Requisites of Negotiability Full Text

  • View
    214

  • Download
    0

Embed Size (px)

Text of Requisites of Negotiability Full Text

  • 7/24/2019 Requisites of Negotiability Full Text

    1/83

    NEGO

    Requisites of Negotiability:

    #1

    Republic of the Philippines

    SUPREME COURT

    Manila

    SECOND DIISION

    G.R. No. 97753 August 10, 1992

    CALTEX (PHLPPNES!, NC.,petitione!"

    s$

    COURT O" APPEALS #$% SECURT& 'AN AN)

    TRUST COMPAN&, !espon%ents$

    REGALA)O,J.:

    &his petition fo! !eie' on certiorarii(pugns an% see)s

    the !ee!sal of the %ecision p!o(ulgate% by !espon%ent

    cou!t on Ma!ch *" 1++1 in C,-.$R$ C No$

    /012 1affi!(ing 'ith (o%ifications" the ea!lie!

    %ecision of the Regional &!ial Cou!t of Manila" 3!anch

    45II" 2'hich %is(isse% the co(plaint file% the!ein by

    he!ein petitione! against !espon%ent ban)$

    &he un%ispute% bac)g!oun% of this case" as foun% by thecou!t a quo an% a%opte% by !espon%ent cou!t" appea!s of

    !eco!%:

    1$ On a!ious %ates" %efen%ant" a

    co((e!cial ban)ing institution" th!ough

    its Sucat 3!anch issue% /*6 ce!tificates

    of ti(e %eposit 7C&Ds8 in fao! of one

    ,ngel %ela C!u9 'ho %eposite% 'ith

    he!ein %efen%ant the agg!egate a(ount

    of P1"1/6"666$66" as follo's: 7oint

    Pa!tial Stipulation of ;acts an%

    State(ent of Issues" O!iginal Reco!%s" p$

    /6s E?hibits 1 to /*68=

    CTDCTD

    DatesSerial Nos.QuantityAmount

    // ;eb$ */ +6161 to +61/6 /6 P*6"666

    / ;eb$ */ s E?hibits /*/-

    218$

    1

  • 7/24/2019 Requisites of Negotiability Full Text

    2/83

    NEGO

    2$ On Ma!ch /2" 1+*/" ,ngel %ela C!u9

    negotiate% an% obtaine% a loan f!o(

    %efen%ant ban) in the a(ount of Eight

    un%!e% Seenty ;ie &housan% Pesos

    7P*s %e(an% an% clai(

    fo! pay(ent of the alue of the C&Ds in

    a lette! %ate% ;eb!ua!y

  • 7/24/2019 Requisites of Negotiability Full Text

    3/83

    NEGO

    , sa(ple te?t of the ce!tificates of ti(e %eposit is

    !ep!o%uce% belo' to p!oi%e a bette! un%e!stan%ing of

    the issues inole% in this !ecou!se$

    SECGRI&H 3,N

    ,ND &RGS& COMP,NH

  • 7/24/2019 Requisites of Negotiability Full Text

    4/83

    NEGO

    fo!th aboe$ It is note% that M!$ &i(oteo P$ &iangco"

    Secu!ity 3an)>s 3!anch Manage! 'ay bac) in 1+*/"

    testifie% in open cou!t that the %eposito! !effe!e% to in the

    C&Ds is no othe! than M!$ ,ngel %e la C!u9$

    ??? ??? ???

    ,tty$ Cali%a:

    q In othe! 'o!%s M!$

    itness" you a!e saying

    that pe! boo)s of the

    ban)" the %eposito!

    !efe!!e% 7sic8 in these

    ce!tificates states that it

    'as ,ngel %ela C!u9

    'itness:

    a Hes" you! ono!" an%

    'e hae the !eco!% to

    sho' that ,ngel %ela

    C!u9 'as the one 'ho

    cause 7sic8 the a(ount$

    ,tty$ Cali%a:

    q ,n% no othe! pe!son

    o! entity o! co(pany"

    M!$ itness

    'itness:

    a None" you! ono!$ 7

    ??? ??? ???

    ,tty$ Cali%a:

    q M!$ itness" 'ho is

    the %eposito! i%entifie%

    in all of these

    ce!tificates of ti(e

    %eposit insofa! as the

    ban) is conce!ne%

    'itness:

    a ,ngel %ela C!u9 is the

    %eposito!$

    ??? ??? ???

