RIVERA VS. SPOUSES CHUA (2015)746 scra 1 FACTS:The parties were friends and kumpadres for a long time already. Rivera obtained a loan from theSpouses Chua evidenced by a Promissory Note. Three years from the date of payment stipulated in the promissory note, Rivera, issued anddelivered to Spouses Chua two (2) checks drawn against his account at Philippine CommercialInternational Bank (PCIB) but upon presentment for payment, the two checks were dishonoredfor the reason “account closed.” The Spouses Chua alleged that they have repeatedly demanded payment from Rivera to noavail. Because of Rivera’s unjustified refusal to pay, the Spouses Chua were constrained to file asuit before the MeTC. Rivera, in his Answer, countered that he never executed the subject Promissory Note. After trial, the MeTC ruled in favor of the Spouses Chua. The decision was affirmed by both the RTC and the CA.ISSUE:WON Negotiable Instruments Law is applicable in the present case.