Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 40 views

    G.R. NO. 151932, August 19, 2009

    Uploaded by

    MAC
    The court did not err in allowing the substitution of a falsified document. Section 7 of the Rules of Court requires that the original or copy of a document be attached if the cause of action relates to that document. Section 3 allows amendments to complaints, including attached documents, with court approval. The court has broad discretion to allow amendments to serve substantial justice, prevent delay, and secure a just resolution. In this case, the bank admitted submitting the wrong document by mistake and approved substituting it with the original to properly resolve the case, with no evidence of fraudulent intent.

    Copyright:

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

    G.R. NO. 151932, August 19, 2009

    Uploaded by

    MAC
    40 views1 page
    The court did not err in allowing the substitution of a falsified document. Section 7 of the Rules of Court requires that the original or copy of a document be attached if the cause of action relates to that document. Section 3 allows amendments to complaints, including attached documents, with court approval. The court has broad discretion to allow amendments to serve substantial justice, prevent delay, and secure a just resolution. In this case, the bank admitted submitting the wrong document by mistake and approved substituting it with the original to properly resolve the case, with no evidence of fraudulent intent.

    Original Title

    G.R. NO. 151932 , August 19, 2009

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The court did not err in allowing the substitution of a falsified document. Section 7 of the Rules of Court requires that the original or copy of a document be attached if the cause of action relates to that document. Section 3 allows amendments to complaints, including attached documents, with court approval. The court has broad discretion to allow amendments to serve substantial justice, prevent delay, and secure a just resolution. In this case, the bank admitted submitting the wrong document by mistake and approved substituting it with the original to properly resolve the case, with no evidence of fraudulent intent.

    Copyright:

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

    G.R. NO. 151932, August 19, 2009

    Uploaded by

    MAC
    The court did not err in allowing the substitution of a falsified document. Section 7 of the Rules of Court requires that the original or copy of a document be attached if the cause of action relates to that document. Section 3 allows amendments to complaints, including attached documents, with court approval. The court has broad discretion to allow amendments to serve substantial justice, prevent delay, and secure a just resolution. In this case, the bank admitted submitting the wrong document by mistake and approved substituting it with the original to properly resolve the case, with no evidence of fraudulent intent.

    Copyright:

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

    HENRY CHING TIU, CHRISTOPHER HALIN GO, and GEORGE CO v.

     PHILIPPINE BANK OF COMMUNICATIONS

    G.R. NO. 151932 | August 19, 2009

    Peralta, J.

    ISSUE: Whether the court erred in allowing the substitution of the falsified document by relying on the provision
    of Section 3, Rule 10 of the Rules of Court.

    HELD:

    NO, the court did not err in allowing the substitution of the falsified document.

    The pertinent rule on actionable documents is found in Section 7, Rule 8 of the Rules of Court, which
    provides that when the cause of action is anchored on a document, its substance must be set forth, and the original
    or a copy thereof "shall" be attached to the pleading as an exhibit and deemed a part thereof.

    While Secton 3, Rule 10 of the Rules of Court allows the complainant to amend its complaint – including
    documents annexed thereto – after the defendant files an answer. Provided, it is done with leave of court.

    The granting of leave to file amended pleading is a matter particularly addressed to the sound discretion of
    the trial court; and that discretion is broad, subject only to the limitations that the amendments should not
    substantially change the cause of action or alter the theory of the case, or that it was not made to delay the action.

    Nevertheless, as enunciated in Valenzuela, even if the amendment substantially alters the cause of action
    or defense, such amendment could still be allowed when it is sought to serve the higher interest of substantial
    justice; prevent delay; and secure a just, speedy and inexpensive disposition of actions and proceedings.

    In the present case, there was no fraudulent intent on the part of PBCOM in submitting the altered surety
    agreement. In fact, the bank admitted that it was a mistake on their part to have submitted it in the first place
    instead of the original agreement. It also admitted that, through inadvertence, the copy that was attached to the
    complaint was the copy wherein the words "IN HIS PERSONAL CAPACITY" were inserted to conform to the bank's
    standard practice. This alteration was made without the knowledge of the notary public. PBCOM's counsel had no
    idea that what it submitted was the altered document, thereby necessitating the substitution of the surety
    agreement with the original thereof, in order that the case would be judiciously resolved.

    You might also like