ChanRobles™ Virtual Law Library | chanrobles.com™  
Main Index Law Library Philippine Laws, Statutes & Codes Latest Legal Updates Philippine Legal Resources Significant Philippine Legal Resources Worldwide Legal Resources Philippine Supreme Court Decisions United States Jurisprudence
Prof. Joselito Guianan Chan's The Labor Code of the Philippines, Annotated Labor Standards & Social Legislation Volume I of a 3-Volume Series 2019 Edition (3rd Revised Edition)
 

 
Chan Robles Virtual Law Library
 
 

 
UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT JURISPRUDENCE
 

 
PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT JURISPRUDENCE
 

   
March-1950 Jurisprudence                 

  • G.R. No. L-1720 March 4, 1950 - SIA SUAN, ET AL. v. RAMON ALCANTARA

    085 Phil 669

  • G.R. No. L-2038 March 4, 1950 - LUIS DEL CASTILLO v. METROPOLITAN INSURANCE COMPANY

    085 Phil 678

  • G.R. No. L-2171 March, 4, 1950 - EL PUEBLO DE FILIPINAS v. IDE LAGON RAMOS

    085 Phil 683

  • G.R. No. L-2407 March 4, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. MATIAS ALUPAY

    085 Phil 688

  • G.R. No. L-2447 March 4, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. PEDRO PULIDO, ET AL

    085 Phil 695

  • G.R. No. L-1296 March 6, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. JOSE PALICTE

    085 Phil 711

  • G.R. No. L-1546 March 6, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILS. v. RUFINO SURALTA

    085 Phil 714

  • G.R. No. L-2462 March 6, 1950 - EL PUEBLO DE FILIPINAS v. GO LEE

    085 Phil 718

  • G.R. No. L-2665 March 6, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. FLORENTINO PATERNO, ET AL

    085 Phil 722

  • G.R. No. L-2996 March 6, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. PRECIANO MEJARES, ET AL.

    085 Phil 727

  • G.R. No. L-3463 March 6, 1950 - LEONCIO ROSARES v. DIRECTOR OF PRISONS

    085 Phil 730

  • G.R. No. L-2335 March 7, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. FRANCISCO MORENO

    085 Phil 731

  • G.R. No. L-3643 March 7, 950

    CARLOS C. ASPRA v. DIRECTOR OF PRISONS

    085 Phil 737

  • G.R. No. L-2269 March 14, 1950 - FABIAN B. S. ABELLERA v. NARCISO DE GUZMAN

    085 Phil 738

  • G.R. No. L-1990 March 15, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. LEONILO GANAL, ET AL.

    085 Phil 743

  • G.R. No. L-2809 March 22, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. FRISCO HOLGADO

    085 Phil 752

  • G.R. No. L-3022 March 22, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. PEDRO CABASA, ET AL

    085 Phil 758

  • G.R. No. L-3580 March 22, 1950 - CONRADO MELO v. PEOPLE OF THE PHIL., ET AL

    085 Phil 766

  • G.R. No. L-2217 March 23, 1950 - MIGUEL R. CORNEJO v. BIENVENIDO A. TAN

    085 Phil 772

  • G.R. No. L-2582 March 23, 1950 - TRINIDAD SEMIRA, ET AL v. JUAN ENRIQUEZ

    085 Phil 776

  • G.R. No. L-2981 March 23, 1950 - VISAYAN SURETY & INSURANCE CORP. v. VICTORIA PASCUAL, ET AL

    085 Phil 779

  • G.R. No. L-2434 March 25, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. MACABANTUG RANGON ET AL.

    085 Phil 786

  • G.R. No. L-2584 March 25, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. TEODORO BARRAMEDA

    085 Phil 789

  • G.R. No. L-2636 March 25, 1950 - YU SIP v. COURT OF APPEALS

    085 Phil 795

  • G.R. No. L-2784 March 25, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. GERARDO NARSOLIS ET AL.

    085 Phil 798

  • G.R. No. L-2856 March 27, 1950 - GO CAM v. Hon. MAGNO S. GATMAITAN, ET AL

    085 Phil 802

  • G.R. No. L-2743 March 29, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. SIXTO CANDELARIA

    085 Phil 805

  • G.R. No. L-836 March 30, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ANACLETO MAGDANG, ET AL

    085 Phil 807

  • G.R. No. L-1912 March 30, 1950 - EL PUEBLO DE FILIPINAS v. ANATOLIO LLENARIZAS

    085 Phil 809

  • G.R. No. L-2239 March 30, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. AURELIO SANTIAGO

    085 Phil 813

  • G.R. No. L-2275 March 30, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. SIMPLICIO MACASO, ET ALS.

    085 Phil 819

  • G.R. No. L-2288 March 30, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. MAXIMO MANOLONG

    085 Phil 829

  • G.R. No. L-2600 March 30, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. PEDRO MARAPAO

    085 Phil 832

  • G.R. No. L-2647 March 30, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. DIONISIO S. SERRANO

    085 Phil 835

  • G.R. No. L-2681 March 30, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. DARIO MARGEN, ET AL.

