REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES COURT OF APPEALS MANILA
Eddie C. Olalia, Appellant
CA GR CV NO. 3018 -e!"#"-
RTC CIVIL CASE NO.
0$-%01 F&!' M&(i&) *&!
Re+&)"ide!a(i&) Re+&)"ide!a(i&) &) (e de+i"i&) da(ed N&ee! /$, 1%
BPI E2!e"" Ca!d C&!2&!a(i&),
Appellee
Pursuant to the Notice of this Honorable Court, Appellant Eddie C. Olalia
By counsel most respectfully submits his
1
APPELLANTS BRIEF SUB4ECT IN5E6 CONTENTS PAGE
COVER PAGE 1 SUB4ECT IN5E6 / TABLE OF AUTHORITIES 3 ASSIGNMET OF ERRORS % STATEMENT OF THE CASE %-8 STATEMENT OF FACTS 8-11 ISSUES 11-1/ ARGUMENTS 1/-1$ A. The court failed to prove that the extension card in the name of Cristina . !lalia "as validly issued and received by #ddie C. !lalia. There are t"o re$uirements before an extension%supplementary card is issued. &irst, payment of the necessary fee, and second, submission of an application for the purpose. None of these re$uirements "ere sho"n to have been complied "ith by !lalia. The court found that in !lalia's applications for the ori(inal as "ell as the rene"al card, he never applied for an extension card in the name of his "ife. B#CC also failed to sho" any receipt for any fee (iven in payment for the purpose of securin( an extension card. B. The court committed mista)e in renderin( a decision that #ddie C. !lalia is responsible for the purchases made from the extension card. Appellant cannot be held responsible because of the fact that B#CC failed to establish that the extension card in the name of *
Cristina . !lalia "as validly issued and received by him. The time appellant applied credit card "ith B#CC in 1++1, he and his "ife Cristina "ere already divorced. Also by the time the extension card, "hich "as under the name of Cristina . !lalia, "as issued and alle(edly received by the appellant, Cristina "as no lon(er in the Philippines. he left for tates in the year 1+-.
PRA7ER 1$-1 APPEN5I6 1
TABLE OF AUTHORITIES
PHILIPPINE 4URISPRU5ENCE PAGE
#rmita/o vs. Court of Appeals, .0. No. 1**2, 34 C0A *1-, *22 51+++6 12 Palmares vs. Court of Appeals, .0. No. 1*2+4, *-- C0A 2**, 233 51++-6 12 7ua Chee an vs. 8a 9nion : 0oc), Co., 8td., +- Phil. -; 12
BOO9S
Pa(e *, Civil Code of the Philippines Annotated by #d(ardo Paras 5*41*6 12
PHILIPPINE STATUTE
3
Article 13 of the C<=<8 C!># !& TH# PH<8
:EBSITE
Para(raph *, Terms and Conditions overnin( the
Para(raph 14, Terms and Conditions overnin( the
ASSIGNMENT OF ERRORS
The trial court committed the follo"in( errors? 1. The court failed to prove that the extension card in the name of Cristina . !lalia "as validly issued and received by #ddie C. !lalia. *. The court rendered a decision that #ddie C. !lalia is responsible for the purchases made from the extension card thus orderin( him to pay the total amount of !ne Hundred Thirty@ix Thousand T"o Hundred Ninety Pesos and Ninety@even Centavos 5P13, *+4.+6 Philippine Currency.
2
I.
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Na(#!e &* (e A+(i&)
1.1.
This is an appeal from the decision of the court a quo (rantin( the otion for 0econsideration, dated >ecember *4, 1++2, led by the appellee a(ainst the appellant.
1.*.
