rule: Prima facie presumption in favor of holder Exception: Burden is reversed (burden on holder to prove that he or some person under whom he claims acquired title as HDC) when it is shown that the title of any person who has negotiated instrument was defective Exception to exception: There will be no reversal if the party being made liable became bound prior to the acquisition of 7. to compel D to pay would expose him to pay a second time to the HDC (in case A was no longer one). Restrictive BPI v. 52 then he is immune from all the personal defense. DISADVANTAGE NON HDC: o of being a B. without receiveing value therefor.. notice to an agent is chargeable against the principal.e. if he further indorses the instrument. drawer. NIL) 6. If he fulfills all the requisites in Sec.1. ii. JUR: 4. BUT. 2001) 7. § Thus. 6. 2.58) 7. NIL) to receive payment on the instrument – discharges the instrument (Sec. to sue on the instrument in his own name (Sec. 51. it is not clear whether A (the payee) is still the HDC since D (the maker) believed that A may have negotiated it.3. Notice of an ACCOMODATION PARTY is not notice of a defect. In CAB. Effect of Conditional and Indorsements A. C. Rights of Holder in Course 6. then the subsequent indorsee will not be a due course holder.2. Sue . an accomodation party (one who has signed the instrument as maker. acceptor or endorser. d. The status of a holder as a HDC is not affected by his taking under a qualified indorsement. The Negotiable Instruments Law does not provide that a holder not in due course can not recover on the instrument. Rights of Purchaser from Holder in Due Course (Sec. He will be deemed a HDC only to the extent of the amount therefore paid by him (Sec. (Atrium Mgt v de Leon. 4. 5.59) A. notwithstanding the fact that the holder knew him to be an accomodation party.
the corp. notwithstanding that from want of capacity. Every holder is deemed prima facie to be a holder in due course. Holder MUST PROVE that he or some person under whom he claims acquired the title as a holder in due course. CONCLUSIVE presumption of a valid delivery – where the instrument is in the hands of a HDC b. 1. NIL) However.can be raised only against holders not on due course. to enforce it against the party sought to be made liable. Legal – one who has legal title to the instrument may recover possession thereof even from holder in due course Equitable – may only recover from a holder not in due course .2. 3.. or the bearer thereof. or infant may incur no liability thereon. who is in possession of it. Equities or Claims Ownership are of 2 Kinds 1. Here. NIL) 3. though holding the legal title. Real Defenses 2. Instrument will not. Where instrument is wanting in any material particular: person in possession has prima facie authority to complete it by filing up blanks therein ii. the true contract appears . Incomplete. REAL defense – attaches to instrument on the principle that there was no contract at all. Signature on blank paper delivered by person making the signature IN ORDER that the paper may be CONVERTED into a NI à operates as prima facie authority to fill up as such for any amount 3. it is valid and effectual for all purposes 2. 15. Instrument Undelivered a. The authority to fill up is limited by the following: 1. REAL defense but Incapacity: available only to the incapacitated party (ex. disclose an absence of one of the essential elements of a contract. Instrument 1. (Sec. (Sec. be a valid contract in the hands of ANY holder. minor or corporation).3. But the last mentioned rule does not apply in favor of a party who became bound on the instrument prior to the acquisition of such defective title. 2. Undelivered B.2.2. NIL) 2. DEFENSES & EQUITIES 1. Presumption in Favor of Due Course Holding A. of 2. 2003) 2. (Sec. NIL) Who may be estopped from raising the real defense under Sec 15? A drawee bank whose negligent custody of the checks.1.8. 16. They are those which attach to the instrument itself and generally. PERSONAL defense – grows out of the agreement or conduct of a particular person in regard to the instrument which renders it inequitable FOR HIM. as against any person whose signature was placed thereon before delivery. the indorsement or assignment of the instrument by a corp. meaning a “payee or indorsee of a bill or note. Personal Defenses Chapter V. or by an infant passes the property therein.1. the defendant is excused from the obligation to perform. 2.22. Delivered (sec. 2 Kinds of Writings: i. 1.14) This is a personal defense only because provision states that if any instrument so completed is negotiated to a holder in due course.” (Yang v CA. BURDEN SHIFTS when it is shown that the title of any person who has negotiated the instrument was defective. not available against a HDC.1. PRIMA FACIE presumption of a valid delivery – where the instrument is no longer in the possession of a party whose sig appears thereon (Sec. Incomplete. if completed and negotiated without authority. Defenses in General 1. after partial execution. available against ALL holders including holders in due course. contributed to its escape 3. but for some reason .59. 1. this presumption arises only in favor of a person who is a holder as defined in Section 191 of the Negotiable Instruments Law. Complete.
2. so the person in possesion cannot be a thief or a finder but a person in lawful possession. Sometimes Real. Enforce payment thereof 3. 6. . Amount. The maker even assured the holder before the purchase that the note was good and that he would pay it at a discount . In general.3. 4. Duress 1. He did so without being aware of the fact that the note had an unlawful origin. Although the signer may know what he is signing. this will amount to forgery. Name of payee 3. (2) usage of trade or business (if any) with respect to such instruments. regard is to be had to the (1) nature of the instrument. 4. PARTIAL FAILURE of consideration is a defense pro tanto whether the failure is an ascertained and liquidated amount or otherwise . believing the note was valid and absolutely good. In order that any such instrument. can be acquired through or under such signature (unless forged signature unnecessary to holder’s title) No subsequent party can acquire the right against any party thereto (prior to the forgery) to: i.a. Illegality 1. Forgery (Sec. so defense only against a holder not in due course) The holder paid the value of the note to its former holder. In general. as to a signed blank paper b.one to whom the instrument has been delivered. 28) 1. PERSONAL defense.5. must be filled up strictly in accordance w/ AUTHORITY given b. REAL when the law expressly provides for illegality as a real defense (Statutory declaration of illegality RODRIGUEZ v MARTINEZ (1905) Maker cannot be relieved from the obligation of paying the holder the amount of the note alleged to have been executed for an unlawful consideration. When completed. In general. 7. may be enforced against any person who became a party thereto prior to its completion: a. 5. Date (Sec 13 “… The insertion of a wrong date does not void the instrument in the hands of a subsequent holder in due course…”) c. Lack of Consideration(Sec. 2. a REAL defense: … Effect a. b. signature is wholly inoperative no right to retain instrument. when completed. or enforce payment against any party thereto. c. a PERSONAL defense even if CC1409 provides that a contract with an illegal cause is void.1. This provision contemplates delivered instruments. He accepted note in good faith. or give discharge. PERSONAL if the party against whom it is sought to enforce such right is PRECLUDED from setting up forgery/want of authority. Place of payment d.4. Give a discharge there for iii. Sometimes Personal 4. Then it becomes a real defense. b. there may be wanting the intent or willingness to be bound. CAMPOS: There may be cases where the duress employed is so serious that it will give rise to a real defense because of the lack of contractual intent . 3. REAL if duress so serious as to give rise to a real defense for lack of contractual intent 3. it may be enforced upon the parties thereto only if it was filled strictly in accordance with the authority given The filling up must be within a reasonable time NOTE: If the signature on a paper is given only for autograph purposes and the same is converted into a NI. (Illegality is personal. constituting thus a valid defense even against a HDC 2. within a REASONABLE TIME – in determining what is reasonable time. 2. and 3) the facts of the particular case BUT if negotiated to HDC. Retain the instrument ii. ABSENCE or failure of consideration is a matter of defense as against any person not a HDC. 23): made without authority of person whose signature it purports to be 1. may enforce it as if it had been filled up properly What details may be filled up? a.
RULE: The drawee who pays the holder of the bill cannot recover from the holder what he paid under mistake Stop Payment Order is one issued by the drawer of a check countermanding his first order to the drawee bank to pay the check. if a bank pays a forged check. and other pertinent records within a reasonable time and to report any errors without unreasonable delay. FAR EAST BANK AND TRUST CO. However. If the stop order comes after the bank has certified or accepted the check. parties who make certain warranties. Who are PRECLUDED? i.If proximate cause of loss. drawer cannot later complain should bank refuse to recredit his account.a.. 62. The drawee who had paid an accepted bill as well as a non-accepted bill. namely: “unless the party against whom it is . cancelled checks. ILUSORIO vs CA (2002) True. irrespective of its good faith. PNB v QUIMPO (1988) A bank is bound to know the signatures of its depositors. If a drawer/depositor’s negligence and delay should cause a bank to honor a forged check. estopped / negligent parties iii. INC. the rule does provide for an exception. the bank (drawee) is not liable 1) 2) It is the duty of the depositor/drawer to carefully examine bank’s statements. it is a rule that when a signature is forged or made without the authority of the person whose signature it purports to be. The neglect was on the part of the drawee. it must be considered as paying out of its funds and cannot charge the amount so paid to the account of the depositor. Drawer/Maker’s signature i. each of which was forged. ACCEPTANCE AND PAYMENT of a forged instrument When there is acceptance and payment of a forged instrument. Effect Of Negligence Of Depositor . like a general indorser or acceptor after forgery (Sec. provided it is received prior to its certification or payment of the check SOME EXCEPTIONS: If the payment to holder is a legitimate debt of the drawer which the holder in due course could have recovered from the drawer anyway. Extensions Of The Price v Neal Doctrine: The bar to recovery (Price v Neal doctrine) is extended to overdrafts and stop payment orders 1) Overdraft occurs when a check is issued for an amount more than what the drawer has in deposit o o with the drawee bank. AND CA (2004) Consequently. SAMSUNG CONSTRUCTION CO. his check stubs. If bank pays a forged check it must be considered as making the payment out of its own funds and cannot charge the account of the depositor whose signature was forged. parties who ratify (BUT there are conflicting views whether “precluded” includes ratification) One view holds that a forged signature cannot be ratified because ratification involves the relation of agency and a forger does not assume to act for another. the rights and liabilities of the parties depend on whether the forgery pertains to the drawer/maker’s signature or merely of an indorsement. could NOT recover the money paid out on the bill. A bank is liable. the check is wholly inoperative. iii. 3) 3. NIL) ii. a. ii. the bank is under the legal duty to pay the holder and will not be liable to the drawer for doing so. in paying a forged check. RULE: The drawee bank is bound to follow the order. PRICE v NEAL. VS. 2) b.
the drawee may only recover from the holder. FAR EAST BANK AND TRUST CO. even if the bank performed with utmost diligence. Since the drawer. The exception to this rule arises only when negligence can be traced on the part of the drawer whose signature was forged. is not precluded by negligence from setting up the forgery. assuming there is forgery. Should he fail to do so(for instance due to insolvency) he cannot recoup his loss by charging it to the drawer’s account 3) Although a depositor/drawer owes a duty to his drawee bank to examine his cancelled checks. After all. it is the exception that applies. Indorsement: i. ii. a depositor is under a duty to set up an accounting system and business procedure as are reasonably calculated to prevent or render the forgery of indorsements difficult. As a rule the drawee bank who has paid the check with forged indorsement. the forgery is not discovered until it is too late for the bank to recover from the holder or the forger 2) 3) GEMPESAW v CA. It is not supposed to be the duty of the drawee to ascertain whether the signatures of the payee or indorsers are genuine or not. because the indorsement can be disregarded as being unnecessary to the holder’s title If drawee fails to act promptly . PBC While there is no duty resting on the drawer to look for forged indorsements on his cancelled checks. and the need arises to weigh the comparative negligence between the drawer and the drawee to determine who should bear the burden of loss. When drawee may recover from holder 1) not 2) Where the instrument is originally a bearer instrument . AND CA (2004) The general rule remains that the drawee who has paid upon the forged signature bears the loss. 2) Generally.. he has no similar duty as to forged indorsements. Petitioner is precluded from setting up the forgery. Samsung Construction. When it is the signature of the indorser that is forged. iii. An exception to this rule is where the drawer is guilty of such negligence which causes the bank to honor the check. VS. INC. When drawee may recover from DRAWER 1) Where the instrument is originally a bearer instrument. This is because drawee makes no warranty as to the genuineness of any indorsement. because the indorsement can be disregarded as being unnecessary to the holder’s title Indorsement forged by an employee or agent of the drawer If due to the drawer’s negligence/delay. cannot charge the drawer’s account for the amount of the said check. the general rule should apply.” In the instant case. as soon as he comes to know of the a forged indorsement should promptly notify the drawee bank REPUBLIC v EBRADA Drawee can recover. the drawer whose signature was forged may still recover from the bank as long as he or she is not precluded from setting up the defense of forgery. Section 23 of the Negotiable Instruments Law plainly states that no right to enforce the payment of a check can arise out of a forged signature.sought to enforce such right is precluded from setting up the forgery or want of authority. 4) The drawer. particularly by the depositor’s own employees. due to his own negligence in entrusting to his secretary his credit cards and checkbook including the verification of his statements of account. Between Drawee Bank and Collecting Bank 1) Collecting bank only liable for forged indorsements . b. SAMSUNG CONSTRUCTION CO. the drawee and drawer CAN recover vs holder 1) The drawee can recover the amount paid by him in cases where only an indorsement has been forged . Still. if he delays in informing the holder whom he paid iv.
