Lina Lim Lao vs. Court of Appeals 274 SCRA 572

LINA LIM LAO, petitioner vs. COURT OF APPEALS and PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, respondents.

G.R. No. 119178 | 1997-06-20

B.P. Blg. 22 Bouncing Checks Law, notice of dishonor must be actually sent to and received by defendant
Bouncing checks (BP 22); requires personal and not constructive notice of dishonor; hence, notice to the corporation is not equivalent to notice to the employee or officer concerned
Bouncing checks law, receipt of notice of dishonor necessary for knowledge of insufficiency of funds to be presumed
Bouncing checks doctrine that mere employee tasked to sign checks in blank is not deemed to have knowledge of insufficiency of funds applies only to corporate checks
Bouncing checks law notice of dishonor to corporation is not notice to employee or officer who issued the corporate check
Bouncing checks law personal knowledge of notice of dishonor necessary

D E C I S I O N

PANGANIBAN, J:

May an employee who, as part of her regular duties, signs blank corporate checks - with the name of the payee and the amount drawn to be filled later by another signatory - and, therefore, does so without actual knowledge of whether such checks are funded, be held criminally liable for violation of Batas Pambansa Bilang 22 (B.P. 22), when checks so signed are dishonored due to insufficiency of funds? Does a notice of dishonor sent to the main office of the corporation constitute a valid notice to the said employee who holds office in a separate branch and who had no actual knowledge thereof? In other words, is...