Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Simeon Del Rosario vs. Equitable Ins. - Casualty
Simeon Del Rosario vs. Equitable Ins. - Casualty
PAREDES, J.:
Insured, the Company shall pay the amount set opposite such
injury:
344
This policy shall not cover disappearance of the Insured nor shall
it cover Death, Disability, Hospital fees, or Loss of Time, caused to
the insured:
x x x (h.) By drowning except as a consequence of the wrecking
or disablement in the Philippine waters of a passenger steam or
motor vessel in which the Insured is travelling as a farepaying
passenger; x x x."
"IV. DROWNING
LOSS COMPUTATION
Amount of Insurance....................................................... P1,000.00
________
vvvvv
x x x x x x x x x
'Part I of the policy fixes specific amounts as indemnities in case of
deaths resulting from 'bodily injury which is effected solely thru violence,
external, visible and accidental means' but, Part I of the Policy is not
applicable in case of death by drowning because death by drowning is not
one resulting from 'bodily injury which is effected solely thru violent,
www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000016cafaba1dab409812f003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 4/7
8/20/2019 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 008
x x x x x x x x x
Besides, on the face of the policy Exhibit 'A' itself, death by
drowning is a ground for recovery apart from the bodily injury
because death by bodily injury is covered by Part I of the policy
while death by drowning is covered by Part VI thereof. But while
the policy mentions specific amounts that may be recovered
347
for death for bodily injury, yet, there is not specific amount
mentioned in the policy for death thru drowning although the
latter is, under Part VI of the policy, a ground for recovery
thereunder. Since the defendant has bound itself to pay P1,000.00
to P3,000.00, as indemnity for the death of the insured but the
policy does not positively state any definite amount that may be
recovered in case of death by drowning, there is an ambiguity in
this respect in the policy, which ambuiguity must be interpreted
in favor of the insured and strictly against the insurer so as to
allow a greater indemnity.
x x x x x x x x x
x x x plaintiff is therefore 'entitled to recover P3,000.00, The
defendant had already paid the amount of P1,000 to the plaintiff
so that there still remains a balance of P2,000.00 of the amount to
which plaintiff is entitled to recover under the policy Exhibit 'A'.
The plaintiff asks for an award of P10,000.00 as attorney's fees
and expenses of litigation. However, since it is evident that the
defendant had not acted in bad faith in refusing to pay plaintiff's
claim, the Court cannot award plaintiff's claim for attorney's fees
and expenses of litigation.
IN VIEW OF THE FOREGOING, the Court hereby reconsiders
and sets aside its decision dated July 21, 1958 and hereby renders
judgment ordering the defendant to pay plaintiff the sum of Two
Thousand (P2,000.00) Pesos and to pay the costs."
www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000016cafaba1dab409812f003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 5/7
8/20/2019 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 008
www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000016cafaba1dab409812f003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 6/7
8/20/2019 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 008
Judgment affirmed.
349
www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000016cafaba1dab409812f003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 7/7