FORTUNE INSURANCE AND SURETY CO., INC. v. CA GR No.

115278 May 23, 1995 FACTS Respondent Producers Bank of the Philippines armored vehicle was robbed in transit, of seven hundred twenty-five thousand pesos (Php 725,000.00) that it was transferring from its branch in Pasay to its main branch in Makati. To mitigate their loss, respondent claimed the amount from their insurer, petitioner Fortune Insurance and Surety Co. Petitioner refused to pay as the loss is excluded from the coverage of the insurance policy under the general exceptions which states that Fortune Insurance will not be liable for any loss caused by any dishonest, fraudulent or criminal act of the insured or any officer, employee, partner, director, trustee or authorized representative of the Insured whether acting alone or in conjunction with others. And since the driver (Magalong) and security guard (Atiga) of the armored vehicle were charged with three others as liable for the robbery, Fortune denied respondent bank of its insurance claim. The RTC and CA ruled in favor of respondent bank. ISSUE WON recovery is precluded under the general exemption clause. HELD Yes. Producers Bank entrusted the three with the specific duty to safely transfer the money to its head office, with Alampay (bank teller) to be responsible for its custody in transit; Magalong to drive the armored vehicle which would carry the money; and Atiga to provide the needed security for the money, the vehicle, and his two other companions. In short, for these particular tasks, the three acted as agents of Producers. A "representative" is defined as one who represents or stands in the place of another; one who represents others or another in a special capacity, as an agent, and is interchangeable with "agent." As such, Fortune is exempt from liability under the general exceptions clause of the insurance policy.