Because the indorsement is a forgery. by the usual proper investigation. (BPI v CA. When both are guilty of negligence. Thus. In such cases the drawee bank has a right to believe that the cashing bank (or the collecting bank) had. In this jurisdiction. The second part admits of exception. 1968) The collecting bank or last indorser generally suffers the loss because it has the duty to ascertain the genuineness of all prior indorsements considering that the act of presenting the check for payment to the drawee is an assertion that the party making the presentment had done its duty to ascertain the genuineness of the indorsements. the collecting bank commits a breach of this warranty and will be accountable to the drawee bank. The drawee bank’s duty is but to verify the genuineness of the drawer’s signature and not of the indorsement because the drawer is its client. who has forged the signature of the payee . is guilty of negligence which proximately contributed to the success of the fraud practiced on the drawee bank. the loss falls upon the bank who cashed the check . satisfied itself of the authenticity of the negotiation of the checks.2) 3) 4) 5) 6) and not forgeries of the drawer or maker’s signature. a collecting bank which indorses a check bearing a forged indorsement and presents it to the drawee bank guarantees all prior indorsements. one who encashed a check which had been forged or diverted and in turn received payment thereon from the drawee. The first part states the general rule that a forged signature is wholly inoperative and payment made through or under such signature is ineffectual. the negligence of the party invoking the forgery is an exception to the general rule. (PNB v CA. Where the negligence of the drawee bank is the proximate cause of the collecting bank’s payment of a check with a forged indorsement. it is the duty of . the demands of substantive justice are satisfied by allocating the loss and the costs on a 6040 ratio. PCIB v. It warrants that the instrument is genuine. made an express guarantee on the validity of “all the prior endorsements”. CA (2001) … A bank which cashes a check drawn upon another bank. cannot hold the proceeds against the drawee when the proceeds of the checks were afterwards diverted to the hands of a third party. 1992) the bank to know that the check was duly indorsed by the original payee and where the bank pays the amount of the check to a 3rd person . (refer to BPI v CA. Both drawee and collecting bank were negligent in the selection and supervision of their employees resulting in the encashment of the checks by the impostor. the degree of negligence of each will be weighed in considering the amount of loss which each should bear. without requiring proof as to the identity of persons presenting it. ( BDO v Equitable bank) The drawee bank is not similarly situated as the collecting bank because the former makes no warranty as to the genuineness of any indorsement. 1992) In presenting the checks for clearing the collecting agent. ASSOCIATED BANK v CA (1996) By reason of the statutory warranty of a general indorser in Section 66 of the Negotiable Instruments Law.” BPI v CA (1992) Section 23 of the NIL has 2 parts. GREAT EASTERN LIFE v HONGKONG & SHANGHAI BANK (1922) “Where a check is drawn payable to the order of one person and is presented to a bank by another and purports upon its face to have been duly indorsed by the payee of the check . Even if the latter bank was not negligent. Both banks were not able to overcome the presumption of negligence in the selection and supervision of their employees Considering the comparative negligence of the parties. or making inquiries with regard to them. and that it is valid and subsisting at the time of his indorsement. including the forged indorsement. and its remedy is against the person to whom it paid the money. the drawee bank may be held liable to the collecting bank . it would still be liable to the drawee bank because of its indorsement. This liability scheme operates without regard to fault on the part of the collecting/presenting bank.
. Jurispridence i. adds place of payment where none specified. 65 and 66. NIL i. instrument in any respect b. 3. 1996) ii. REAL defense when relied on to deny liability according to the altered terms. b. Material Alteration (Sec. authorized or assented to alteration ii. vii. HDC may enforce payment thereof according to orig. Campos: Any other alteration would be non-material and would not affect the liability of any prior party . time or place of payment iv. NIL) As to a HOLDER in DUE COURSE i. 2. 1. number/relations of parties v. tenor ii. c. but the holder may enforce it only according to its original tenor. vi. the holder in due course can recover the principal sum with the original rate of interest When alteration is of the amount or the interest rate is altered. the holder can recover the ORIGINAL AMOUNT/interest rate. PERSONAL defense when used to deny liability according to the tenor of the instrument b. change date ii. L. party who has himself made. The intended payee was the same. IMMATERIAL ALTERATION a.4. It means that an unauthorized change in an instrument that purports to modify in any respect the obligation of a party or an unauthorized addition of words or numbers or other change to an incomplete instrument relating to the obligation of a party. other change/addition altering effect of viii. (PNB v CA. c.) and spoliation (alterations done by a stranger) will not avoid the instrument. What constitutes material alteration? a. A material alteration is one which changes the items which are required to be stated under Section 1 of the Negotiable Instruments Law. may estop him from setting up alteration as a defense. citing J. The sum of money due to the payee remained the same. Int’l Corporate Bank v CA. N. Statutory: Review Sec. I. the drawer’s negligence.125. (PNB v CA. [It] is not an essential requisite for negotiability under Section 1 of the Negotiable Instruments Law.124) 1. changes on items other than those required to be stated under Sec. DRAWER’S NEGLIGENCE a. (PNB v CA. Vitug) 4. (Metrobank v Cabilzo. 5.2. The general rule is that the drawee cannot charge against the drawer’s account the amount of an altered check. BUT. The aforementioned alteration did not change the relations between the parties. Where the interest rate is altered . before or after the alteration. subsequent indorser because by indorsement he warrants that the instrument is in all respects what it purports to be and that it was valid and subsisting at the time of his indorsement (Secs. The name of the drawer and the drawee were not altered. either for principal or interest iii. Alterations of the serial numbers do not constitute material alterations on the checks. b. except as against: i. Note that #7 is a catch-all provision such that sec 125 may still have broad applicability. Alteration must NOT be apparent on the face of the instrument for the holder then would not be a holder in due course iii. As a DEFENSE: a. However. General Rule: Where NI materially altered w/o the assent of all parties liable thereon it is AVOIDED. medium/currency of payment. An alteration is said to be material if it changes the effect of the instrument. 2006) c.. sum payable. the drawer is not bound to so prepare the check that nobody else can successfully tamper with it . b. EFFECT OF MATERIAL ALTERATION a. 2006) EFFECT: an innocent alteration (generally. 1996. When an instrument that has been materially altered is in the hands of a HDC not a party to the alteration.
because by the indorsement he warrants that the instrument is in all respects what it purports to be and that it was valid and subsisting at the time of his indorsement (Sec 65 and 66) b. FROM DRAWER: drawee has no right to seek reimbursement from drawer for its erroneous payment METROBANK v CABILZO (2006) In addition. REPUBLIC BANK v CA (1991) The collecting bank is protected by the24-hour clearing house rule from the liability to refund the amount paid by the drawee bank. 3) SC: a. Chemical Natl Bank) Where the negligence of the drawer consists in failing to discover alterations previously made which he could have discovered by a comparison of the cancelled checks and check stubs or by diligent observation of his records and could thus have prevented the drawee bank from subsequently cashing other altered checks . Drawee bank is not liable. (2) Sec. [Note: A much recent Circular changed the point of reckoning for the return of the altered check from within 24 hours from the clearing to within 24 hours from the discovery of the alteration] ASSOCIATED BANK v CA (1996) The rule mandates that the checks be returned within twenty-four hours after discovery of the forgery but in no event beyond the period fixed by law for filing a legal action. The remedy of the drawee bank is against the party responsible for the forgery or alteration. 124 and (3) Sec. adopted the minority view but on a different basis— the Central Bank Circular regulating clearing of checks and limiting the period within which a drawee bank may return a spurious check b. constitutes material alteration of the instrument without consent of the parties liable thereon and so discharges the instrument. is under strict liability to pay to the order of the payee in accordance with the drawer’s instructions as reflected on the face and by 5 Affirmed the minority view that drawee cannot recover . bec.62 in relation to Sec. known as the drawee bank. holder liable (PCIB v CA.d. a drawer cannot be expected to foresee that his clerk will use acid to alter his checks. Critten v. RECOVERY after acceptance or payment by the drawee bank i. but if holder is guilty of ii. EFFECT OF DRAWEE’S ACCEPTANCE OF ALTERED CHECKS a. 2001) MONTINOLA v PNB (1951) The insertion of the words “Agent Philippine National Bank” converted the bank from a mere drawee to a drawer and therefore changes its liability. the collecting bankmaybe prejudiced and lose the opportunity to go after its depositor. HONGKONG & SHANGHAI BANK v PEOPLES BANK (1970)5 The failure of the drawee bank to call the attention of the collecting bank as to such alteration until after the lapse of 27 days would negate whatever right it might have had. the HDC can recover the principal sum with the original rate of interest. i.Yes. Where the interest rate is altered. EXCEPT: A subsequent indorser. If prompt notice is not given. bec. FROM HOLDER 1) Prevailing view . the drawee can charge the subsequent check against the negligent drawer’s account. 132 2) Minority view – No. The rationale of the rule is to give the collecting bank (which indorsed the check) adequate opportunity to proceed against the forger. (2) stability of transactions and (3) bank is in a better position to shoulder the loss. negligence which proximately contributed to the erroneous payment by drawee. 6. of (1) estoppel. of (1) payment under mistake. (ex. the bank on which the check is drawn.
duty bound to pay the holder at date of maturity. Dishonor by such party. it has control of the drawer's account. the right to deduct the erroneous payment it made from the drawer’s account which it was expected to treat with utmost fidelity. (BPI v Buenaventura. (Sec. Parties secondarily liable: 1. Available as a defense against non-HDC b. to ascertain the legal nature of the paper he is executing Chapter VI. Drawer of bill 2. and the result of its negligence must rest upon it. Due presentment or demand from primary party for payment or acceptance. it violates the terms of the check.1. BPI v BUENAVENTURA (2005) …It [the bank] should be able to detect alterations. Primary Parties 2. Since the drawee bank. and he is not relieved from liability even if the instrument should become overdue due to failure of holder to make such demand. ii. Where the signor does not know the nature of the instrument he signs. c. 70. When the drawee bank pays a materially altered check. person who by the terms of the instrument is absolutely required to pay the same. but 2. Fraud 1. In General 1. not liable to ANY holder PERSONAL DEFENSE a. Maker of promissory note b.3. Taking of proceedings required by law after dishonor. as directed by the drawer. by the exercise of ordinary care. where. by its terms. Fraud in factum accompanied by NEGLIGENCE of maker or signer i. and he is able and willing to pay it there at maturity. 2. fraud in execution / fraud in factum: did not know that paper was a NI when it was signed b. a. and it is supposed to be familiar with the drawer's signature. Acceptor of bill of exchange unconditionally liable. payable at a special place. 2. erasures.the terms of the check. REAL DEFENSE a. 2005) 1. he could have discovered it. not bound to pay unless the following has been fulfilled a. superimpositions or intercalations thereon. in the instant case. Parties primarily liable: 1. b. such ability and willingness are equivalent to a tender of payment upon his part. Payment made under materially altered instrument is not payment done in accordance with the instruction of the drawer. 4. LIABILITY OF PARTIES 1. Conditionally liable. it is not only a question of payment under mistake. for these instruments are prepared. NIL) 2.1. as well as its duty to charge its client’s account only for bona fide disbursements he had made. then it has no right to claim reimbursement from the drawer. Fraud in inducement: knows it is NI but deceived as to value/terms i. did not pay according to the original tenor of the instrument. having the opportunity to ascertain its character. but payment in neglect of duty which the commercial law places upon it. pronounces it to be valid and pays it. WON holder demands payment from him.2. much less. REMEDY: Unless a forgery or alteration is attributable to the fault or negligence of the drawer himself. Promises to pay it according to its tenor . Three factors are typically used in determining the existence of negligence: 1) legal character of the instrument which the signer thinks he is signing 2) the physical condition of the signer and his ability to read 3) whether the signer had the opportunity at the time of signing.2. and c. It should possess appropriate detecting devices for uncovering forgeries and/or alterations on these instruments… There is nothing inequitable in such a rule for if in the regular course of business the check comes to the drawee bank which. Indorsers. otherwise. Liability of MAKER 1. Presentment for payment not necessary to charge primary party if the instrument is. the remedy of the drawee bank that negligently clears a forged and/or altered check for payment is against the party responsible for the forgery or alteration. it bears the loss. both note and bill b. as in this case. SECONDARY PARTIES: a. Presentment and 2. printed and issued by itself. PAYMENT: Tender 1.
or lack thereof. the bank is liable for paying it in disregard of the countermand. are sufficient statements of clear abuse of right for which it may be held liable under Article 19 of the Civil Code for any damages she incurred resulting therefrom.2. c) Moreover.4. and payment thereafter to the payee by the bank is wrongful. NIL) . his capacity and authority to draw the instrument iv.3. drawee can no longer recover what it voluntarily paid to the holder of the uncertified and unaccepted instrument. he engages to pay the bill according to the tenor of his acceptance. 3. Drawer 1) Payment despite Stop Payment Order a) Before payment or certification by the bank. b) Since a check is not an assignment of the drawer’s fund. prevented Catalan from seeking further redress with Thomson for the recovery of her claim while the latter was alive. Majority and prevailing view: Where alteration consists in raising the amount payable. Acceptor: Liability a.” ii. CATALAN (2004) HSBC is not being sued on the value of the check itself but for how it acted in relation to Catalan’s claim for payment despite the repeated directives of the drawer Thomson to recognize the check the latter issued. NIL). existence of drawer ii. Admits existence of payee and his then capacity to indorse. Meaning of "according to the tenor of his acceptance" i. the drawer may countermand the order. or a corporation acting ultra vires This was an action by a depositor against a bank for damages resulting from the wrongful dishonor of the depositor's checks. (Sec. 127. Acceptance 1. NIL) Drawee is not liable unless he accepts the bill and in doing so. the payee is a fictitious person ii. NIL) 3. BANK OF AMERICA(1971) 2. DRAWEE and ACCEPTOR 1.62. Therefore. (Sec. genuineness of his signature iii. Bank of America) or to the holder (refer to HSBC v. Definition: i. PRECLUDED from setting up the following defenses: i. Holder 1) Not liable on the instrument until he accepts it and even a holder in due course cannot sue him on the instrument before his acceptance 2) A bill/check of itself does not operate as an assignment of the funds in the hands of the drawee/bank (Sec 189. the payee was insane. a prized and valuable asset. 2) Refusal to Accept a) Under some circumstances. if the alteration of payee's name. Her allegations in the complaint that the gross inaction of HSBC on Thomson’s instructions. Common law rule: Acceptor of altered check not liable to innocent holder except for the original amount 2. 19. Catalan) ARANETA V. HSBANK’s actions. w/c constitutes material loss. HSBC VS. the drawee who refuses to accept may be made liable for breach of contract or for damages based on a tort either to the drawer (refer to Araneta v. Liability of DRAWEE to: 2. HELD: Araneta's claim for temperate damages is legally justified because of the adverse reflection on the financial credit of a businessman. as well as its evident failure to inform Catalan of the reason for its continued inaction and non-payment of the checks. "Acceptance" means an acceptance completed by delivery or notification (Sec. existence of payee and his then capacity to endorse b. A person on whom a bill of exchange or check is drawn and who is ordered to pay it b. acceptor liable to HDC only as to its original amount. a minor. and admits the following: i. IN GENERAL: a. smack of insouciance on its part. paying banks cannot charge drawer's account with the amount of the check because its duty is to pay only “according to the order of the drawer. Drawee a. a. and the drawee/bank is NOT LIABLE on the bill unless and UNTIL he/it ACCEPTS (or certifies) the same.
150. b) The bill may be accepted even after it is overdue or dishonored. NIL) 1) A bill may be accepted: a) before it has been signed by the drawer. refuses within 24hrs or such other period as the holder may allow.ii. or ii. or by non payment 2) But when a bill payable after sight is dishonored by nonacceptance and drawee subsequently accepts it. NIL). c. NIL: The holder of a bill presenting the same for acceptance may require that the acceptance be written on the bill and if such request is denied. Virtual acceptance . (Sec. doesn’t bind the acceptor except in favor of a person to whom it is shown and who. the acceptance. will retroact to date of presentation. Campos: Usually made by writing the word “accepted” and signing immediately below 1) BUT. It must not express that the drawee will perform his promise by any other means than the payment of money. PERIOD within which to accept i. destroys the bill. to return the bill accepted or non-accepted to the holder b.unconditional promise in writing to accept a bill before it is drawn. in the absence of diff agreement. or b) while otherwise incomplete. Acceptance. 137 relating to constructive acceptance ii. Extrinsic acceptance . NIL) ii. Temple) ii. receives the bill for value. 3. Effect of non-acceptance within the prescribed period 1) Where bill is duly presented and is not accepted within prescribed time. SUMCAD v. is entitled to have bill accepted as of date of the 1st presentment. 138. PROVINCE OF SAMAR (1956) There was implied acceptance in view of the circumstances of the case (furnishing of photostatic copies. or c) when it is overdue. Under the clearing house rules. presentment for certification) by voluntary assuming the obligation of holding so much deposit as would be sufficient to cover the amount of the check. The signification by the drawee of his assent to the order of the drawer (Sec 132. a) Sec. If there is not demand for the return of the bill and the drawee keeps it until after the expiration of said period without expressly accepting or refusing it. Acceptance of an INCOMPLETE bill (Sec 138. if given. two views: i. REQUISITES for a valid acceptance (Sec 132. the holder.137. Sec 133. may treat the bill as dishonored 1) Effect: holder may go against the party’s secondarily liable—the drawer and the indorsers iii. (Sec. dates as of the day of presentation. deemed an actual acceptance in favor of every person . 136. since an instrument DOES NOT LOSE ITS NEGOTIABILITY by the mere fact that its d. CONSTRUCTIVE ACCEPTANCE: occurs in the following circumstances a. Constitutes dishonor because Sec. the drawee bank’s failure to return within the prescribed time will be deemed payment or acceptance of the check. drawee’s signature alone is sufficient (Campos citing Lawless v. 1) Thus there is no valid or implied acceptance except as provided by Sec. acceptance of an existing bill f. or d) after it has been dishonored by a previous refusal to accept.acceptance is written on a paper other than the bill itself. (Sec. It must be in writing and signed by the drawee. The drawee is allowed 24 hours after presentment to decide WON he will accept the bill. does not change the implied promise of acceptor to pay only in money c. Constitutes constructive notice ii. NIL uses the word "refuses" d. NIL) 2. NIL) i. NIL: Where the drawee i. MANNER of acceptance i. NIL) b. ACCEPTANCE ON A SEPARATE INSTRUMENT e. maturity date has passed or the drawee’s refusal to accept or pay it. if given. the person presenting it must treat the bill as dishonored by nonacceptance or he loses right of recourse against the drawer and indorsers. SEC 137. iii. NIL allows acceptance to be made while the bill is incomplete. on the faith thereof. 134.
acceptance of future bill In both cases. TRADE . within a reasonable time. payment by the acceptor dependent on the fulfillment of a condition therein stated. the payee is declared guilty of gross negligence to the effect that the holder of the check is not a holder in good faith. 142. he is not a HDC. 2. BATAAN CIGAR & CIGARETTE FACTORY. Cashier's or manager's . 139. and (c) the act serves as a warning to the holder that the check has been issued for a definite purpose so that he must inquire if he has received the check pursuant to that purpose. receives the bill for value. NIL) c. 3) When the drawer or an indorser receives notice of a qualified acceptance. NIL) 1) The holder may refuse to take a qualified acceptance. (b) the check may be negotiated only once – to one who has an account with the bank. upon the faith thereof. It may legally be negotiated as long as the one who encashes the check with the drawee bank is another bank.a negotiable time draft or bill of exchange drawn on and accepted by a commercial bank. as such. Definition: A check is an instrument in the form and nature of a BE. and again when it is cashed. otherwise. The acceptance of some. (Sec. unless expressly states that bill is to be paid there only and not elsewhere. 1. always payable on demand and always drawn on a bank. CA The negotiability of a check is not affected by its being crossed. c. . NIL) i.drawn by a bank on itself and its issuance has the effect of acceptance. but an unlike an ordinary bill. Memorandum check . iii. STATE INVESTMENT HOUSE V. b. by the bank mentioned between the parallel lines. NIL). or subsequently assent thereto. Kinds: a. 2) Where a qualified acceptance is taken. drawn by a seller on a buyer for the purchase price of goods. the holder may treat it is either a BE or PN. a. without need of presentment. the drawer and indorsers are discharged from liability on the bill unless they have authorized the holder to take a qualified acceptance. NIL).where the word "memorandum" or "memo" is written across its face. one or more of the drawees but not of all. to pay part only of the amount for which the bill is drawn. since the drawer and drawee are the same. CHECKS certification : acceptance and 4. IAC Crossed check should put the payee on inquiry to ascertain the holders’ title to the check or the nature of his possession.in express terms varies the effect of the bill as drawn. Crossed – when the name of a particular banker or a company is written between the parallel lines drawn. INC. (Sec. Effects of a crossed check: (a) the check may not be encashed but only deposited in the bank. (Sec. GENERAL assents without qualification to the order of the drawer. 140. BANKER'S acceptance . Conditional. (Sec. thus the bank never had any chance of accepting or rejecting them. d.g. ii. QUALIFIED .5. may treat the bill as dishonored by nonacceptance. or if it is especially crossed. Failing this. the acceptance must clearly and unequivocally identify the bill to which the acceptance refers. he must. (Sec. v. these cannot be subject of escheat. whether specially or generally.first when it is issued. (Sec. 2. 141.upon which the holder's signature must appear twice -. 135. d. signifying that the drawer will pay the holder absolutely. express his dissent to the holder or he will be deemed to have assented thereto. KINDS OF ACCEPTANCE: An acceptance is either (1) general or (2) qualified. RP v. PNB (1961) Demand drafts have not been presented either for acceptance or for payment. who.139. iv.a draft or bill of exchange with a definite maturity. always states upon its face the transaction from which it arose. Qualified as to time. Partial. to pay only at a particular place. Includes acceptance to pay at a particular place. NIL) b. Local. Traveler's check . bearing across its face the acceptance of the buyer. v.
