Bar Commercial Law - Filoteo Files

Tuesday, January 31, 2006

Bar Questions in Negotiable Instrument
Summary of Bar Examination Cases
MERCANTILE LAW REVIEW
Negotiable Instruments Law

GENERAL PRINCIPLES
A. THEORY
01. What are the requisites of a negotiable instruments? [1953, 1954, 1964, 1968, 1989, 1991,
1996, Bar Examinations].
02. What constitutes a holder in due course? [1996, Bar Examinations].
03. Can a bill of exchange or a promissory note qualify as a negotiable instrument if a.It is not dated; or
b.The date and the month, but not the year of its maturity is given; or
c.It is payable to cash; or
d.It names two alternative drawees [1997, Bar Examinations].
04. A promissory note reads as follows: I promise to pay Gabriela Silangan P1,000.00 three
years after the unconditional withdrawal of the U.S. of its military bases in the Philippines.
Discuss the negotiability or non-negotiability of the note above [1966 Bar Examinations].
05. Can the payee in a promissory note be a holder in due course within the meaning of the
Negotiable Instruments Law? [2000 Bar Examinations].
06. How do you treat a negotiable instrument that is so ambiguous that there is a doubt whether
it is a bill or a note? [1999, Bar Examinations].
07. When a signature is so placed upon a negotiable instrument that it is not clear in what
capacity the person making the same intended to sign, what is his liability? [1946, Bar
Examinations].
08. When a negotiable instrument contains the words I promise to pay and is signed by two or
more persons, what is their liability, joint or solidary? Explain [1946, Bar Examinations].

B. TESTS OF NEGOTIABILITY

09. MP bought a used cellphone from JR.

JR preferred cash but MP is a friend so JR accepted MPs promissory note for P10,000.00.
JR though of converting the note into cash by indorsing it to his brother KR. The promissory
note is a piece of paper with the following hand-printed notation: MP WILL PAY JR P10,000.00
IN PAYMENT FOR HIS CELLPHONE ONE WEEK FROM TODAY.
Below this notation is MPs signature with 8/1/00 next to it, indicating the date of the
promissory note.
When JR presented MPs note to KR, the latter said it was not a negotiable instrument under
the law and so could not be a valid cash substitute.
JR took the opposite view, insisting on the notes negotiability. You are asked to referee .
Which of the opposing views is correct? Explain [2000 Bar Examinations].
10. Perla bought a motor car payable in installments from Automotic Company for P250,000.00
with a P50,000.00 downpayment.
She executed a promissory note for the balance which reads:
For value received, I promise to pay Automotive Company or order at its office in Legaspi City,
the sum of P200,000.00 with interest at 12% per annum, payable in equal installments of
P20,000.00 for ten (10) months starting 21 October 2002.
SGD Perla
Manila, 21 September 2002
Automotive Company subsequently indorsed the note to Reliable Finance Corporation which
financed the purchase. Perla defaulted in the payment of her installments.
Is the above promissory note a negotiable instrument? Explain [1992 Bar Examinations].
11. Romeo had P100,000.00 in his current account at Matatag Banking Corporation. Romeo
learned that his enemy had hired a contract killer to liquidate him. Fearful of his life, he mailed to
his fiance, Juliet, a check for his P100,000.00 in the bank. The check was payable to Juliet or
order and was accompanied by a letter stating that he was giving her his money out of his great
love for her and because something would happen to him anytime now. Juliet presented the
check for payment but the bank refused to honor it. Does Juliet have any right of action against
the bank? Because of the humiliation she suffered from the bank, Juliet broke off her
engagement with Romeo. Does Romeo have a right of action against the bank? Explain [1986
Bar Examination].
12. Explain whether or not the following instrument is negotiable.
P1,000.00 Manila, October 5, 1970
I acknowledge to have received from Jose Cruz one thousand pesos (P1,000.00) which I
promise to pay on demand or in five months from date with one percent interest per month
payable within the first five days of every month. If the interest is not paid when due, then both
principal and interest shall become due at the option of the holder.

SGD: Pedro Garcia

[1970 Bar Examination].
13. For value received, X executed a promissory note in favor of Y for P10,000.00 agreeing to
pay interest thereon but without specifying the rate thereof. Can Y collect interest on the note?
Why? Explain [1964 Bar Examination].

DEFENSES
C. FAILURE/ABSENCE OF CONSIDERATION
14. In payment of canned goods he had purchased, Pedro Flores of Cabanatuan drew a check
upon PNB for P1,000.00 payable to the order of Veraz and Co., the seller in Manila. He sent the
check without recourse to Juan Santos. The latter indorsed it in blank, for consideration, to
Pablo Reyes, who, in turn, sold it for P800.00, by delivery to Antonio Gomez. The canned goods
were never forwarded to Flores. Gomez presented the check to the bank, but payment was
refused because Reyes had not put his name on it. Is the bank right in so refusing? Why? If
Gomez gave due notice to Veraz and Co., may he recover from the latter? May Gomez recover
from Santos? Why? May he recover from Reyes? Why? [1968 Bar Examination].
15. Eva issued to Imelda a check in the amount of P50,000.00 post-dated September 19, as
security for a diamond ring to be sold on commission. On September 15, Imelda negotiated the
check to MT Investment which paid the amount of P40,000.00 to her. Eva failed to sell the ring,
so she returned it to Imelda on September 19. Unable to retrieve her check, Eva withdrew her
funds from the drawee bank. Thus, when MT Investment presented the check for payment, the
drawee bank dishonored it. Later on, when MT Investment sued her, Eva raised the defense of
absence of consideration, the check having been issued merely as security for the ring that she
could not sell. Does Eva have a valid defense? Explain [1996, Bar Examination].
16. A and B executed and delivered to C a promissory note which reads: I promise to pay C or
bearer the sum of P2,000.00 with interest at 12% per annum on or before June 30, 1960.
Manila, February 1, 1969. SGD A and B. Two months later, for value received, C delivered to D
the aforesaid note with the indorsement: Pay to D; and on April 15, 1969, the said note was
indorsed in blank by D and delivered to X, without consideration. Upon As refusal to pay despite
demand, X filed an action to collect from A the total amount of the promissory note, with 12%
interest per annum from February 1, 1969, and the costs. As defenses are that the note is null
and void because the same was issued to pay a gambling debt and that in any event, his liability

cannot exceed more than one-half of the amount due. Are As defenses valid? Is X entitled to
the whole amount of the note? Explain. [1969 Bar Examination].
17. For the purpose of lending his name without receiving value therefor, Pedro makes a note
for P20,000.00 payable to the order of X who in turn negotiates it to Y, the latter knowing that
Pedro is not a party for value. May Y recover from Pedro if the latter imterposes absence of
consideration? Supposing under the same facts, Pedro pays the said P20,000.00, may he
recover the same amount from X? Explain [1998 Bar Examination].
18. Nora applied for a loan of P100,000.00 with BUR Bank. By way of accommodation, Noras
sister, Vilma, executed a promissory note in favor of BUR Bank. When Nora defaulted, BUR
Bank sued Vilma, despite its knowledge that Vilma received no part of the loan. May Vilma be
held liable? Explain [1996 Bar Examination].
19. Santos purchased Veras car for P50,000.00. Not having enough cash on hand, Santos
offered to pay in check. Vera refused to accept the check unless it is indorsed by Reyes, their
mutual friend. Reyes indorsed Santos check and Vera, knowing that Reyes had not received
any value for indorsing the check, accepted it. The next day, Vera presented the check to the
drawee bank for payment. Payment was refused for lack of funds. Vera gave notice of dishonor
to Reyes, but Reyes refused to pay, saying that he indorsed merely as a friend. Is Reyes liable
to Vera? In the event Reyes voluntarily pays Vera, does Reyes have the right to recover from
Santos? Explain [1985 Bar Examination].

D. INCOMPLETE DELIVERED INSTRUMENT

20. Larry issued a negotiable promissory note to Evelyn and authorized the latter to fill up the
amount in blank with his loan account in the sum of P1,000.00. However, Evelyn inserted
P5,000.00 in violation of the instruction. She negotiated the note to Julie who had knowledge of
the infirmity. Julie, in turn, negotiated said note to Devi for value and who had no knowledge of
the infirmity. Can Devi enforce the note against Larry, and if she can, for how much? Supposing
Devi indorses the note to Baby for value but who has knowledge of the infirmity, can the latter
enforce the note against Larry? Explain [1993 Bar Examination].
21. Maria issued a negotiable promissory note and authorized Pilar to fill-up the amount in blank
up to P2,000.00. However, Pilar filled it up to P4,000.00 and negotiated the note to Pepe. For
what amounts are Maria and Pilar liable to Pepe? Explain [1972 Bar Examinations].

