Anda di halaman 1dari 2

Insular Savings Bank v Court of Appeals, Judge Amin, and Far East Bank and Trust

Company
June 15, 2005 | Garcia
Facts:

Far East instituted an Arbitration case against Insular before the Arbitration
Committee of the Philippine Clearing ouse Corporation!

ispute!
"he dispute in#ol#ed $ unfunded chec%s &ith a total #alue of P25,200,000! "he
chec%s &ere dra&n against 'ar (ast and &ere presented b) Insular for clearing!
'ar (ast returned the
chec%s be)ond the reglementar) period but after Insular*s account h
ad alread) been credited! Insular refused to refund the mone) to the ban%!

Action!
'ar (ast instituted a Ci#il Case in the +"C of ,a%ati and pra)ed for a &rit of
preliminar) attachment! "his &as granted upon the posting of an attachment
bond for -,! "he &rit &as issued for P25,200,000!

"oney divided pending ar#itration!
Pending arbitration, the ban%s agreed to temporaril) di#ide bet&een themsel#es
the 25,200,000. each ban% had in its possession 12,-00,000!
"otion to disc$arge attac$ment!
As half &as &ith 'ar (ast, Insular filed a motion to discharge the attachment b)
counter/bond in the amount of P12,-00,000! "he ,otion and the ,otion for
+econsideration &as denied b) Judge Amin, &ho argued the counter/bond should
beP20,2$0,000!

Court of Appeals!
Insular &ent to the CA on a petition for certiorari for GA1A2J! "he) argued he
erroneousl) factored in unli3uidated claim items such as damages, legal interest
and attorne)*s fees in his computation of the counter bond! o&e#er, the CA still
dismissed the petition on the basis of Section %&, 'ule ()!
Issue:
456 the CA erred in not ruling that the "C committed GA1 in den)ing the
motion to discharge attachment b) counter/bond in the amount of P12,-00,000!
7Alternati#el)8 4as the 20, counter bond &rong9:
*eld:
;es!<(C! 12! 1ischarge of attachment upon gi#ing counter/bond!
=
At an) time after an order of attachment has been granted, the part) &hose
propert) has been attached, ! ! ! ma) upon reasonable notice to the applicant, appl)
to the >udge &ho granted the order or to the >udge of the court &hich the action
is pending, for an order discharging the attachment &holl) or in part on the
securit) gi#en! "he >udge shall, after hearing, order the discharge of
the attachment if a cash deposit is made, or a counter/bond e?ecuted to the
attaching creditor is filed, on behalf of the ad#erse part), &ith the cler% or
>udge of the court &here the application is made
in an amount e+ual to t$e value of t$e property attac$ed as determined #y
t$e ,udge, to secure t$e payment of any ,udgment t$at t$e attac$ing creditor
may recover in t$e action!
? ? ? ! <hould such counter/bond for an) reason be found to be, or become
insufficient, and the part) furnishing the same fail to file an additional counter/
bond, the attaching part)
ma) appl) for a ne& order of attachment@
7(mphasis supplied:"he amount of the counter/attachment bond is to be measured
against the #alue of the attached propert), as determined b) the >udge to secure
pa)ment of an) >udgment that the attaching creditor ma) reco#er! It is logical
that the counter bond necessar) to discharge the lien should correspond in
#alue to or match the attaching creditor*s principal claim! (lse,
e?cessi#e attachment, &hich should be a#oided at all times, shall ensue!

Anda mungkin juga menyukai