THE METROPOLITAN BANK AND TRUST COMPANY, Petitioner vs.

ANA GRACE ROSALES AND YO YUK TO, Respondents.

G.R. No.183204 January 13, 2014 Del Castillo, J.

Authority to Withhold, Sell and/or Set Off:

The Bank is hereby authorized to withhold as security for any and all
obligations with the Bank, all monies, properties or securities of the
Depositor now in or which may hereafter come into the possession or under
the control of the Bank, …

Issue:
Whether respondents have an obligation to the bank for the “Hold Out”
clause to apply.

Ruling: None. The "Hold Out" clause applies only if there is a valid and
existing obligation arising from any of the sources of obligation enumerated
in Article 115779 of the Civil Code, to wit: law, contracts, quasi-contracts,
delict, and quasi-delict. In this case, petitioner failed to show that
respondents have an obligation to it under any law, contract, quasi-contract,
delict, or quasi-delict.

Jose Sanico and Vicente Castro, Petitioners, v. Werherlina P.

Colipano, Respondent
G.R. No. 209969 | September 27, 2017 | J. Caguia | Second Division

Issue:
Whether or not Sanico (employer/operator) and Castro (driver) breached
the contract of carriage with Colipano (passenger)

Ruling: Only Sanico. Since the cause of action is based on a breach of a

contract of carriage, the liability of Sanico is direct as the contract is
between him and Colipano. Castro, being merely the driver of Sanico’s
jeepney, cannot be made liable as he is not a party to the contract of
carriage.

CBK POWER COMPANY LIMITED, Petitioner vs.

COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent.
G.R. Nos. 198729-30 January15, 2014 Sereno, CJ

Issue :
Whether the principle of solutio indebiti is applicable in the case, thus
entitling petitioner to its claim.

Ruling: No. Also devoid of merit is the applicability of the principle of solutio
indebiti to the present case. According to this principle, if something is
received when there is no right to demand it, and it was unduly delivered
through mistake, the obligation to return it arises. In that situation, a
creditor-debtor relationship is created under a quasi-contract, whereby the
payor becomes the creditor who then has the right to demand the return of
payment made by mistake, and the person who has no right to receive the
payment becomes obligated to return it.21 The quasi-contract of solutio
indebiti is based on the ancient principle that no one shall enrich oneself
unjustly at the expense of another.