The case arose from the time "hen appellant, !lalia, applied in the credit card system of the appellee, BP< #xpress Card Corporation 5B#CC6. Appellant "as (ranted membership and credit accommodation "ith B#CC. Appellant's card expired and a rene"al card "as issued. B#CC also issued another card "hich "as an extension of the appellant's credit card in the name of Cristina . !lalia, appellant's ex@"ife. B#CC alle(es that the extension card "as delivered and received by the appellant at the same time as the rene"al card.
for
purchases
made
from
arch
to April
1++1,
particularly in the province of
!ne Hundred !ne Thousand #i(ht Hundred &orty@&our and &ifty@&our Centavos 5P141, -22. ;26 Philippine Currency.
S#a!; &* (e P!&+eedi)<"
1.3.
B#CC sent a demand letter to the appellant, to "hich the latter denied liability sayin( that said purchases "ere not made under his o"n credit card and that he did not apply for nor receive the extension card in the name of his "ife.
1.2.
A case for collection "as led by B#CC before the 0TC but appellant only admits responsibility for the amount of Thirteen Thousand #i(ht Hundred #i(hty Three and T"enty@even Centavos 5P13, --3.*6 Philippine Currency, representin( purchases made under his o"n credit card. After trial on the merits, a decision "as rendered as follo"s? DEH#0#&!0#, ud(ment is rendered orderin( defendant #ddie C. !lalia to pay plaintiF the sum of Thirteen Thousand #i(ht Hundred #i(hty@Three Pesos and T"enty@seven Centavos 5P13, --3.*6, Philippine Currency "ith interest thereon at the le(al rate from Gune 1-, 1++1, until fully paid and to pay the costs. ! !0>#0#>. I*
1.;.
&rom the aforesaid decision, a otion for 0econsideration "as led, alle(in( that !lalia should also be held liable for the
1 0ecords, p. 3-. * Rollo, p.1-.
purchases arisin( from the use of the extension card since he alle(edly received the same, as evidenced by his si(nature appearin( in the 0ene"al Card Ac)no"led(ement 0eceipt and by the express provision of para(raph * of the terms and conditions (overnin( the use and issuance of a BP< #xpress Card, ma)in( the cardholder and his extension ointly and severally liable for all purchases and availments made throu(h the use of the card. 3 1..
!n April *-, 1++;, the otion for 0econsideration "as (ranted and an !rder "as issued, statin(? D>efendant #ddie C. !lalia has not led any reaction paper up to
the
present
relative
to
plaintiF's
!T
&!0
0#C!N<>#0ATecember *4, 1++2. &indin( the alle(ations in said motion to be meritorious, the same is hereby (ranted. EH#0#&!0#, the dispositive portion of the decision dated November
*;,
1++2,
is
reconsidered
and
accordin(ly
amended%corrected to read as follo"s? EH#0#&!0#, ud(ment is rendered orderin( defendant #ddie C. !lalia to pay plaintiF the sum of !ne Hundred Thirty ix Thousand T"o Hundred Ninety Pesos and Ninety@seven Centavos 5P13, *+4.+6 Philippine Currency, as of !ctober *, 1++1. ! !0>#0#>.I2
R#li)<" a)d O!de!" &* (e C!(
3ee para(raph *, Terms and Conditions overnin( the
1..
The dispositive portion of the decision dated November *;, 1++2? DEH#0#&!0#, ud(ment is rendered orderin( defendant #ddie C. !lalia to pay plaintiF the sum of Thirteen Thousand #i(ht Hundred #i(hty@Three Pesos and T"enty@seven Centavos 5P13, --3.*6, Philippine Currency "ith interest thereon at the le(al rate from Gune 1-, 1++1, until fully paid and to pay the costs. ! !0>#0#>.I;
1.-.
