Consolidated Bank v.

CA & Diaz 
G.R. No. 138569
Sept. 11, 2003

Facts:
Solidband is a domestic banking corporation while private respondent L.C. Diaz and
Company, CPA’s (“LC. Diaz”), is a professional partnership engaged in practice of
accounting and opened a savings account with Solidbank. Ismael Calapre deposited the
money with Solidbank and left the passbook with Solidbank, but when he returned to
retrieve the passbook, Teller No. 6 informed him that somebody got the passbook. The
following day, LC. Diaz learned of the unauthorized withdrawal of P300.000 from its
savings account and filed a Complaint of Recovery of a Sum of Money against
Solidbank. After trial, the trial court rendered a decision absolving Solidbank and
dismissing the complaint, but the Court of Appeals reversed the decision of the trial
court.

Issue: Whether or not Solidbank must be held liable for fraudulent withdrawal.

Held: Yes.

The contract between the bank and its depositor is governed by the Civil Code on simple
loan, which imposes high standards of integrity and performance. Solid bank's tellers
must exercise a high degree of diligence in insuring that they return the passbook only to
the depositor or his authorized representative.

However, L.C. Diaz was guilty of contributory negligence in allowing a withdrawal slip
signed by its authorized signatories to fall into the hands of an impostor, resulting in the
liability of Solidbank being reduced to only 60%, the remaining 40% being borne by
private respondent.