Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 15 Pay V Vda de Palanca

    Uploaded by

    luigimanzanares
    43 views1 page
    New Pacific Timber deposited a cashier's check for P50,000 and cash of P13,130 with the court clerk to satisfy a judgment against it of P63,130. The respondent refused to accept the payment, arguing that a cashier's check is not legal tender. The Supreme Court ruled that a cashier's check is deemed the equivalent of cash, as the funds are transferred from the maker's account to the payee upon certification. As the full amount was deposited to satisfy the judgment, the respondent's refusal of payment and subsequent auction of New Pacific Timber's properties were invalid.

    Original Description:

    case digest

    Original Title

    15 Pay v Vda de Palanca

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    New Pacific Timber deposited a cashier's check for P50,000 and cash of P13,130 with the court clerk to satisfy a judgment against it of P63,130. The respondent refused to accept the payment, arguing that a cashier's check is not legal tender. The Supreme Court ruled that a cashier's check is deemed the equivalent of cash, as the funds are transferred from the maker's account to the payee upon certification. As the full amount was deposited to satisfy the judgment, the respondent's refusal of payment and subsequent auction of New Pacific Timber's properties were invalid.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    43 views1 page

    15 Pay V Vda de Palanca

    Uploaded by

    luigimanzanares
    New Pacific Timber deposited a cashier's check for P50,000 and cash of P13,130 with the court clerk to satisfy a judgment against it of P63,130. The respondent refused to accept the payment, arguing that a cashier's check is not legal tender. The Supreme Court ruled that a cashier's check is deemed the equivalent of cash, as the funds are transferred from the maker's account to the payee upon certification. As the full amount was deposited to satisfy the judgment, the respondent's refusal of payment and subsequent auction of New Pacific Timber's properties were invalid.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 1

    NEW PACIFIC TIMBER & SUPPLY CO. INC. vs. HON. SENERIS, RICARDO A.

    TONG and EX-OFFICIO SHERIFF HAKIM S. ABDULWAHID


    New Pacific Timber & Supply Co, Inc vs Seneris
    GR No. L-41764, December 19, 1980

    Doctrine: Cashier’s check deemed as cash. Certification of check by drawee bank equivalent to acceptance.

    FACTS:
     In a complaint for collection of sum of money, petitioner New Pacific Timber failed to comply with judgment obligation in amicable settlement
    with the respondent Tong.
     Hence, a writ of execution was issued for the amount of P63,130. New Pacific Timber’s properties (wheelers, shaper) were levied, set for an
    auction sale.
    Prior to date of auction sale, New Pacific Timber deposited with Clerk of Court, in his capacity as Ex-Officio Sheriff, sum of P63,130 for
    payment, consisting of P50k Cashier’s Check and P13,130 cash.
     Respondent Tong refused to accept the check and cash deposit.

     Respondent judge upheld respondent Tong’s claim that he has right to refuse payment by means of a check and cited:
    o Section 63 of the Central Bank Act:
    “Sec 63. Legal Character – Checks representing deposit money do not have legal tender power and their acceptance in payment of
    debts, both public and private, is at option of the creditor. Provided, however, 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 amount credited to account.”
    o Article 1249 of NCC - which provides for payment of debts in money shall be made in the currency stipulated or the currency that is legal
    tender in the Philippines.
    o Respondent judge upheld respondent’s right to refuse payment of P13, 130 in cash since it is less than amount of judgment obligation,
    which is a partial payment as provided in Article 1248 of the New Civil Code.
    Art. 1248. Unless there is an express stipulation to that effect, the creditor cannot be compelled partially to receive the presentations in
    which the obligation consists.
     Petitioner New Pacific Timber filed an ex-parte motion for issuance of certificate of satisfaction of judgment after his levied properties were all
    sold during the auction sale; questions said judge committed GAD, since there was already full satisfaction of judgment before auction sale.

    ISSUE:
    WON there was a valid refusal (by Respondent Tong) to accept the payment by petitioner New Pacific Timber consisting of P50k cashier’s check and
    P13 130.00 cash. -- NO
    IOW: WON cashier’s check can be considered legal tender. -- YES

    RULING:
    A cashier’s check is not an ordinary check. It is a well-known and accepted practice in the business sector that a Cashier’s Check is deemed as cash.

    Where a check is certified by the bank on which it is drawn, the certification is equivalent to acceptance. By the certification of drawee bank, the
    funds represented by the check are transferred from the credit of the maker to that of the payee or holder, and for all intents and purposes, the
    latter becomes the depositor of the drawee bank.
    Said certification implies that check is drawn upon sufficient funds in the hands of the drawee that they have been set apart for its satisfaction,
    that they shall be so applied whenever the check is presented for payment.

    The object of certifying a check, as regards to both parties, is to enable the holder to use it as money. When the holder procures the check to
    be certified, the check operates as an assignment of a part of the funds to the creditors.

    Certification of a check is an exception to the rule enunciated under Sec 63 of the CB Act.

    It also appears that the Cashier’s Check was even withdrawn by the petitioner and replaced with cash in the corresponding amount of P50,000.00
    on January 27, 1975 pursuant to an agreement entered into by the parties at the instance of the respondent Judge. However, the private
    respondent still refused to receive the same.

    As a consequence, considering that the whole amount deposited by the petitioner consisting of Cashier’s Check of P50, 000.00 and P13, 130.00 in
    cash covers the judgment obligation of P63,000.00 AND THAT, cashier’s check was actually replaced with cash, we see no valid reason for
    respondent to refuse acceptance of the payment of the obligation in his favor. The auction sale was uncalled for.
    It appears private respondent is more interested in the levied properties than in the mere satisfaction of the judgment obligation.

    You might also like