JOSE C. GO vs.

BANGKO SENTRAL NG PILIPINAS

G.R. No. 178429 October 23, 2009

BRION, J.:

Facts:

An Information for violation of Section 83 of Republic Act No. 337 (RA 337) or the
General Banking Act, as amended by PD No. 1795, was filed against Go before the Regional Trial
Court, alleging that Go, being then the Director and the President of the Orient Commercial
Banking Corporation (Orient Bank) unlawfully borrow the deposits or funds of the said banking
institution for his own use without the written approval of the majority of the Board of Directors
of Orient Bank. Before the trial could commence, Go filed a motion to quash the Information
claiming that the same do not constitute an offense under Section 83 of RA 337. The Regional
Trial Court granted Go’s motion to quash the Information. On appeal, the Court of Appeals ruled
against Go. Hence, this petition.

Issue: WON the Court of Appeals erred in overturning the trial Court’s decision

Ruling:

No. The Supreme Court ruled that under Section 83 of RA 337, the following elements
must be present to constitute a violation of its first paragraph:1. the offender is a director or officer
of any banking institution;2. the offender, either directly or indirectly, for himself or as
representative or agent of another, performs any of the following acts: a. he borrows any of the
deposits or funds of such bank; or b. he becomes a guarantor, indorser, or surety for loans from
such bank to others, orc. he becomes in any manner an obligor for money borrowed from bank or
loaned by it; 3. the offender has performed any of such acts without the written approval of the
majority of the directors of the bank, excluding the offender, as the director concerned. Since the
elements are present in the instant case, the same constitutes an offense. The Supreme Court denied
the petition.

Page 1 of 1