The dispositive portion of the !rder (rantin( the otion for 0econsideration dated April *-, 1++;? D>efendant #ddie C. !lalia has not led any reaction paper up to
the
present
relative
to
plaintiF's
!T
&!0
0#C!N<>#0ATecember *4, 1++2. &indin( the alle(ations in said motion to be meritorious, the same is hereby (ranted. EH#0#&!0#, the dispositive portion of the decision dated November
*;,
1++2,
is
reconsidered
and
accordin(ly
amended%corrected to read as follo"s? EH#0#&!0#, ud(ment is rendered orderin( defendant #ddie C. !lalia to pay plaintiF the sum of !ne Hundred Thirty ix Thousand T"o Hundred Ninety Pesos and Ninety@seven Centavos 5P13, *+4.+6 Philippine Currency, as of !ctober *, 1++1. ! !0>#0#>.I
1.+.
Hence, this appeal.
II.
STATEMENT OF FACTS
; Rollo, p.1-. Rollo, p.*4 -
*.1.
Petitioner operates a credit card system under the name of BP< #xpress Card Corporation 5B#CC6 throu(h "hich it extends credit accommodations to its cardholders for the purchase of (oods and other services from member establishments of petitioner to be reimbursed later on by the cardholder upon proper billin(.
*.*.
0espondent #ddie C. !lalia applied for and "as (ranted membership and credit accommodation "ith B#CC.
B#CC
Card No. 4*4144@3@44@4*-1 "as issued in his name "ith a credit limit of &ive Thousand Pesos 5P;, 444.446. *.3.
This
second card "as an extension of !lalia's credit card. B#CC alle(es that the extension card "as delivered and received by !lalia at the same time as the rene"al card. Ho"ever, !lalia denies ever havin( applied for, much less receivin(, the extension card.
*.2.
As evidenced by char(e slips presented and identied in court, it "as found that the extension card in the name of Cristina . !lalia "as used for purchases made from arch to April 1++1, particularly in the province of
Total unpaid char(es from the use of this card
amounted to !ne Hundred !ne Thousand #i(ht Hundred 0ecords, at p.2. +
&orty@&our Pesos and &ifty@&our Centavos 5P141, -22.;26 Philippine Currency.
*.;.
B#CC sent a demand letter to !lalia, to "hich the latter denied liability sayin( that said purchases "ere not made under his o"n credit card and that he did not apply for nor receive the extension card in the name of his "ife. He has li)e"ise not used or allo"ed anybody in his family to receive or use the extension card. oreover, his "ife, from "hom he "as already divorced, left for the tates in 1+- and has since resided there.
Bacolod or
*..
A case for collection "as led by B#CC before the 0TC but !lalia only admits responsibility for the amount of Thirteen Thousand #i(ht Hundred #i(hty@Three Pesos and T"enty@ even
Centavos
5P13,
--3.*6
Philippine
Currency,
representin( purchases made under his o"n credit card. After trial on the merits, a decision "as rendered as follo"s? DEH#0#&!0#,
ud(ment
is
rendered
orderin(
defendant #ddie C. !lalia to pay plaintiF the sum of Thirteen Thousand #i(ht Hundred #i(hty@Three Pesos and T"enty@seven Centavos 5P13, --3.*6 Philippine Currency "ith interest thereon at the le(al rate from Gune 1-, 1++1, until fully paid and to pay the costs. - 0ecords, at p.3-. 14
! !0>#0#>.I+ *..
&rom the aforesaid decision, a otion for 0econsideration "as led, alle(in( that !lalia should also be held liable for the purchases arisin( from the use of the extension card since he alle(edly received the same, as evidenced by his si(nature appearin( in the 0ene"al Card Ac)no"led(ement 0eceipt and by the express provision of para(raph * of the terms and conditions (overnin( the use and issuance of a BP< #xpress Card, ma)in( the cardholder and his extension ointly and severally liable for all purchases and availments made throu(h the use of the card. 14
*.-.
!n April *-, 1++;, the otion for 0econsideration "as (ranted and an !rder "as issued, statin(? D>efendant #ddie C. !lalia has not led any reaction paper up to the present relative to plaintiF's !T#0ATecember *4, 1++2. &indin(
the
alle(ations
in
said
motion
to
be
meritorious, the same is hereby (ranted. EH#0#&!0#, the dispositive portion of the decision dated
November *;,
1++2,
is reconsidered and
accordin(ly amended%corrected to read as follo"s? EH#0#&!0#,
ud(ment
is
rendered
orderin(
defendant #ddie C. !lalia to pay plaintiF the sum of !ne Hundred Thirty ix Thousand T"o Hundred Ninety + Rollo, p.1-. 14 ee para(raph *, Terms and Conditions overnin( the
Pesos and Ninety@even Centavos 5P13, *+4.+6 Philippine Currency, as of !ctober *, 1++1. ! !0>#0#>.I11
III.
<<<.1
ISSUES
Ehether or not the court committed an error for failin( to prove that the extension card in the name of Cristina . !lalia "as validly issued and received by #ddie C. !lalia "hen there "as an evidence of his si(nature appearin( in the 0ene"al Card Ac)no"led(ement 0eceipt and by the express provision of para(raph * of the terms and conditions (overnin( the use and issuance of a BP< #xpress Card, ma)in( the cardholder and his extension ointly and severally liable for all purchases and availments made
<<<.*
throu(h the use of the card. Ehether or not the court committed a mista)e in renderin( a decision that #ddie C. !lalia is responsible for the purchases made from the extension card thus orderin( him to pay the total amount of !ne Hundred Thirty@ix Thousand T"o Hundred Ninety Pesos and Ninety@even Centavos 5P13, *+4.+6 Philippine Currency.
IV.
ARGUMENT
A. Te +!( *ailed (& 2!&e (a( (e e(e)"i&) +a!d i) (e )ae &* C!i"(i)a G. Olalia =a" alidl; i""#ed a)d !e+eied ; Eddie C. Olalia.
11 Rollo, p.*4. 1*
2.1.
9nder Para(raph No. 11 of the Terms and Conditions overnin( the
11. 9PP8##NTA0J CA0> K #xtension of the CA0> issued to the Cardholder may be (iven to the latter's spouse or children upon payment of the necessary fee thereof, and the submission of an application for the purpose and the use of such CA0>, as "ell as the extensions, thereof, shall be (overned by this A(reement, and secured by the urety 9nderta)in( hereto.
Any reference to the CA0> issued to the
Cardholder hereafter shall also apply to extensions and%or rene"als. hould a CA0> be issued to the spouse%children Cardholder's
of
re$uest,
a
Cardholder the
Cardholder
upon shall
the be
responsible for all char(es includin( all fees, interest and other char(es made throu(h the CA0>.
of
separation,
le(al
or
other"ise,
the
Cardholder shall continue to be responsible for all such char(es to be made throu(h the extension CA0> unless Cardholder re$uest in "ritin( that the privile(es of such extension Cardholder under this
13
A(reement be terminated provided all char(es incurred shall have been fully paid and satised. 1*
2.*.
None of
these re$uirements "ere sho"n to have been complied "ith by !lalia. The court found that in !lalia's applications for the ori(inal as "ell as the rene"al card, he never applied for an extension card in the name of his "ife. B#CC also failed to sho" any receipt for any fee (iven in payment for the purpose of securin( an extension card.
2.3.
B#CC alle(ed that #ddie C. !lalia received the extension card in the name of his "ife, by presentin( the 0ene"al Card Ac)no"led(ement 0eceipt "herein appellant aLxed his si(nature. uch is not a suLcient proof that the re$uirements for the issuance of the extension card have been complied "ith, especially in the face of appellant's rm denial.
2.2.
Contracts of this nature are contracts of adhesion, so@ called because their terms are prepared by only one party "hile the other merely aLxes his si(nature si(nifyin( his
1* ee Para(raph No. 14, Terms and Conditions overnin( the
adhesion thereto. 13 Article 13 of the Civil Code applies "ith even (reater force in contracts of adhesion. 12 As such, their terms are construed strictly a(ainst the party "ho drafted it.1;
2.;.
B#CC failed to explain "hy a card "as issued "ithout accomplishment of the re$uirements. oreover, B#CC did not even secure the specimen si(nature of the purported extension cardholder, such that it cannot no" counter #ddie C. !lalia's contention that the si(natures appearin( on the char(e slips of the $uestioned transactions "ere not that of his former "ife, Cristina . !lalia.
2..
#ddie C. !lalia did not indicate nor declare that he had a spouse "hen he applied for a credit card "ith B#CC.
B. Te +!( +&i((ed i"(a>e i) !e)de!i)< de+i"i&) (a( Eddie C. Olalia i" !e"2&)"ile *&! (e 2#!+a"e" ade 13 Ermitaño vs. Court of Appeals, .0. No. 1**2, 34 C0A *1-, **2 51+++6. 12 Qua Chee Gan vs. La Union & Rock, Co., nc. Co., Lt!., "# $hil. #% see also pa(e *, Civil Code of the Philippines Annotated by #d(ardo Paras 5*41*6. 1; $almares vs. Court of Appeals, .0. No. 1*2+4, *-- C0A 2**, 233 51++-6. 1;
*!& (e e(e)"i&) +a!d (#" &!de!i)< i (& 2a; (e (&(al a)( &* O)e H#)d!ed Ti!(;-Si T"a)d T=& H#)d!ed Ni)e(; Pe"&" a)d Ni)e(;-See) Ce)(a&" ?P13, /0.@ Pili22i)e C#!!e)+;.
2..
Ehen the otion for reconsideration led by the appellee "as (ranted, the court then rendered a decision ma)in( #ddie C. !lalia responsible for the purchases made on the extension card. Appellant cannot be held responsible because of the fact that B#CC failed to establish that the extension card in the name of Cristina . !lalia "as validly issued and received by him. The time appellant applied credit card "ith B#CC in 1++1, he and his "ife Cristina "ere already divorced. Also by the time the extension card, "hich "as under the name of Cristina . !lalia, "as issued and alle(edly received by the appellant, Cristina "as no lon(er in the Philippines. he left for tates in the year 1+-.
V.
PRA7ER
:HEREFORE, the premises considered, Appellant respectfully pray
that this Honorable Court?
1. Annul the decision dated April *-, 1++; on (rantin( the otion for 0econsideration led by the appllee a(ainst the appellant.
1
*. Appellant not be held liable for the purchases made under the extension card irre(ularly issued by the appellee and used for purchases made by an unauthoriMed party "hose actions the respondent could not be liable. 3. Appellant should only be made liable of the purchases made under his o"n credit card in the amount of Thirteen Thousand #i(ht Hundred #i(hty@Three Pesos and T"enty@even Centavos 5P13, --3. *6 Philippine Currency, exclusive of interest and penalty thereon, if any.
Appellant further prays for such other relief as may be ust and e$uitable in the premises. a)ati City, anila, Philippines, this 12 th day of >ecember *441.
VI.
APPEN5I6
Copy of the appealed order of the 0e(ional Trial Court, Branch 12;, a)ati City, dated April *-, 1++; 5Appendix DAI6.
By Appellant's Counsel?
4#a) de la C!# PT0 N!. 441-%G AN 12, *44+%AAT< C
e 8a CruM : A!Crive, a)ati Avenue a)ati City, Philippines Tel. No.? 543*6 ;;;@3++ &ax ? 543*6 ;;;@3-;; 1
#@mail ? delacruMla"rmyahoo.com
E6PLANATION
>ue to the shorta(e of messen(erial services and lac) of time this Appellant's Brief is bein( served to the other parties by re(istered mail in accordance "ith ection 11, 0ule 13 of the 0evised 0ules of Court.
COP7 FURNISHE5' ?/ COPIES
MARIA E. RE7ES Counsel for Appellee BP< #xpress Card Corporation Q1* econd &loor 8amp Buildin( #rnesto treet, a)ati Avenue a)ati City, Philippines
1-