    085 Phil 839

  • G.R. No. L-2175 March 31, 1950 - NG GIOC LIU v. SECRETARY OF THE DFA

    085 Phil 842

  • G.R. No. L-2189 March 31, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. CILDO, ET AL

    085 Phil 845

  • G.R. No. L-2318 March 31, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. TEOFILO PAAR

    085 Phil 864

  • G.R. No. L-2405 March 31, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. JUAN DE LOS SANTOS

    085 Phil 870

  • G.R. No. L-2801 March 31, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. PEDRO BELANDRES, ET AL.

    085 Phil 874

  • G.R. No. L-2880 March 31, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. DEMETRIO MOSTOLES, ET AL.

    085 Phil 883

  •  




     
     

    G.R. No. L-2038   March 4, 1950 - LUIS DEL CASTILLO v. METROPOLITAN INSURANCE COMPANY<br /><br />085 Phil 678

     
    PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

    SECOND DIVISION

    [G.R. No. L-2038. March 4, 1950.]

    LUIS DEL CASTILLO, in his capacity as administrator of intestate estate of the deceased Andres Grimalt y Pastor, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. METROPOLITAN INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant-Appellee.

    Prudencio de Guzman for Appellant.

    Claro M. Recto for Appellee.

    SYLLABUS


    1. INSURANCE; LIABILITIES ASSUMED BY INSURE; EXTRAORDINARY RISK DUE TO UNUSUAL CAUSES. — Insurance companies, generally are willing to assume only ordinary risks or looses that may happen under ordinary conditions or in times of peace. Insurance companies are entitled to protect themselves and maintain their stability in the interest of the people whom they insure and accordingly they should avoid assuming extraordinary risks due to unusual and peculiarly destructive causes which are disproportionate to the amount of premiums paid. It is for this reason that extraordinary causes of loss for which no augmented premium has been paid are excluded from the coverage of the policies issued by the defendant company.

    2. ID.; ID.; DAMAGES CAUSED BY FIRE DUE TO WAR OR INVASION. — When the property insured was destroyed by fire, the conditions in Manila were entirely abnormal on account of the war. Peace and order were beyond control for they were characterized by panic and confusion and accompanied by unchecked looting, uncontrolled mobs, and outbreaks of fire. Two-thirds of the population and two thirds of the police force of the city had evacuated to the provinces, many houses were left without vigilance and were subject of general looting, and fire, in several instances, was the consequence because only a handful of policemen and Manila’s firemen were left. Calls for assistance received no response from the fire department, so much so that the fire which destroyed the insured’s property was the effect of abnormal conditions caused by war, of which the insurer is not liable.

    3. ID.; LIMITATIONS OF ACTION, STIPULATION IN THE POLICY AS TO. — Failure of the ensured to bring the proper action under the conditions and within the time stipulated in the policy, bars him from proceeding against the insurer.


    D E C I S I O N


    MORAN, C.J. :


    This is an appeal taken from a decision of the Court of First Instance of Manila absolving the defendant Metropolitan Insurance Company from the complaint filed by Luis del Castillo as administrator of the estate of the deceased Andres Grimalt y Pastor.

    According to the stipulation of facts submitted by the parties, the deceased Andres Grimalt y Pastor, was the owner of "Panaderia la Magdalena" situated between O’Donnel and Misericordia Streets in the City of Manila which was insured against fire and lightning and covered by Policies Nos. 21489, 21105 and 21106 issued by the Metropolitan Insurance Company which were in full force and effect at the time said property was partially destroyed by fire. Said policies have their face value of P15,000, P30,000, and P40,000 respectively and were worded identically there having been paid by the insured to the defendant company as premiums the amounts of P300 for Policy No. 21489, P600 for Policy No. 21105 and P800 for Policy No. 21106 for the period comprised between September 23, 1941, and September 23, 1942.

    Paragraph 6 of each of these policies is as follows:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph

    "This insurance does not cover any loss or damage which either in origin or extent is directly or indirectly, proximately or remotely, occasioned by or contributed to by any of the following occurrences, or which, either in origin or extent directly or indirectly, proximately or remotely, arises out of or in connection with any of such occurrences, namely:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph

    "(1) Earthquake, volcanic eruption, typhoon, hurricane, tornado, cyclone, or other convulsion of nature or atmospheric disturbance.

    "(2) War, invasion, act of foreign enemy, hostilities or war-like operations (whether war be declared or not), mutiny, riot, civil commotion, insurrection, rebellion, revolution, conspiracy, military naval or usurped power, martial law or state of siege, or any of the events or causes which determine the proclamation or maintenance of martial law or state of siege.

    "Any loss or damage happening during the existence of abnormal conditions (whether physical or otherwise), directly or indirectly, proximately or remotely, occasioned by or contributed to by or arising out of or in connection with any of the said occurrences shall be deemed to be loss or damage which is not covered by this insurance, except to the extent that the Insured shall prove that such loss or damage happened independently of the existence of such abnormal conditions.

    "In any action, suit or other proceeding, where the Company alleges that by reason of the provisions of this condition any loss or damage is not covered by this insurance, the burden of proving that such loss or damage is covered shall be upon the Insured."cralaw virtua1aw library

    Early in the afternoon of January 2, 1942, a fire broke out in a grocery store owned by Yu Dian Chiang, then being looted, and caught and destroyed two doors of the "Panaderia la Magdalena" building, thus causing a damage in the amount of P62,000.

    The main issue here is whether or not the defendant, Metropolitan Insurance Company, is liable for the damage thus caused to the bakery above mentioned.

    As above indicated, one of the conditions stipulated in the policies is that any loss or damage caused by war or invasion or "any loss or damage happening during the existence of abnormal conditions (whether physical or otherwise) directly or indirectly, proximately or remotely, occasioned by or contributed to by or arising out of or in connection with any of the said occurrences shall be deemed to be loss or damage which is not covered by this insurance" and that "where the company alleges that by reason of the provisions of this condition any loss or damage is not covered by this insurance, the burden of proving that such loss or damage is covered shall be upon the Insured."cralaw virtua1aw library

    Insurance companies, generally, are willing to assume only ordinary risks or losses that may happen under ordinary conditions or in times of peace. Insurance companies are entitled to protect themselves and maintain their stability in the interest of the people whom they insure and accordingly they should avoid assuming extraordinary risks due to unusual and peculiarly destructive causes which are disproportionate to the amount of premium paid. It is for this reason that extraordinary causes of loss for which no augmented premium has been paid are excluded from the coverage of the policies issued by the defendant company. (See Aetna Ins. Co. v. Boom, 95 U. S., 117; 24 Law. ed., 395, 398; cited with approval in Woogmaster v. Liverpool & London Globe Ins. Co., 45 N.E. [2d], 394, 396; Am. Mfg. Corp. v. Nat. Union Fire Insurance Co., 14 So. [2d], 430, 438; Holmes v. Employer’s Liability Ass. Corp. Ltd. of London, Eng., 43 N.E. [2d], 746, 753.)

    On January 2, 1942, when the bakery owned by plaintiff was destroyed partially by fire, the conditions in Manila were entirely abnormal on account of the war. In the stipulation of facts submitted by the parties, it is stated that in the City of Manila from December 29, 1941 up to January 3, 1942, due undoubtedly to the evacuation of the Philippine and U. S. Army and to the imminence of Japanese invasion, the conditions of peace and order were totally abnormal and beyond control for they were characterized by panic and confusion and accompanied by unchecked looting, uncontrolled mobs, and outbreaks of fire. From December 8, 1941 to January 4, 1942 there had been at least 50 fires in Manila and on January 2, 1942 there had been at least 8 fires in the city. And on January 6, a fire gutted the building opposite and directly in front of the bakery owned by plaintiff. Since 2/3 of the population and 2/3 of the police force of the city had evacuated to the provinces, many houses were left without vigilance and were the subject of general looting, and fire, in several instances, was the consequence. Looting and robbery were rampant in the city because only a handful of policemen were left and they were generally ignored by the mob of looters. Fires breaking out in houses being looted were beyond control because a great portion of Manila’s firemen had also evacuated to the provinces or failed to report for duty in fear of imminent danger and calls for assistance received no response from the fire department.

    The fire which destroyed partially the bakery in question, came from a grocery that was being looted. Such fire was the effect of abnormal conditions caused by war.

    There is another reason why plaintiff’s action should be dismissed. In paragraph thirteen (13) of the policies it is stipulated that "if the claim is made and rejected and an action or suit be not commenced within twelve (12) months after such rejection . . . all benefit under this Policy shall be forfeited." According to the stipulation of facts, plaintiff’s claim was rejected on February 1942, and yet the complaint in this case was filed on May 22, 1946. The action, therefore, is barred by the limitation agreed upon by the parties.

    Judgment is affirmed with costs against Appellant.

    Ozaeta, Pablo, Bengzon, Padilla, Tuason, Reyes and Torres, JJ., concur.

    Montemayor, J., concurs in the result.

    MORAN, C.J. :chanrob1es virtual 1aw library

    Mr. Justice Paras voted for affirmance.

    G.R. No. L-2038   March 4, 1950 - LUIS DEL CASTILLO v. METROPOLITAN INSURANCE COMPANY<br /><br />085 Phil 678




    Back to Home | Back to Main

     

    QUICK SEARCH

    cralaw

       

    cralaw



     
      Copyright © ChanRobles Publishing Company Disclaimer | E-mail Restrictions
    ChanRobles™ Virtual Law Library | chanrobles.com™
     
    RED