G.R. No. 112550 . February 5, 2001.
DICK L. GO, petitioner, vs. COURT OF APPEALS and SECURITY BANK & TRUST COMPANY, respondents.

FACTS

National Steel Corporation (NSC) issued two PNB Manager’s Checks payable to the Collector of Customs for customs duties. These checks were diverted and deposited into accounts under the name “Robert Santos” at Security Bank and Trust Company (SBTC). The accounts were opened with the participation of SBTC employees, including petitioner Dick Go, an Assistant Manager. The proceeds were siphoned off. Upon discovering the fraud, SBTC reimbursed PNB and filed a civil case for sum of money against Go and others. The Regional Trial Court (RTC) acquitted Go in the related criminal case and dismissed the civil complaint. The Court of Appeals (CA) reversed the civil dismissal, finding Go and a co-defendant jointly and severally liable. The CA based its finding partly on testimonies that a checkbook for one “Robert Santos” account was delivered to Go by a co-accused.

ISSUE

Whether the Court of Appeals erred in finding petitioner Dick Go civilly liable based on hearsay evidence.

RULING

Yes. The Supreme Court reversed the CA and reinstated the RTC’s dismissal of the civil case against Go. The CA’s finding of liability was improperly anchored on hearsay evidence. The testimonies of witnesses Lourdes Gabriel and Ester Mendoza, stating that co-accused Eduardo Lauchengco delivered a checkbook to Go, were not based on their personal knowledge but on what Lauchengco told them. Hearsay evidence is one where the witness has no direct knowledge of the fact asserted but relays information obtained from another person. Such evidence has no probative value and cannot be used as a basis for a finding of fact. Since a crucial link in establishing Go’s participation—the delivery of the checkbook—was proven only by this inadmissible hearsay, the civil liability imposed by the CA lacked a proper evidentiary foundation. Consequently, the RTC’s decision, which did not rely on this hearsay, was reinstated.