E. INCOMPLETE UNDELIVERED INSTRUMENT

22. PN makes a promissory note for P5,000.00, but leaves the name of the payee in blank
because he wanted to verify its correct spelling first. He mindlessly left the note on top of his
desk at the end of the workday. When he returned the following morning, the note was missing.
It turned up later when X presented it to PN for payment. Before X, T, who turned out to have

filched the note from PNs office, had endorsed the note after inserting his own name in the
blank space as the payee. PN dishonored the note, contending that he did not authorize its
completion and delivery. But X said he had no participation in, or knowledge about, the pilferage
and alteration of the note and therefore he enjoys the rights of a holder in due course under the
Negotiable Instruments Law. Who is correct and why? [2000 Bar Examination].
23. Jose makes a negotiable note payable to bearer with the amount in blank and delivers it to
Karen for safekeeping. Marina fills up the note for P20,000.00 and negotiates it to Adriano, a
holder in due course. If you were Jose and Adriano presented to you the note for payment, what
defense or defenses are you going to interpose to negate liability on the instrument? Explain
[1981 Bar Examinations].
24. A entrusted to B, his secretary, a blank check drawn on X bank, signed by him, with
instructions to fill up the check in favor of D for the amount of P1,000.00 and to thereafter deliver
the said check to D. In breach of trust, B filled up the check by writing the name of E, and the
amount of P2,000.00 on the check and delivered the same to E, who accepted it in payment of
certain goods sold by E to B. Before E could encash the check, A learned of the misdeed of B
and issued a stop-payment order to X bank as a result of which X bank refused to honor the
check presented to it by E. Can E now hold X bank and A liable? Reason [1971 Bar
Examinations].
25. Jose Reyes signed a blank check, and in his hasted to attend a party, left the check on top
of his executive desk in his office. Later, Nazareno forced the door to Reyes office and stole the
blank check. Nazareno immediately filled in the amount of P50,000.00 and a fictitious name as
payee on the said check. Nazareno then endorsed the check in the payees name and passed it
to Roldan. Thereafter, Roldan endorsed the check to Dantes. Can Dantes enforce the check
against Jose Reyes? If Dantes is a holder in due course, will your answer be the same? [1985
Bar Examinations].
26. A signed a blank check which he inadvertently left at his desk at his Escolta Office. The
same was later stolen by B, who filled in the amount of P22,300.00 and a fictitious name as
payee. B then endorsed the check in the payees name and passed the check to C; thereafter C
passed it to D; then D to E; and E to F. Can F enforce the instrument against A? Suppose that F
is a holder in due course, what will be your answer? Can F enforce the instrument against B?
Against C. Give reasons [1978 Bar Examinations].

F. FORGERY
27. A delivers a bearer instrument to B. B then specially indorses it to C, and C later indorses it
in blank to D. E steals the instrument from D and, forging the signature of D, succeeds in
negotiating it to F who acquires the instrument in good faith and for value. If, for any reason,
the drawee bank refuses to honor the check, can F enforce the instrument against the drawer?
In case of the dishonor of the check by both the drawee and the drawer, can F hold any of B, C
and D liable secondarily on the instrument? [1997 Bar Examinations].

28. Juan makes a promissory note payable to his order, signing Pedros name thereon as maker
without Pedros knowledge and consent. Juan then indorses the note to Jose, who, in turn,
indorses it to Carlos under circumstances which make Carlos a holder in due course. May
Carlos enforce the note against Pedro? And if the note is dishonored by Pedro, may Carlos hold
Juan and Jose liable on their respective indorsements? Reason out your answers [1989 Bar
Examinations].
29. Juan makes a promissory note payable to the order of Pedro, who indorses it to Jose.
Somehow, Roberto obtains possession of the note and, forging the signature of Jose, indorses it
to Amado. Amado then indorses the note to Nilo, the holder. State the rights and liabilities of the
parties [1984 Bar Examinations].
30. A makes a negotiable promissory note payable to B or bearer. A delivers the note to B. B
indorses the note to C. C places the note in his wallet, which was stolen by X, who, finding the
note, indorses it to D by forcing Cs signature. D indorses the note to E, who in turn, delivers the
note to F, a holder in due course, without indorsement. What are the liabilities of A, B and C to F.
Explain briefly [1981 Bar Examinations].
31. Juan de la Cruz signs a promissory note payable to Pedro Lim or bearer, and delivers it
personally to Pedro Lim. The latter somehow misplaces the said note and Carlos Ros finds the
note lying around the corridor of the building. Carlos Ros endorses the promissory note to
Juana Bond, for value, by forging the signature of Pedro Lim. May Juana Bond hold Juan de la
Cruz liable on the note? Explain [1980 Bar Examinations].
32. Fernando forged the name of Daniel, manager of a Trading Company, as the drawer of a
check. The Bank of Philippine Islands, the drawee bank, did not detect the forgery and paid the
amount. May the bank charge the amount paid against the account of the alleged drawer?
Explain [1977 Bar Examinations].