a certificate of deposit payable to the order of depositor. NEW PACIFIC TIMBER v. the holder at that stage cannot exercise his right of recourse against the drawer and the indorsers ii. the certification is equivalent to acceptance. with rights and duties of one in such situation. or any other obligation it can assume. and for all intents and purposes. equivalent to acceptance b.check collection process b. 2006) [S]ince the said check had been certified by the drawee bank. and b) The drawer and all indorsers discharged from all liability (versus ordinary bill of exchange – not discharged) 2) Drawer a) secondary parties not released ROMAN CATHOLIC BISHOP V. 3. It is really the bank’s own check and may be treated as a promissory note with the bank as a maker. an agreement by which a bank promises to pay the check at any time it is presented for payment . the contract is executory until the credit is established. though insofar as the remitting bank is concerned. whether a manager's check or ordinary check.” When the holder procures the check to be certified. 4. IAC (1990) A certified personal check is not legal tender nor is it the currency stipulated.Definition i. The mere issuance of it is considered an acceptance thereof. Where a check is certified by the bank on which it is drawn. and shall continue good. In effect. Sept. It is an understanding that the check is good then. the drawer would be the maker and in which case the holder need not prove presentment for payment or present the bill to the drawee for acceptance EPCIB v ONG (2006) A manager’s check is an order of the bank to pay. Clearing a. that they have been set apart for its satisfaction. the funds represented by the check are transferred from the credit of the maker to that of the payee or holder. If procurement by: 1)Holder a) The bank becomes the solidary debtor. It is similar to a cashier’s check both as to effect and use.Cashier's check is the substantial equivalent of a certified check and is thus subject to escheat. Ong. Check must be payable 1) Checks cannot be certified before payable c. Clearing house where representatives of different banks meet every afternoon of every business day to receive the envelopes containing checks drawn against the bank he represents for examination and clearance. Telegraphic transfers are likewise subject to escheat because upon making payment complete the transaction insofar as he is concerned. Certification a. SENERIS (1980) (as cited in EPCIB v. INTERNATIONAL CORPORATE BANK v GUECO (2001) A manager’s check is one drawn by the bank’s manager upon the bank itself. it is a bill of exchange drawn by the cashier of a bank upon the bank itself. PAL V. and therefore cannot constitute valid tender of payment. and accepted in advance by the act of its issuance. A cashier’s check is a check of the bank’s cashier on his own or another check. integrity and honor behind its issuance. “the check operates as an assignment of a part of the funds to the ii. If treated as promissory note. Must be in writing ii. By its peculiar character and general use in commerce. Bank which certifies 1) Becomes liable as an acceptor 2) REFUSAL to certify a check doesn’t constitute dishonor. Made on the check or another instrument iii. When check certified by bank on which it is drawn. Said certification “implies that the check is drawn upon sufficient funds in the hands of the drawee. by the certification. a manager’s check is regarded substantially to be as good as the money it represents. is to enable the holder to use it as money. Liability i. The check becomes the primary obligation of the bank which issues it and constitutes its written promise to pay upon demand. and this agreement is as binding on the bank as its notes circulation. and an offer of a check in payment of a debt is not a valid tender of payment and may be refused receipt by the obligee or creditor. The object of certifying a check. and that they shall be so applied whenever the check is presented for payment. Requisites for a Valid Certification i. the latter becomes the depositor of the drawee bank. Clearing . CA (1990) A check. as regards both parties. drawn upon itself. committing in effect its total resources. The issuance of the check to a person authorized to receive it operates to release the judgment debtor from any further obligations on the judgment.
ii. Secondary Parties 3. In depositing the check in his name. Tavera & Ventura (HTV). Liability of DRAWER 1. according to its tenor c. in favor of PNB or his order. However. The surrender of the check by the holder to the drawee bank upon its payment is not negotiation. private respondent did not become the outright owner of the amount stated therein. the drawee bank extinguishes it as a negotiable instrument and converts it into a mere voucher. this is in accordance with ordinary banking practices and with this Court’s pronouncement that "the collecting bank or last endorser generally suffers the loss because it has the duty to ascertain 6 “SEC. he warranted that it would be accepted upon proper presentment & paid in due course.creditors. petitioner shall credit the amount in private respondent’s account or infuse value thereon only after the drawee bank shall have paid the amount of the check or the check has been cleared for deposit. Surrender of Check a. the drawee bank extinguishes it as a negotiable instrument and converts it into a mere voucher. after receiving the deposit. Hyndman. which in turn will collect on the check from the drawee bank. B. These are 2 different contracts. The payee or holder gives value to the drawer. By paying the check.1. 63. This is in consonance with the rule that a negotiable instrument. As it was not paid. Admits existence of payee and his then capacity to endorse b. under its own rules. HELD: A. his is in the position of a bona fide indorsee. HTV accepted it. whether a manager’s check or ordinary check. such as a check. BPI vs CA (2000) the genuineness of all prior endorsements considering that the act of presenting the check for payment to the drawee is an assertion that the party making the presentment has done its duty to ascertain the genuineness of the endorsements. is not legal tender." The rule finds more meaning in this case where the check involved is drawn on a foreign bank and therefore collection is more difficult than when the drawee bank is a local one even though the check in question is a manager’s check 3. Engages that on due presentment instrument will be accepted. Again. That if it be dishonored + necessary proceedings on dishonor duly taken. Sec. The fact that Picornell was an agent of HTV in the purchase of the tobacco does not necessarily make him an agent of HTV in drawing the bill of exchange. the exception to the rule enunciated under Section 63 6 of the Central Bank Act to the effect “that a check which has been cleared and credited to the account of the creditor shall be equivalent to a delivery to the creditor in cash in an amount equal to the amount credited to his account” shall apply in this case x x x. He cannot claim 2. Liability of Drawer (Picornell) As drawer of the bill. PICORNELL (1922) Picornell obtained money from PNB Cebu to purchase tobacco to be shipped to Manila. or both. – Checks representing deposit money do not have legal tender power and their acceptance in the payment of debts. that a check which has been cleared and credited to the account of the creditor shall be equivalent to a delivery to the creditor of cash in an amount equal to the amount credited to his account. through the clearinghouse. Distinction between surrender of check upon payment thereof and negotiation i. the signature at the back of the check would constitute an indorsement. is at the option of the creditor: Provided. b. will pay the amount thereof to the holder or to a subsequent indorser who may be compelled to pay it Limiting Liability: drawer may insert in the instrument an express stipulation negativing / limiting his own liability to holder PNB v. As such. and if he is ignorant of the equities between the drawer and acceptor. both public and private. NIL a. he became liable to the payment of its value to PNB. Legal character . HTV subsequently refused to pay the bill because some of the tobacco shipped were damaged. By paying the check. Liability of Acceptor (HTV) PNB is a holder in due course and the partial want of consideration does not exist with respect to the bank who paid full value for the bill of exchange. Picornell then drew a bill of exchange drawn against his principal. The holder in negotiating the check to the depositary bank. The want of consideration between the acceptor and drawer does not affect the rights of the payee who is a remote party. Upon presentation of the bill. 61. The delivery of the check by the holder to the drawee bank upon its payment is not negotiation. or paid. unless otherwise indicated. . He was merely designating petitioner as the collecting bank. however. 5. In the case of a deposit of a check by the holder thereof in a bank other than the drawee bank.” Hence.
BA could not have been a HDC. B negotiated these checks by indorsement to BA w/c paid the full amount of the checks without first clearing with the drawee bank. 65. or payable to bearer: liable to all parties subsequent to maker/drawer 3) Signs for accommodation of payee. Drawer received notice of protest in fulfillment of the condition set by law for his liability to arise. Sec. Liability of INDORSERS: 1. b. NOTE: The Camposes note that the drawer was not held liable because the decision was based on §23 on forgery instead of §124 on material alteration. Sec 64.2. CRIMINAL LIABILITY FOR BOUNCING CHECK a. deceit or damage to the payee thereof. 67. NIL: A person. in all respects what it purports to be iii He has good title to it iv All prior parties had capacity to contract v He has no knowledge of any fact w/c would impair validity of instrument or render it valueless vi in case of negotiation by delivery only. drawer. instrument genuine. the Embassy could have been held liable for the original amount of the checks 3. contrary to normal banking practice. 66. b. WARRANTIES: a. good title. Hence. NIL: Irregular Indorser i When a person not otherwise a party to an instrument. 2. Drawer's liability is only secondary as the liability of the acceptor is primary. incurs all the liabilities of an indorser. places thereon his signature in blank before delivery. General or Unqualified Indorser: Every person who indorses without qualification. capacity of prior parties . in accordance w/ these rules: 1) Instrument payable to order of 3rd person: liable to payee and to all subsequent parties 2) Instrument payable to the order of maker/drawer. warrants to all subsequent HDCs: (Sec. HELD: Drawer (embassy) not liable. Indorser a. 3. or acceptor unless he indicates by appropriate words his intention to be bound in some other capacity i SAPIERA vs CA (1999). that the offender postdated or issued a check in payment of an obligation contracted at the time the check was issued. liable to all parties subsequent to payee 2. Under BP 22 PEOPLE v NITAFAN(1992) Lim issued a memorandum check which was subsequently dishonored for insufficiency of funds. If BA had been a HDC. NIL) ii Instrument genuine. BA is guilty of negligence in giving B special treatment as a privileged client. NIL) i. c. who places his signature on an instrument negotiable by delivery. PEOPLE v REYES (2005) There is no estafa through bouncing checks when it is shown that private complainant knew that the drawer did not have sufficient funds in the bank at the time the check was issued to him. or his funds deposited therein were not sufficient to cover the amount of the check. NIL: A person placing his signature upon an instrument other than as a maker. in disregard of elementary principles of prudence that should attend banking transactions. Every person negotiating an instrument by delivery or by a qualified indorsement warrants: (Sec. therefore. it should suffer the loss. warranty only extends in favor of immediate transferee b. It is undisputed that the four (4) checks issued by de Guzman were signed by petitioner at the back without any indication as to how she should be bound thereby and. Estafa under the RPC PACHECO v CA (1999) The essential elements in order to sustain a conviction under the above paragraph are: 1. Sec. What the law punishes is the issuance itself of a bouncing check & not the purpose for which it was issued nor the terms & conditions relating to its issuance. A memorandum check has the same effect as an ordinary check and within the ambit of BP 22. he is liable as an indorser.exemption from liability by invoking the existence of agency. that such postdating or issuing a check was done when the offender had no funds in the bank. BANCO ATLANTICO v AUDITOR GENERAL (1978) B fraudulently altered checks payable to her drawn by the Embassy by increasing the amounts. she is deemed to be an indorser thereof. 3. Such knowledge negates the element of deceit and constitutes a defense in estafa through bouncing checks. 63.
that private respondent did not intend to bind himself thereon. he will pay the amt. Accomodation Party: one who signed instrument as maker/drawer/acceptor/ indorser w/o receiving value thereof. Nor is it correct to say that the holder for value is not a holder in due course merely because at the time he acquired . Only evidence of the clearest and most convincing kind will suffice for that purpose. NIL): a. among themselves: liable prima facie in the order they indorse. or both. The following are the rules on reimbursement: 1. A solidary accommodation maker who pays on the note may directly demand reimbursement from his co-accommodation maker without first directing his action against the principal debtor provided that : (a) he made the payment by virtue of a judicial demand or (b) the principal debtor is insolvent. referring to the case of Goodman v Gaul where an accommodation indorsement may be made for the accommodation of the payee or holder. Such an indorsement is generally for the purpose of better securing the payment of the note. he knew that the indorser was only an accommodation party. joint payees/indorsees deemed to indorse jointly and severally TUAZON v RAMOS (2005) After an instrument is dishonored by nonpayment. without consideration. The fact that the accommodation party stands only as a surety in relation to the maker is a matter of concern exclusively between accommodation indorser & accommodated party. the instrument. An accommodation note is one which the accommodation party has put his name. i. ANG TIONG v.ii. if it is dishonored.e. Order of Liability among Indorsers (Sec. the indorser makes the indorsement for the accommodation of the maker. regardless of order of indorsement c. CA. that the checks were supported by valuable consideration. v. Liability : Liable on the instrument to HFV even if holder knew he was only an AP MAULINI v. but holder may sue any of the indorsers. indorsers cease to be merely secondarily liable. for the purpose of lending his name to some other person 2. INC. SERRANO (1914) In accommodation indorsement. The holder of a negotiable instrument need not even proceed against the maker before suing the indorser. The only evidence private respondent offered was his own testimony that he had issued the checks to Travel-On as payee to "accommodate" its General Manager. instrument is at time of indorsement valid and subsisting iii. he lends his name to the maker not to the holder. eon due presentment. The liability of the accommodation party remains primary & unconditional. SADAYA v. TRAVEL-ON. it shall be accepted or paid. according to tenor iv. they become principal debtors whose liability becomes identical to that of the original obligor. This right springs from an implied promise between the accommodation makers to share equally the burdens that may ensue from their having consented to stamp their signatures on the promissory note. and necessary proceedings on dishonor be duly taken. SEVILLA (1967) The solidary accommodation maker who made payment has the right of contribution from his coaccommodation maker. and 2. Note: Campos disagrees with this ruling. TING (1968) It is not a valid defense that the accommodation party did not receive any valuable consideration when he executed the instrument. but proof of another agreement admissible b. Accomodation Party 1. It is immaterial to the claim of a holder for value. CA Travel-On was entitled to the benefit of the statutory presumption that it was a HDC. for the purpose of accommodation some other party who is to use it and is expected to pay it. 68. CRISOLOGO-JOSE v. 3. this claim was in fact a claim that the checks were merely simulated. or to any subsequent indorser who may be compelled to pay it 3.3. A solidary accommodation maker of a note may demand from the principal debtor reimbursement for the amount he paid to the payee. To holder.
