Aisporna v.

CA of People, 113SCRA459 AISPORNA VS CA Facts Mapalad Aisporna was accused of acting as an agent in soliciting insurance without securing the certificate of authority from the Insurance Commission in violation of section 189 of the Insurance Act. Mapalad contended that being the wife of a true agent, Rodolfo, she naturally helped him in his work. She said the policy issued to Isidro, a cient, was merely a renewal at the time when her husband was absent. Issue Was Mapalad an insurance agent within the scope or intent of the Insurance Act? Held No. The first paragraph of section 189 prohibits a person from acting as agent, subagent or broker in the solicitation or procurement of applications for insurance without first procuring a certificate of authority so to act from the Insurance Commissioner; the second paragraph defines who is an insurance agent within the intent of the section; and the third paragraph prescribes the penalty to be imposed for its violation. Legislative intent must be ascertained from a consideration of the statute as a whole. The particular words, clauses and phrases should not be studied as detached and isolated expressions, but the whole and every part of the statute must be considered in fixing the meaning of any of its parts and in order to produce harmonious whole.

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful