RSS

Philippine National Bank v. Maza and Mecenas [G.R. No. L-24224. November 3, 1925]

30 Jul

FACTS

Appellants claim that they executed a promissory note sent to them in blank by a certain Enrique Echaus, which they neither did negotiate nor have received the value thereof.

 

ISSUE

Whether or not appellants are liable as accommodation parties.

 

RULING

YES. As accommodation parties, the defendants having signed the instruments without receiving value therefor and for the purpose of lending their names to some other person, are still liable on the instruments. The law now is that the accommodation party can claim no benefit as such, but he is liable according to the face of his undertaking, the same as if he were himself financially interested in the transaction.

 

Tags: ,

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

 
%d bloggers like this: