Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 2

SIMEX INTERNATIONAL (MANILA) Inc. vs. CA & TRADERS ROYAL business standing or commercial credit.

" The amount of loss

BANK does not need to be absolutely certain to be awarded.
1990|Cruz i. Article 2216 of the Civil Code specifically provides
that "no proof of pecuniary loss is necessary in
Petitioner, Simex, is a private corporation engaged in the exportation order that moral, nominal, temperate, liquidated
of food products. He had a checking account with respondent, Traders Royal or exemplary damages may be adjudicated."
Bank (TRB) in Romulo Avenue, Cubao, which he constantly deposited in to b. Moral damages is not awarded to penalize but to
the amount of P190,380.74. Simex issued several checks drawing from the compensate the plaintiff for the injuries he/she may have
bank but it was dishonored for insufficient funds. On June 1981, as a suffered.
consequence, petitioner received demand letters from its suppliers for the i. The RTC failed to consider that claimed losses need
dishonored checks, had its credit line canceled and was withheld supplies. not be established exactly precisely because of their
nature as they are not susceptible of pecuniary
Upon investigation after Simex complained on June 10, it was found estimation.
out that the P100,000 deposited was not credited to it. The error was rectified c. Moral damages and not nominal damages is the proper
on June 17 and the dishonored checks were consequently paid. Simex relief to which the petitioner is entitled.
demanded reparation from TRB for its gross and wanton negligence to no i. Under Article 2221 of the Civil Code, "nominal
avail. damages are adjudicated in order that a right of the
 Petitioner filed before the RTC for a complaint for moral damages plaintiff, which has been violated or invaded by the
(P1M), nominal damages (P20k) and attorney's fees and costs (P5k). defendant, may be vindicated or recognized, and not
The RTC later held that respondent bank was guilty of negligence for the purpose of indemnifying the plaintiff for any
but petitioner nonetheless was not entitled to moral damages since loss suffered by him."
there was no proof of bad faith as it was a simple omission and the d. Exemplary damages under Art. 2229 says that "Exemplary
dishonored checks were eventually paid. or corrective damages are imposed, by way of example or
correction for the public good, in addition to the moral,
ISSUE: W/N TRB acted with gross and wanton negligence amounting to the temperate, liquidated or compensatory damages" and Art.
award of damages - YES. 2232 "In contracts and quasi-contracts, the court may award
exemplary damages if the defendant acted in a wanton,
HELD: fraudulent, reckless, oppressive, or malevolent manner" is
1. Simex was indeed prejudiced by the omission. Its credit line warranted.
was canceled and orders were not acted upon meant that its i. The banking system is indispensable and plays a
business declined and its reputation was tarnished in the vital role in the economic life of every civilized
business community. nation. People regard them with respect, gratitude
a. Article 2205, CC provides that actual or compensatory and confidence.
damages may be received "(2) for injury to the plaintiff s
ii. The depositor expects the bank to treat his
account with the utmost fidelity, whether the
account only has a few hundreds or millions.
iii. The bank must record every single transaction ITC: The dishonored checks took almost a month when properly, the
accurately, down to the last centavo, and as checks should have been paid immediately upon presentment. The initial
promptly as possible. This has to be done if the carelessness of the bank and the lack of promptitude in repairing its
account is to reflect at any given time the amount of error justifies the grant of moral damages. The laxity it showed regarding
money the depositor can dispose of as he sees fit, the complaining depositor constituted gross negligence, if not wanton bad
confident that the bank will deliver it as and to faith.
whomever he directs. A blunder by the bank can
cause the depositor financial loss and litigation.  The P1M claimed is preposterous because its business is not that
big, or its name not that prestigious to generate such an extravagant
amount. Moreover, a corporation is not as a rule entitled to moral
damages because, not being a natural person, it cannot experience
physical suffering or such sentiments as wounded feelings, serious
anxiety, mental anguish and moral shock. The only exception to
this rule is where the corporation has a good reputation that is
debased, resulting in its social humiliation.
o However, its prestige was indeed impaired. Moral damages
to the amount of P20k should be awarded.
 Banks are businesses affected with public interest and because
of the nature of its functions, the bank is obligated to treat the
accounts of its depositors with meticulous care, always having in
mind the fiduciary nature of their relationship. ITC, the bank violated
its relationship and did not immediately correct its mistake upon
being informed nor gave a satisfactory explanation for the error and
the lack of promptness in rectifying such. Such constitutes "wanton
manner" and TRB deserves to be imposed exemplary damages of
 P5k in attorney's costs and fees.