    On this sco!e" the accepte% !ule is that the negotiability

    o! non-negotiability of an inst!u(ent is %ete!(ine% f!o(

    the '!iting" that is" f!o( the face of the inst!u(ent

    itself$9In the const!uction of a bill o! note" the intention

    of the pa!ties is to cont!ol" if it can be legally

    asce!taine%$ 10hile the '!iting (ay be !ea% in the light

    of su!!oun%ing ci!cu(stances in o!%e! to (o!e pe!fectly

    un%e!stan% the intent an% (eaning of the pa!ties" yet as

    they hae constitute% the '!iting to be the only out'a!%

    an% isible e?p!ession of thei! (eaning" no othe! 'o!%s

    a!e to be a%%e% to it o! substitute% in its stea%$ &he %uty

    of the cou!t in such case is to asce!tain" not 'hat the

    pa!ties (ay hae sec!etly inten%e% as

    cont!a%istinguishe% f!o( 'hat thei! 'o!%s e?p!ess" but

    'hat is the (eaning of the 'o!%s they hae use%$ hat

    the pa!ties (eant (ust be %ete!(ine% by 'hat they

    sai%$ 11

    Cont!a!y to 'hat !espon%ent cou!t hel%" the C&Ds a!e

    negotiable inst!u(ents$ &he %ocu(ents p!oi%e that the

    a(ounts %eposite% shall be !epayable to the %eposito!$

    ,n% 'ho" acco!%ing to the %ocu(ent" is the %eposito! It

    is the bea!e!$ &he %ocu(ents %o not say that the

    %eposito! is ,ngel %e la C!u9 an% that the a(ounts

    %eposite% a!e !epayable specifically to hi($ Rathe!" the

    a(ounts a!e to be !epayable to the bea!e! of the%ocu(ents o!" fo! that (atte!" 'hosoee! (ay be the

    bea!e! at the ti(e of p!esent(ent$

    If it 'as !eally the intention of !espon%ent ban) to pay

    the a(ount to ,ngel %e la C!u9 only" it coul% hae 'ith

    facility so e?p!esse% that fact in clea! an% catego!ical

    te!(s in the %ocu(ents" instea% of haing the 'o!%

    3E,RER sta(pe% on the space p!oi%e% fo! the na(e

    of the %eposito! in each C&D$ On the 'o!%ings of the

    %ocu(ents" the!efo!e" the a(ounts %eposite% a!e

    !epayable to 'hoee! (ay be the bea!e! the!eof$ &hus"

    petitione!>s afo!esai% 'itness (e!ely %ecla!e% that ,ngel

    %e la C!u9 is the %eposito! insofa! as the ban) is

    conce!ne%" but obiously othe! pa!ties not p!iy to the

    4

  • 7/24/2019 Requisites of Negotiability Full Text

    5/83

    NEGO

    t!ansaction bet'een the( 'oul% not be in a position to

    )no' that the %eposito! is not the bea!e! state% in the

    C&Ds$ ence" the situation 'oul% !equi!e any pa!ty

    %ealing 'ith the C&Ds to go behin% the plain i(po!t of

    'hat is '!itten the!eon to un!ael the ag!ee(ent of the

    pa!ties the!eto th!ough facts aliunde.&his nee% fo! !eso!tto e?t!insic ei%ence is 'hat is sought to be aoi%e% by

    the Negotiable Inst!u(ents 5a' an% calls fo! the

    application of the ele(enta!y !ule that the inte!p!etation

    of obscu!e 'o!%s o! stipulations in a cont!act shall not

    fao! the pa!ty 'ho cause% the obscu!ity$ 12

    &he ne?t que!y is 'hethe! petitione! can !ightfully

    !ecoe! on the C&Ds$ &his ti(e" the ans'e! is in the

    negatie$ &he !eco!%s !eeal that ,ngel %e la C!u9"

    'ho( petitione! chose not to i(plea% in this suit fo!

