IGNACIO SATURNINO vs. THE PHILIPPINE AMERICAN LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY G.R. No.

L-16163, 28 February 1963 FACTS: Estefania Saturnino obtained a 20-year endowment non-medical insurance. This kind of policy dispenses with the medical examination of the applicant usually required in ordinary life policies. However, two months prior to the issuance of the policy, Saturnino was operated on for cancer, involving mastectomy of the right breast. She did not make a disclosure thereof in her application for insurance. On the contrary, she stated therein that she did not have, nor had she ever had, among other ailments listed in the application, cancer or other tumors. Sometime after, Saturnino died of pneumonia, secondary to influenza. Appellants here, who are her surviving husband and minor child, respectively, demanded payment of the face value of the policy. The claim was rejected and hence an action was subsequently instituted.

ISSUE: Whether the insured made such false representations of material facts as to avoid the policy

HELD: YES. The Insurance Law provides that “materiality is to be determined not by the event, but solely by the probable and reasonable influence of the facts upon the party to whom the communication is due, in forming his estimate of the proposed contract, or in making his inquiries.” The waiver of medical examination renders even more material the information required of the applicant concerning previous condition of health and diseases suffered, for such information necessarily constitutes an important factor which the insurer takes into consideration in deciding whether to issue the policy or not. It is logical to assume that if appellee had been properly apprised of the insured’s medical history she would at least have been made to undergo medical examination in order to determine her insurability. A concealment, whether intentional or unintentional, entitles the insurer to rescind the contract of insurance, concealment being defined as “negligence to communicate that which a party knows and ought to communicate”. The basis of the rule vitiating the contract in cases of concealment is that it misleads or deceives the insurer into accepting the risk, or accepting it at the rate of premium agreed upon. The insurer, relying upon the belief that the assured will disclose every material facts within his actual or presumed knowledge, is misled into a belief that the circumstance withheld does not exist, and he is thereby induced to estimate the risk upon a false basis that it does not exist. The judgment appealed from, dismissing the complaint and awarding the return to appellants of the premium already, paid, with interest at 6% up to January 29, 1959, affirmed, with costs against appellants.

True intention of the policy was to protect the liabilities of the insured towards the passengers of the motor vehicle & the public or third persons in other words. Insured & heirs of Carlito filed a complaint against the Company to collect proceeds of the policy. Counsels did not suggest the settlement of the issue by arbitration. although not a party to the contract. No. WON the Coquias (heirs of the driver) have a contractual relationwith the company & thus entitled to indemnity. 2. 1. Feb. As regards to the 2nd issue: Claim is based on Sec. Company will indemnify the Insured in the event of accident caused by/arising out of the use of Motor Vehicle against all sums w/Insured will be legally liable to pay in respect of death/bodily injury to any fare-paying passenger including the driver. Exception is the well-known principle concerning contracts pour autrui. 1. Such may be considered as a waiver of their respective rights to demand arbitration. insofar as they can apply. to the decision of 2 arbitrators. 1961: Fieldmen’s Insurance (Company) issued in favor of Manila Yellow Taxicab (Insured) a common carrier accident insurance policy from the period of Dec. Insured filed for a claim of P5k. the Company will indemnify his personal representatives as though they were the Insured. WON insured failed to comply w/the provisions of the policyconcerning arbitration. fulfill & be subject to the terms of this policy.R. before the stipulation in his favor has been revoked. 1962: Insured’s taxicab driven by Carlito Coquia met an accident as a result of w/c. Company has the option to make the indemnity payable directly to the claimants/heirs of claimants w/ or w/o securing the consent of or prior notification to the Insured. The heirs have a direct cause of action. 10. Exception: CC Art. FIELDMEN'S INSURANCE CO. Terms of the policy clearly show that the heirs of the driver are entitled to indemnity. enforcement of w/c may be demanded by a 3rd party for whose benefit it was made. 1311 – If a contract should contain some stipulation in favor of a 3rd person. observe. INC. and/or inspector riding in the motor vehicle insured at the time of accident/injury. They could have maintained an independent action w/o the assistance of the insured. This is further strengthened by the fact that the driver paid50% of the corresponding premiums w/c were deducted from his weekly commissions. 1968 . General rule: only parties to a contract may bring an action based thereon. All the more that they can properly join the latter in filing this complaint.2. none of the parties invoked this section or made any reference to arbitration during the negotiations before case was instituted. Thus. he may demand its fulfillment provided he communicated his acceptance to the obligor before its revocation. Insured rejected such & made a counter-offer of P4k but such was rejected. ISSUES: 1. Decision appealed from affirmed in toto November 29. Trial court sentenced company to pay plaintiffs P4k + costs. 1. G. RULING: As regards to the first issue: YES.. Company then offered to pay P2k.MELECIO COQUIA ET AL vs. 1961 up to Dec.3. L-23276 FACTS: Dec. 17 of the policy w/c provides that should any difference/dispute arise. conductor. Terms of the contract:1. However. In the event of the death of any person entitled to indemnity. the driver died. 1962. it shall be referred to the decision of a single arbitrator agreed upon by both parties or failing such agreement.

17 December 1955 FACTS: Plaintiff-appellee owned four bodegas used for the storage of copra and hemp. the insurance company refused payment. for the reason that knowing fully all that the number of hydrants demanded therein never existed from the very beginning. and after it had misled the defendant into believing that the policies were effective. Consequently. filing of fraudulent claims.000. G. ISSUE: Whether or not the insurer company is liable HELD: YES.81 which was later reduced to the full amount of the insurance. Php370. it is mere so for the latter.R. and that the fire had been deliberately caused by the insured or by other persons in connivance with him. . were completely destroyed by fire of an undetermined origin. LTD. However. the appellant nevertheless issued the policies in question subject to such warranty. since its dominant bargaining position carries with it stricter responsibility. to the extent of its interest. three of the bodegas. The contract of insurance is one of perfect good faith (uferrimae fidei) not for the insured alone. were insured with the defendant company since 1937 and the loss made payable to the Philippine National Bank as mortgage of the hemp and crops. belonging to the municipality of Tabaco. and that he actually had only 2 with a further pair nearby. The damage was determined to be equivalent to P398. claiming violation of warranties and conditions. and received the corresponding premiums. The latter conducted an extensive investigation. If moreover argued that since the bodegas insured had an external wall perimeter of 500 meters or 1. Qua Chee Gan notified the insurance company of his loss.00. We find no reversible error in the judgment appealed from. in fact.QUA CHEE GAN vs. The SC is in agreement with the trial court that the appellant is barred by waiver (or rather estoppel) to claim violation of the so-called fire hydrants warranty. but equally so for the insurer. Sometime after. together with the merchandise inside.640 feet. together with their contents. Costs against the appellant. the appellee should have 11 fire hydrants in the compound. No. It would be perilously close to conniving at fraud upon the insured to allow appellant to claims now as void ab initio the policies that it had issued to the plaintiff without warning of their fatal defect. L-4611. These buildings.562. LAW UNION AND ROCK INSURANCE CO. of which it was informed. wherefore the same is hereby affirmed..

covering any of the property hereby insured. which. such as shoes. In its answer. Manila. which. this time from the Federal Insurance Company. 1962.000. other insurance without the consent of petitioner would ipso facto avoid the contract. all benefits accruing from the policy were deemed forfeited.00 covering the same properties. is interested in preventing the situation in which a fire would be profitable to the insured. Any false declaration or breach or this condition will render this policy null and void. 1962.in nor endorsed on Policy No. The public.000. Chua Soon Poon Oliva Yap's son-in-law. except as may be stated on the face of this policy there is no other insurance on the property hereby covered and no other insurance is allowed except by the consent of the Company endorsed hereon. On April 19. At dawn on December 19. The validity of a clause in a fire insurance policy to the effect that the procurement of additional insurance without the consent of the insurer renders ipso facto the policy void is wellsettled. or endorsed on this Policy by or on behalf of the Company before the occurrence of any loss or damage. OLIVA YAP. being informed of the fact. for payment of the face value of her fire insurance policy. unless. and its judgment was affirmed in full by the Court of Appeals. asking. petitioner alleged that no property belonging to plaintiff Yap and covered by the insurance policy was destroyed by the fire.R. however. and unless such notice be given and the particulars of such insurance or insurances be stated in. in order to entitle himself to the benefit of the contract. CHUA SOON POON . was in charge of the store. We deem it unnecessary to consider the other defenses interposed by petitioner. represented by her attorney-in-fact. It is understood that. respondent Yap took out Fire Insurance Policy No. 4219. 1962. 4219." In view of the above conclusion. The trial court decided for plaintiff Oliva Yap. in violation of the express stipulations in Policy No. an insurance policy for P20. upon denial she filed with the Court of First Instance of Manila the present complaint. 1962 of Policy No. hence. on the ground of "breach and/or violation of any and/or all terms and conditions" of Policy No. L-36232 December 19. and yet to bind the other party to obligations. vs. a fire broke out in the building housing respondent Yap's above-mentioned store. but for those stipulation would not have been entered into.000. Still later. Hence Yap filed an insurance claim. Inc. was not noted as a co-insurance in Policy No. wherever the specified conditions should occur. FACTS: Oliva Yap was the owner of a store in a two-storey building located at No. The obvious purpose of the aforesaid requirement in the policy is to prevent over-insurance and thus avert the perpetration of fraud. 4219 in favor of respondent Yap.. 4216 from petitioner Pioneer Insurance & Surety Corporation with a face value of P25. but the same was denied in petitioner's letter of May 17. No. procured without notice to and the written consent of petitioner Pioneer Insurance & Surety Corporation and. among others." At the time of the insurance on April 19. therefore.00 covering her stocks. and that Yap took out an insurance policy from another insurance company without petitioner's knowledge and/or endorsement. sandals and step-ins. 1963. 856 Juan Luna Street. he has no right to ask the court to dispense with the performance of his own part of the agreement.00 issued by the Great American Insurance Company covering the same properties was noted on said policy as co-insurance. or on September 26. And as stipulated in the above-quoted provisions of such policy "all benefit under this policy shall be forfeited. for he assents to comply with all the stipulation on his side. all benefits under this Policy shall be forfeited. It required no affirmative act of election on the part of the company to make operative the clause avoiding the contract. Among the conditions in the policy executed by the parties are the following: "The Insured shall give notice to the Company of any insurance or insurances already effected. it consented to the additional insurance. 1974 PIONEER INSURANCE AND SURETY CORPORATION. 471 of defendant. which new policy was. Its obligations ceased. office furniture. where in 1962 she sold shopping bags and footwear. as well as the insurer. upon reason or principle. ISSUE: Whether YAP's claimed with Pioneer Insurance is without merit because of violation committed by her on the terms and conditions (co-insurance clause) on the policy contract HELD: The SC held that by the plain terms of the policy. or which may subsequently be effected. . According to Justice Story: "The insured has no right to complain. respondent Oliva Yap took out another fire insurance policy for P20. that Yap's claim was filed out of time. and the said store was burned. fixtures and fittings of every kind and description. 4219.G.

INC. the taxi he was driving collided with a Transport Taxicab at the intersection of Old Sta. The other issue made by Capital Insurance is that by joining the heirs of Alfredo Monje as a party. resulting in his death.. At the time of the accident. The amount for which each passenger.. The fulfillment of such statutory obligation cannot be the basis for evading the clear.R. was employed as taxi driver by the Taurus Taxi Co. Capital Insurance & Surety Co. It is too well-settled to need the citation of authorities that what the law requires enters into and forms part of every contract.00.. On December 6. but despite demands.. including the driver. the previous payment made of the compensation under such legislation is no obstacle by virtue of a clause like that invoked by defendant-appellant to the payment of indemnity under the insurance policy. INC. Social Security System that sickness benefits under the Social Security Act may be recovered simultaneously with disability benefits under the Workmen's Compensation Act. vs. THE CAPITAL INSURANCE & SURETY CO.. The Workmen's Compensation Act.. plaintiff Taurus Taxi Co. After the issuance of policy No.. made representations "for the payment of the insurance benefit corresponding to her and her children since it was issued in its name. Inc. v. or strictly. it would appear indisputable that the obligation of Capital Insurance under the policy had not in any wise been extinguished.. the only legal remedy available to it." The basis for such an allegation is one of the conditions set forth in the policy. committed a breach of policy condition and thus forfeited whatever benefits. Inc. Inc. FELICITAS V. Mapa Streets. Inc. Capital Insurance company refused and still refuses to pay them. promise or payment shall be made by or on behalf of the insured without the written consent of the Company which shall be entitled if it so desires to take over and conduct in his name the defense or settlement of any claim or to prosecute in his name for its own benefit any claim for indemnity or damages or otherwise and shall have full discretion in the conduct of any proceedings and in the settlement of any claim and the Insured shall give all such information and assistance as the Company may require . Manila. 1968 TAURUS TAXI CO.. if any.000. FACTS: Alfredo Monje.. ET AL. promise. explicitly requires that an employee suffering any injury or death arising out of or in the course of employment be compensated. 101. to which it might be entitled under appellant's policy.G. if open to the construction contended for by the insured. MONJE. Mesa and V. 1962. its rights under the contract of insurance to which it is a party. offer. Keller Co. is insured is P5. L-23491 July 31. ISSUE: Whether the heirs of ALFREDO MONJE be entitled to the proceeds of the insurance policy issued by Capital Insurance Company even if there is an existing indemnity contract with another insurance company at the time of his death. to be construed most strongly. for it merely seeks to enforce. by court action.. HELD: The Supreme Court held that what is prohibited by the insurance policy in question is that any "authorized driver of plaintiff Taurus Taxi Co.. Inc. issued by CAPITAL INSURANCE & SURETY CORP. Inc. there was subsisting and in force Commercial Vehicle Comprehensive Policy No. explicit and mandatory terms of a policy. or payment by the company." . benefit corresponding to her and her children. the heirs of the said deceased are not entitled to indemnity under the insurance policy issued by it for the reason that the latter policy contains a stipulation that "the company will indemnify any authorized driver provided that such authorized driver is not entitled to indemnity under any other policy.. 737 . against the insurer and liberally in favor of the contention of the insured. A contract of insurance couched in language chosen by the insurer is.The institution of the action cannot possibly be construed as an admission.. 101. After which Taurus Taxi Co. Inc. In the same way as was held in Benguet Consolidated. . offer. which means in accordance with the rule contra proferentem." should not be "entitled to any indemnity under any policy". Ltd. A. which was issued to Taurus Taxi Co. No. 737. Thus: No admission. alleged "that in view of the fact that the deceased Alfredo Monje was entitled to indemnity under another insurance policy issued by Ed. to herein Taurus Taxi Co. Inc..

it is either because it was willing to waive such disqualification. 1982 REGINA L. On May 31. through the negligence or incompetence of its employees for which it has only itself to blame. vs. 1969 or FORTY-FIVE (45) DAYS after the insurance coverage was applied for. On June 7. She filled up the blank application form given to her and filed the same with the insurance corporation. Her claim having been denied. a risk covered by the policy. occurred on May 31. ISSUE: Whether the petitioner in this case is not entitled to the proceeds of the insurance taken by the insured because the insured is more than 60 years of age when she applied for the insurance as the age is one the condition being violated in the said policy. the insurance corporation is already deemed in estoppel. submitting all the necessary papers and other requisites with the insurance company. EDILLON. Despite such information which could hardly be overlooked in the application form. The policy was to be effective for a period of 90 days. If the private respondent failed to act. QUEZON CITY FACTS: Sometime in April 1969. There was sufficient time for the private respondent to process the application and to notice that the applicant was over 60 years of age and thereby cancel the policy on that ground if it was minded to do so. the policy was null and void. It inaction to revoke the policy despite a departure from the exclusionary condition contained in the said policy constituted a waiver of such condition. Lapuz was not concealed to the insurance company. 1969. Lapuz its Certificate of Insurance No. . Lapuz applied with The Insurance corporation for insurance coverage against accident and injuries. the respondent insurance corporation relies on a provision contained in the Certificate of Insurance. the respondent insurance corporation received her payment of premium and issued the corresponding certificate of insurance without question. The accident which resulted in the death of the insured. 12886. the respondent insurance corporation issued to Carmen O. Edillon instituted this action in the Court of First Instance of Rizal on August 27. 1969. It was reasoned out that a policy of insurance being a contract of adhesion. Carmen O. Her application for insurance coverage which was on a printed form furnished by private respondent and which contained very few items of information clearly indicated her age of the time of filing the same to be almost 65 years of age. 128866. considering its prominence thereon and its materiality to the coverage applied for. MANILA BANKERS LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION and the COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE OF RIZAL. 1904. the insured in this case. Carmen O. and no risk on the part of the insurance corporation had arisen therefrom. petitioner Regina L. a sister of the insured and who was the named beneficiary in the policy. she paid the sum of P20. HELD: The Supreme Court held that the age of the insured Carmen 0. L-34200 September 30. Edillon. Upon the filing of said application and the payment of the premium on the policy applied for. 1969 or during the effectivity of Certificate of Insurance No. it simply overlooked such fact. or. excluding its liability to pay claims under the policy in behalf of "persons who are under the age of sixteen (16) years of age or over the age of sixty (60) years" It is pointed out that the insured being over sixty (60) years of age when she applied for the insurance coverage.00 representing the premium for which she was issued the corresponding receipt signed by an authorized agent of the respondent insurance corporation. Regina L. upon learning from its terms that she could not have been qualified under the conditions stated in said contract. It was further argued by the trial court that the ruling calling for a liberal interpretation of an insurance contract in favor of the insured and strictly against the insurer may not be applied in the present case in view of the peculiar facts and circumstances obtaining therein.G. In the said application form which was dated April 15. as assisted by her husband. In resisting the claim of the petitioner. No. it was the duty of the insured to know the terms of the contract he or she is entering into. On the same date. 1969. Under the circumstances. Lapuz died in a vehicular accident in the North Diversion Road. The trial court sustained the contention of the insurance company and dismissed the complaint.R. what she should have done is simply to ask for a refund of the premium that she paid. she gave the date of her birth as July 11. MARCIAL EDILLON. filed her claim for the proceeds of the insurance. BRANCH V.

why did it not inform private respondent about it? After all. The promissory notes were secured by a Chattel Mortgage executed by the petitioner spouses on the vehicle in favor of TQA. FACTS: Spouses Mario and Corazon Villalva issued forty-eight (48) checks totaling P547. 1996 to October 21.392. For the period of August 14. the respondent caused the enforcement of a writ of replevin and recovered possession of the mortgaged vehicle.00 to cover installment payments due on promissory notes executed in favor of Toyota. this petition. or on April 19. It is understood that MORTGAGEE has no obligation to carry out aforementioned authority to procure insurance for the account of the MORTGAGOR.02 allegedly representing unpaid obligations on the promissory notes and mortgage as of January 31. vs. viz the MORTGAGOR covenants and agrees that they will cause the property mortgaged to be insured against loss or damage by accident. As a consequence. As a rule. 165661 August 28. (2) when from the nature and the circumstances of the obligation it appears that the designation of the time when the thing is to be delivered or the service is to be rendered was a controlling motive for the establishment of the contract. 1997 and paid a P14. or (3) when demand would be useless. petitioner spouses procured the necessary insurance but did not deliver the same to the respondent until January 17. None of the exceptions are present in this case.523.G. respondent sent a letter of demand to the petitioners for P12. On February 10. The same was affirmed by the Regional Trial Court but when appealed it was reversed by the Court of Appeals. filed a complaint for Recovery of Possession with Replevin with the Metropolitan Trial Court of Pasay City. 1999. and endorse and deliver the policies to the mortgagor. theft and fire. Petitioners asserted that they insured the mortgaged vehicle in compliance with the Deed of Chattel Mortgage. this Court held that the mortgagors had not defaulted. If petitioner was aware that the insurance coverage was inadequate. In lieu thereof. 1999. The evidence shows that the petitioner spouses faithfully complied with the obligation to insure the mortgaged vehicle from 1993 until 1996. demand by a creditor is not necessary in order that delay may exist: (1) when the obligation or the law expressly so declares. Two weeks later. demand is required before a party may be considered in default. No. Quezon Avenue (TQA) for the purchase of a ’93 Toyota Corolla. theft and fire for a period of one year from date hereof with an insurance company or companies acceptable to the MORTGAGEE…The MORTGAGOR hereby irrevocably authorizes the MORTGAGEE or its assigns to procure for the account of the MORTGAGOR the insurance coverage every year thereafter until the mortgage obligation is fully paid and any money so disbursed shall be payable and shall bear interest and/or finance charge in the same manner as stipulated in the next preceding sentence. 1997. . respondent had the mortgaged vehicle insured for the period of October 21. respondent demanded that petitioner spouses surrender the mortgaged vehicle within five days from notice. In order to get the ’93 Toyota Corolla.R. 1997. hence.939. 1996 to August 14. MARIO & CORAZON VILLALVA. we rule that the petitioners had not defaulted on their obligation to insure the mortgaged vehicle and the condition sine qua non for respondent to exercise its right to pay the insurance premiums over the subject vehicle has not been established. the respondent failed to demand that petitioners comply with their obligation to secure insurance coverage for the mortgaged vehicle. since petitioner was under no obligation to effect renewal thereof. Due to the mortgagee’s failure to notify the mortgagor prior to application of the latter’s payments to the insurance premiums. petitioner spouses were to insure the vehicle against loss or damage by accident. it is but logical that it should relay to private respondents any defect of the insurance coverage before itself assuming the same. which was raffled to Branch 45 thereof. Under the Deed of Chattel Mortgage. as when the obligor has rendered it beyond his power to perform. Metropolitan Trial Court rendered a decision in favor of petitioners. 1999. Following settled jurisprudence.361. RCBC SAVINGS BANK. ISSUE: Whether the petitioners failed to comply with their obligation to insure the subject vehicle under the Deed of Chattel Mortgage which the Deed of Chattel Mortgage requires that the petitioners to: (1) secure the necessary insurance and (2) deliver the policies so endorsed to the respondent on the day of the execution of this mortgage. HELD: The Supreme Court held that petitioners did not default in the performance of their obligation. However. and respondent bank was reimbursed P10.86 by Malayan Insurance Company. 2006 SPS.36 insurance premium. In the case at bar. The insurance policy obtained by respondent was later cancelled due to the insurance policy secured by petitioner spouses over the mortgaged vehicle.

