Case no.

01-01

ALBENSON ENTERPRISES v CA and BALTAO

FACTS:

On September to November 1980, petitioner Albenson Enterprises delivered to Guarantee

Industries, Inc located at Sta. Mesa, Manila, mild steel plates which they had ordered. Part of payment,
Albenson was given a heck of PBC No. 136361 in the amount of P2,575 and drawn against E.L.
Woodworks account. The checked bounced. Account closed. Albenson traced it from SEC records and
discovered that it was from Eugenio S. Baltao. E.L. Woodworks was registered in the name of Eugenio
Baltao and the signature appearing was from him. AEC made an extrajudicial demand upon private
respondent Eugenio S. Baltao, President of Guaranteed to replace/make good the dishonored check.
Baltao, through counsel, denied the check and alleged that Guaranteed was a defunct entity. On
February 14, 1983, Albenson filed a complaint for violation of BP Blg 22. Respondent Baltao has a
namaesake, his son who manages a business, E.L. Woodworks on the ground floor of Baltao Bldg.
Respondent filed motion for reinvestigation with the Provincial Fiscal of Rizal who reversed the Asst
Fiscals findings. Filed in RTC QC complaint for damages. AEC contended that it was one for malicious
prosecution and its acting was without malice.

ISSUE:

Whether or not AEC is liable for damages under Art. 19, 20,21 of the Civil Code.

HELD:

No, AEC could not be said to have violated the principle of abuse of rights. It has been concluded
that based on Art 19, 20, 21 of the CC which states that the abuse of right using a legal act with the
intent to injure others shall compensate for the damage. Albenson et. al did not intend to injure that
respondent for accusing Baltao of B.P. blg 22, Moreover, albenson just want to collect what was due to
them for they believe that the check was issued by Baltao based on their collected info. Eugenio did
nothing to clarify the case of mistaken identity. AEC find the best possible means to collect the sum due
to it. AEC acted in good faith in filing the complaint. Therefore, in the absence of proof and bad faith,
AEC cannot be held liable for damage. Damnum absque injuria. Petition is granted and decision of CA is
reversed and set aside.

Case no. 01-01

ALBENSON ENTERPRISES v CA and BALTAO

FACTS:

On September to November 1980, petitioner Albenson Enterprises delivered to Guarantee

Industries, Inc located at Sta. Mesa, Manila, mild steel plates which they had ordered. Part of payment,
Albenson was given a heck of PBC No. 136361 in the amount of P2,575 and drawn against E.L.
Woodworks account. The checked bounced. Account closed. Albenson traced it from SEC records and
discovered that it was from Eugenio S. Baltao. E.L. Woodworks was registered in the name of Eugenio
Baltao and the signature appearing was from him. AEC made an extrajudicial demand upon private
respondent Eugenio S. Baltao, President of Guaranteed to replace/make good the dishonored check.
Baltao, through counsel, denied the check and alleged that Guaranteed was a defunct entity. On
February 14, 1983, Albenson filed a complaint for violation of BP Blg 22. Respondent Baltao has a
namaesake, his son who manages a business, E.L. Woodworks on the ground floor of Baltao Bldg.
Respondent filed motion for reinvestigation with the Provincial Fiscal of Rizal who reversed the Asst
Fiscals findings. Filed in RTC QC complaint for damages. AEC contended that it was one for malicious
prosecution and its acting was without malice.

ISSUE:

Whether or not AEC is liable for damages under Art. 19, 20,21 of the Civil Code.

HELD:

No, AEC could not be said to have violated the principle of abuse of rights. It has been concluded
that based on Art 19, 20, 21 of the CC which states that the abuse of right using a legal act with the
intent to injure others shall compensate for the damage. Albenson et. al did not intend to injure that
respondent for accusing Baltao of B.P. blg 22, Moreover, albenson just want to collect what was due to
them for they believe that the check was issued by Baltao based on their collected info. Eugenio did
nothing to clarify the case of mistaken identity. AEC find the best possible means to collect the sum due
to it. AEC acted in good faith in filing the complaint. Therefore, in the absence of proof and bad faith,
AEC cannot be held liable for damage. Damnum absque injuria. Petition is granted and decision of CA is
reversed and set aside.