Practice question
Corporate clients allegedly deceive a commercial bank into extending a credit facility. The bank is the victim, and the accused did not use an association they manage to solicit and misappropriate the covered public contributions. The prosecution argues that bank deposits alone automatically supply PD1689’s covered-funds setting. What does the operative Galvez reconsideration ruling teach?
- Every fraud against a bank is necessarily syndicated estafa
- The2012 syndicated classification was left wholly unchanged
- The clients’ bank fraud was treated as simple estafa on reconsideration; the bank’s deposit-taking alone did not supply the asserted PD1689 classification
- A bank can never be a victim of any estafa
- The accused were automatically innocent of every offense
Legal references
- Galvez v. Court of Appeals, G.R.187919/188030, February20 2013, majority resolution on reconsideration: https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2013/feb2013/gr_187919_2013.html
Answer this question in flashcards to review your response and continue practicing.