Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
CA
Facts:
Eeastern Shipping Lines Inc. (ESLI) loaded on board a
vessel (SS Easter Explorer) several shipment of 2 boxes
of internal combustion engine parts, 334 bags of
ammonium chloride, 200 bags of glue and garments for
carriage to several consignees. While the vessel was off
Okinawa, Japan, a small fire was detected on the
acetylene cylinder located in the accommodation area
near the engine room. This resulted in a flash of flame
throughout the accommodation area. The vessel was
abandoned. All the cargoes of ESLI were delivered to
their respective consignees but with corresponding
additional freight and salvage charges. All the charges
were paid by PHAC. Thus, PHAC, as subrogee of the
consignees now seeks recovery from ESLI alleging that
they were negligent. ESLI argues, among others, that the
fire was a fortuitous event. The trial court and the CA
ruled in favour o ESLI. Hence this petition for review with
the Supreme Court.
Issue:
WON the fire was a fortuitous event.
WON ESLI should be held liable for the additional
charges.
Held: No, the fire cannot be considered as a fortuitous
event. Thus, it is presumed that ESLI was negligent and
should be held liable to PHAC.
In our jurisprudence, fire may not be considered a natural
disaster or calamity since it almost always arises from
some act of man or by human means.
It cannot be an act of God unless caused by lightning or a
natural disaster or casualty not attributable to human
agency.
There is strong evidence indicating that the acetylene
cylinder caught fire because of the fault and negligence of
respondent ESLI, its captain and its crew:
(1) The acetylene cylinder which was fully loaded should
not have been stored in the accommodation area near
the engine room where the heat generated therefrom
could cause the acetylene cylinder to explode by reason
of spontaneous combustion;
(2) Respondent ESLI should have known that by storing
the acetylene cylinder in the accommodation area
supposed to be reserved for passengers, it unnecessarily
exposed its passengers to grave danger and injury.
(3) The fact that the acetylene cylinder was checked,
tested and examined and subsequently certified as
having complied with the safety measures and standards
by qualified experts before it was loaded in the vessel
only shows to a great extent that negligence was present
in the handling of the acetylene cylinder after it was
loaded and while it was on board the ship.
Bachrach v. British American Insurance Co. Insurance Proceeds
17 PHIL 555
Facts:
Held: NO.
We think that the action of the trial court in rejecting the
proof offered by Tan Chuco as to the amount of the loss
must be sustained.
The contract of fire insurance being a contract of
indemnity, Tan Chuco is only entitled to recover the
amount of actual loss sustained by him. There being no
express valuation in the policy, the judgment was properly
entered against him for lack of satisfactory proof of the
amount of loss.
Rule: In the absence of express valuation in a fire
insurance policy, the insured is only entitled to recover
the amount of actual loss sustained and the burden is
upon him to establish such amount.
MICO vs Arnaldo
FACTS:
June
7,
1981: Malayan insurance
co.,
inc.
(MICO) issued to Coronacion
Pinca,
Fire Insurance Policy for her property effective July
22,
1981,
until
July
22,
1982
(a)
non-payment of premium;
(f)
a determination by the Commissioner that the
continuation of the policy would violate or would place the
insurer in violation of this Code.
As for the method of cancellation, Section 65 provides as
follows: