Scribd
Upload
220 views1 page

03 Metrobank Vs Chiok

Metropolitan Bank and Trust Company vs. Wilfred N. Chiok concerns a dispute over payment of manager's checks deposited by Chiok for dollar trading with Gonzalo Nuguid. When Nuguid failed to deliver the agreed dollars, Chiok sought to stop payment on the checks. The court ruled that payment of manager's and cashier's checks cannot be countermanded for reasons not appearing on the face of the check, such as a third party's failure to fulfill obligations. While Chiok had cause for action against Nuguid, he did not have grounds to rescind the check contracts with Metrobank and Global Bank and have the amounts credited back to his accounts. A manager's check is a commitment by the bank of its

Uploaded by

Jimenez Lorenz
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
220 views1 page

03 Metrobank Vs Chiok

Metropolitan Bank and Trust Company vs. Wilfred N. Chiok concerns a dispute over payment of manager's checks deposited by Chiok for dollar trading with Gonzalo Nuguid. When Nuguid failed to deliver the agreed dollars, Chiok sought to stop payment on the checks. The court ruled that payment of manager's and cashier's checks cannot be countermanded for reasons not appearing on the face of the check, such as a third party's failure to fulfill obligations. While Chiok had cause for action against Nuguid, he did not have grounds to rescind the check contracts with Metrobank and Global Bank and have the amounts credited back to his accounts. A manager's check is a commitment by the bank of its

Uploaded by

Jimenez Lorenz
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 1

G.R. No.

172652               November 26, 2014

METROPOLITAN BANK AND TRUST COMPANY, Petitioner,


vs.
WILFRED N. CHIOK, Respondent.

Facts: 
Respondent Wilfred N. Chiok (Chiok) had been engaged in dollar trading for several years. He usually buys dollars
from Gonzalo B. Nuguid (Nuguid) at the exchange rate prevailing on the date of the sale. Chiok pays Nuguid either
in cash or manager’s check, to be picked up by the latter or deposited in the latter’s bank account.

Chiok then deposited the three checks with an aggregate value of ₱26,068,350.00 in Nuguid’s account. Nuguid was
supposed to deliver the dollar equivalent of the three checks, however, failed to do so, prompting Chiok to request
that payment on the three checks be stopped.

Chiok filed a Complaint for damages with application for ex parte restraining order and/or preliminary injunction
with the Regional Trial Court.

The RTC issued a temporary restraining order (TRO) directing the spouses Nuguid to refrain from presenting the
said checks for payment and the depositary banks from honoring the sameuntil further orders from the court.

Asian Bank refused to honor MC in deference to the TRO. Metrobank claimed that when it received the TRO it
refused to honor the check and stopped payment thereon. However, in a letter Cubao-Araneta Branch informed
Metrobank that the TRO was issued a day after the check was presented for payment. Thus, according to Paz, the
transaction was already consummated and FEBTC had already validly accepted the same

Issue: Whether or not payment of manager’s and cashier’s checks are subject to the condition that the payee
thereof should comply with his obligations to the purchaser of the checks.

Held: No. A manager’s check, like a cashier’s check, is an order of the bank to pay, drawn upon itself, committing in
effect its total resources, integrity, and honor behind its issuance. By its peculiar character and general use in
commerce, a manager’s check or a cashier’s check is regarded substantially to be as good as the money it
represents. While manager’s and cashier’s checks are still subject to clearing, they cannot be countermanded for
being drawn against a closed account, for being drawn against insufficient funds, or for similar reasons such as a
condition not appearing on the face of the check. Long standing and accepted banking practices do not
countenance the countermanding of manager’s and cashier’s checks on the basis of a mere allegation of failure of
the payee to comply with its obligations towards the purchaser. Therefore, when Nuguid failed to deliver the
agreed amount to Chiok, the latter had a cause of action against Nuguid to ask for the rescission of their contract;
but, Chiok did not have a cause of action against Metrobank and Global Bank that would allow him to rescind the
contracts of sale of the manager’s or cashier’s checks, which would have resulted in the crediting of the amounts
thereof back to his accounts.

You might also like