.398 .078 41 .2.

 47.

.943949038:70/ 0-  38:70/ 89.03-.:73 90 .4 80..209..79446:./039.3 .708:941.-/7..8..438039 41 4757473491.

90/7.425.00/8419054.943990.39.07 .5.79410/.425.0/94..394..3903411070/94 5..4397.241! 425./0.4:79 803903...4898   $$&$    9046:.39118! .9574.8 0784190/7.3 9:8 03990/943/0239     38:70/1. %7..90/8:.70...90/ %:8 38:70/ 07841.0/.8700. 2.0.38990425.4:3907 4110741!-:98:...07/0/ 38:70/10/147..40.9:.425.3945.425.! 38:70/700.

-73....8438419054..7:0435../0/ 0 .0 94 904-47 -01470 98 70.059.790894.98 54:7 .943-.90/ 8 .3..422:3.4397..43.90574.943  .0733 .50 .4741..80/907043 .05943 79  1.3.05943 8 900 343 573.7/507843 02.:97:  03147./02.7/89490178988:0 $ 0307.984:/.4.92.43.4397..0733.4397..3/ 981:12039 574.94331.02039 41 ..38420895:.7-97.943   #&  870..439.

47708543/35702:28.990/7.7994 90 .0 905:-.89457490.94: 349 .. 7/ 5.8 2..4797/50784383490747/8  %881:7907897039030/-901.7003990/943/0239 %7:03903943419054. 5.7 84 9.9 90 0784190/7.075. -0/02.4397.. . 2.943 3 8 1..3/0/ - .990.79 147 480 -03019 9 .7/8905.9  -01470 90 895:.0..8 -003 70.8803078419024947./0  .47 .40/  %0728 41 90 54.99./ 4190.-90841 9038:70/94.07.0.

 070/0/:.0.9.4:/.943.33/0503/039.30/.02.39..943 %0.:8041../70..42288438  %0078.90/1742800....

990.8889.3.0419038:70/ 9024709.80/43$0.490 ..28-.35745074390.425. 419054.7/894903/88:0 ..39   870.990731398.

0.3/110703./089.574.984:/..

843.943 47 2.7908 3.079894/02.8.-07010770/9490 /0.9.7-97.943  0.7-97.0 94 .7002039  94 90 /0.550.38:.830.0/1742.37010703.3/..947.438/070/.07  3430 41 90 5.84341.0741907 70850.843 41  ./85:90.7908471.40/ 98 80..9478  40..7-97.-0.9438 -01470 .780  98.943 /:73 90 3049.7-97.80.7-97.943 $:.2. .700/ :543--495./0 .8 3899:90/  4:3808 // 3498:08990809902039419088:0-.11720/39494               .

82479..383.. .550.4.089.7458 949009039 41983907089  $420920 .23..9077085438-9  0 13/ 34 70..433.39.3/ 70.9 90 .39              .2.098/423.99./010./439.8.-.1907  9700 41 90 -4/0.39 8 -.3/80 38/0  070 .730.39 30.:/:039 .0/ 1742  0701470 90 8. .04190025.9 44/ 1.48094.3418488 %0.90 .94341. .4390398 07038:70/990/0103/.39.9 41.3.9.-09490!5530.7- -043394 902:3.9070894550 94.39394-00.9 90 170 .309073.0 41 .0.39-.90.3/ .5500084:/.8314720/ ./05.3/.0790088 88:0/ 90 54.02-07 %$ !.24:39 41 90 38:7.0.3.841479038:707 31.943.0 90 -4/0.770/ -.38990.943 %0/./280/90/0103/.07 0890/ 1742 90 .07 47 7.08 3 6:08943 8:-0.425.3/ 025  %080 -:/38 9409079907.0 1/0  349 147 90 38:70/ .3.8 .9343 1: .9907 83.77.4397..9 83.0/170/7..4/.7:0/ 9...2.20 8 070- .11720/ 4898. 9.8 38:70/..07 .039 94 !   ./88:0/94905.457.7.0 8 430 41 50710.:/:5439038:70/94.39 1479070.3983 90.425.3994.550.4254:3/ ...941%..7002039 9 90 97.3908 .0.943419084 .3.5.9 41 38:7. 00 .3 :3/0907230/ 473  43806:039  ":.309038.3/0/ 90703 30.9 :10772.078-0 07747 3 90 :/2039 .1:79075.3.43/9438  13 41 17.3701:80/5...07 9038:7.2834.8  940907 9 90 207.4   $$& 0907473499038:707.2039 .4.9 9820708414790..391194:9.77..0/ 90 .3/ 9.3.089.4:79 9..07 -0333  90 .733 419071.33 548943.39  .425.9.3911 . .55000 430/ 14:7 -4/0.0/ 94 90 1: ./.3.8 & # $&# %   # 4   0.43/:.550.4 .-3949054.3/.907 70/:.5072090741 20907847  1009 90.03..19079.9 9054.8/0907230/ 94 -0 06:."&.8 :80/ 147 90 8947.8439.9 94 8:.:80/ - 90 38:70/ 47 - 4907 5078438 3 .398.0 .3 34910/ 90 38:7.080700110.550.9907.398 /02.0170 /7.770899897.-0   $  %0 $ 8 3 .425.430 -:906:.77.9:.3/90 4882.9.38.0  %0 .433..3/ 9.550.47708543/35702:28 94:/-05074:8..425090 /089740/ - 170 41 .90/.28  .917.9 90 3:2-07 41 /7..0./ -003 /0-07.0  !5 40.0 9 2  1 24704.

04738:7.0 43 90 5745079 070- .79.3  3.3.07 3/.1 41 90 425.04357 41!4.059 - 90 .4 174250994307!4300738:7.3.0 2039430/89470 .0425.4 38:7.510/.338:7.3/ /08.907  47 43 $05902-07     708543/039 .4.3 38:7...0 .40/ 0.349. 89470 3 .9 &$ %$ .0!4.-4.4...80/0.4741708543/039.994730 3 1.88408 8..3/.3 488 47 /..0 94 90 425.70419089470  357  708543/039 . 94 89470 -:/34. 9070 8 34 4907 38:7.8-:730/ 03.38:7.0 1:739:70  19:708 .3..34907 170 38:7.3.3:.943.90/  .3. 8:-806:039 -0 0110.7 8:.5 944 4:9 .4.943 9 .02-07     .3/905.147! 88:0/-9070. 1.:70/ 94:9 349.08 -0 89.8.0-0.4.  .5 .3/ 90 79903 .3/14490...4 38:7. - 47 43 -0.2.8  411.8.8 2.08 .$443!443 .. .70901443 %0 38:70/ 8.3..:7703. 170-740 4:9 3 90 -:/3 4:83 708543/039 .90/ .073 07 894.4 31.75943 24390. ..3 :3.3/.070/ .  439074:3/41-70.4/  990920419038:7.5 8 .3 41 90 5745079 070- 38:70/ .90/ 43 90 1.3 43 0.03!4./89470.20 574507908  98 920 1742 90 0/07.8/030/350994307 80990741.073 90 8.3.78418:.338:7.3/8905 38  :..03. 30 54.0  .:90/-905.3/.3.3. . 147 !  . .20 574507908 . -0 1471090/  9 8 :3/078944/ 9.00.:.0  $9 .3.3.0 47 38:7.4   9 /. .59444:97038:7.8 .83493490/.43/9438390 54..3 -01470 90 4.20.0 349.9 4   :.4380394190425.0 41 98 54.4. 38:7.8.438039 41 50994307 !43007 38:7.8  40.3 41 .0.2 -:990 8.90/ 3  47 03/4780/ 43 98 !4.94347-70.0  $:709 47547.07390 8.07  574.8 3490/ 43 8..4798./ 54.3.3.3/34 4907 38:7... . 8.3.7908.3. -030198 :3/07 98 !4. # 4  0.5  .3.0 425.83.0 54..0 $:70947547.073 .054.8  '! 7057080390/-07.9  0. 2..7.3.338:7. $97009  .9207..3.70.0 94 .303/4780/07043 31.0. 07038084/84553-.3/ 19938 41 0.3/:30888:.059 .43/943 703/079854.0 41 .3/908./ 0110.3/ 90701470 .8 90 4307 41 .3.5 8843 3 .02-07  ! #$&#$&#% #! #%   . -0 89.:0 41 !  .90/  47 .0 8 .

47.3/.4.94341 .3.

47.3.3807 50994307.0 54.054.3/.8/089740/-901709.83 .90728.3 94:9 50994307 8 340/0.425.3 38:7.3.3..425.3/ 9.4.24349078 1475.4  :543/03.3.5.9.00/9.2.3.3/. 398.9345745079-0433945.054.3911.203941901.:04107 17038:7.5 8.810/4:941920.0..5 944 4:9 ..34907 38:7.8010/9904:7941789 389.9 . 1742 .905708039.070/-9038:7.0 .43/943841!4.39 .3/ .041.3..

80.//943.0.9 070.:80 439054.425.  -:9 147 9480 895:.943 4:/ 349 .438039 41 90 38:707 703/078584 1.//943.94383!4. 070 /0020/ 1471090/  %0 97..3. 170 38:7.0 .9438  .4  03.0.3 90728 41 90 54.039 4.438/07904907/010380839075480/-50994307  !   .4.4380390/9490.-4.4:79 94 /850380 9 90 5071472.4397..3911 .943 43 8 8/0  3 47/07 94 03990 2801 94 90 -03019 41 90 .94.090.0$947%038:70/.80/ :3088 -03314720/41901.9433 .4397.0 41 8 43 5...0 41 90 .:80 41 .9.79 41 90 .43.43/9438 .54.9434117.0 . 38:7..3/ 9:8 .5.9 90 574. .3/.843 47 573.50  0 ./0/ 147 5. 94 90 0110.1704:/-057419.9434190057088895:.-01471090/ %04-.9.8 90 .0 8 94:9 2079 -0. .11720/31:-904:7941550.:/ %05:-.0790850.4....794.47/394:89.:843  0 /002 9 :330. 38:7.0 6:490/ 574.4703/47802039 3.:80.9 - 90 5.1172.8.0  %0 .8438418:..7941 90.8.94343905...../ 706:702039 3 90 54...4/390.3 1470. .90/ 3 90 .3.0..9 9..422990/-07439090728.425.4 38:7.-03019:3/079854. -030198 .0 94:9 90 .079 90 5075097.-4.4397.3.9  .4/90.438039 41 509943074:/5841.9  %0 $ 0/ 9.088.43/9438 84:/4.  4907 38:7..3/98:/2039.94100.4/ 8 0 80990/ 3 347 03/4780/ 43!4. 4   41 /0103/.9438.0 54..4:85:754804190 .3.3942.:80 3 . 8 94 570.  :543 70.89038:707 839070890/3570.4:79 /0.3. ..3/ 09 94 -3/ 90 4907 5.8 34 79 94 .3.0 .0 94:9 90 ..3.7:3 1742 90 54.:7 984-.8 895:.39  3/ .:702039 41 .3.88039894./9 41 ..8  $$& 0907 ! 8 .14708.4397.79 94 4-.9 9.8347994.03939089:.. 90 895:.9490 54.10/..0 -003 039070/ 394 3 ..425 9 .07 38:7.943 .20/ 9 !43007 38:7..9 9706:70/34.-0949038:70/  .7002039  . .04507.

