Section 14: If a person is issued a negotiable instrument wanting a material, he/she can remedy the situation by filling in the blanks. A signature on a blank paper delivered by the person making the signature in order that the paper may be converted into a NI operates as
a prima facie authority to fill it up as such for any amount.
4. May enforce payment of the instrument for the full amount thereof against all parties liable thereon. (Secs. 51 and 57)
Every holder of a negotiable instrument is deemed prima facie a holder in due course. However, this presumption arises only in favor of a person who is a holder as defined in Section 191 of the NIL. The weight of authority sustains the view that a payee may be a holder in due course. Hence, the presumption that he is a prima facie holder in due course applies in his favor. (Cely Yang vs. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 138074, August 15, 2003) Holder Not In Due Course
the books of the corporation the shares are still in his name, the
creditor can attach and levy on the shares.
Now, although it has been said that shares of stock are personal property and are quasi-negotiable because to transfer them, the seller can simply sign at the back and deliver it they’re not like negotiableinstruments. That’s why if the indorsement of the stockholder was forged even if it was an indorsement in blank, the buyer shall not acquire any right to the share of stock. Now if the one who forged it was an employee or officer of the corporation who was precisely in charge of the stock, the records or the stock certificates, then the corporation will be responsible for his act. Like you know, you are required to be a stockholder of PLDT to get a telephone line. Many people do not claim their stock certificates so they are there in the vault of PLDT. I have one case where an employee there who was in charge of their custody forged the indorsement of some stock and sold them in the stock market. So the buyer would get good title, the corporation will be liable. So what will happen? The buyer will get good title and the seller will also have to be recognized. And it would be PLDT who would bear the loss. But remember whenever there will be an over-issuance of the shares, irrespective of good faith, the buyer cannot acquire title. If there is over-issuance, the owner of the shares of stock whose signature was forged must be recognized as still the owner and the remedy of the buyer would simply be to sue PLDT for damages. Likewise if the indorsement was forged… somebody stole the stock certificate, forged the indorsement and because of that, the corporation issued a stock certificate to that forger so he now has a stock certificate in his name and he goes around and sells that to somebody who bought that in good faith, he will be protected because he has the right to rely on that stock certificate in the name of the seller. So what will happen, both the original owner whose stock was stolen and that buyer, para ‘tong Torens title, will be recognized. But again if this will result in over-issuance, it is the original owner who will be recognized and the remedy of that buyer will be to simply sue the corporation for damages.
I. GENERAL CONCEPTS
NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENT (NI)
A written contract for the payment of money which complies with the requirements of Sec. 1 of the NIL, which by its form and on its face, is intended as a substitute for money and passes from hand to hand as money, so as to give the holder in due course (HDC) the right to hold the instrument free from defenses available to prior parties. (Reviewer on Commercial Law, Professors Sundiang and Aquino)
Security Bank of Sioux City v. Gunderson – The promissory note in suit
contains the following language:
“The makers, indorsers, guarantors of this note, and the sureties hereon severally waive presentment for payment, protest and notice of dishonor, and consent that the time of its payment may be extended without notice, all defenses on the ground of any extension of time of payment being hereby expressly waived.” In First National Bank of Pomeroy v. Buttery, the Court held that this phrase does not express an agreement to extend time, but leaves the matter of extension optional with the holder, and not obligatory upon him, and the note of its face fixes the time when it becomes due. The obvious purpose of the provision taken as a whole was merely to relieve the holder of the paper from the burdens made necessary by the rigid requirements of the mercantile law in order to secure the continued liability of the indorsers and sureties upon the paper. Therefore what was meant by the stipulation as to the extension of time was simply that in case the holder and the maker should agree upon an extension, the sureties and indorsers should not be discharged. The holder and maker of any note may at anytime agree upon an extension; therefore the fact that they have that right does not affect the negotiability of the paper.
Describe the Administrative Code of 1987.
