Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

WILLY G. SIA v. PEOPLE

This case has been cited 5 times or more.

	GR No. 200090 2013-03-06	ERLINDA C. SAN MATEO v. PEOPLE ABAD, J.
Here, there is no basis in concluding that San Mateo knew of the insufficiency of her funds. While she may have requested Sehwani in her letters dated October 8, 2005 and November 11, 2005, to defer depositing all the checks, with maturity dates of July and August 2005, otherwise, her account will close, such act did not amount to an admission that, when she issued those checks, she knew that she would have no sufficient funds in the drawee bank to pay for them.[8]
	GR No. 152666 2008-04-23	MARCIANO TAN v. PHILIPPINE COMMERCIAL INTERNATIONAL BANK CARPIO MORALES, J.
Respecting the second element of the crime, the prosecution must prove that the accused knew, at the time of issuance, that he does not have sufficient funds or credit for the full payment of the check upon its presentment.[18]
	GR NO. 154128 2007-02-08	DR. AMANDA T. CRUZ v. WILFREDO R. CRUZ SANDOVAL-GUTIERREZ, J.
In Lozano v. Martinez, [7] we held that the Bouncing Checks Law is aimed at putting a stop to or curbing the practice of issuing worthless checks or those that end up being dishonored for payment because of the injury it causes to the public interests. In Sia v. People, [8] we explained that the law is intended to safeguard the interests of the banking system and the legitimate checking account users.
	GR NO. 156169 2005-08-12	VICTOR ONGSON v. PEOPLE YNARES-SANTIAGO, J.
Then too, the gravamen of the offense punished by B.P. 22 is the act of making and issuing a worthless check, that is, a check that is dishonored upon its presentation for payment. The mere act of issuing a worthless check is malum prohibitum. So also, it is not the nonpayment of the obligation that is being punished, but the making of worthless checks.[40] What the law punishes is such issuance of a bum check and not the purpose for which the check was issued nor the terms or conditions relating to its issuance.[41] Thus, even if there had been payment through compensation or some other means, there could still be prosecution for violation of B.P. 22.[42]
	GR No. 144887 2004-11-17	ALFREDO RIGOR v. PEOPLE AZCUNA, J.
The notice of dishonor of a check may be sent to the drawer or maker by the drawee bank, the holder of the check, or the offended party either by personal delivery or by registered mail.[23] The notice of dishonor to the maker of a check must be in writing.[24]