PNB vs CA & Gueco et al

By -
PHILIPPINE NATIONAL BANK VS. COURT OF APPEALS,RITA GUECO TAPNIO,CECILIO GUECO and THE PHILIPPINE AMERICAN GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY

FACTS: Mrs. Rita Gueco Tapnio was indebted to the Philippine National Bank at San Fernando,Pampanga for the total sum of P2,379.91.  Her indebtedness was a crop loan and was secured by the mortgage on her standing crap including her sugar quota allocation for the agricultural year corresponding to the said standing crop. During agricultural year 1956-1957 Mrs. Tapnio had an excess in her export sugar quota, 1000 piculs which she does not need. Mr. Jacobo Tuazon, a planter harvest less than his sugar quota. Mrs. Tapnio agreed to allow Mr. Tuazon to use her excess sugar quota for the consideration of P2,500.00.  Since the quota of Mrs. Tapnio was mortgaged to the PNB, the contract of lease that Mrs. Tapnio and Mr. Tuazon agreed into had to be approved by the bank. The branch manager required the parties to raise the consideration to P2,800.00 informing them that “ the minimum lease rental acceptable to the bank is 2.80 per picul.  Mr. Tuazon agreed to the raising of consideration and informed the manager that he was ready to pay the said amount.  When the branch manager of the PNB recommended the approval of the contract of lease at the price of 2.80 to the board of directors, they required that the amount be be raised to 3.00 per picul considering that the current price prevailing at the time was 3.00 per picul. Mr. Tuazon asked for the reconsideration from the board of directors to approved the 2.80 per picul but to no avail. February 22, 1957 Mr. Tuazon informed the bank that he is no longer  interested to continue the deal. The agricultural year was about to expire and Mrs. Tapnio has been unable to utilize her sugar quota. The result is that Mrs. Tapnio lost the sum of P2,800.00 which she should have received from Tuazon and which she could have paid the bank to cancel off her indebtedness.

ISSUE:   Whether or not petitioner is liable for the damaged caused?

HELD:    Yes, PNB was liable because the failure of the negotiation for the lease of the sugar allocation of Rita Gueco Tapnio to Tuazon was due to the fault of the directors of the PNB. The refusal on the part of the bank to approve lease at the rate of 2.80 per picul would have enabled Rita Gueco Tapnio to realize the amount of 2,800.00 which was more than sufficient to pay off indebtedness to the bank. Its insistence on the rental price of 3.00 per picul brought the rescission of the lease contract. In failing to observe the reasonable degree care and vigilance which the surrounding circumstances reasonably impose, the petitioner is consequently liable for the damages. Article 21 of the New Civil Code “ any person who willfully causes loss or injury to another in the manner contrary to morals, good costums or public policy shall compensate the latter for the damage.”  A corporation is civilly liable, whenever a tortuous act is committed bt any officer or agent under express direction or authority from the stockholders or members acting as a body or generally , from the directors as the governing body.
Affirmed.



Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Co vs Court of Appeals

By -
ALBINO S. CO,  petitioner,  vs. COURT OF APPEALS and PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES,  respondents. G.R. No. 100776 October 28, 1993 Facts:                 In connection with an agreement to salvage and refloat asunken vessel — and in payment of his share of the expenses of the salvage operations therein stipulated — petitioner Albino Co delivered to the salvaging firm on September 1, 1983 a check drawn against the Associated Citizens' Bank, postdated November 30, 1983 in the sum of P361,528.00. The check was deposited on January 3, 1984. It was dishonored two days later, the tersely-stated reason given by the bank being: "CLOSED ACCOUNT."                 A criminal complaint for violation of Batas Pambansa Bilang 22 2 was filed by the salvage company against Albino Co with the Regional Trial Court of Pasay City. The case eventuated in Co's conviction of the crime charged, and his being sentenced to suffer a term of imprisonment of sixty (60) days and to inde
Read more

GONZALES vs COMELEC [G.R. No. L-28196, November 9, 1967]

By -
FACTS: On March 16, 1967, the Senate and the House of Representatives passed resolutions No. 1, 2 and 3 – i.e. to increase the seats of the Lower House from 120 to 180; to convoke a Constitutional Convention of 1971; and to amend the Constitution (Section 16, Article VI) so they can become delegates themselves to the Convention.  Subsequently, Congress passed a bill, which, upon approval by the President, on June 17, 1967, became Republic Act No. 4913, providing that the amendments to the Constitution proposed in the aforementioned Resolutions No. 1 and 3 be submitted, for approval by the people, at the general elections which shall be held on November 14, 1967. Two cases were filed against this act of Congress:  One an is original action for prohibition, with preliminary injunction by Ramon A. Gonzales, in L-28196, a Filipino citizen, a taxpayer, and a voter. He claims to have instituted case L-28196 as a class unit, for and in behalf of all citizens, taxpayers, and voters simil
Read more