Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 41 views

    Bpi V Metro Bank

    Uploaded by

    lemon ade
    BPI Family Savings Bank opened a current account for First Metro Investment Corporation (FMIC) and deposited 100 million pesos with a 17% annual interest rate. Four days later, BPI transferred 80 million pesos from FMIC's account to another company without FMIC's authorization. FMIC claimed the signatures approving the transfer were forged. The Supreme Court upheld previous rulings finding that BPI failed to exercise the high degree of diligence required as a bank in protecting its depositors' funds. BPI was negligent and breached its contract with FMIC by improperly transferring the money without consent. As a bank, BPI has a duty to treat deposits with the highest standard of care.

    Copyright:

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

    Bpi V Metro Bank

    Uploaded by

    lemon ade
    41 views1 page
    BPI Family Savings Bank opened a current account for First Metro Investment Corporation (FMIC) and deposited 100 million pesos with a 17% annual interest rate. Four days later, BPI transferred 80 million pesos from FMIC's account to another company without FMIC's authorization. FMIC claimed the signatures approving the transfer were forged. The Supreme Court upheld previous rulings finding that BPI failed to exercise the high degree of diligence required as a bank in protecting its depositors' funds. BPI was negligent and breached its contract with FMIC by improperly transferring the money without consent. As a bank, BPI has a duty to treat deposits with the highest standard of care.

    Original Title

    bpi v metro bank.docx

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    BPI Family Savings Bank opened a current account for First Metro Investment Corporation (FMIC) and deposited 100 million pesos with a 17% annual interest rate. Four days later, BPI transferred 80 million pesos from FMIC's account to another company without FMIC's authorization. FMIC claimed the signatures approving the transfer were forged. The Supreme Court upheld previous rulings finding that BPI failed to exercise the high degree of diligence required as a bank in protecting its depositors' funds. BPI was negligent and breached its contract with FMIC by improperly transferring the money without consent. As a bank, BPI has a duty to treat deposits with the highest standard of care.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    41 views1 page

    Bpi V Metro Bank

    Uploaded by

    lemon ade
    BPI Family Savings Bank opened a current account for First Metro Investment Corporation (FMIC) and deposited 100 million pesos with a 17% annual interest rate. Four days later, BPI transferred 80 million pesos from FMIC's account to another company without FMIC's authorization. FMIC claimed the signatures approving the transfer were forged. The Supreme Court upheld previous rulings finding that BPI failed to exercise the high degree of diligence required as a bank in protecting its depositors' funds. BPI was negligent and breached its contract with FMIC by improperly transferring the money without consent. As a bank, BPI has a duty to treat deposits with the highest standard of care.

    Copyright:

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

    BPI Family Savings Bank, Inc.

    vs First Metro Investment Corporation

    Facts: Respondent FMIC, an investment house through its Executive Vice President
    Antonio Ong, opened a current account with petitioner BPI. On August 25, 1989, it
    deposited 100 million. They agreed to a 17% per annum interest. FMIC also assured
    BPI that it will maintain its deposit for a year, provided that the interest must be paid in
    advance. The agreement was made in writing.

    Four days later (August 29), on the basis of authority to debit signed by the Executive
    VP and the David, the Senior Manager of FMIC, PI FB transferred 80 million from
    FMICs current account to the savings account of Tevesteco Arrastre Stevedoring, Inc.
    leaving only 20 million on the deposit. FMIC denied the authorization of the transfer of
    its funds to Tevesteco, and further claimed that the signatures of Ong and David were
    falsified. FMIC tried to draw a check to recover it but the check was dishonored for
    insufficient funds.

    FMIC filed a complaint for a sum of money before the RTC which then ruled in their
    favor. CA affirmed.

    Issue: Whether petitioner was remiss in its fiduciary duty.

    Held: Yes, petitioner maintains that respondent should have first inquired whether the
    deposit of 100 Million and the fixing interest rate were pursuant to the petitioner’s
    internal procedures. The petitioners stance is a futile attempt to evade an obligation
    clearly established by the intent of the parties. What happens in the corporate board
    room is entirely an internal matter. Thus, petitioner may not impute negligence on the
    part of respondent’s representative in failing to find out the scope of authority of the
    petitioner’s Branch manager. The public has the right to rely on the trustworthiness of
    the bank managers and their acts. Confidence in the banking system, which necessarily
    includes reliance on the bank managers, is vital in the economic life of the society.

    Hence, the Supreme Court upholds the finding of the lower courts. Petitioner failed to
    exercise the degree of diligence required by the nature of its obligations to its
    depositors. BPI’s act of transferring the money constituted breach of contract, The bank
    had the duty to treat the deposit account with the highest degree of diligence. Such
    degree is more than that of a good father of a family. Petitioner cannot claim it exercised
    such degree of care and must therefore bear the consequences.

    You might also like