Aruego signed as a drawee/acceptor. unless he discloses name of principal and fact that he’s only acting as agent. mere addition of words describing him as an agent without disclosing his principal ii. Effect of non-presentment [w/in reasonable time] (Sec. notwithstanding such holder. PNB The right of an agent to indorse commercial paper will not be lightly inferred. not liable if he was duly authorized b. Signature per procuration operates as notice that the agent has limited authority to sign. bill payable after sight. PBC v ARUEGO (1981) Aruego obtained a credit accommodation from PBC. Any person taking checks made payable to a corporation does so at his peril & must abide by the consequences if the agent who indorses the same is without authority. Aruego invokes the defense that he signed the document in his capacity as President of the Phil. As an accommodation party. AGRO CONGLOMERATES v CA (2000) An accommodation party is a person who has signed the instrument as maker. where bill expressly stipulates that it shall be presented for acceptance c. such as the president and vicepresident. or the production of a PN to the party liable for payment 3. or indorser.Section 29 of the NIL does not apply to corporations which are accommodation parties because the issue or indorsement of negotiable paper by a corporation without consideration is ultra vires. Hence. at the time of the taking of the instrument knew him to be only an accommodation party. Aruego is liable on the instrument to a holder for value. Reasonable Time: considerations i nature of instrument ii usage of trade or business with respect to instrument iii facts of each case 3. the printer collected the cost of printing by drawing a draft against PBC. For every printing of the publication. and the principal is bound only in case the agent in so signing acted within the actual limits of his authority 2.1. It is the signatories thereof that shall be personally liable therefor. 4. LIABILITY a. a. 144. established as in ordinary agency b. WHEN LIABLE: i. 2. GEN RULE: Where person adds to his signature words indicating that he signs on behalf of a principal. How made (Sec. In no other case is presentment for acceptance necessary in order to render any party to the bill liable. He has the right. 69. Presentment 4. which will later be sent to Aruego for acceptance.accommodation party EXCEPT if the officer or agent of the corp. BY or ON BEHALF of the holder . Definition: 1. to obtain reimbursement from the party accommodated. 65. Corporate officers. notwithstanding such holder at the time of taking the instrument knew (the signatory) to be an accommodation party. the accommodation party being the surety. AGENCY: a.4. where bill is drawn payable elsewhere than at residence / place of business of drawee d. NIL) INSULAR DRUG v. 143. NIL) a. Where a broker or agent negotiates an instrument without indorsement. or in other cases where presentment for acceptance necessary to fix maturity b. NIL) . Presentment for Acceptance 1. since the relation between them has in effect become one of principal and surety. Education Foundation & only as an accommodation party.discharges the drawer and all indorsers. he is primarily liable for the drafts.2. or to the drawer or acceptor for PAYMENT. without receiving value therefor. PBC seeks recovery on these drafts. Signature of any party may be made by duly authorized agent. As drawee. and for the purpose of lending his name to some other person and is liable on the instrument to a holder for value. the production of a BE to the drawee for his ACCEPTANCE. after paying the holder. one who has taken the instrument with knowledge of the accommodation cannot recover against a corporation . he incurs all liabilities in Sec. was specifically authorized to execute or indorse the paper for the accommodation of a third person. have no power to execute for mere accommodation a NI of the corporation for their individual debts or transactions in which the corporation has no legitimate concern. When necessary (Sec. authority to collect money does not have the implied authority to indorse checks received in payment. HELD: Aruego is personally liable because nowhere in the draft did he disclose that he was signing as a representative of the Phil Education Foundation. A salesman with 2. NIL) a. (Sec. Neither did he disclose his principal. acceptor. 145. Liability of an AGENT 1. 4.
Where. v. NIL) iii. 149. whether in the case of a foreign bill of exchange or other NI – deemed to be a waiver not only of a formal protest but also of presentment and notice of dishonor. 80. (3) fictitious. express or implied. 70. b. 148. ON a business day and before the bill is overdue. 150. NIL – i at the time fixed therein without grace. d. TO the drawee or some person authorized to accept or refuse acceptance on his behalf. NIL) b. 2) Where the drawee is a fictitious person. 151. 70. 147. 72. after the exercise of reasonable diligence. (2) absconded. (4) does not have capacity to contract by bill. Sec. Dishonor by nonacceptance: i When duly presented for acceptance – acceptance is refused or can not be obtained. NIL) ii Right of holder: immediate right of recourse against the drawer and indorsers and no presentment for payment is necessary. when a bill is dishonored by nonacceptance – immediate right to recourse accrues to holder (Sec. NIL) ii. to charge the drawer where he has no right to expect or require that the drawee or acceptor will pay the instrument. and i bill addressed to drawees not partners. NIL) NOTICE OF DISHONOR i Recipient. to charge an indorser where the instrument was made or accepted for his accommodation and he has no reason to expect that the instrument will be paid if presented. 85. b. presentment cannot be made. NIL) Except as herein otherwise provided. in case of waiver of protest. c. b. (Sec. NIL) NON ACCEPTANCE of the bill i Duty of holder: must treat the bill as dishonored by nonacceptance or he loses the right of recourse against the drawer and indorsers. (Sec. Excused: 1) Where. Presentment for Payment 1. acceptance has been refused on some other ground.(Sec. (Sec. NIL) 4. 117. Where. 111. NIL) iv. IN GENERAL a. ii drawee is dead. c. MAY be made to his personal representative. NIL) When Excused (Sec. Dishonor and Effects a. delay is excused and doesn’t discharge the drawers and indorsers. Where the drawee is (1) dead.3. NIL) Bill may be treated as dishonored by nonacceptance: a. c. 6.b. (Sec. (Sec. . MAY be made: 1) to him or 2) to his trustee or assignee. although presentment has been irregular. 151. c. with the exercise of reasonable diligence. bearing fixed maturity / not payable on demand – on the day it falls due 5. NIL) 2. MUST be made to them all unless one has authority to accept or refuse acceptance for all. Date and time of presentment a. NECESSARY in order to charge the drawer and indorsers(Sec. to present the bill for acceptance before presenting it for payment. 1) to the drawer and 2) to each indorser. (Sec. to charge the person primarily liable on the instrument (Sec.89. (Sec. after the exercise of reasonable diligence. Where the holder has no time. AT a reasonable hour. presentment can not be made. 4. NIL) on any day on which NIs may be presented for payment under: a. NOT necessary i. Sec. NIL – at a reasonable hour on a business day i Instruments falling due or becoming payable on Saturday next succeeding business day ii EXCEPT instruments payable on demand [at the option of the holder] – before twelve o'clock noon on Saturday WHEN that entire day is not a holiday. iii drawee has been adjudged a bankrupt or an insolvent or has made an assignment for the benefit of creditors. or ii When presentment for acceptance is excused – bill is not accepted. 3) By waiver of presentment. 79. NIL) vi. 146. ii Effect of omission to give notice of non-acceptance 1) any drawer or indorser to whom such notice is not given is discharged 2) does not prejudice the rights of a HDC subsequent to the omission. When made (Sec. (Sec.
72. NIL) c. it will be held to operate as actual payment of the debt or obligation for which it was given. when the cause of delay ceases to operate. (Sec. may be presented for payment before twelve o'clock noon on Saturday when that entire day is not a holiday (Sec. misconduct. CHAN WAN v. HELD: Checks crossed specially to China Banking should have been presented for payment by that bank. 81.if day of maturity falls on Sunday or a holiday. Seeto indorsed to PNB-Surigao a bearer check dated 10 March drawn against PBCCebu. the drawer cannot be held liable irrespective of loss or injury unless presentment is otherwise excused. Chan Wan seeks recovery on these checks.85. (Sec. his failure to do so for more than ten (10) years undoubtedly resulted in the impairment of the check through his unreasonable and unexplained delay. iv at the option of the holder. except when through the fault of the creditor. HELD: The indorser is discharged from liability by reason of the delay in the presentment for payment. Where DELAY excused .NIL) 4. 74. NIL) b. demand bill of exchange – within a reasonable time after the last negotiation. Manner of Presentment a. (2) after sight. and if he from whom it is received sustains loss by want of such diligence. The instrument must be exhibited. NIL) (NOTE: though reasonable time from last negotiation. include date of payment. iii PAPA v A. However. payable on demand – within a reasonable time after its issue. Inasmuch as Chan Wan presented them for payment himself. when paid. The check was dishonored for insufficient funds because the delay in presentment cause the exhaustion of the drawer's funds. presentment must be made with reasonable diligence (Sec.How time computed. The acceptance of a check implies an undertaking of due diligence in presenting it for payment. The payee of a check would be a creditor under this provision and if its non-payment is caused by his negligence. (Sec. It has. 85. But there was due presentment as clearance endorsements by China Bank can be found at the back of the checks. TAN KIM(1960) Tan Kim drew specially crossed checks payable to bearer. Check . (Sec. VALENCIA (1998) Granting that petitioner had never encashed the check. (Sec.must be presented for payment within reasonable time after its issue or drawer will be discharged from liability thereon to extent of loss caused by delay i. likewise. Chan Wan presented the checks for payment to the drawee bank but they were dishonored due to insufficient funds.BY WHOM: the holder. there was no proper presentment & the liability did not attach to the drawer. payment will be deemed effected and the obligation for which the check was given as conditional payment will be discharged. Indorser Seeto asked that the suit be deferred while he made inquiries. it may be unreasonable time from issuance thus holder may not be HDC under sec. PNB-Surigao mailed the check to its Cebu branch on 20 March & was presented to the drawee bank on 09 April. . — When payable at a (1) fixed period after date. the instrument is impaired. While it is true that the delivery of a check produces the effect of payment only when it is cashed. 71.when the delay is caused by circumstances beyond the control of the holder and not imputable to his default. or by some person authorized to receive payment on his behalf. What constitutes a sufficient presentment. exclude day from which the time is to begin to run. The assurances of refund by the indorser are the ordinary obligation of an indorser which are discharged by the unreasonable delay in presentation of the check. or the last day for payment falls on a Sunday or on a holiday – may be done on the next succeeding secular or business day. 3. not by Chan Wan. some of the checks were stamped account closed. the rule is otherwise if the debtor is prejudiced by the creditor’s unreasonable delay in presentment. NIL) b. NIL) PNB v. He assured PNB that he would refund the value in case of dishonor. SEETO (1952) On 13 March. NOTE: Camposes note that the discharge of the indorser should have been based on §§ 66 & 71 on presentment as a condition to the indorser's liability & presentment for payment of a demand bill made within a reasonable time from its last negotiation. 71) d. NIL) ii. This is in harmony with Article 1249 of the Civil Code under which payment by way of check or other negotiable instrument is conditioned on its being cashed. 194. the instruments falling due or becoming payable on Saturday are to be presented for payment on the next succeeding business day (Sec. Drawer had enough funds when he issued the check because his subsequent checks drawn against the same bank had been encashed. 86.Where the day. NIL) i. or negligence.U. under §84. been held that if no presentment is made at all. must be delivered up to the party paying it. or (3) after that happening of a specified event.
