Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 94 views

    4-Ins-Perez v. Ca

    Uploaded by

    Joesil Dianne
    Primitivo Perez had an insurance policy of P20,000 with BF Lifeman Insurance Corporation since 1980. In 1987, an agent convinced Perez to increase coverage to P50,000 and Perez's wife paid the deposit. However, the agent lost the application form, causing delay. Perez then died in a boating accident in November 1987 before the increased coverage was approved. BF Lifeman later approved the increased policy without knowing Perez had died. Perez's wife claimed the increased amount but was denied. The Court ruled there was no consummated insurance contract for the increased amount because the conditions of policy approval and delivery while in good health had not been met due to Perez's death. Delay in processing the application also did not constitute

    Copyright:

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

    4-Ins-Perez v. Ca

    Uploaded by

    Joesil Dianne
    94 views2 pages
    Primitivo Perez had an insurance policy of P20,000 with BF Lifeman Insurance Corporation since 1980. In 1987, an agent convinced Perez to increase coverage to P50,000 and Perez's wife paid the deposit. However, the agent lost the application form, causing delay. Perez then died in a boating accident in November 1987 before the increased coverage was approved. BF Lifeman later approved the increased policy without knowing Perez had died. Perez's wife claimed the increased amount but was denied. The Court ruled there was no consummated insurance contract for the increased amount because the conditions of policy approval and delivery while in good health had not been met due to Perez's death. Delay in processing the application also did not constitute

    Original Title

    4-INS-PEREZ V. CA

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Primitivo Perez had an insurance policy of P20,000 with BF Lifeman Insurance Corporation since 1980. In 1987, an agent convinced Perez to increase coverage to P50,000 and Perez's wife paid the deposit. However, the agent lost the application form, causing delay. Perez then died in a boating accident in November 1987 before the increased coverage was approved. BF Lifeman later approved the increased policy without knowing Perez had died. Perez's wife claimed the increased amount but was denied. The Court ruled there was no consummated insurance contract for the increased amount because the conditions of policy approval and delivery while in good health had not been met due to Perez's death. Delay in processing the application also did not constitute

    Copyright:

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

    4-Ins-Perez v. Ca

    Uploaded by

    Joesil Dianne
    Primitivo Perez had an insurance policy of P20,000 with BF Lifeman Insurance Corporation since 1980. In 1987, an agent convinced Perez to increase coverage to P50,000 and Perez's wife paid the deposit. However, the agent lost the application form, causing delay. Perez then died in a boating accident in November 1987 before the increased coverage was approved. BF Lifeman later approved the increased policy without knowing Perez had died. Perez's wife claimed the increased amount but was denied. The Court ruled there was no consummated insurance contract for the increased amount because the conditions of policy approval and delivery while in good health had not been met due to Perez's death. Delay in processing the application also did not constitute

    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 2

    PEREZ V.

    CA
    G.R. No. 112329. January 28, 2000

    Facts
    Primitivo B. Perez is insured with private respondent BF Lifeman insurance Corp since 1980 for P20,000.00. On
    October 1987, an agent of the insurance corporation, Rodolfo Lalog (Lalog) convinced Perez to increase the
    coverage to P50,000.00. Perez’ wife paid the deposit. However, Lalog lost the application form and so delay took
    place in processing the application form.

    Unfortunately, on Nov. 25, 1987, Perez died in an accident riding in a banca which capsized during a storm. At the
    time of his death, the applications for the increased coverage were still in the provincial lots under the insurance
    policies of the deceased. Without knowing that Perez died on November 25, 1987, BF Lifeman Insurance
    Corporation approved the application and issued the corresponding policy for the P50,000.00. His wife then went to
    Manila to claim the benefits. She was paid under the first insurance policy but was refused of the claim under the
    increased coverage of P50,000.00. The insurance company maintained that the insurance had not been perfected at
    the time of death of the insured.

    On September 21, 1990, BF Lifeman filed a complaint for rescission of contract. Meanwhile herein petitioner filed a
    counterclaim for collection of the amount under the increased policy.

