Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 213 views

    Insular Life Assurance Co

    Uploaded by

    LD
    The document summarizes two court cases involving Insular Life Assurance Co., Ltd. and Serafin Feliciano: 1. In the first case, the court held that Insular Life must pay the insurance claim, as their agent knowingly provided false information on the insured's application that differed from the truthful answers provided. An insurer cannot avoid liability if their agent commits fraud without the applicant's knowledge. 2. Upon reconsideration, the Supreme Court reversed their previous decision. They held that when the insured signed the application in blank, authorizing the agent to fill it out, he was responsible for any falsification by the agent. The policy was void from the beginning. The insured was only entitled to

    Copyright:

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

    Insular Life Assurance Co

    Uploaded by

    LD
    213 views1 page
    The document summarizes two court cases involving Insular Life Assurance Co., Ltd. and Serafin Feliciano: 1. In the first case, the court held that Insular Life must pay the insurance claim, as their agent knowingly provided false information on the insured's application that differed from the truthful answers provided. An insurer cannot avoid liability if their agent commits fraud without the applicant's knowledge. 2. Upon reconsideration, the Supreme Court reversed their previous decision. They held that when the insured signed the application in blank, authorizing the agent to fill it out, he was responsible for any falsification by the agent. The policy was void from the beginning. The insured was only entitled to

    Original Description:

    Insular Life Assurance Co

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The document summarizes two court cases involving Insular Life Assurance Co., Ltd. and Serafin Feliciano: 1. In the first case, the court held that Insular Life must pay the insurance claim, as their agent knowingly provided false information on the insured's application that differed from the truthful answers provided. An insurer cannot avoid liability if their agent commits fraud without the applicant's knowledge. 2. Upon reconsideration, the Supreme Court reversed their previous decision. They held that when the insured signed the application in blank, authorizing the agent to fill it out, he was responsible for any falsification by the agent. The policy was void from the beginning. The insured was only entitled to

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    213 views1 page

    Insular Life Assurance Co

    Uploaded by

    LD
    The document summarizes two court cases involving Insular Life Assurance Co., Ltd. and Serafin Feliciano: 1. In the first case, the court held that Insular Life must pay the insurance claim, as their agent knowingly provided false information on the insured's application that differed from the truthful answers provided. An insurer cannot avoid liability if their agent commits fraud without the applicant's knowledge. 2. Upon reconsideration, the Supreme Court reversed their previous decision. They held that when the insured signed the application in blank, authorizing the agent to fill it out, he was responsible for any falsification by the agent. The policy was void from the beginning. The insured was only entitled to

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    You are on page 1of 1

    E.

    CONCEALMENT AND REPRESENTATION


    Insular Life Assurance Co., Ltd. vs Serafin Feliciano (1941)
    FACTS:
    Evaristo Feliciano was issued an insurance policy by Insular Life. In September 1935, he
    died. His heirs (Serafin Feliciano et al) filed an insurance claim but Insular Life denied the
    application as it averred that Felicianos application was attended by fraud. It was later found
    in court that the insurance agent and the medical examiner of Insular Life who assisted
    Feliciano in signing the application knew that Feliciano was already suffering from
    tuberculosis; that they were aware of the true medical condition of Feliciano yet they still
    made it appear that he was healthy in the insurance application form; that Feliciano signed
    the application in blank and the agent filled the information for him.
    ISSUE: Whether or not Insular Life can avoid the insurance policy by reason of the fact that
    its agent knowingly and intentionally wrote down the answers in the application differing from
    those made by Feliciano hence instead of serving the interests of his principal, acts in his own
    or anothers interest and adversely to that of his principal.
    HELD: No. Insular Life must pay the insurance policy. The weight of authority is that if an
    agent of the insurer, after obtaining from an applicant for insurance a correct and truthful
    answer to interrogatories contained in the application for insurance, without knowledge of the
    applicant fills in false answers, either fraudulently or otherwise, the insurer cannot assert the
    falsity of such answers as a defense to liability on the policy, and this is true generally without
    regard to the subject matter of the answers or the nature of the agents duties or limitations on
    his authority, at least if not brought to the attention of the applicant.
    The fact that the insured did not read the application which he signed, is not indicative of bad
    faith. It has been held that it is not negligence for the insured to sign an application without
    first reading it if the insurer by its conduct in appointing the agent influenced the insured to
    place trust and confidence in the agent.
    Insular Life Assurance Co., Ltd. vs Serafin Feliciano (1943)
    FACTS:
    From the courts decision rendered in the case of Insular Life Assurance vs Feliciano (1941),
    Insular Life filed a motion for reconsideration. Insular avers that Feliciano is not entitled to the
    claim because the insurance policy is void ab initio; that he connived with the insurance agent
    and the medical examiner; and that at best, Feliciano is only entitled to refund or the
    reimbursement of what he has paid in premium.
    ISSUE: Whether or not Insular Life is correct.
    HELD: Yes. This time, the Supreme Court held that Insular Lifes contention is correct. When
    Evaristo Feliciano, the applicant for insurance, signed the application in blank and authorized
    the soliciting agent and/or medical examiner of Insular to write the answers for him, he made
    them his own agents for that purpose, and he was responsible for their acts in that
    connection. If they falsified the answers for him, he could not evade the responsibility for the
    falsification. He was not supposed to sign the application in blank. He knew that the answers
    to the questions therein contained would be the basis of the policy, and for that very reason
    he was required with his signature to vouch for truth thereof.

    You might also like