FIRST REPORTERs ( OCTOBER 29) – Group 1 Insurance Commission

and Group 2 Warranties

2nd REPORTERs (November 5) – Group 3 Premium and Group 4 Loss

LAST REPORTERs (November 12) – Group 5 Notice of Loss and Group

6 Double Insurance

THE INSURANCE COMMISSIONER

A. Administrative functions Secs 187, 414, 415 ; PD 1141

B. Adjudicative function Secs 416
Case: Philippine American Life, et al. v. Ansaldo, et aI., 234 SCRA 509 (1994)
Almendras Mining Corporation v. Offce of the lnsurance Commissioner, 160 SCRA 656
(1988)
C. Jurisdiction Sec.416; Sec. 9[3] BP 129
D. Binding effect of decision, order or ruling Secs 1, 4, 416; Rule 43 Rules of Court

Warranties Secs 67-76

a. Defined

b. Kinds Secs 67, 68,71.,72

cases: Qua Chee Gan v. Law Union 98 PhiI. 85 (1955), supra
Young v. Midland Textile Insurance 30 Phil 617 (1915)

c. Form Sec 69

d. When omission does not avoid Sec73

e. Effect of breach Secs 74-76

Cases: Pioneer Insurance & Surety v. Yap 61 SCRA 426 (1974), supra
New Life Enterprises v. CA 207 SCRA 609 (1992) (cf.Pacifc Banking a. CA, 168 SCRA 1)
(1988)

f. Meaning of warranty condition

Case: Prudential Guarnntee and Assurance Inc. u. Trans-Asia Shippirtg Lines Inc., G.R.1,51890,
lune 20, 2006

g. Warranties in fire insurance policies; standa.rd clauses Secs 168-170

h. Warranties in fire insurance policies, standard clauses Secs 168-170

Case: Young v. Midland Textile lnsurnnce, 30 Phil. 61'7
Premium payments – Secs 77-78, 64, 66,306

a. Defined
b. Duty to pay Sec77
c. Effect of premium - effectivity of policy
1. General rules Sec77
2. Exceptions:
a. Life and industrial life policy
b. Written acknowledgement of the receipt of premium by insurer Sec 78
c. Payment in installments - Makati Tuscanny Condominium Corp. v. CA, 215 SCRA 462
(1992)
d. Credit extension for the payment of premium
e. Estoppel

d. Effect of non-payment
Case: Philippine Phoenix Surety as. Woodworks, Inc., G.R. L-22684, August 31,1967

e. Effect of partial payment

Case: Tibay, et aI. v. CA, G.R. 119655, May 24,1996
UCPB General Insurance v. Masagana Telemart, Inc., G.R. 137172, lune 15,1999, supra

f. Effect of Payment by check

g. Effect of Payment through agent
Case: Malayan Insurance as. Arnaldo, et al, G.R. L-67835, October 12, 1987
South Sea Surety vs. CA, G.R. 102253,lune 2,1995
h. Return of premiums Secs 79-81
1. When right to return exists
a. Risk never attached
Case: Edillon v. Manila Bankers Life, et al,, 202 Phil. 508 (1982)
Great Pacific Life v. CA and Teodoro Cortez, G.R. L-57308, April 23, 1990
2. policy surrendered before termination
3. contract is voidable - fraud, mistake
Case: Lumibao vs.IAC, et al., G.R, 64677, September 13,1990

4. contract is voidable due to facts unknown to insurer

5. insurer never incurred liabilify due to insured default
Case: Tibay, et al. as. CA, G.R.1-19655, May 24, 1996
American Home Assurance us. Chua, G.R. 130421, lune 28,1999
6. over-insurance
7. rescission due to break
Case: Areola v. CA, G.R.95641, September 22,1994

8. No right to return of premiums Sec 80

LOSS Secs 85 – 89
 A. Terms defined
1. Loss - Bonifacio Bros. v. Mora, 20 SCRA 261 (1969)
2. Proximate cause - Vda. De Bataclan v. Medina,102 Phil 181 (1957)

B. Loss for which insurer liable

1. Loss the proximate cause of which is the peril insured against Sec 84
Case: Allied Banking Corp v. Lim Sio Wan, 549 SCRA (2008)

2. Loss the irnrnediate cause of which is the peril insured against except where the proximate
cause is an excepted peril Sec 86

3. Loss through the negligence of the ir-rsured Sec 87

Case: FGU v. CA, 454 SCRA 337 (2005)

4. Loss caused by efforts to rescue the thing from the peril insured against Sec. 85

C. Loss for Which insurer not liable

1. Loss by the insured's willful act Sec 87
2. Loss due to connivance of the insured
3. Loss where the excepted peril is the proximate cause Sec 86
Case: Paris-Manila Perfumery v. Phoenix Assurance Co., 49 Phil 753 (1926)

D. Prerequisite to recovery for loss in insurance against fire

1. Notice of loss Sec 88
2. Proof of loss Sec 89
3. Waiver of defects in notice or proof of loss Sec 90
4. Waiver of delay in presentation of notice or proof Sec 91
5. Effect of failure to secure certificate or testimony of third persons Sec 92

Notice and proof of loss (Sec. 88-92, ICP)

Cases: Bonifacio Bros. Inc. vs. Mora (May 29, 1967);

The Insular Life Assurance vs. Ebrado, 80 SCRA 181);
Vda. de Consuegra vs. GSIS (37 SCRA 315);
Asian Terminals, Inc. v. Malayan Insurance, Co., Inc., (G.R. No. 171406, April 4, 2011)

Double Insurance Secs. 95-100

a. Defined Sec 93
b. Requisites
Case: Pioneer Insurance & Surety Corp. v. Yap, 61 SCRA 426 (1974)

c. Rules of payment Sec 94

d. Distinguished from over-insurance
e. Stipulation against double insurance
f. Rules for payment where there is over-insurance by double insurance (Sec. 94, ICP)
Case: Malayan Insurance Co., Inc., v. Philippines First Insurance Co. Inc. and Reputable Forwarder
Services (G.R. No. 184300, July 11, 2012)
Mitsubishi Motors Philippines Salaried Employees Union (MMPSEU), v. Mitsubishi Motors Philippines
Corporation (GR 175773, June 17, 2013)