    Lower Court’s Ruling: ruled in favor of the petitioner.


    CA Ruling: reversed the decision.
     the insurance contract for the increased indemnity could not have been perfected since at the time the
    policy was issued, Primitivo was already dead.

    Before the SC, the instant petition was filed on the ground that there was a consummated contract because the
    condition of the policy was potestative, being dependent upon the will of the insurance company only and was
    therefore null and void.

    ISSUE 1: W/N THERE WAS A CONSUMMATED CONTRACT OF INSURANCE


    HELD: No. Insurance is a contract whereby, for a stipulated consideration, one party undertakes to compensate the
    other for loss on a specified subject by specified perils. A contract, on the other hand, is a meeting of the minds
    between two persons whereby one binds himself, with respect to the other to give something or to render some
    service. Consent must be manifested by the meeting of the offer and the acceptance upon the thing and the cause
    which are to constitute the contract. The offer must be certain and the acceptance absolute.

    Here, when Primitivo filed an application for insurance, paid P2,075.00 and submitted the results of his medical
    examination, his application was subject to the acceptance of private respondent BF Lifeman Insurance Corporation.
    The perfection of the contract of insurance between the deceased and respondent corporation was further
    conditioned upon compliance with the following requisites stated in the application form:
    "there shall be no contract of insurance unless and until a policy is issued on this application and that the
    said policy shall not take effect until the premium has been paid and the policy delivered to and accepted by
    me/us in person while I/We, am/are in good health."

    The assent of private respondent BF Lifeman Insurance Corporation therefore was not given when it merely received
    the application form and all the requisite supporting papers of the applicant. Under the abovementioned provision, it is
    only when the applicant pays the premium and receives and accepts the policy while he is in good health that the
    contract of insurance is deemed to have been perfected.

    W/N the condition imposed by Insurer is potestative being dependent upon the will of the corporation and is
    therefore null and void
    HELD: No. A potestative condition depends upon the exclusive will of one of the parties. For this reason, it is
    considered void (Art. 1182).

    In the case at bar, the following conditions were imposed by the respondent company for the perfection of the
    contract of insurance: (a) a policy must have been issued; (b) the premiums paid; and (c) the policy must have been
    delivered to and accepted by the applicant while he is in good health.

    The condition imposed by the corporation that the policy must have been delivered to and accepted by the applicant
    while he is in good health can hardly be considered as a potestative or facultative condition. On the contrary, the
    health of the applicant at the time of the delivery of the policy is beyond the control or will of the insurance company.
    Rather, the condition is a suspensive one whereby the acquisition of rights depends upon the happening of an
    event which constitutes the condition. In this case, the suspensive condition was the policy must have been delivered
    and accepted by the applicant while he is in good health. There was non-fulfillment of the condition, however,
    inasmuch as the applicant was already dead at the time the policy was issued. Hence, the non-fulfillment of the
    condition resulted in the non-perfection of the contract.

    W/N DELAY OF THE INSURER IN ACTING ON THE APPLICATION CONCSTITUTES ACCEPTANCE


    HELD: NO.
    A contract of insurance, like other contracts, must be assented to by both parties either in person or by their agents.
    So long as an application for insurance has not been either accepted or rejected, it is merely an offer or proposal to
    make a contract. The contract, to be binding from the date of application, must have been a completed contract, one
    that leaves nothing to be done, nothing to be completed, nothing to be passed upon, or determined, before it shall
    take effect. There can be no contract of insurance unless the minds of the parties have met in agreement.

    Thus, respondent corporation cannot be held liable for gross negligence. An application is a mere offer which
    requires the overt act of the insurer for it to ripen into a contract. Delay in acting on the application does not
    constitute acceptance even though the insured has forwarded his first premium with his application. The corporation
    may not be penalized for the delay in the processing of the application papers.

    Re: Rescission: Rescission presupposes the existence of a valid contract. A contract which is null and void is no
    contract at all and hence could not be the subject of rescission.

    You might also like