Held: The Code is a general law and “incorporates in a unified document the major structural, functional and procedural principles of governance (Third Whereas Clause, Administrative Code of 1987) and “embodies changes in administrative structures and procedures designed to serve the people.” (Fourth Whereas Clause, Administrative Code of 1987) The Code is divided into seven (7) books. These books contain provisions on the organization, powers and general administration of departments, bureaus and offices under the executive branch, the organization and functions of the Constitutional Commissions and other constitutional bodies, the rules on the national government budget, as well as guidelines for the exercise by administrative agencies of quasi-legislative and quasi-judicial powers. The Code covers both the internal administration, i.e., internal organization, personnel and recruitment, supervision and discipline, and the effects of the functions performed by administrative officials on private individuals or parties outside government. (Ople v. Torres, G.R.
Minister is elected from among the members of the National Assembly and serves as the head of government and commander-in-chief of the Philippine Armed Forces. A President is elected from among the members of the National Assembly and serves as the symbolic head of state with a six-year term. The judicial power is vested in the Supreme Court, composed of a Chief Justice and 14 Justices. The National Assembly exercises the power to define, prescribe and apportion the jurisdiction of the lower courts. All justices of the Supreme Court and judges of the lower courts are appointed by the Prime Minister. This Constitution retains the independence of the Commission on Elections and establishes two independent Constitution al bodies [Civil Service Commission and the Commission on Audit] as well as the National Economic Development Authority [NEDA]. On 24 August 1970, Congress enacted RA No. 6132, otherwise known as the Constitution al Convention Act, for the purpose of convening a Constitution al Convention. The 320 delegates met from June 1971 until 30 November 1972, when they approved the draft of the new Charter. While in the process of drafting a new Constitution , President Ferdinand Marcos declared Martial Law on 21 September 1972. The draft Constitution was submitted to the Citizen's Assemblies from January 10 to 17, 1973 for ratification. On 17 January 1973 , President Marcos issued Proclamation No. 1102, announcing the ratification of the Constitution of the Republic of the Philippines. The above constitution was amended in 1976, 1980 and in 1981. There were minor amendments done in 1984.
intention to to b b rr e e a a k k tt h h e e lawlaw o o rr ot ot h h e e rw rw ise ise to to do do wr wr on on g g o o rr not. not. h h e e rr e e is is a a larg
larg e e body body o o f f uni uni cc ii pal law a pal law a tt tt h h e e pr pr esent d esent d a a y y wh wh ii ch ch is is so so cc on on cc eived eived W
It has, likewise, been held that if no presentment is made at all, the drawer cannot be held liable irrespective of loss or injury unless presentment is otherwise excused. 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, except when through the fault of the creditor, the instrument is impaired. The payee of a check would be a creditor under this provision and if its non-payment is caused by his negligence, payment will be deemed effected and the obligation for which the check was given as conditional payment will be discharged. Failure of a payee to encash a check for more than ten (10) years undoubtedly resulted in the impairment of the check through his unreasonable and unexplained delay
5] There is presumptions under Section 118 and 139 of the NegotiableInstruments Act in favour of holder of the cheque. Until contrary is proved, presumption is in favour of holder of cheque that it was drawn for discharge of debt or liabilities. However, it is rebutable one and accused can rebut it without entering into witness box, through crossexamination of the prosecution witnesses. Complainant is not absolved from liability to show that cheque was issued for legally enforceable debt or liability. Burden on accused in such case would not be as light as it is in the cases under sec.114 of the Evidence Act. In case of “ Goa Plast Pvt. Ltd. vs. Shri Chico Ursula D' Souza 1996 (4)
While it is true that the delivery of a check produces the effect of payment only when it is cashed, pursuant to Art. 1249 of the Civil Code, the rule is otherwise if the debtor is prejudiced by the creditor‘s unreasonable delay in presentment. The acceptance of a check implies an undertaking of due diligence in presenting it for payment, and if he from whom it is received sustains loss by want of such diligence, it will be held to operate as actual payment of the debt or obligation for which it was given. It has, likewise, been held that if no presentment is made at all, the drawer cannot be held liable irrespective of loss or injury unless presentment is otherwise excused. 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, except when through the fault of the creditor, the instrument is impaired. The payee of a check would be a creditor under this provision and if its non-payment is caused by his negligence, payment will be deemed effected and the obligation for which the check was given as conditional payment will be discharged.
28 | N E G O T I A B L E I N S T R U M E N T S – S U N D I A N G N O T E S 2 K A Y 2 0 1 2 - 2 0 1 3 h i r y u k i m i k o This is Dean Sundiang’s analysis. (I ask you, though: Do the provisions of
the NIL [sec.23] apply suppletorily to the negotiation of NDTs? Would it not be more in line with civil law to apply the Statute Frauds and deem the contract entered into by the thief as unenforceable for violating Art.1403(1) because he entered into it by forging the signatures of the owner or the duly authorized representative and thus entered into the contract in the name of another person without having been given proper authority or legal representation? Just thinking aloud –Kimiko)
b. Final say to prosecute still rests in the executive department.
c. The Ombudsman or Tanodbayan may use mandamus to compel the fiscal to prosecute.
4.) Direct the officer concerned, in any appropriate case, and subject to such limitations as may be provided by law to furnish it with copies of documents relating to contracts or transactions entered into by his office involving the disbursement or use of public funds of properties, and report any irregularity to COA for appropriate action.
2. Exercise direct and immediate supervision and control over election officials. Deputize, with the concurrence of the President, law enforcement agencies and
instrumentalities of the Government, including the Armed Forces of the Philippines, for the exclusive purpose of ensuring free, orderly, honest, peaceful and credible elections
>So, if the offender is 16, therefore he is over 15 but below 18, and he committed a crime and acted with discernment. During the trial, it was established and proven that he is guilty beyond reasonable doubt. There is already a pronouncement of a judgment of civil liability. Under Sec. 38, once the child who is under 18 years of age at the time of the commission of the crime was found guilty of the offense charged the court shall determine and ascertain any civil liability which may have resulted from the offense committed. However, instead of pronouncing the judgment of conviction, the court shall place the child in conflict with the law under suspended sentence, without need of application. Provided however, that the suspension of the sentence shall still be applied even if the juvenile is already 18 years of age or more at the time of the pronouncement of his guilt. Therefore, as long as he is 18 years and below at the time of the commission of the crime, even if he is above 18 at the promulgation of the judgment, he can still benefit from the suspended sentence.
Subject to repurchase by wife, legal heirs within 5 years from date of conveyance Granted by law, need not be stipulated
2. Redemption in tax sales
in case of tax delinquency/failure to pay tax assessments, property is foreclosed delinquent payer has 1 year to redeem by paying to the revenue District Officer
a. Preparatory acts – ordinarily not punished except when considered by law as independent crimes (e.g. possession of picklocks and similar tools) b. Acts of Execution – punishable under RPC
ATTEMPTED STAGE – Marks the commencement of the subjective phase SUBJECTIVE PHASE – That portion of the acts constituting the crime, starting from the point where the offender begins the commission of the crime to the point where he has still control over his acts, including their (acts) natural course
For example, a special law punishes a certain act as a crime. The special law is silent as to the civil liability of one who violates the same. Here is a person who violated the special law and he was prosecuted. His violation caused damage or injury to a private party. May the court pronounce that he is civilly liable to the offended party, considering that the special law is silent on this point? Yes, because Article 100 of the Revised Penal Code may be given suppletory application to prevent an injustice from being done to the offended party. Article 100 states that every person criminally liable for a felony is also civilly liable. That article shall be applied suppletory to avoid an injustice that would be caused to the private offended party, if he would not be indemnified for the damages or injuries sustained by him.
amount of the dishonored check. The trial court ruled in favor of Jenny. Allied remitted to the sheriff a manager’s check amounting to P800,000 drawn on Rhea’s account which was duly received by Jenny. Rhea filed a petition in the CA seeking to annul and set aside the trial court’s decision on the ground of extrinsic fraud. The appellate court granted Rhea’s petition. Is the CA correct? A: Yes. Annulment of judgment is a remedy in law independent of the case where the judgment sought to be annulled is promulgated. It can be filed by one who was not a party to the case in which the assailed judgment was rendered. Here, Rhea may avail of the remedy of annulment of judgment under Rule 47. The ordinary remedies of new trial, appeal and petition for relief were not available to her for the simple reason that she was not made a party to the suit against Allied (Villanueva v. Nite, G.R. No. 148211, July 25, 2006).