SIMEX INTERNATIONAL (MANILA) Inc. vs. CA & TRADERS ROYAL
" The amount of loss
BANK
1990|Cruz
Petitioner, Simex, is a private corporation engaged in the exportation
of food products. He had a checking account with respondent, Traders Royal
Bank (TRB) in Romulo Avenue, Cubao, which he constantly deposited in to
the amount of P190,380.74. Simex issued several checks drawing from the
bank but it was dishonored for insufficient funds. On June 1981, as a
consequence, petitioner received demand letters from its suppliers for the
dishonored checks, had its credit line canceled and was withheld supplies.
Upon investigation after Simex complained on June 10, it was found
out that the P100,000 deposited was not credited to it. The error was rectified
on June 17 and the dishonored checks were consequently paid. Simex
demanded reparation from TRB for its gross and wanton negligence to no
avail.
 Petitioner filed before the RTC for a complaint for moral damages
(P1M), nominal damages (P20k) and attorney's fees and costs (P5k).
The RTC later held that respondent bank was guilty of negligence
but petitioner nonetheless was not entitled to moral damages since
there was no proof of bad faith as it was a simple omission and the
dishonored checks were eventually paid.
ISSUE: W/N TRB acted with gross and wanton negligence amounting to the
award of damages - YES.
HELD:
1. Simex was indeed prejudiced by the omission. Its credit line
was canceled and orders were not acted upon meant that its
business declined and its reputation was tarnished in the
business community.
a. Article 2205, CC provides that actual or compensatory
damages may be received "(2) for injury to the plaintiff s
ii. The depositor expects the bank to treat his
account with the utmost fidelity, whether the
account only has a few hundreds or millions.
iii. The bank must record every single transaction
accurately, down to the last centavo, and as
promptly as possible. This has to be done if the
account is to reflect at any given time the amount of
money the depositor can dispose of as he sees fit,
confident that the bank will deliver it as and to
whomever he directs. A blunder by the bank can
cause the depositor financial loss and litigation.
business standing or commercial credit.
does not need to be absolutely certain to be awarded.
i. Article 2216 of the Civil Code specifically provides
that "no proof of pecuniary loss is necessary in
order that moral, nominal, temperate, liquidated
or exemplary damages may be adjudicated."
b. Moral damages is not awarded to penalize but to
compensate the plaintiff for the injuries he/she may have
suffered.
i. The RTC failed to consider that claimed losses need
not be established exactly precisely because of their
nature as they are not susceptible of pecuniary
estimation.
c. Moral damages and not nominal damages is the proper
relief to which the petitioner is entitled.
i. Under Article 2221 of the Civil Code, "nominal
damages are adjudicated in order that a right of the
plaintiff, which has been violated or invaded by the
defendant, may be vindicated or recognized, and not
for the purpose of indemnifying the plaintiff for any
loss suffered by him."
d. Exemplary damages under Art. 2229 says that "Exemplary
or corrective damages are imposed, by way of example or
correction for the public good, in addition to the moral,
temperate, liquidated or compensatory damages" and Art.
2232 "In contracts and quasi-contracts, the court may award
exemplary damages if the defendant acted in a wanton,
fraudulent, reckless, oppressive, or malevolent manner" is
warranted.
i. The banking system is indispensable and plays a
vital role in the economic life of every civilized
nation. People regard them with respect, gratitude
and confidence.
ITC: The dishonored checks took almost a month when properly, the
checks should have been paid immediately upon presentment. The initial
carelessness of the bank and the lack of promptitude in repairing its
error justifies the grant of moral damages. The laxity it showed regarding
the complaining depositor constituted gross negligence, if not wanton bad
faith.
 The P1M claimed is preposterous because its business is not that
big, or its name not that prestigious to generate such an extravagant
 amount. Moreover, a corporation is not as a rule entitled to moral
damages because, not being a natural person, it cannot experience
physical suffering or such sentiments as wounded feelings, serious
anxiety, mental anguish and moral shock. The only exception to
this rule is where the corporation has a good reputation that is
debased, resulting in its social humiliation.
o However, its prestige was indeed impaired. Moral damages
to the amount of P20k should be awarded.
 Banks are businesses affected with public interest and because
of the nature of its functions, the bank is obligated to treat the
accounts of its depositors with meticulous care, always having in
mind the fiduciary nature of their relationship. ITC, the bank violated
its relationship and did not immediately correct its mistake upon
being informed nor gave a satisfactory explanation for the error and
the lack of promptness in rectifying such. Such constitutes "wanton
manner" and TRB deserves to be imposed exemplary damages of
P50,000.
 P5k in attorney's costs and fees.

GRANTED - MODIFIED.