33 vil. NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENTS What are the requisites for an instrument to be ne- gotiable? Section 1 of Act No. 2031, otherwise known as the Negotiable Instruments Law, enumerates the requisites for an instrument to become negotiable, viz: “(a) It must be in writing and signed by the maker or drawer; (b) Must con- tain an unconditional promise or order to pay a sum certain ‘in money; (c) Must be payable on demand, or at a fixed or rminable future time; (d) Must be payable to order or to and (e) Where the instrument is addressed to a , he must be named or otherwise indicated therein reasonable certainty.” (Caltex (Philippines), Inc. vs. of Appeals, 212 SCRA 448 [1992]) is negotiability of an instrument determined? The accepted rule is that the negotiability or non- gotiability of an instrument is determined from the writ- t is, from the face of the instrument itself. In the ction of a bill or note, the intention of the parties is rol, if it can be legally ascertained. While the writing be read in the light of surrounding circumstances in to more perfectly understand the intent and meaning le parties, yet as they have constituted the writing to be ly outward and visible expression of their meaning, jords are to be added to it or substituted in its duty of the court in such case is to ascertain, the parties may have secretly intended as contra- | from what their words express, but what is words they have used. What the parties ined by what they said. (CaltexTaxeNOTE: COMMERCIAL LAW SERIES 34 (pritioeines) Inc. vs. Court of Appeals, 212 SCRa ey 1992) is the extent of liability of the co-makers what Is OF an : instrument? which begins with “I” ,"WE” or “Eithe ¢° promise to P2Y. when signed by two or more poised m_ solidarily liable Where an instrument cop! taining the words “I promise to pay” is signed b re deemed to be jointly and ‘An instrument jiable thereon. r or “Either of us” promise to pay, more persons, makes them solidarily the singular pronoun is used indicates individual as to each other; meaning signers is deemed to have made an in promise to pay the notes in full. ( vs. Court of Appeals, 21 As a tule, when the payee is to be the true recipient of the procee ios ee a bearer instrument. A change drawn on a bank payable on an order or a bearer mnetranihe (Phi vs. Rodriguez, 566 SCRA 513 [2008]) Distinguish between bearer and35 NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENTS: SEC. 30. What constitutes negotiation —An instrument is negotiated when it is transfer one person to another in su the transferee the holder the it is negotiated by delivery; negotiated by the ‘ndorsement of the holder com” pleted by delivery. (Philippine National Bank v6. Rod- riguez, 566 SCRA 513 [2008)) When is an instrument payable to a specified payee -onsidered a bearer instrument? A check that is payable toa specified payee is an or- jer instrument. However, under Section 9(c) of the NIL, a eck payable to a specified payee may nevertheless be nsidered as a bearer instrument if it is payable to the of a fictitious or non-existing person, and such fact is to the person making it so payable. Thus, checks ed to “Prinsipe ‘Abante” or “Si Malakas at si Maganda,” 9 are well-known characters in Philippine mythology, bearer instruments because the named payees are us and non-existent. (Philippine National Bank vs. quez, 866 SCRA 513 [2008)) ain the meaning of the term “fictitious” under e Negotiable Instruments Law. The Supreme Court explained: “We have yet to discuss a broader meaning of the as used in the NIL. It is for this reason that look elsewhere for guidance. Court rulings in the ed States are a logical starting point since our law on iments was directly lifted from the Uniform S of the United States. A review y that an actual, existing, and “fictitious” if the maker of the i 1e payee to in fact receive the