SALVACION vs.

CENTRAL BANK
G.R. No. 94723 August 21, 1997

FACTS:
Greg Bartelli, an American tourist, lured Karen Salvacion, then 12 years old into his apartment
wherein he detained the girl and raped her several times. Karen was rescued after 4 days. Bartelli was
arrested and detained. Criminal cases for serious illegal detention and 4 counts of rape were filed against
him. Petitioners also filed a case for damages with preliminary attachment.

The application for a writ of preliminary attachment was granted. The Deputy Sheriff of Makati
served a Notice of Garnishment to China Banking Corporation. However, China Bank invoked RA 1405
(Secrecy of Bank Deposits) as its answer to the notice of garnishment. The sheriff claimed that the
garnishment did not violate the secrecy of bank deposits since the disclosure is merely incidental to a
garnishment legally made by virtue of a court order. China Bank then invoked Section 113 of Central Bank
Circular No. 960.

The petitioners filed a petition for declaratory relief, asking that Sec. 113 of Central Bank Circular
No. 960 be declared as contrary to the provisions of the Constitution, hence void; because its provision
that "Foreign currency deposits shall be exempt from attachment, garnishment, or any other order or
process of any court, legislative body, government agency or any administrative body whatsoever,” has
taken away the right of petitioners to have the bank deposit of defendant Greg Bartelli garnished to satisfy
the judgment rendered in petitioners' favor.

ISSUE:
Whether or not Sec. 113 of Central Bank Circular No. 960 and Section 8 of the Foreign Currency
Deposit Act shall be made applicable to a foreign transient.

HELD:
NO. Obviously, the foreign currency deposit made by a transient or a tourist is not the kind of
deposit encouraged by PD Nos. 1034 and 1035 and given incentives and protection by said laws because
such depositor stays only for a few days in the country and, therefore, will maintain his deposit in the
bank only for a short time.

Respondent Greg Bartelli, as stated, is just a tourist or a transient. He deposited his dollars with
respondent China Banking Corporation only for safekeeping during his temporary stay in the Philippines.

In fine, the application of the law depends on the extent of its justice. Eventually, if we rule that
the questioned Section 113 of Central Bank Circular No. 960 which exempts from attachment,
garnishment, or any other order or process of any court, legislative body, government agency or any
administrative body whatsoever, is applicable to a foreign transient, injustice would result especially to a
citizen aggrieved by a foreign guest like accused Greg Bartelli. This would negate Article 10 of the New
Civil Code which provides that "in case of doubt in the interpretation or application of laws, it is presumed
that the lawmaking body intended right and justice to prevail. "Ninguno non deue enriquecerse
tortizeramente con dano de otro." Simply stated, when the statute is silent or ambiguous, this is one of
those fundamental solutions that would respond to the vehement urge of conscience.

The provisions of Section 113 of CB Circular No. 960 and PD No. 1246, insofar as it amends Section
8 of R.A. No. 6426 are hereby held to be INAPPLICABLE to this case because of its peculiar circumstances.