Scribd
Upload
30 views1 page

Salazar Vs

In the case of Salazar vs. J.Y. Brothers Marketing Corp., a freelance sales agent was held liable for 300 bags of rice after endorsing a dishonored check. The court ruled that the acceptance of a replacement check did not constitute novation or discharge her obligation, as there was no express intention to novate. The change in payment method did not alter the underlying obligation owed to J.Y. Bros.

Uploaded by

Mary grace Apostol
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
30 views1 page

Salazar Vs

In the case of Salazar vs. J.Y. Brothers Marketing Corp., a freelance sales agent was held liable for 300 bags of rice after endorsing a dishonored check. The court ruled that the acceptance of a replacement check did not constitute novation or discharge her obligation, as there was no express intention to novate. The change in payment method did not alter the underlying obligation owed to J.Y. Bros.

Uploaded by

Mary grace Apostol
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 1

Salazar vs. J.Y. Brothers Marketing Corp.

A freelance sales agent is held liable for the value of 300 bags of rice after negotiating and endorsing a dishonored check, as
the acceptance of a replacement check did not discharge her obligation due to the lack of an express intention to novate and
no incompatibility between the two checks.

Facts:

 Anamer Salazar, a freelance sales agent, negotiated and indorsed a Prudential Bank check issued by Nena Jaucian
Timario, who owed J.Y. Brothers Marketing (J.Y. Bros.) for the purchase of 300 bags of rice.
 The check was dishonored.
 Salazar argued that the acceptance of a Solid Bank check, which replaced the dishonored Prudential Bank check,
constituted novation and discharged her obligation.

Issue:

 Whether the acceptance of a replacement check constitutes novation and discharges the obligation of the indorser.

Ruling:

 The acceptance of the Solid Bank check did not result in novation and did not discharge Salazar's obligation.

Ratio:

 Novation requires an express intention to novate, and there was no agreement to establish that Salazar was already
discharged from her liability.
 The acceptance of the Solid Bank check did not result in any incompatibility, as both checks were for the purpose of
paying the amount owed to J.Y. Bros.
 The change in the mode of payment, from a negotiable check to a crossed check, did not constitute a change in the
object or principal condition of the obligation for novation to take place.

You might also like