UNLESS the person to make payment has no funds there to meet it at any time during the day. The effects of crossing a check relate to the mode of presentment for payment. 5. check may be negotiated only one -. 76. The law imposes a duty of diligence on the collecting bank to scrutinize checks deposited with it. (Sec. NOTE: Camposes note that despite the addition of the words "non-negotiable" on the specially crossed checks. 1) where instrument payable at bank. acting without authority. Sayson. a principal debtor. NIL) i. and 3. deposited & encashed the checks with Associated Bank. 2) no place of payment specified but address of the person to make payment is given in the instrument – at the address given. PLACE: proper place as herein defined: (Sec. ii.As Chan Wan failed to indicate how the checks reached his hands. to the knowledge of the drawer or indorser of an instrument. presentment is excused and the instrument is overdue and unpaid. ASSOCIATED BANK v. Sec 83. as to holder. 1) in any other case – wherever person to make payment can be (1) found.to them all (Sec. Notice of Dishonor 5. the fact that a specified NI. NIL) 3) where persons primarily liable are partners and no place of payment is specified. has not been . even though there has been a dissolution of the firm. A check on its face normally has all the requisites of negotiability.Definition 1. Effect:: [subject to NIL provs] an immediate right of recourse to all parties secondarily liable accrues to the holder. or if presented (2) at his last known place of business or residence 2) where principal debtor is dead and no place of payment is specified – to his personal representative. residence of the person to make payment. for the purpose of determining their genuineness & regularity. 78. 3) no place of payment and no address is given – at the usual place of business or 5. TIME: reasonable hour on a business day. upon proper proceedings taken. the court held him not to be a holder in due course who can still recover on the checks but subject to personal defenses. (2) to any person found at the place where the presentment is made. HELD: Citing State Invt House v IAC. the act of crossing the check serves as a warning to the holder that the check has been issued for a definite purpose so that he must inquire if he has received the check pursuant to that purpose. NIL) 1) place of payment specified – at place of payment. NIL The instrument when: i. 77. NIL) iii. ii. 84. iv. the Court considered the checks as negotiable instruments. 75. in which case presentment at any hour before the bank is closed on that day is sufficient (Sec. To bring either verbally or by writing. NIL) TO WHOM: (1) person primarily liable on the instrument.to any one of them. duly presented for payment and payment refused or cannot be obtained. such as lack of consideration. the effects of crossing a check are: 1. 2. This is conditioned upon the giving of due notice of dishonor iii. or ii. check may not be encashed but only deposited in the bank. (Sec. b. CA & REYES (1992) Different department stores issued crossed checks bearing "for payee's account only" payable to Melissa's RTW. NIL) 4) joint debtors and no place of payment is specified . Dishonor is a condition precedent to the enforcement of the liability of secondary parties. 73. — must be made during banking hours. IF any AND IF he can be found with the exercise of reasonable diligence (Sec. Dishonor by Nonpayment a. presentment for . or if he is absent or inaccessible. and the addition of the above words should not change its character as a negotiable instrument. An indorser whose liability has become fixed by demand and notice is.to one who has an account with a bank.1.
NIL Except as herein provided. There must be actual personal service. unless delay excused (Sec. If given otherwise .The ff. supplemented and validated by verbal communication c. accepted or has not been paid. Indorser c. notice still sufficient: (Sec. by the next mail thereafter ii. NIL): Must be given w/in the ff. instrument suffering from misdescription UNLESS the party to whom the notice is given is in fact misled thereby. when a negotiable instrument has been dishonored by non-acceptance or nonpayment. notice of dishonor must be given to the drawer and to each indorser… 2. NOTICE to SUBSEQUENT PARTY: Each party who receives a notice is given the same period of time within which to notify prior indorsers that the last holder had. a bank has a right of set off of the deposits in its hands for the payment of any indebtedness to it on the part of a depositor. and b. NIL) a. When necessary 1. when the cause of delay ceases to operate. Contents – must contain any terms which sufficiently a. Notice may be given as soon as the instrument is dishonored and within the time fixed by NIL.4. But. Personal service i. 4.2. and that the party notified is expected to pay it General rule: MUST be given to drawer and to each indorser. As a general rule. Where parties reside in same place (Sec. 113. the bank made use of the money standing in his account to make good for the treasury warrant. An ordinary intelligent and diligent effort to make personal service b. (Sec.identify the instrument. 5. Form of Notice: a. insufficient written notice. TIME FIXED BY THE NIL: a. NIL) i. However. 104. or . b. Campos: must be in a language that will inform the addressed party that the instrument has been duly presented 2. Acceleration Clause a. Through the mails c. indicate that it has been dishonored by non-acceptance or non-payment. NIL) 2. If sent by mail .2. If clause is optional on holder: i The bringing of an action against the maker and indorsers constitutes a valid exercise of option and a valid notice of dishonor b. PNB (1935) A notice of dishonor is necessary to charge an indorser & that the right of action against him does not accrue until the notice is given. prior to the mailing of notice of dishonor & without awaiting any action by Gullas. misconduct. and any drawer or indorser to whom such notice is not given is discharged 5. Campos: Through the telephone i Party to be notified must be fully identified as the party at the receiving end of the line 4. Accomodation Indorsers i Joint maker excluded if not an indorser 3. if it had been deposited in the post office within the time specified above c. Sender deemed to have given due notice (Sec.before the usual hours of rest on the day following iv If sent by mail . 103. NIL). or if there be no mail at a convenient hour on last day. times: ii If given at the place of business of the person to receive notice before the close of business hours on the day following iii If given at his residence .: i.deposited in the post office in time to reach him in usual course on the day following. Delay (Sec.Time and Place 1. or negligence ii. ii. NIL) 5. or oral b. Clause is automatic: i Notice of dishonor must be givem at once ii Not sufficient to give it upon commencement of action GULLAS v. Form and Contents (Sec 96) 1.deposited in the post office in time to go by mail the day following the day of dishonor. 3. Sec 89. not signed b. 107) 3. Parties entitled to notice: a. Convenient hour: depends on the usual hours of opening of business houses and the post-office iii. Excused: when the delay is caused by circumstances beyond the control of the holder and not imputable to his default. Gullas was merely an indorser & notice should actually have been given to him in order that he might protect his interests. 105. notice must be given with reasonable diligence. Where parties reside in different places (Sec. Drawer b.3. may either be in writing.within the time that notice would have been received in due course of mail.Mode of delivery a. 95. a written notice. 102.
to either place. or ii If he lives in one place and has his place of business in another. to the parties liable thereon c. 93. To partners : to any one partner.6. all subsequent holders and b. notwithstanding any miscarriage in the mails 4. NIL) To joint parties(Sec. to his trustee or assignee a. still SUFFICIENT i Where the notice is actually received by the party within the time specified in this Act. Notice of dishonor may be given by an agent either in his own name or in the name of any party entitled to give notice. if address not given: i to the post-office nearest to his place of residence or where he is accustomed to receive his letters. to his principal. or iii If he is sojourning in another place. If no personal representative – MAY be sent to the last residence or last place of business of the deceased. . upon taking it up. 3.7. When rule requiring notice not applied 1. where notice given by/on behalf of a party entitled to give notice: inures for benefit (Sec. (Sec. Parties affected by waiver i. even though there has been a dissolution. to the place where he is so sojourning. Place where notice must be sent (Sec. NIL) a. NIL). to the address. “deposit in post office” — when deposited in any branch post office or in any letter box under the control of the post-office department. unless in the meantime the instrument has been accepted b. Waiver of notice may be made either: i before the time of giving notice has arrived or ii after the omission to give due notice. To whom notice MAY be given 1. NIL) b. By Whom Given 1. 90. 106.8. In whose favor notice operates 1. 5. all prior parties who have a right of recourse vs. may be expressed or implied. NIL) b. 100.binding upon all parties. or he may give notice to his principal (within the same time as if agent were holder) (Sec. 97) a. he may either himself give notice to the parties liable thereon. 101. i. Where notice of dishonor is duly addressed and deposited in the post office. Waiver a. Sec 112: notice of dishonor is dispensed with when after the exercise of reasonable diligence. holder b. Where instrument has been dishonored in hands of agent. 92. unless one of them has authority to receive such notice for the others. to the party himself or b. 91. 98. Or his agent in that behalf If party is dead and death known to the party giving notice (Sec. (Sec. Dependent upon where the waiver is written ii. if any. 94. By or on behalf of the holder or b. and if with reasonable diligence. 5. all parties subsequent to party to whom notice given 5. whether that party be his principal or not (Sec. or b. in case of an instrument dishonored in the hands of an agent (Sec. to each of the party b. Agent a. NIL) 2. NIL) a. and who. would have a right to reimbursement from the party to whom the notice is given 2. NIL) b.5. When notice of non-acceptance is already given a. when given by/on behalf of holder: inures to benefit of (Sec. 4. Ratio for the rule: dishonor by nonacceptance confers upon the holder an immediate right against all secondary parties 3. Party himself b. Sec. b. 94. Where the waiver is embodied in the instrument itself . NIL a. MUST be given to a personal representative. Reasonable diligence depends upon the circumstance of the case 2.a. he can be found. added by the party to his signature. Sec 116: Where due notice of dishonor by non-acceptance has been given. 109. b. NIL) a. Notice sent to place not in accord with NIL. the party to whom it’s given 2. 6. (Sec. 5. If given by an agent a. to bankrupt (Sec. NIL) a. 99. notice of a subsequent debtor by non-payment is not necessary. 108. NIL) a. any party to the instrument who may be compelled to pay it to the holder. In general a. if there be one. NIL) 5. it cannot be given to or does not reach the parties sought to be charged b. ex: collecting bank IN GENERAL (Sec.
