Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 1K views

    PNB V Picornell

    Uploaded by

    Jassy Bustamante
    Bartolome Picornell purchased tobacco in Cebu and obtained funds from Philippine National Bank (PNB) by drafting a bill of exchange for the value of the tobacco against Hyndman, Tavera & Ventura. The bill and documents for the tobacco shipment were delivered to PNB but were not to be released until payment of the bill. Hyndman refused payment claiming some of the tobacco was damaged. PNB protested non-payment and sold the tobacco. The issue is whether Picornell can be held liable. The court held that as the drawer, Picornell warranted the bill would be accepted and paid, and upon non-payment, he became secondarily liable to PNB provided proper dishonor proceedings

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    PNB V Picornell

    Uploaded by

    Jassy Bustamante
    1K views2 pages
    Bartolome Picornell purchased tobacco in Cebu and obtained funds from Philippine National Bank (PNB) by drafting a bill of exchange for the value of the tobacco against Hyndman, Tavera & Ventura. The bill and documents for the tobacco shipment were delivered to PNB but were not to be released until payment of the bill. Hyndman refused payment claiming some of the tobacco was damaged. PNB protested non-payment and sold the tobacco. The issue is whether Picornell can be held liable. The court held that as the drawer, Picornell warranted the bill would be accepted and paid, and upon non-payment, he became secondarily liable to PNB provided proper dishonor proceedings

    Original Description:

    Case digest

    Original Title

    PNB v Picornell

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Bartolome Picornell purchased tobacco in Cebu and obtained funds from Philippine National Bank (PNB) by drafting a bill of exchange for the value of the tobacco against Hyndman, Tavera & Ventura. The bill and documents for the tobacco shipment were delivered to PNB but were not to be released until payment of the bill. Hyndman refused payment claiming some of the tobacco was damaged. PNB protested non-payment and sold the tobacco. The issue is whether Picornell can be held liable. The court held that as the drawer, Picornell warranted the bill would be accepted and paid, and upon non-payment, he became secondarily liable to PNB provided proper dishonor proceedings

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    1K views2 pages

    PNB V Picornell

    Uploaded by

    Jassy Bustamante
    Bartolome Picornell purchased tobacco in Cebu and obtained funds from Philippine National Bank (PNB) by drafting a bill of exchange for the value of the tobacco against Hyndman, Tavera & Ventura. The bill and documents for the tobacco shipment were delivered to PNB but were not to be released until payment of the bill. Hyndman refused payment claiming some of the tobacco was damaged. PNB protested non-payment and sold the tobacco. The issue is whether Picornell can be held liable. The court held that as the drawer, Picornell warranted the bill would be accepted and paid, and upon non-payment, he became secondarily liable to PNB provided proper dishonor proceedings

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    You are on page 1of 2

    G.R. No.

    18751
    PNB v Bartolome Picornell et al
    Related topic: liability of drawee; Sec 61, NIL
    FACTS:
    Bartolome Picornell, under the instruction of Hyndman, Tavera &
    Ventura, bought in Cebu 1, 735 bales of tobacco. As a consequence,
    Picornell obtained from National Bank in Cebu the sum of Php 39,
    529.83 covering the value of the tobacco. In return, he drafted a bill of
    exchange against Hyndman, Tavera & Ventura and in favor of the bank.
    28 Feb 1920. For Php 39, 529.83; At thirty days sight please pay this
    first of exchange (second unpaid) to the order of Philippine National
    Bank. Value received. To: Sres. HYNDMAN, TAVERA Y VENTURA, Calle
    Soler 26 y 28. (Sgd.) B. Picornell
    The bill of exchange was delivered to the Philippine National Bank,
    which was shipped in the boat Don Ildefonso with the invoice and bill of
    lading of the tobacco, consigned to Hyndman, Tavera & Ventura at
    Manila. However, the invoice and bill of lading were given to the
    National Bank with the intention that the bank should not deliver them
    to Hyndman until payment of the bill (condition was expressed by
    putting D/P Documents for payment). The central office of
    Philippine National Bank in Manila subsequently received the bill and
    presented the same to Hyndman et al who accepted it.
    Upon the arrival of the tobacco at Manila, Hyndman, Tavera & Ventura
    proceeded to examine the same which was deposited in their
    warehouses. Picornell was notified that a certain portion of the tobacco
    was of no use and was damaged. As a result, they refused to pay the
    bill. The bank protested the bill, took possession of the tobacco, and
    had it appraised and sold at an auction.
    ISSUE: whether or not Picornell can be held liable for the non-payment
    of the bill of exchange
    HELD:
    YES. Picornell warranted the instrument as a drawer; that it would be
    accepted upon proper presentment, and paid in due course. As it was
    not paid by the drawee (Hyndman, Tavera & Ventura) he became liable
    to the payment of its value to PNB. The act of negotiating a bill is a
    different contract from that of having purchased tobacco on behalf of
    the firm. Picornell cannot exempt himself from responsibility by saying
    he is an agent of the firm, as the same is not even indicated on the bill.

    Notice was given to Picornell of the dishonor of the bill, and the protest
    for non-payment was mailed to him. PNB has a right of recourse
    against him because of his warranty. He is secondarily liable on the
    instrument and upon its non-payment, he is liable provided that the
    necessary proceedings on dishonor be duly taken which was present in
    this case. (Sec 61, NIL)

    You might also like

    pFad - Phonifier reborn

    Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

    Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


    Alternative Proxies:

    Alternative Proxy

    pFad Proxy

    pFad v3 Proxy

    pFad v4 Proxy