MANSION BICUIT CORPORATION, represented by its president, ANG CHO HONG, petitioner, vs. COURT OF APPEALS, TY SECK SUAN, substituted by his heirs, ROSENDA TY, ELIZABETH TY KOH, EDWARD TY, EDMUND TY, EDGAR TY, EVELYN T. LIM, EDWIN TY and EDISON TY, and SY GUI, respondents
G.R. No. 94713. November 23, 1995
FACTS:
Sometime in 1981, Ty Teck Suan, the president of Edward Ty Brothers Corp. (herein ETBC), ordered numerous cartons of Nutri-wafer Biscuits from Mansion Biscuits Corp (herein MBC). ETBC then, through Ty Teck Suan, issued 4 post dated checks totalling P/404,908.00 to Ang Chu Hong and 4 other checks of P/100,000.00 each, hence MBC delivered the goods ordered by ETBC. MBC discovered that the checks were dishonoured due to insufficiency of funds and apprised/ asked Ty Teck Suan for replacement of the checks with cash or good checks. Demand letters, with MBC’s counsel, were issued stating that MBC will file an action if Ty Teck Suan refuses to pay but the latter ignored such.
The RTC granted the Motion to Dismiss since the violation cannot be considered violation of BP 22 because the checks were not made or drawn and issued to apply account or for value. The checks were issued only as guarantee or secure fulfilment of agreement. The RTC found the defendants not guilty.
On January 10, 1989, while pending case with the CA, Ty Teck Suan died. The CA advised that he be substituted by his children and ruled that acquittal does not extinguish one from civil liability. Hence, the CA dismissed the appeal since the civil liability was not a personal obligation of Ty Teck Suan but of ETBC (which was not a party in the case). A separate civil action must be filed against ETBC to claim civil liability.
ISSUE:
Whether or not the petitioner can enforce the civil liability for non-payment against Ty Teck Suan notwithstanding the fact that he contracted the agreements in behalf of ETBC.
RULING:
The Court held that the civil liability was not a personal obligation since it was signed by representatives of the company only. TyTeck Suan did not purchase the goods fpr himself but for the company hence it is a contractual liability of ETBC to MBC. However, the Court cannot decide on the contractual liability since ETBC is not a party in this case. SC advises that MBC file a separate civil action against ETBC for its right of payment. Therefore, acquittal of Ty Teck Suan and Siy Gui extinguished criminal and civil liability.
