Emmanuel Oñate and Econ Holdings Corporation

v.
Judge Abrogar, and Sun Life Insurance Company of Canada, et al.
G.R. No. 107303
February 23, 1995

Facts:

A collection for a sum of money with preliminary attachment was filed by SunLife against
petitioners Econ and Brunner for the return of the money SunLife allegedly paid to the latter as
consideration for the sale of treasury bills which were never delivered to the latter. During
Sunlife’s investigation, it was found out that the money paid were deposited in Oñate’s account
in BPI and an unnamed account in PNB allegedly owned by the petitioners. Thus, in relation to
such, Sunlife asked the court to release an order for the examination of the said accounts in both
BPI and PNB. The issue reached the Supreme Court, where the latter initially in favor of the
validity of the order on the ground that such examination is an exception to the Bank Secrecy
Law, as the accounts were the subject of the litigation. Now, the petitioners filed a motion with
the Supreme Court assailing the validity of the order examining the subject bank accounts
because Oñate was not a signatory to the documents evidencing the transaction between Sunlife
and Econ Holdings, and that the money was not a consideration for the sale of the bills, but a
money placement.

Issue: Whether or not the order granting the examination of the subject bank accounts was valid.

Ruling: No.

The real issue before the court is not whether or not the money was received by the
petitioners, since the real issue concerns the nature of the transaction between petitioner
Brunner and Sun Life. The question is whether the money paid to Brunner was the consideration
for the sale of treasury bills, as Sun Life claims, or whether it was money intended for placement,
as petitioners allege. Petitioners do not deny receipt of the money from Sun Life. Hence, whether
the transaction is considered a sale or money placement does not make the money the "subject
matter of litigation" within the meaning of Sec. 2 of Bank Secrecy Law which prohibits the
disclosure or inquiry into bank deposits except "in cases where the money deposited or invested
is the subject matter of litigation." Nor will it matter whether the money was "swindled" as Sun
Life contends.