Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 25 views

    PHILIPPINE EDUCATION CO vs. MAURICIO SORIANO

    Uploaded by

    karen grace bosi
    A man obtained 10 postal money orders from the Manila Post Office using private checks instead of cash. The postal service later discovered the money orders were unpaid and instructed postmasters not to pay anyone holding them. However, one of the money orders was received by a bank and deducted from the petitioner's account. The lower court ruled the notice should be revoked and the petitioner indemnified. The Supreme Court affirmed, holding that postal money orders are not negotiable instruments since the postal service issues them to benefit the public, not for commercial gain.

    Copyright:

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

    PHILIPPINE EDUCATION CO vs. MAURICIO SORIANO

    Uploaded by

    karen grace bosi
    25 views1 page
    A man obtained 10 postal money orders from the Manila Post Office using private checks instead of cash. The postal service later discovered the money orders were unpaid and instructed postmasters not to pay anyone holding them. However, one of the money orders was received by a bank and deducted from the petitioner's account. The lower court ruled the notice should be revoked and the petitioner indemnified. The Supreme Court affirmed, holding that postal money orders are not negotiable instruments since the postal service issues them to benefit the public, not for commercial gain.

    Original Title

    PHILIPPINE EDUCATION CO vs. MAURICIO SORIANO.docx

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    A man obtained 10 postal money orders from the Manila Post Office using private checks instead of cash. The postal service later discovered the money orders were unpaid and instructed postmasters not to pay anyone holding them. However, one of the money orders was received by a bank and deducted from the petitioner's account. The lower court ruled the notice should be revoked and the petitioner indemnified. The Supreme Court affirmed, holding that postal money orders are not negotiable instruments since the postal service issues them to benefit the public, not for commercial gain.

    Copyright:

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

    PHILIPPINE EDUCATION CO vs. MAURICIO SORIANO

    Uploaded by

    karen grace bosi
    A man obtained 10 postal money orders from the Manila Post Office using private checks instead of cash. The postal service later discovered the money orders were unpaid and instructed postmasters not to pay anyone holding them. However, one of the money orders was received by a bank and deducted from the petitioner's account. The lower court ruled the notice should be revoked and the petitioner indemnified. The Supreme Court affirmed, holding that postal money orders are not negotiable instruments since the postal service issues them to benefit the public, not for commercial gain.

    Copyright:

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

    PHILIPPINE EDUCATION CO., INC. v. MAURICIO A.

    SORIANO. G.R. No. L-22405. June 30, 1971.


    FACTS:

    Enrique Montinola sought to purchase from the Manila Post Office ten (10) money orders of
    P200.00. He offered them with private checks that were not generally accepted in payment of money
    order. Apparently, he managed to leave with the money orders. After the discovery of the
    disappearance of the unpaid money orders, a message was sent to all postmasters instructing them
    not to pay anyone that holds the orders.

    The Bank of America, then, received of the money orders from petitioner. Defendant then notified the
    bank that the money order has been irregularly issued that the amount was deducted from
    petitioner's account. After asking the Postmaster General to reconsider the deduction, which he
    denied, plaintiff filed an action against defendant.

    The lower court decided that the notice be revoked that the plaintiff shall be indemnified.

    ISSUE: Whether the money order was negotiable.

    RULING:

    The SC affirmed the lower court's decision. Postal money orders are not negotiable instruments. The
    reason behind this rule being that, in establishing and operating a postal money order system, the
    government is not engaging in commercial transactions but merely exercises a governmental power
    for the public benefit.

    You might also like