Solid Bank Corp. v Spouses Tan; G.R. No. 167346; 02 Apr 2007; 520 SCRA 123

FACTS:
Respondents’ representative deposited a total of ten checks with petitioner bank where respondents maintain an account. It was later found that one of the checks was not posted to respondents’ passbook. The duplicate deposit slip listing the checks deposited by their representative but it did not include the missing check. Petitioners subsequently learned that the check had cleared after it was inexplicably deposited in a different bank. The spouses filed a case for collection of a sum of money after the bank refused to pay them the amount of the check.

ISSUE(S):
Whether or not petitioner bank was negligent.

RULING:
YES. The business of banking is impressed with public interest and great reliance is made on the bank’s sworn profession of diligence and meticulousness in giving irreproachable service. Rhe degree of diligence required of banks is more than that of a good father of a family in keeping with their responsibility to exercise the necessary care and prudence in handling their clients’ money.

Tags: , , ,

Category: Legal Chyme

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *