Category Archives: Anti Bouncing Check

Did the pendency of the civil action in the MeTC in one court (as the civil aspect in BP 22) bar the filing of Civil Case in another court on the ground of litis pendentia?

Did the pendency of the civil action in the MeTC in Manila(as the civil aspect in Criminal Case No. 275381) bar the filing of Civil Case No. 915-00 in the MeTC in PasayCityon the ground of litis pendentia? For litis … Continue reading

Posted in Anti Bouncing Check, Litis Pendentia | Tagged | Leave a comment

Applicable Law and Jurisprudence on the Propriety of filing a separate civil action based on BP 22

The Supreme Court has settled the issue of whether or not a violation of BP 22 can give rise to civil liability in Banal v. Judge Tadeo, Jr.,[17] holding: xxx          Article 20 of the New Civil Code provides:    … Continue reading

Posted in Anti Bouncing Check | Tagged | Leave a comment

Definition, nature and prerequisited in the issuance of subpoena

As stated at the outset hereof, the Court of Appeals, in a decision dated 20 August 2002,[4] dismissed the petition and accordingly affirmed the impugned resolutions of the RTC. With his motion for reconsideration having been denied by the same … Continue reading

Posted in Anti Bouncing Check, Subpoeana | Tagged | Leave a comment

Does the suspension of “all claims” as an incident to a corporate rehabilitation also contemplate the suspension of criminal charges filed against the corporate officers of the distressed corporation?

The issue to be resolved then is: does the suspension of “all claims” as an incident to a corporate rehabilitation also contemplate the suspension of criminal charges filed against the corporate officers of the distressed corporation? This Court rules in … Continue reading

Posted in Action for Claims, Anti Bouncing Check, Corporate Rehabilitation, Insolvency Act, SSS | Tagged | Leave a comment

Without proof of notice of dishonor, knowledge of insufficiency of funds cannot be presumed and no crime (whether estafa or violation of BP 22) can be deemed to exist

DECEIT AND DAMAGE AS ELEMENTS OF ESTAFA Under paragraph 2 (d) of Article 315 of the RPC, as amended by RA 4885,[20] the elements of estafa are: (1) a check is postdated or issued in payment of an obligation contracted … Continue reading

Posted in Anti Bouncing Check, Criminal Law, Estafa | Tagged , , , | 4 Comments

BP 22 and Notice of Dishonor

Petitioner was specifically charged with violation of the first paragraph of Section 1 of BP Blg. 22, which provides: “SECTION 1.  Checks without sufficient funds. – Any person who makes or draws and issues any check to apply on account … Continue reading

Posted in Anti Bouncing Check | Tagged | 3 Comments

Intention and Nature of BP 22

The gravamen of the offense punished by B.P. 22 is the act of making and issuing a worthless check or a check that is dishonored upon its presentation for payment.  It is not the non-payment of an obligation which the … Continue reading

Posted in Anti Bouncing Check | Tagged , | Leave a comment