Soriano and Ilagan were the president and general manager of Rural Bank of San Miguel. They were criminally charged for indirectly obtaining loans for themselves from the bank by falsifying loan applications and records to make it appear the loans were obtained by other individuals. Soriano and Ilagan argued their actions did not constitute a criminal offense and at most would only render them civilly liable. However, the Supreme Court ruled they committed grave abuse of discretion by violating laws on loans to directors, officers, stockholders and related interests (DOSRI). The court found DOSRI violations have different elements than estafa, so charging Soriano with multiple offenses was proper.
Soriano and Ilagan were the president and general manager of Rural Bank of San Miguel. They were criminally charged for indirectly obtaining loans for themselves from the bank by falsifying loan applications and records to make it appear the loans were obtained by other individuals. Soriano and Ilagan argued their actions did not constitute a criminal offense and at most would only render them civilly liable. However, the Supreme Court ruled they committed grave abuse of discretion by violating laws on loans to directors, officers, stockholders and related interests (DOSRI). The court found DOSRI violations have different elements than estafa, so charging Soriano with multiple offenses was proper.
Soriano and Ilagan were the president and general manager of Rural Bank of San Miguel. They were criminally charged for indirectly obtaining loans for themselves from the bank by falsifying loan applications and records to make it appear the loans were obtained by other individuals. Soriano and Ilagan argued their actions did not constitute a criminal offense and at most would only render them civilly liable. However, the Supreme Court ruled they committed grave abuse of discretion by violating laws on loans to directors, officers, stockholders and related interests (DOSRI). The court found DOSRI violations have different elements than estafa, so charging Soriano with multiple offenses was proper.
Soriano and Ilagan were the president and general manager of Rural Bank of San Miguel. They were criminally charged for indirectly obtaining loans for themselves from the bank by falsifying loan applications and records to make it appear the loans were obtained by other individuals. Soriano and Ilagan argued their actions did not constitute a criminal offense and at most would only render them civilly liable. However, the Supreme Court ruled they committed grave abuse of discretion by violating laws on loans to directors, officers, stockholders and related interests (DOSRI). The court found DOSRI violations have different elements than estafa, so charging Soriano with multiple offenses was proper.
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
Download as docx, pdf, or txt
You are on page 1of 1
HILARIO SORIANO AND ROSARIO ILAGAN vs.
PEOPLE, BANGKO SENTRAL,
PDIC GR 159517-18, 30 June 2009 FACTS: Hilario P. Soriano (Soriano) and Rosalinda Ilagan (Ilagan) were the President and General Manager, respectively, of the Rural Bank of San Miguel (Bulacan), Inc. (RBSM). Allegedly, on June 27, 1997 and August 21, 1997, during their incumbency as president and manager of the bank, petitioners indirectly obtained loans from RBSM. They falsified the loan applications and other bank records, and made it appear that Virgilio J. Malang and Rogelio Maaol obtained loans of P15,000,000.00 each, when in fact they did not. Criminal charges were filed against them. They sought for its dismissal because their action does not amount to any criminal action, and if it does, it will only render them liable civilly. Also, their single act could not amount to multiple offenses. ISSUE: Whether or not the petitioners can be held liable for their actions. RULING: YES.They committed grave abuse of discretion in the exercise of their duties. As aptly pointed out by the BSP in its memorandum, there are differences between the two (2) offenses. A DOSRI violation consists in the failure to observe and comply with procedural, reportorial or ceiling requirements prescribed by law in the grant of a loan to a director, officer, stockholder and other related interests in the bank, i.e. lack of written approval of the majority of the directors of the bank and failure to enter such approval into corporate records and to transmit a copy thereof to the BSP supervising department. The elements of abuse of confidence, deceit, fraud or false pretenses, and damage, which are essential to the prosecution for estafa, are not elements of a DOSRI violation. The filing of several charges against Soriano was, therefore, proper.