Allied Banking Corporation v. Sia, G.R. No. 195341, 28 August 2019

 

From the foregoing, it is clear that Allied Bank could not be faulted for considering See as one of the depositors of SA No. 0570231382. Again, it is evident that See has a share in the deposits in the subject savings account, as could be adequately shown by the bank records available to Allied Bank at that time. While Elizabeth was the only one expressly named as the depositor of SA No. 0570231382, the Deed of Assignment dated December 13, 1999, indicates that the subject savings account is essentially a joint account between her and her father. This fact is not controverted by See's mistake when he authorized Elizabeth to claim and receive payment for Orient Bank Account No. 023190001020, which was her individual account, instead of Orient Bank No. 023190001031. Even with this error, the fact remains that the settlement payments for Orient Bank No. 023190001031 was one of the sources of the deposits in SA No. 0570231382, making See a co- owner, and effectively a co-depositor, of the said account.

In sum, the Court holds that Allied Bank, was actually legally bound to temporarily withhold any withdrawal from SA No. 0570231382 after it was informed of See's death. As such, no breach of contract could be attributed to it. Obviously, there is also no reason to adjudge the bank liable for damages.