Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 9 views

    Tibajia v. CA, 223 SCRA 163, 167

    Uploaded by

    Steven Casais
    The Tibajia spouses were ordered to pay Eden Tan over P300,000 based on a trial court decision that was modified on appeal. To satisfy the judgment, funds belonging to the Tibajia spouses that were deposited with the RTC were garnished. The Tibajia spouses later attempted to pay Eden Tan P398,483.70, with part in cash and part by cashier's check. Eden Tan refused this payment, insisting the garnished funds be withdrawn. When the Tibajia spouses sought to lift the writ of execution, arguing the debt was paid, the trial court denied this because payment by cashier's check is not legal tender. The Court of Appeals dismissed the Tib

    Copyright:

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

    Tibajia v. CA, 223 SCRA 163, 167

    Uploaded by

    Steven Casais
    9 views1 page
    The Tibajia spouses were ordered to pay Eden Tan over P300,000 based on a trial court decision that was modified on appeal. To satisfy the judgment, funds belonging to the Tibajia spouses that were deposited with the RTC were garnished. The Tibajia spouses later attempted to pay Eden Tan P398,483.70, with part in cash and part by cashier's check. Eden Tan refused this payment, insisting the garnished funds be withdrawn. When the Tibajia spouses sought to lift the writ of execution, arguing the debt was paid, the trial court denied this because payment by cashier's check is not legal tender. The Court of Appeals dismissed the Tib

    Original Title

    54. Tibajia v. CA, 223 SCRA 163, 167

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The Tibajia spouses were ordered to pay Eden Tan over P300,000 based on a trial court decision that was modified on appeal. To satisfy the judgment, funds belonging to the Tibajia spouses that were deposited with the RTC were garnished. The Tibajia spouses later attempted to pay Eden Tan P398,483.70, with part in cash and part by cashier's check. Eden Tan refused this payment, insisting the garnished funds be withdrawn. When the Tibajia spouses sought to lift the writ of execution, arguing the debt was paid, the trial court denied this because payment by cashier's check is not legal tender. The Court of Appeals dismissed the Tib

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    9 views1 page

    Tibajia v. CA, 223 SCRA 163, 167

    Uploaded by

    Steven Casais
    The Tibajia spouses were ordered to pay Eden Tan over P300,000 based on a trial court decision that was modified on appeal. To satisfy the judgment, funds belonging to the Tibajia spouses that were deposited with the RTC were garnished. The Tibajia spouses later attempted to pay Eden Tan P398,483.70, with part in cash and part by cashier's check. Eden Tan refused this payment, insisting the garnished funds be withdrawn. When the Tibajia spouses sought to lift the writ of execution, arguing the debt was paid, the trial court denied this because payment by cashier's check is not legal tender. The Court of Appeals dismissed the Tib

    Copyright:

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

    G.R. No.

    100290 June 4, 1993

    NORBERTO TIBAJIA, JR. and CARMEN TIBAJIA, petitioners,


    vs.
    THE HONORABLE COURT OF APPEALS and EDEN TAN, respondents.

    FACTS

    A writ of attachment was issued by the trial court, the Deputy Sheriff filed a return stating that a
    deposit made by the Tibajia spouses in the RTC of Kalookan City in the amount of P442,750.00
    in another case, had been garnished by him. The RTC, rendered its decision in the same case
    in favor of the plaintiff Eden Tan, ordering the Tibajia spouses to pay her an amount in excess of
    P300,000.00. On appeal, the Court of Appeals modified the decision by reducing the award of
    damages. The decision having become final, Eden Tan filed the corresponding motion for
    execution and thereafter, the garnished funds which by then were on deposit with the cashier of
    the RTC of Pasig, Metro Manila, were levied upon.

    On 14 December 1990, the Tibajia spouses delivered to Deputy Sheriff Eduardo Bolima the
    total amount of P398,483.70. 135,733.70 in the form of Cash and P262,750.00 in the form of
    Cashier's Check.

    Eden Tan, refused to accept the payment made by the Tibajia spouses and instead insisted that
    the garnished funds deposited with the cashier of the RTC of Pasig, Metro Manila be withdrawn
    to satisfy the judgment obligation. Defendant spouses (petitioners) filed a motion to lift the writ of
    execution on the ground that the judgment debt had already been paid. The motion was denied
    by the trial court on the ground that payment in cashier's check is not payment in legal tender.
    Thereafter, the spouses Tibajia filed a petition for certiorari, prohibition and injunction in the
    Court of Appeals. The appellate court dismissed the petition, holding that payment by cashier's
    check is not payment in legal tender as required by Republic Act No. 529.

    ISSUE

    Whether or not payment by means of check (even by cashier's check) is considered payment in
    legal tender

    RULING
    No, In the recent cases of Philippine Airlines, Inc. vs. Court of Appeals and Roman
    Catholic Bishop of Malolos, Inc. vs. Intermediate Appellate Court,5 this Court held that A check,
    whether a manager's check or ordinary check, is not legal tender, and an offer of a check in
    payment of a debt is not a valid tender of payment and may be refused receipt by the obligee or
    creditor.

    You might also like