The fact that presentment was made and the manner thereof. instrument made/accepted for his accommodation E. drawee fictitious. NIL) Delay excused 1. at the place where it is dishonored. Upon presentment of the draft. Under these conditions. When Notice Not Necessary 1. a. As Moulic failed to sell the jewelry. protest for non-acceptance if dishonored by nonacceptance & 3. drawer countermanded payment STATE INVESTMENT HOUSE v CA (1993) Moulic issued 2 checks to Victoriano as security for pieces of jewelry to be sold on commission. Definition: testimony of some proper person that the regular legal steps to fix the liability of drawer and indorsers have been taken When necessary: 1. drawer has no right to expect/require that drawee/acceptor will honor instrument e. 2. 114. In case of a FOREIGN BILL appearing on its face to be such. (Sec. Effect of failure to protest: the drawer and indorsers are discharged. HELD: State Investment is a holder in due course & is not subject to the personal defense of lack of consideration. it must be protested for non-payment at the place where it is expressed to be payable. and indorser aware of the fact at time of indorsement b. indorser is person to whom instrument presented for payment c. 2. the drawee is necessary. incapacitated c.. 110. Moulic withdrew her funds from the drawee bank. F. Requisites: a. Protest A. HELD: The action is not brought upon the bill of exchange which was used only as evidence of the indebtedness. There is no need to serve the drawer a notice of dishonor because she was responsible for the dishonor of her checks.When not necessary to charge drawer (Sec. protest & notice of nonpayment are C. drawer/drawee same person b. NIL) D. Where not necessary to charge indorser (Sec. 4. 159. When protest dispensed with by any circumstances which would dispense with notice of dishonor. Contents 1. By whom 1. the bill must be noted or protested with reasonable diligence. (Sec. K. the checks were dishonored. NIL) B. 2. she returned them to Victoriano. 3. protest for nonpayment if not previously dishonored by nonpayment. incapacitated. NIL) Waiver of protest: deemed to be a waiver not only of a formal protest but also of presentment and notice of dishonor. and 2. 155. annexed to the bill or must contain a copy thereof. where written above the signature of an indorser . (Sec. must be under the hand and seal of the notary making it. in the presence of two or more credible witnesses.9. . 111. TAN LEONCO v GO INQUI(1907) In exchange for the abaca from Tan Leonco's plantations. When the cause of delay ceases to operate. 153. any respectable resident of the place where the bill is dishonored. The bill was not protested. EXCEPT bill drawn payable at the place of business or residence of person other than the drawee has been dishonored by nonacceptance. 4. she failed to retrieve her checks. NIL) Protest for better security against the drawer and indorsers — where the acceptor has been adjudged a bankrupt or an insolvent or has made an assignment for the benefit of creditors before the bill matures (Sec. or negligence. when duly noted. Victoriano negotiated these checks to State Investment. Place 1. not imputable to his default. when caused by circumstances beyond the control of the holder. J. 158. (Sec. 152. she could not have expected her checks to be honored. 2. no further presentment for payment to. After withdrawing her funds. The demand made and the answer given. NIL) Time 1. and b. 2. (Sec. or the fact that the drawee or acceptor could not be found. However. NIL) Form 1.binds him only. H. NIL) a. 5. The time and place of presentment. if any. 115. it was refused payment due to a stop order from the drawer. (Sec. misconduct. NIL). on the day of its dishonor unless delay is excused. NIL) a. A notary public. (Sec. (Sec. 7. 154. 156. Go Inqui drew a bill of exchange against Lim Uyco. or 2. and b. G. 2. drawee fictitious. or demand on.iii. The cause or reason for protesting the bill. NIL). Upon presentment. drawer is person to whom instrument is presented for payment d. the protest may be subsequently extended as of the date of the noting. I.
NOTE: The ruling of the Court on protest is merely obiter dictum. 182. NIL) Effect of discharging one of a set. NIL) 5. there may be a further acceptance by a different person for the honor of another party. and containing a reference to the other parts. even though a place of payment 8. promise to pay only at a special place. — When a BE has been (1) protested for dishonor by non-acceptance or protested for better security and (2) is not overdue à any person not being a party already liable may.. (Sec. C.may be written on any part and it must be written on one part only. NIL) Acceptance . D. (Sec. and every indorser subsequent to him is liable on the part he has himself indorsed. 4. it is equivalent to an order to the bank ton pay the same for the account of the principal debtor therein BINGHAMPTON PHARMACY v FIRST NATIONAL BANK (1915) There is a distinction between the drawer of a check & the maker of a note payable at a bank: Note payable at Check bank maker of a note is drawer of a check is liable after primarily liable on only dishonor the instrument Law excuses requires presentment presentment of the within a reasonable time at the peril of instrument discharging the drawer obligation of the Breach of the duty of maker of a note is the holder of a check present for not a conditional to G.When the acceptor of a bill drawn in a set pays it without requiring the part bearing his acceptance to be delivered up to him. — the holder whose title first accrues is the true owner of the bill. When bill may be accepted for honor. 178. Definition: Discharge The release of all parties. he is liable on every such part as if it were a separate bill. B. 6. Referee in case of need — person whose name is inserted by the drawer of a bill and any indorser to whom the holder may resort in case bill is dishonored by nonacceptance or non-payment. If the drawee accepts more than one part and such accepted parts negotiated to different holders in due course. 131. DISCHARGE 1. NIL) B.3 INSTRUMENTS PAYABLE AT BANK Sec 87: Where the instrument is made payable at a bank. 179. (Sec. the whole bill is discharged. 3. (Sec. But nothing in this section affects the right of a person who. he is liable to the holder thereon. F.any person may intervene and pay bill protested for nonpayment supra protest (Sec. Practice of accepting for honor is obsolete 2. 171. NIL) payment at the place where it is payable at a reasonable time discharges the drawer from liability to the extent he is damaged by the breach. option of the holder to resort to the referee (Sec. (Sec. renders the instrument non-negotiable . NIL) Liability of holder who indorses two or more parts of a set to different persons. (Sec. 183. accepts or pays the parts first presented to him. whether primary or secondary. as if such parts were separate bills. from the obligation on the instrument. 181.unnecessary in order to render the drawer liable. but is a promise to pay generally. — liable on every such part. Bills in Set A. and the part at maturity is outstanding in the hands of a holder in due course. E. in due course. with the CONSENT of the holder. NIL) PAYMENT FOR HONOR . Acceptance or Payment for Honor A. The acceptance for honor may be for part only of the sum for which the bill is drawn. — Except as herein otherwise provided. Acceptance 1. intervene and accept the bill supra protest for the honor of any party liable thereon or for the honor of the person for whose account the bill is drawn. where there has been an acceptance for honor for one party. 161. composed of various parts being numbered. 180. Chapter VII. NIL) Payment . 9. all of which parts constitute one bill of lading Bills in set constitute one bill. (Sec. NIL) Right of HDCs where different parts are negotiated.
right of recourse reserved. where instrument negotiated back to a prior party. 5. 124. where instrument or signature appears to have been cancelled. such party may reissue and further negotiate. the latter may recover on the instrument. By whom made: i payment in due course by or on behalf of principal debtor ii payment in due course by party accommodated where party is made/ accepted for accommodation c. OF SECONDARY PARTIES (Sec. valid Tender of payment. Prior Party and Instrument Discharge. 88: Payment is made in due course when it is made: i at or after the maturity of the payment o if payment is made before maturity and the note is negotiated to a HDC. by discharge of instrument intentional cancellation of signature by holder discharge of prior party valid tender of payment by prior party release of principal debtor. but not entitled to enforce payment vs. The party receiving payment must have been authorized by others to receive payment. Suggested Mnemonics: CuPID CRRAFFT: intentional Cancellation. Release. J. ex. NIL) any other act which discharges a simple contract for payment of money a. 70.2. When check deemed paid by drawee bank i Once the holder receives the cash ii If the bank credits the amt of the check to the depositor’s account iii Where the drawee bank charges the check to the account. 2. ii to the holder thereof o payment to one of several payees or indorsees in the alternative discharges the instrument. Sec. Certification. C. any Agreement. any intervening party to whom he was personally liable 2. 8 . the party so paying it is remitted to his former rights as regard to all prior parties G. Failure to give notice of dishonor. B. 122. d. Failure to make due presentment. Refer to Art 1231 of the Civil Code principal debtor becomes holder of instrument at or after maturity in his own right renunciation of holder: (Sec. NIL)8 A. o but payment to one of several joint payees or joint indorsers is not a discharge. or 2. b. How discharged: (Sec 119)7 By Payment in due course a. 125. H. indicating intention to honor the check intentional cancellation by holder a. burden of proof on party which alleges it was unintentional. Discharge INSTRUMENT 1. issuance of a renewal note— novation b. 2ndary party reserved any agreement binding upon holder to extend time of payment. renunciation does not affect rights of HDC w/o notice. 120. NIL: what constitutes material alteration (Sec. unless holder’s right of recourse vs. E. or to postpone holder’s right to enforce instrument. NIL) failure to give notice of dishonor certification of check at instance of holder reacquisition by prior party 1. I. where instrument is paid by party secondarily liable.1. Renunciation must be in writing unless instrument delivered up to person primarily liable thereon material alteration – review Sec. etc. D. iii in good faith and without notice that his title is defective b. before or after its maturity b. if unintentional or under mistake or without authority of holder. 3. holder may expressly renounce his rights vs. Intentional Cancellation. any Other Act. any party to the instrument. but a. absolute and unconditional renunciation of his rights against PRINCIPAL DEBTOR made at or after maturity discharges the instrument c. 7 Suggested Mnemonics: PICk ROAD: Payment in due course. 123. Renunciation. 2. Reacquisition. NIL: material alteration w/o assent of all parties liable avoids instrument except as against party to alteration and subsequent indorsers) 3. 144. made with assent of party secondarily liable. UNLESS 1. (Sec. NIL) a. Failure to make due presentment (Secs. Debtor becomes holder. F. it’s not discharged. inoperative. of the 4.
b. have certain attributes of negotiability. 1. must be issued in favor of a definite person. though not to mature for a long time. Bonds 1. 3. merely special forms of either PNs or BEs. (b) may be issued for an undetermined amount. assure some regular income to bondholders in the form of interest*. A general indorser thereof however would be liable for such want of capacity. bonds and interest coupons (evidences interest obligations)* § may be negotiable in form. In General 1. 3. Consequently. Thus. and not to order. a. there is no warranty on the part of such indorser or negotiator that prior parties had capacity to contract. evidences of indebtedness. Debentures 1. accept and pay draft(s) or negotiate and/or fulfill any other obligation under the credit is not subject to claims or defenses by the applicant resulting from his relationships with the issuing bank or the beneficiary. the undertaking of a bank to pay. See Art 568 Code of Commerce. are separate transactions from the sales or other contract(s) on which they may be based and banks are in no way concerned with or bound by such contract(s). the engagement of the issuing bank is to pay the seller or beneficiary of the credit once the draft and the required documents are presented to it. funds generated by such bonds are used to finance corporate projects and public works. usually payable annually b.3. e. § both are actually promissory notes c.The draft and the letter of credit are generally used together to effect payment in international transactions. The qualified indorser & negotiator by 2. and again negotiate instrument. or accept bills drawn upon himself for the like amount. in the nature of a PNs usually accompanied by a mortgage of the property of the issuer issued by the government (municipal & other public corporations) & private corporations. and promises that he will repay the same to the person making the 2. Quasi-negotiable includes commercial paper which though not governed by the NIL.1. one person requests some other person to advance money or give credit to a third person. and are often sold to the public in general d. even if any reference whatsoever to such contract(s) is included in the credit. 2. they are often issued on the general credit of the issuer corporation 2. except i where it’s payable to order of 3rd party and has been paid by drawer ii where it’s made/accepted for accommodation and has been paid by party accommodated delivery of a bond do not warrant therefore that the corporation which issued the bonds has any judicial capacity to act. Commercial papers – 1. 3.1. a. A beneficiary can in no case avail himself of the contractual relationships existing between the banks or between the applicant and the issuing bank. “INDEPENDENCE PRINCIPLE”: Credits. they run for long periods of time. and he may strike out his own and all subsequent indorsements. Drafts and Letters of Credit .2.1. Chapter VIII. 4. advancement. also governed by the NIL 3. 3. also Negotiable instruments. by their nature. OTHER FORMS OF COMMERCIAL PAPER 1. Letters of Credit 1. similar to bonds except that they are usually for a shorter tem and may or may not be accompanied by a mortgage. 2.2. therefore governed by NIL (Sec 65). 3. Drafts and Letters of Credit 3. under our law. Draft a form of BE generally used to facilitate the transactions between persons physically remote from each other.2. Bonds and Debentures 2. 2. . a letter of credit cannot be a negotiable instrument because (a) it may not contain the words of negotiability.