    !easons of its o'n" %elie!e% the C&Ds a(ounting to

    P1"1/6"666$66 to petitione! 'ithout info!(ing

    !espon%ent ban) the!eof at any ti(e$ Gnfo!tunately fo!

    petitione!" although the C&Ds a!e bea!e! inst!u(ents" a

    ali% negotiation the!eof fo! the t!ue pu!pose an%

    ag!ee(ent bet'een it an% De la C!u9" as ulti(ately

    asce!taine%" !equi!es both %elie!y an% in%o!se(ent$ ;o!"

    although petitione! see)s to %eflect this fact" the C&Ds

    'e!e in !eality %elie!e% to it as a secu!ity fo! De la

    C!u9> pu!chases of its fuel p!o%ucts$ ,ny %oubt as to

    'hethe! the C&Ds 'e!e %elie!e% as pay(ent fo! the

    fuel p!o%ucts o! as a secu!ity has been %issipate% an%

    !esole% in fao! of the latte! by petitione!>s o'n

    autho!i9e% an% !esponsible !ep!esentatie hi(self$

    In a lette! %ate% Noe(be! /" 1+*/ a%%!esse% to

    !espon%ent Secu!ity 3an)" $$ ,!anas" !$" Calte? C!e%it

    Manage!" '!ote: $ $ $ &hese ce!tificates of %eposit 'e!e

    negotiate% to us by M!$ ,ngel %ela C!u9 to guarantee his

    purchases of fuel products 7E(phasis ou!s$8 13&his

    a%(ission is conclusie upon petitione!" its p!otestations

    not'ithstan%ing$ Gn%e! the %oct!ine of estoppel" an

    a%(ission o! !ep!esentation is !en%e!e% conclusie upon

    the pe!son (a)ing it" an% cannot be %enie% o! %isp!oe%

    as against the pe!son !elying the!eon$ 1*, pa!ty (ay not

    go bac) on his o'n acts an% !ep!esentations to the

    p!eu%ice of the othe! pa!ty 'ho !elie% upon the($ 15In

    the la' of ei%ence" 'henee! a pa!ty has" by his o'n

    %ecla!ation" act" o! o(ission" intentionally an%

    %elibe!ately le% anothe! to beliee a pa!ticula! thing t!ue"

    an% to act upon such belief" he cannot" in any litigation

    a!ising out of such %ecla!ation" act" o! o(ission" be

    pe!(itte% to falsify it$ 1+

    If it 'e!e t!ue that the C&Ds 'e!e %elie!e% as pay(ent

    an% not as secu!ity" petitione!>s c!e%it (anage! coul%

    hae easily sai% so" instea% of using the 'o!%s to

    gua!antee in the lette! afo!equote%$ 3esi%es" 'hen

    !espon%ent ban)" as %efen%ant in the cou!t belo'" (oe%

    fo! a bill of pa!ticula!ity the!ein 17p!aying" a(ong

    othe!s" that petitione!" as plaintiff" be !equi!e% to ae!

    'ith sufficient %efiniteness o! pa!ticula!ity 7a8 the %ue

    %ate o! %ates ofpayment of the allege% in%ebte%ness of

    ,ngel %e la C!u9 to plaintiff an% 7b8 'hethe! o! not it

    issue% a !eceipt sho'ing that the C&Ds 'e!e %elie!e% to

    it by De la C!u9 aspayment of the latte!>s allege%

    in%ebte%ness to it" plaintiff co!po!ation oppose% the

    (otion$ 1a% it p!o%uce% the !eceipt p!aye% fo!" it coul%

    hae p!oe%" if such t!uly 'as the fact" that the C&Ds

    'e!e %elie!e% as pay(ent an% not as secu!ity$ aing

    oppose% the (otion" petitione! no' labo!s un%e! the

    p!esu(ption that ei%ence 'illfully supp!esse% 'oul% be

    a%e!se if p!o%uce%$ 19

    Gn%e! the fo!egoing ci!cu(stances" this %isquisition

    inIntergrated ealty Corporation! et al. vs. "hilippine

    National #an$! et al$20is ap!opos:

    $ $ $ ,%e!ting again to the Cou!t>s

    p!onounce(ents in%opez! supra" 'equote the!ef!o(:

    &he cha!acte! of the

    t!ansaction bet'een the

    pa!ties is to be

    %ete!(ine% by thei!

    intention" !ega!%less of

    'hat