(click the link)
Doctrine:
"x x x.
Given the foregoing, we find no reversible error in the findings of the appellate court that PNB was negligent in the handling of FFCCI’s combo account, specifically, with respect to PNB’s failure to detect the forgeries in the subject applications for manager’s check which could have prevented the loss. As we have often ruled, the banking business is impressed with public trust.[21] A higher degree of diligence is imposed on banks relative to the handling of their affairs than that of an ordinary business enterprise.[22]Thus, the degree of responsibility, care and trustworthiness expected of their officials and employees is far greater than those of ordinary officers and employees in other enterprises.[23] In the case at bar, PNB failed to meet the high standard of diligence required by the circumstances to prevent the fraud. In Philippine Bank of Commerce v. Court of Appeals[24] and The Consolidated Bank & Trust Corporation v. Court of Appeals,[25] where the bank’s negligence is the proximate cause of the loss and the depositor is guilty of contributory negligence, we allocated the damages between the bank and the depositor on a 60-40 ratio. We apply the same ruling in this case considering that, as shown above, PNB’s negligence is the proximate cause of the loss while the issue as to FFCCI’s contributory negligence has been settled with finality in G.R. No. 173278. Thus, the appellate court properly adjudged PNB to bear the greater part of the loss consistent with these rulings.
x x x."