G. FRAUD
33. A succeeded in making B affix his signature on a check without Bs knowing that it was a
check. At the time of signing, the check was complete in all respects. A intended to cash the
check the following morning, but that night, it was stolen by C who succeeded in negotiating the
same to D, a holder in due course. D cashed the check the following morning. B refused to have
the amount of the check deducted from his bank deposit. Who may properly be charged with the
amount of the check? Explain your answer [1961 Bar Examinations].
34. A induces B by fraud to make a promissory note payable on demand to the order of A in the
sum of P5,000.00. Can A file an action successfully against the maker B for the amount of the
note? Reasons. Going further, A transfers the note to C who pays P5,000.00 therefor and
acquires the note under circumstances that make him (C) as holder in due course. Can C file an
action successfully against B, the maker of the note, for the amount of the note? What

defense/defenses can B interpose? Explain [1978 Bar Examinations].

H. MATERIAL ALTERATION
35. A check for P50,000.00 was drawn against drawee bank and made payable to XYZ
Marketing or order. The check was deposited with payees account at ABC Bank which then
sent the check for clearing to drawee bank. Drawee bank refused to honor the check on the
ground that the serial number thereof had been altered. XYZ Marketing sued drawee bank. Is it
proper for the drawee bank to dishonor the check for the reason that it had been altered? In
instant suit, drawee bank contended that XYZ Marketing as payee could not sue the drawee
bank as there was no privity between them. Drawee theorized that there was no basis to make it
liable for the check. Is this contention correct? Explain [1999 Bar Examinations].
36. William issued to Albert a check for P10,000.00 drawn on XM Bank. Albert altered the
amount of the check to P210,000.00 and deposited the check to his account with ND Bank.
When ND Bank presented the check for payment through the Clearing House, XM Bank
honored it. Thereafter, Albert withdrew the amount of P210,000.00 and closed his account.
When the check was returned to him after a month, William discovered the alteration. XM Bank
recredited P210,000.00 to Williams current account and sought reimbursement from ND Bank.
ND Bank refused, claiming that XM Bank failed to return the altered check within the 24 hour
clearing period. Who, as between XM Bank and ND Bank, should bear the loss? Explain [1996
Bar Examinations].
37. In consideration of some goods he bought, A issued to B a personal check in the amount of
P280.00 which B altered to P2,800.00 without the knowledge of A. The alteration is not apparent
to the naked eye. B then deposited the altered check in his account with PNB, which released it
for clearing. The BPI, the drawee bank, did not notice the alteration and the check therefore
cleared. B was able to withdraw the P2,800.00, after which, he closed his account. When A
received his bank statement and cancelled checks, he noticed the discrepancy in the amount
when he compared the altered check with his check stub. He immediately notified BPI and
demanded a recredit. BPI, in turn, demanded recredit from PNB which cannot now locate B.
Can A compel BPI to recredit his account? If so, how much? Can PNB be compelled to
reimburse BPI of the amount the latter may have recredit to the account of A? Explain [1986 Bar
Examinations].
38. Pedro writes out a check for P1,000.00 in favor of Jose or order against his current account
with the Bank of America. Juan steals the check, erases the name of Jose and superimposes
his own name. Juan deposits the check at Citibank and after clearing, Juan withdraws the
amount and absconds. Upon discovery by Pedro of the material alteration, he lodged a
complaint at the Bank of America, who debited the amount to Pedro. Bank of America demands
reimbursement for Citibank which refuses on the ground that it only acted as an agent for
collection. Who bears the loss? Why? [1977 Bar Examinations].

39. Maria issued a negotiable promissory note and authorized Pilar to fill up the amount in blank
up to P2,000.00 only. However, Pilar filled it up to P4,000.00 and negotiated the note to Pepe.
For what amount are Maria and Pilar liable to Pepe? Explain [1972 Bar Examinations].
40. A executed a bill of exchange for P500.00 in favor of B, who altered the amount to
P5,000.00 and presented the bill to the drawee for acceptance. The drawee, not knowing of the
alteration which was neatly done, accepted the bill. Thereafter, N negotiated the bill to C, who
now seeks to hold the drawee liable for P5,000.00. The drawee contends that under the rule on
alteration, he can only be liable up to P500.00. Is the drawees contention tenable? Can the
drawee debit the amount of A, and if so, to what extent? Reasons [1971 Bar Examinations].
I. MINORITY
41. X makes a promissory note for P10,000.00 payable to A, a minor, to help him to buy school
books. A endorses the note to B for value, who in turn endorses the note to C. C knows A is a
minor. If C sues X on the note, can X set up the defenses of minority and lack of consideration?
Explain [1998 Bar Examinations].
42. X, without receiving consideration therefor, makes a promissory note for P500.00 payable to
A, a minor, to help him buy school books. A indorses the note to B, who, in turn, indorses the
note to C. C knows As minority. If C presents the note to X for payment, what are the possible
defenses to be interposed by X? If C sues X on the note, can X set up the defense of minority
and lack of consideration? Explain [1989 Bar Examinations].

