Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 183 views

    BPI Vs CA and Julio R. Templonuevo

    Uploaded by

    Ian Cabana
    This case discusses the relationship between banks and depositors, which is that of creditor and debtor. The bank, BPI, debited P267,707.70 from a depositor's account, Annabelle Salazar, and paid it to Julio Templonuevo after he claimed the funds in Salazar's account were deposited there without his authorization via checks made out to him. While the bank had the right to set-off the deposited funds against withdrawals, it failed its duty to carefully treat Salazar's account as her fiduciary relationship as a depositor required. The court partially granted the bank's petition, reversing the order to return the funds to Salazar but affirming the decision in all

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    BPI Vs CA and Julio R. Templonuevo

    Uploaded by

    Ian Cabana
    183 views2 pages
    This case discusses the relationship between banks and depositors, which is that of creditor and debtor. The bank, BPI, debited P267,707.70 from a depositor's account, Annabelle Salazar, and paid it to Julio Templonuevo after he claimed the funds in Salazar's account were deposited there without his authorization via checks made out to him. While the bank had the right to set-off the deposited funds against withdrawals, it failed its duty to carefully treat Salazar's account as her fiduciary relationship as a depositor required. The court partially granted the bank's petition, reversing the order to return the funds to Salazar but affirming the decision in all

    Original Description:

    Original Title

    5. BPI vs CA and Julio R. Templonuevo

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    This case discusses the relationship between banks and depositors, which is that of creditor and debtor. The bank, BPI, debited P267,707.70 from a depositor's account, Annabelle Salazar, and paid it to Julio Templonuevo after he claimed the funds in Salazar's account were deposited there without his authorization via checks made out to him. While the bank had the right to set-off the deposited funds against withdrawals, it failed its duty to carefully treat Salazar's account as her fiduciary relationship as a depositor required. The court partially granted the bank's petition, reversing the order to return the funds to Salazar but affirming the decision in all

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    183 views2 pages

    BPI Vs CA and Julio R. Templonuevo

    Uploaded by

    Ian Cabana
    This case discusses the relationship between banks and depositors, which is that of creditor and debtor. The bank, BPI, debited P267,707.70 from a depositor's account, Annabelle Salazar, and paid it to Julio Templonuevo after he claimed the funds in Salazar's account were deposited there without his authorization via checks made out to him. While the bank had the right to set-off the deposited funds against withdrawals, it failed its duty to carefully treat Salazar's account as her fiduciary relationship as a depositor required. The court partially granted the bank's petition, reversing the order to return the funds to Salazar but affirming the decision in all

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 2

    Cabana, Adrian C.

    Doctrine : The relationship between banks and depositors has been held to be that
    of creditor and debtor.

    Case Title : BPI vs CA and Julio R. Templonuevo


    January 25, 2007
    G.R. No. 136202
    AZCUNA, J

    Facts

    Respondent Salazar prayed for the recovery of the amount of Two Hundred Sixty-Seven
    Thousand, Seven Hundred Seven Pesos and Seventy Centavos debited by petitioner BPI from her
    account in an action for a sum of money before the RTC

    BPI answered that Templonuevo, third-party defendant and herein also a private
    respondent, demanded from the former payment of (P267,692.50) representing the aggregate value of
    three (3) checks, which were allegedly payable to him, but which were deposited with the petitioner
    bank to private respondent Salazar’s account without his knowledge and corresponding endorsement.

    When advised to settle the matter, respondent Salazar and Templonuevo did not arrive at any
    settlement. As it appeared that private respondent Salazar was not entitled to the funds represented by
    the checks which were deposited and accepted for deposit, petitioner BPI decided to debit the amount
    of P267,707.70 from her Account No. 0201-0588-48 and the sum of P267,692.50 was paid to
    Templonuevo by means of a cashier’s check. The difference between the value of the checks
    (P267,692.50) and the amount actually debited from her account (P267,707.70) represented bank
    charges in connection with the issuance of a cashier’s check to Templonuevo.

    Respondent Templonuevo admitted the payment to him of P267,692.50 and argued that said payment
    was to correct the malicious deposit made by respondent Salazar to her private account

    Hence, this petition for review under Rule 45 of the Rules of Court was filed seeking the reversal of the
    Decision of the CA.

    Issue:

    Whether or not petitioner bank had the right to set-off the over the deposits therein for the payment of
    any withdrawals on the part of a depositor.

    Ruling: 

    Yes.  A bank generally has a right of set-off over the deposits therein for the payment of any withdrawals
    on the part of a depositor. The right of a collecting bank to debit a client's account for the value of a
    dishonored check that has previously been credited has fairly been established by jurisprudence. To
    begin with, Article 1980 of the Civil Code provides that "[f]ixed, savings, and current deposits of money
    in banks and similar institutions shall be governed by the provisions concerning simple loan."
    Hence, the relationship between banks and depositors has been held to be that of creditor and debtor.
    Thus, legal compensation under Article 1278 of the Civil Code may take place "when all the requisites
    mentioned in Article 1279 are present,"

    While, however, it is conceded that the petitioner had the right of set-off over the amount it paid to
    Templonuevo against the deposit of Salazar.  As businesses affected with public interest, and because of
    the nature of their functions, banks are under obligation to treat the accounts of their depositors with
    meticulous care, always having in mind the fiduciary nature of their relationship. In this regard,
    petitioner was clearly remiss in its duty to private respondent Salazar as its depositor.

    WHEREFORE, the petition is partially GRANTED. The assailed Decision dated April 3, 1998 and Resolution
    dated April 3, 1998 rendered by the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. CV No. 42241 are MODIFIED insofar as it
    ordered petitioner Bank of the Philippine Islands to return the amount of Two Hundred Sixty-seven
    Thousand Seven Hundred and Seven and 70/100 Pesos (P267,707.70) to respondent Annabelle A.
    Salazar, which portion is REVERSED and SET ASIDE. In all other respects, the same are AFFIRMED.

    You might also like