Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 13 views

    001 Geagonia V. Ca (Balisong)

    Uploaded by

    Maisie Zabala
    1) Geagonia took out a P100,000 fire insurance policy with Country Bankers for his store. The policy required informing the insurer of any other insurance policies and prohibited total insurance exceeding P200,000. 2) Geagonia's store was also insured by two P100,000 policies from Philippines First Insurance that named a textiles company as beneficiary due to a mortgage on the store. 3) The Supreme Court ruled that the policies insured different interests - Geagonia as owner and the textiles company as mortgagee. Therefore, there was no double insurance in violation of the Country Bankers policy, and Geagonia could still claim from that policy since the total insurance did not exceed

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    001 Geagonia V. Ca (Balisong)

    Uploaded by

    Maisie Zabala
    13 views2 pages
    1) Geagonia took out a P100,000 fire insurance policy with Country Bankers for his store. The policy required informing the insurer of any other insurance policies and prohibited total insurance exceeding P200,000. 2) Geagonia's store was also insured by two P100,000 policies from Philippines First Insurance that named a textiles company as beneficiary due to a mortgage on the store. 3) The Supreme Court ruled that the policies insured different interests - Geagonia as owner and the textiles company as mortgagee. Therefore, there was no double insurance in violation of the Country Bankers policy, and Geagonia could still claim from that policy since the total insurance did not exceed

    Original Description:

    mmm

    Original Title

    Insurance

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    1) Geagonia took out a P100,000 fire insurance policy with Country Bankers for his store. The policy required informing the insurer of any other insurance policies and prohibited total insurance exceeding P200,000. 2) Geagonia's store was also insured by two P100,000 policies from Philippines First Insurance that named a textiles company as beneficiary due to a mortgage on the store. 3) The Supreme Court ruled that the policies insured different interests - Geagonia as owner and the textiles company as mortgagee. Therefore, there was no double insurance in violation of the Country Bankers policy, and Geagonia could still claim from that policy since the total insurance did not exceed

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    13 views2 pages

    001 Geagonia V. Ca (Balisong)

    Uploaded by

    Maisie Zabala
    1) Geagonia took out a P100,000 fire insurance policy with Country Bankers for his store. The policy required informing the insurer of any other insurance policies and prohibited total insurance exceeding P200,000. 2) Geagonia's store was also insured by two P100,000 policies from Philippines First Insurance that named a textiles company as beneficiary due to a mortgage on the store. 3) The Supreme Court ruled that the policies insured different interests - Geagonia as owner and the textiles company as mortgagee. Therefore, there was no double insurance in violation of the Country Bankers policy, and Geagonia could still claim from that policy since the total insurance did not exceed

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 2

    001 GEAGONIA v.

    CA (BALISONG) He further asserted that the total of the amounts claimed under the three policies was below the
    6 Feb. 1995 | Davide, Jr., J. | “Other Insurance” Clause; Insurable Interest in Mortgage actual value of his stocks at the time of loss, which was P1,000,000.00.

    FACTS: MAY STILL CLAIM


    7. Geagonia is the owner of Norman's Mart located in the public market of San Francisco, Separate insurances covering different insurable interests may be obtained by the mortgagor and
    Agusan del Sur. On 22 December 1989, he obtained from the Country Bankers a fire insurance the mortgagee.
    policy for P100,000.00. The period of the policy was from 22 December 1989 to 22 December  The mortgagor's insurable interest covers the full value of the mortgaged property,
    1990 and covered the following: "Stock-in-trade consisting principally of dry goods such as even though the mortgage debt is equivalent to the full value of the property.
    RTW's for men and women wear and other usual to assured's business."  The mortgagee's insurable interest is to the extent of the debt, since the property is
    relied upon as security thereof, and in insuring he is not insuring the property but his
    8. Geagonia declared in the policy under the subheading entitled CO- INSURANCE that interest or lien thereon.
    Mercantile Insurance Co., Inc. was the co-insurer for P50,000.00.
    A mortgagor may, however, take out insurance for the benefit of the mortgagee, which is the
    9. The policy contained the following condition: usual practice
    Condition 3. The insured shall give notice to the Company of any insurance or insurances  a "standard mortgage clause," containing a collateral independent contract between
    already effected, or which may subsequently be effected, covering any of the property or the mortgagee and insurer, may be attached; or
    properties consisting of stocks in trade, goods in process and/or inventories only hereby insured,  In the policy obtained by the mortgagor with loss payable clause in favor of the
    and unless notice be given and the particulars of such insurance or insurances be stated therein mortgagee as his interest may appear, the mortgagee is only a beneficiary under the
    or endorsed in this policy pursuant to Section 50 of the Insurance Code, by or on behalf of the contract, and recognized as such by the insurer but not made a party to the contract
    Company before the occurrence of any loss or damage, all benefits under this policy shall be himself. Hence, any act of the mortgagor which defeats his right will also defeat the
    deemed forfeited, provided however, that this condition shall not apply when the total insurance right of the mortgagee. 22 This kind of policy covers only such interest as the
    or insurances in force at the time of the loss or damage is not more than P200,000.00. mortgagee has at the issuing of the policy.23

    10. On 27 May 1990 a fire broke out in the public market. The insured stocks- in-trade were The fire insurance policies issued by the PFIC name the petitioner as the assured and contain a
    completely destroyed. Geagonia filed a claim against Country Bankers, but the claim was denied mortgage clause which reads:
    because Country Bankers found that at the time of the loss, Geagonia’s stocks-in-trade were Loss, if any, shall be payable to MESSRS. TESING TEXTILES, Cebu City as their interest may
    likewise insured by two insurance policies worth P100,000 each with Philippines First appear subject to the terms of this policy.
    Insurance, Co., Inc. (PFIC) in violation of the condition in the policy. This is clearly a simple loss payable clause, not a standard mortgage clause.
    Condition 3 of the subject policy is not totally free from ambiguity and must, perforce, be
    11. The PFIC policies indicate that the insured was Discount Mart under the proprietorship of meticulously analyzed. Such analysis leads us to conclude that (a) the prohibition applies only
    Geagonia, and with a mortgage clause making the loss payable to Cebu Tesing Textiles, as their to double insurance, and (b) the nullity of the policy shall only be to the extent exceeding
    interest may appear. Hence, this petition for collection of sum of money for the recovery of P200,000.00 of the total policies obtained.
    P100,000. A double insurance exists where the same person is insured by several insurers separately in
    respect of the same subject and interest. As earlier stated, the insurable interests of a mortgagor
    12. The Insurance Commission ruled in favor of Geagonia saying that he had no knowledge of and a mortgagee on the mortgaged property are distinct and separate. Since the two policies of
    the PFIC policies because it was Cebu Tesing which procured them. The CA reversed the IC, the PFIC do not cover the same interest as that covered by the policy of the private respondent,
    holding that Geagonia knew of the PFIC policies when it procured insurance from Country no double insurance exists. The non-disclosure then of the former policies was not fatal to the
    Bankers as admitted in his letter dated 18 January 1991. petitioner's right to recover on the private respondent's policy.
    Furthermore, by stating within Condition 3 itself that such condition shall not apply if the total
    ISSUE/s: insurance in force at the time of loss does not exceed P200,000.00, the private respondent was
    Whether Geagonia had knowledge of PFIC insurance amenable to assume a co-insurer's liability up to a loss not exceeding P200,000.00. What it had
    WON Geagonia may claim from the policy. YES in mind was to discourage over-insurance.
    Indeed, the rationale behind the incorporation of "other insurance" clause in fire policies is to
    Held: prevent over-insurance and thus avert the perpetration of fraud. When a property owner obtains
    insurance policies from two or more insurers in a total amount that exceeds the property's value,
    KNOWLEDGE the insured may have an inducement to destroy the property for the purpose of collecting the
    His letter of reconsideration of denial of claim to Country Bakers conclusively proves this insurance. The public as well as the insurer is interested in preventing a situation in which a fire
    knowledge. He admitted in the said letter that at the time he obtained the private respondent's would be profitable to the insured.32
    fire insurance policy he knew that the two policies issued by the PFIC were already in existence; WHEREFORE, the instant petition is hereby GRANTED. The decision of the Court of Appeals
    however, he had no knowledge of the provision in the private respondent's policy requiring him in CA-G.R. SP No. 31916 is SET ASIDE and the decision of the Insurance Commission in Case
    to inform it of the prior policies; this requirement was not mentioned to him by the private No. 3340 is REINSTATED.
    respondent's agent; and had it been mentioned, he would not have withheld such information.

    You might also like

    pFad - Phonifier reborn

    Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

    Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


    Alternative Proxies:

    Alternative Proxy

    pFad Proxy

    pFad v3 Proxy

    pFad v4 Proxy