Art 567. or for the general and/or particular conditions stipulated in the documents or superimposed thereon. They involve bank to bank transactions. Under this principle. bearer cannot acquire any right of action by reason of non-payment against the person who issued it. solvency. for the amount paid by virtue thereof. d. Parties to a commercial letter of credit include: (a) the buyer or the importer. DE RENY FABRIC (1970) The company and its officers cannot shift the burden of loss to the bank because of the terms of their Commercial Letter of Credit Agreement with the bank provides that latter shall not be responsible for the any difference in character or condition of the property. (b) the seller. ii limited to a fixed and specified amount. or any other person whomsoever. performance or standing of the consignor. quality. nor do they assume any liability or responsibility for the description. the letter of credit was developed to facilitate the sale of goods between. would at the instance of the buyer agree to pay drafts drawn on it by the seller. which is identical with the same obligations under the underlying agreement. Letters of credit . value or existence of the goods represented by any documents. whose credit was acceptable to the seller. and not to order. weight. The drawer of a letter of credit may annul it. The essential conditions of letter of credit shall be: i issued in favor of a definite person. In both cases the payment may be enjoined if in the light of the purpose of the credit the payment of the credit would constitute fraudulent abuse of the credit. distant and unfamiliar buyers and sellers. or (b) independence may be only as to the justification aspect like in a commercial letter of credit or repayment standby. condition. an action involving execution may be brought to recover it. but all within a maximum the limit of which has to be stated exactly. and within 12 months anywhere outside thereof. genuineness. with legal interest and the current exchange in the place where it is repaid. packing. provided that certain documents are presented such as bills of lading accompanied the corresponding drafts. Art 568. Furthermore. Letters of credit may not be protested even if not be paid. it shall be void in fact and in law.issued by one merchant to another for the purpose of attending to a commercial transaction. Luzon Hydro) Pertinent Code of Commerce provisions: a. or in default of a period fixed. counted from its date. quantity. falsification or legal effect of any documents. Should he not do so. Art 570. Historically. The person paying has right to demand the proof of the identity of the person in whose favor the letter of credit was issued. f. (Transfield vs. or to one or more undetermined amount. (2) within 6 months. in providing financing in international business transactions do not deal with the property to be exported or shipped to the importer. sufficiency. . the bank was able to prove the existence of a custom in international banking and financing circles negating any duty of the bank to verify whether what has been described in letters of credits or drafts or shipping documents actually tallies with what was loaded aboard ship. within the maximum fixed therein. banks assume no liability or responsibility for the form. The drawer of a letter of credit shall be liable to the person on whom it was issued. also referred to as beneficiary. or for the good faith or acts and/or omissions. informing the bearer and the person to whom it is addressed Art 571. c. or the insurers of the goods. If the bearer of a letter of credit does not make use thereof within the (1) period agreed upon with the drawer. Art 569. b. Art 572. This principle assures the seller or the beneficiary of prompt payment independent of any breach of the main contract and precludes the issuing bank from determining whether the main contract is actually accomplished or not. Expansion in the use of letters of credit was a natural development in commercial banking. BPI v. in any point in the Philippines. The bearer of a letter or credit shall pay the amount received to the drawer without delay. Note: Those which do not have any of these last circumstances shall be considered as mere letters of recommendation. Banks. e. the carriers.5. b. accuracy. The independent nature of the letter of credit may be: (a) independence in toto where the credit is independent from the justification aspect and is a separate obligation from the underlying agreement like for instance a typical standby. LEE v CA (2002) Modern letters of credit are usually not made between natural persons. It was an arrangement under which a bank. but deal only with documents. delivery.
dock warrant. 3. LUZON HYDRO (2004) Can the beneficiary invoke the independence principle? Yes. described as Quasi-Negotiable bec oftentimes. the latter appears to be the owner thereof. confers on another all the indicia of ownership of the said stock certificates. stock certificates are given the attributes of negotiability only where the owner thereof has entrusted the wrongdoer with the possession of such certificate and clothed him with apparent ownership thereof. Negotiable Documents of Title as distinguished from negotiable instruments. in failing to take the necessary precaution upon delivering the certificate of stock to her broker. 4. E. and is the same as would be reached if the certificate were negotiable. and to effectuate the ends of justice and the intention of the parties. (d) the notifying bank which is the correspondent bank of the opening bank through which it advises the beneficiary of the letter of credit. The rule is applicable where the certificate is lost or stolen while signed in blank. C. whenever the facilities of the opening bank are used. In General 1. When the owner or shareholder signs the printed form of sale or assignment at the back of every stock certificates without filling in the blanks provided for the name of the transferee as well as for the name of the attorney-in-fact. SANTAMARIA v HONGKONG & SHANGHAI BANK (1951) Plaintiff. the independence doctrine works to the benefit of both the issuing bank and the beneficiary. To say that the independence principle may only be invoked by the issuing banks would render nugatory the purpose for which the letters of credit are used in commercial transactions. McGRATH (1955) Although a stock certificate is sometimes regarded as quasi-negotiable.(c) the opening bank which is usually the buyer’s bank which actually issues the letter of credit. TRANSFIELD VS. but is included in the term “securities” bec does not contain any promise or order to pay money. . the courts decree a better title to the transferee than actually existed in his transferor. although such third person has diverted the certificate from the purpose for which he was entrusted therewith. includes any bill of lading. DE LOS SANTOS. refer to goods and not to money. upon the request of the beneficiary. not a NI. coupled with delivery it is well settled that the instrument is non-negotiable. the sale of goods covered is effected by the transfer of said document not governed by the NIL but by the Civil Code. D. Certificate of Stock B. in effect. in the sense that it may be transferred by endorsement. and as such. Even a purchaser in good faith cannot acquire title as against the true owner. will be protected in his acquisition. except in so far as such rights or defenses are subject tot eh limitations imposed by the principles governing estoppel. 2. The services of the notifying bank must always be utilized if the letter of credit is to be advised to the beneficiary through cable. by application of the principles of estoppel. was chargeable with negligence in the transaction which resulted to her own prejudice. because the holder thereof takes it without prejudice to such rights or defense as the registered owner or credit may have under the law.1. As a rule. “quedan”. F. (e) negotiating bank which is usually any bank in the city of the beneficiary. is deemed quasi-negotiable. (f) the paying bank which buys or discounts the drafts contemplated by the letter of credit. A certificate of stock. (Principle of Estoppel) 5. G. A bona fide purchaser of value without notice. she is estopped from asserting title to it as against the defendant bank. MACASAET (1990) Certificates of stocks are considered as quasinegotiable instruments. A. or share certificate is the customary and convenient evidence of the holder’s interest in the corporation which issues it. the said owner or shareholder. The same rule is applicable if the certificate is in bearer form. and as such the transferee thereof is justified in believing that it belongs to the holder and transferor. (?) At common law. indorsed in blank. if such draft is to be drawn on the opening bank or on another designated bank not in the city of the beneficiary. the beneficiary is supposed to present his drafts to the notifying bank for negotiation and (g) the confirming bank which. or warehouse receipt or order for 5. CAPCO v. confirms the letter of credit issued by the opening bank. As it is. When the shareholder signs the back of certificates of stock without filling in the blanks (for the name of the transferee and attorneyin-fact) and the certificate is delivered to another.
ex.4. . Personal defenses include: negotiation was a breach of duty on the part of the person making the negotiation. even if the negotiation to him was valid.4. if the negotiation to the present holder’s transferor was not valid. à the holder’s remedy if any. is against his transferor and/or the guilty party. if the original bailor had no authority from such owner to deposit the goods. for value and without notice is placed on the same level as a HDC of a negotiable instrument – i. 3. even if in good faith and for value. then it should be indorsed by such person.. the delivery of goods. either specially or in blank. Kinds 1. or the document has been indorsed in blank.2. to bearer = delivery 1. a holder of a negotiable document of title in good faith. If the goods are deliverable to bearer. or authorizing or purporting to authorize the possessor of the document to transfer or receive. mistake. It also facilitates the purchase of goods by one person from another who is physically remote and probably unknown to him. Note Art 1518’s conflict with Art 1512. such holder. personal defenses enumerated in said article are not available against him. accident. b. it is negotiable if it meets all the requirements of Sec 1 NIL 2. If by the terms of the document. does not acquire any right to the goods. fraud. Negotiation . 2.3. iii In both cases. Otherwise. Documents of title negotiable when goods represented thereby are deliverable to a specified person . then the holder of the negotiable document. to order=delivery + indorsement. 5.same as those used in NIs. then the holder of the negotiable document. ii On the other hand. When free from personal defense a. Under Art 1518 Civil Code. “straight” bill where the goods are to be delivered to a specified person. generally framed in such FORM as to constitute a promissory note. valuable in commerce because it facilitates the sale and delivery of goods. if the negotiation to the present holder’s transferor was not valid. (see p 915) 2. negotiable bill of lading is useful not only as evidence of the receipt of the goods by the carrier but as evidencing title to goods covered by it. b. Warehouse receipts an agreement by a warehouseman to store goods and deliver them to a named person or his order or to bearer. it is taken when depositor does not need his money for some extended period of time and wants it to earn interest. AND even if the original bailor had authority. either by indorsement or by delivery. cannot acquire title to the goods. A person to whom a negotiable document of title has been duly negotiated acquires the title of the person NEGOTIATING it as well as the title of the ORIGINAL BAILOR or depositor of the goods. to order or to bearer. or any other document used in the ordinary course of business in the sale or transfer of goods. or to the depositor or order. cannot acquire title to the goods. Bill of Lading a similar contract by a carrier to ship goods and deliver them to the person named therein or his order or to bearer. owner of the document was deprived of the possession of the same by loss. as proof of the possession or control of the goods. it is not negotiable and is called a “straight” bill. if the original bailor or depositor of the goods was not the owner thereof or had no authority from such owner to deposit the goods. 5. goods represented by such document. the goods are deliverable to the order of a specified person.e. the holder’s remedy if any. a. 5. is against his transferor and/or the guilty party. 3. duress or conversion. or to bearer. The means of negotiating a document of title are the same as those used in negotiable instruments. does not acquire any right to the goods. even if the negotiation to him was valid. such holder. 1514 and 1519 Civil Code) a. Rights of a Holder 1. then negotiation may be by mere delivery. even if in good faith and for value. Certificate of Deposita receipt of a bank for certain sum of money received upon deposit. even if the original bailor or depositor was the owner or had authority from the owner. b. it is referred to as an “order” bill. What title acquired (NOTE: see Arts 1513. theft. i Thus. The person to whom the document has been negotiated acquires the obligation 5. more of an investment paper than a commercial paper because it is not attendant to a commercial transaction the way a check or a promissory note is. a. payable to the depositor.
he warrants that he has the right to transfer title thereto and that they are merchantable. despite breaches of trust or violations of agreement on the part of the apparent owner. 5. The indorsement of a negotiable document of title carries with it certain implied warranties by the indorser. Liability of Indorser 1. i By issuing a negotiable document of title. his legal right to negotiate it and his lack of knowledge of any fact which would impair its validity. or to bearer. iv A sale of the goods without the document will not prejudice a subsequent purchaser who takes the document in good faith and for value. v The bailee’s delivery to the legal holder of the document would relieve him of any further responsibility for the goods.of the bailee to make delivery to him. as if they had contracted directly with each other. notice of any transfer should be given to the bailee otherwise bailee or any other person other than the transferor not bound iii Thus. 4. ii If document non-negotiable. latter. As to the goods. the transferee’s rights may be defeated by a levy of attachment on the goods or by a notification to the bailee of a sale of the goods to another purchaser. it is a representation of title upon which bona fide purchasers for value are entitled to reply. such bailee had given in advance his consent to hold the goods for any person to whom such document is negotiated. (1922) A warehouse receipt must be interpreted according to its evident intent and it is obvious that the deposit evidenced by the receipt in this case was intended to be made subject to the order of the depositor and therefore negotiable. 3. As to the document. HSBC If the owner of the goods permits another to have the possession or custody of negotiable warehouse receipts running to the order of the . ROMAN v ASIA BANKING CORP. the indorser of a negotiable document of title is not liable for the failure of the bailee to fulfill his obligation to deliver the goods.” SIY CONG BIENG v. 2. The indorsement in blank of the receipt with its delivery which took place on the date of the issuance of the receipt demonstrate the intent to make the receipt negotiable. his warranty covers its genuineness. unlike the indorser of a NI who is liable if the primary party fails to pay. Furthermore.5. the receipt was not marked “non-negotiable. However.
NEGOTIABLE-INSTRUMENTS-LAW-PART-1.pdf
More From Miguel Ancheta
Admissibility to Best Evidence Rule