WARRANTIES/LIABILITIES
J. ACCEPTOR
43. X draws a check against his current account with Ortigas Branch of Bonifacio Bank in favor
of B. Although X does not have sufficient funds, the bank honors the check when it was
presented to payment. Apparently, X has conspired with the banks bookkeeper so that his
ledger card would show that he still has sufficient funds. The bank files an action for recovery of
the amount paid to B because the check presented has no sufficient funds. Decide the case
[1998 Bar Examinations].

K. NEGOTIATOR BY DELIVERY
44. Anna makes a promissory note payable to bearer and delivers it to Bing. In turn, Bing
negotiates it by mere delivery to Carmen, who indorses it specially to Dong. Dong negotiates it
by special indorsement to Emma, who negotiates it to Fe by mere delivery. Anna did not pay. To
whom are Bing and Carmen liable? To whom are Dong and Emma liable? Explain [1988 Bar
Examinations].

L. INDORSERS
45. Alex issued a negotiable promissory note (PN) payable to Benito or order in payment of
certain goods. Benito indorsed the PN to Celso in payment of an existing obligation. Later, Alex
found the goods to be defective. While in Celsos possession, the PN was stolen by Dennis who
forged Celsos signature and discounted it with Edgar, a money lender who did not make
inquiries about the PN. Edgar indorsed the PN to Felix, a holder in due course. When Felix
demanded payment of the PN from Alex, the latter refused to pay. Dennis could no longer be
located. What are the rights of Felix, if any, against Alex, Benito, Celso and Edgar? Explain.
Does Celso have any right of action against Alex, Benito and Felix? Explain [1995 Bar
Examinations].
46. A drew a check for P1,000.00 on B, the Bank payable to the order of C and delivered the
check to the latter for value. C indorsed the check in blank and negotiated it to D, who lost it. At
Ds request, A ordered payment stopped by notifying B. The stop payment order was overlooked
and the check was paid to E, who had taken the check, without actual knowledge of the loss, in
payment of merchandise sold to a stranger whom he thought owned the check. D now sues the
bank. Decide the case with brief reasons [1979 Bar Examinations].

INCIDENTS
M. NEGOTIATION
47. Richard Clinton makes a promissory note payable to bearer and deliverrs the same to
Autora Page. The latter, however, endorses it to X in this manner: Payable to X, Signed: Aurora
Page. Later, X, without endorsing the promissory note, transfers and delivers the same to
Napoleon. The note is subsequently dishonored by Richard Clinton. May Napoleon proceed
against Richard Clinton for the note? [1998 Bar Examinations].
48. On November 3, as payment for goods received, A gave to B his check drawn on PNB,
Manila. B thereafter negotiated the check to C. On November 10, C could not encash the check
because the Bangko Sentral had forbidden PNB to do business on grounds of insolvency. Can
C hold A liable on the uncashed check? Can C hold B liable instead on the uncashed check?
Explain. If you were B, how would you negotiate the check to negate future liability thereon?
Explain [1987 Bar Examinations].

N. DISHONOR
49. When is notice of dishonor not required to be given to the drawer? [1996, Bar
Examinations].

50. A issued a promissory note to B dated January 1, 2002, in the following tenor: I promise to
pay to the order of B P1,000.00 sixty days after date. (Sgd.) A. The note was subsequently
negotiated with proper indorsement by B to C, C to D, and D to E, the holder. When E presented
the note for payment to A, the latter refused to pay. E then gave a notice of dishonor to C only.
May E immediately proceed against B, C or D? What should C do to protect his rights, if any,
against A, B and D? Explain [1984 Bar Examinations].
51. X draws a bill of exchange against Y in favor of W for P1,000.00, requesting the drawee to
pay on December 24, 1962. W indorses the instrument to P on September 1 and on September
15 presents it for acceptance. The bill is dishonored. P promptly sues W for payment. Will the
case prosper? Give reasons for your answer [1963 Bar Examinations].
Servant Warrior at 8:57 PM
No comments:
Post a Comment

Home
View web version
Powered by Blogger.