 5.70 349 03990/ 94 3/0239 :3/07 90 38:7.3/ 9:8 1471090/ .3.3/89701:808945.425. $0.0  - ./70383.. 706:708 039078 394 ..054.2039 2..89./0-4743-0.888:0/94 %.070/ 82:9. /7.094.3.30254008:11073.3701:80/.  $$&  09079007841#  -003990/9490574. 08.-0 9.8889./ /0.380-003093:80/ 989440 80990/94300/90.01:/8.4397.3 3/0239 :3/07 .9.4:7804102542039-0.0/3.385479%.9  90 570.9 90 ..2039413/0239 :3/079038:7.4397.3490754.881478:.9 05..550.3/-07.3088-030198:3/0790$4.0 $:7094 3. 4       .3 0.9 2.902 .8 9.304:8 9 /8. ..9706:7089. 1907.  %0 . 31472.7  05..0 .3 .3994905..4803-9038:7078 1 4503 94 90 . -0 70.$970098 .3.59. -70.0 .3.07-030198 1.9 .3.990390780.4:8 5.3349-0 90 -.8.4:.3/2.... 08.0-03019..:7:8 %.24:39 147 .3.38:7./0/ 9../0 41 90 .089.3 54.31./3 90 .474190.943 8 34 4-89.0 !4. .9 . 706:70 %03899:9434190.8/7.59.3/8  .0.425..-02.4 3.943 41 .3.34907 38:7..07574.07 .-.943.9438 147905.3  147 9 2070 8008 94 03147...9 9 .  9 4:/ . 8:.5.3/ 07 .425038.39 .9439.943 :3/07 8:. 4  3.9    %0 $:57020 4:79 0/ 9.33495488--0. 4  3.43/9438 809 14793 90 54.1419038:70/94:99079903. 88:0/ - .3 2.9:9474-.79      . %0-.2039 - 90 .054.90.:7:8 %.3.7 3/85:9. 7020/ . 5.9 .4 3. ..425.:79 .38:7.:7:8 %.3.422990/ .0.943 .3:.98:.09.79:041.4.  3 0.3.5.2039419038:7.3/8..0.3.3/ .943 .4397.947 90728 41 .843 9..43897:..94138:7.0.39 854.:90383.8 03990/ 94 3/0239 :3/07 .94138:7.03 1 9070 8 .3.0847 490780.3. 3 6:08943 8 9.20.9 90 4-. 0.9 90 .:7:8 %. 41 54.943 8 430 41 90 .54..33:747/0. 4  3.0.550.0 42570038.3.:8009. .8.-0949 98798:3/0790.:9470//7. 38:7.20398.3/ 14728 5.0.88 147 0.2090/01038047809902039 41.47/. 4  3.:9470//7.07 41 5.  .98.3 .07834903990/943/0239:3/07.43903943419038:70/ .0 42207.2479457480..  %:8 4 ..439.3.4/0/9. 2.02-07    909.888:0/3 98 3.3.07 - 90 %.0 54.8.47708543/39407.0 41 90 1.3899038:707.8 90 425.9907 54.00/9.4397.38.43903/0/ 147 - 90 38:70/  94 -0 .3 ./703  -:9 /08590 /02.20  -03019 .3911 %. 708:9338/0.07  838:70/ 8 !  1907 90 88:.:7:8 %.0 54.59.:79$89029. $4.9 90 /0.8 0/303:094384/.:/3 90 /7.-9 -030198 :3/07 90 47203 8 425038.94341.43/:./28843  41107 574280 47 5.70943390.3/. # 4  :  %&#&$%  %$'   %  .:7:8%. 88:0/ - /    007 4  9/  90 078 41 90 8.20..3.$0.43897:0/.383.990920418/0.550. 88:0/ - 9 147 90 70..88:-8893 .43/943 .9-4339007841170/4430.3/.943.3 0893 3/0239 .07.9  .3 .943.00/8419038:7.98..425.3./039 9070.  3 90 8./0705708039.3.57410703902   %0490788:02.00/38.90/ 3.59.79 41 0.9  %0 47203 8 425038.80/ 170/4 430 .-003990/1984/08708949.. .90/ %01:12039418:.3.93.880307  3.990.9.8 02540/ .0 54.425038..3.43897:0/ 2489 89743  47 897...80/ .04. 38:7.0.59.94341 /$9.9 9.895:.3.79  5..9383.93 . .3 94.21473/023947/.40/-/0103/.%7.0 :3/07 90 54. 4       88:0/  - !% $&#  $&#%  #!  94 0703 %..3911 %.7834:94147 390.:9470/ /7.. ...34907 38:7.8.0 .:947908 9.. 38:7.4:79 .0 425.929-003990/:3/07.943  90 43 0.941./3493.3.0-.33/0231./28843 41107 574280 47 5.3/39080990203941 .201479843-03019./0-.3.%. '0.9.3574.0 4154.3/' .3/ 3 147. .9 9909204190.3/07.2.9 .8  %!%$&# $&#%   %$ 170/4 430  .43/:.3/ 90 38:70/ 8.0.943 .  84:/ 349 -0 03990/ 94 .0 9907:0.47708543/3 94 07 .4380394190425. .2 .9 8 574-90/ - 90 38:7.4397.

43/9438 89.0394190708543/03938:7.4:/ 349 .0 .88890/ - 07 :8-.8  3.8430/4:99.07.90 708543/03994574..3-003 /030/  #03.9431472.3.4. 708:90/ 3 90 /0.8903.0 -003 6:.-07.425.0 .0.88907419038:70/.3.550/1479038:7.57390/14721:7380/ -57.084-9./54.9..3.8/.8 1:7907 .4..425. # 4   $05902-07  #      .941.:.39  9 .8 349 .439.4:799..0789  0.2 41 90 50994307 90708543/03938:7.071090284131472.3.3/347843905.439.   47/:7390 0110.   %0 $:57020 4:79 0/ 9.70:3/07 90 ..943 1472.070/- 90 54.0.4:79 8:89.3/ 88:0/ 90 .0.0 085908:...  10/ 07 .20 98254.438/073985742303.73/..8 .07.3/94349.3/982.43/943-03.79419038:7.203941905702:2439054./039 . /86:.088..3.041980254008147./908:2 41! 7057080393905702:2147..7.943700843.3/ 905.30/3900791.3390703  $$&  09079050994307398.3.80.2094-0.94341.0.943.349-0.0 4    %0 54.0..3.739054.425./0843 9./54.90708543/0391.:/398.8 8:11.943.30/ 3908.0843090.9.0.843..4/ .0 41 89   0.55.47708543/3 .5: .943 &5439013418.0  8:-2993 .4.550/ 9 %0 38:7./.3..0 .3/.55.47547..47547.0 0.47547.4:/.0.7.:809038:70/824709.4397.03 94 07.4397.0 94:9 6:08943  %0 .3..43.8:    3908.:..3 .7:0/-9097..803..0 .3.3 .7/ -04..9041 38:7.943 8 .5: /0/ 3 .90/3908.3.9 90 38:70/-034..7841.94388:0/ 94 .:289.574.0 .0 /430 8 825 94 .9439470.94314738:7.78 41 .24890.0 47 3.90708543/039.90/ 3 8.9907:3..409054..47547.3.3.71.    47  #% '   $ .059830/- .7203  .7331742 98 90728 9..389 .47419038:70/.9.:80 9 .943 3 90 4:79 41 789 389.7 .79:701742900.0.9.0 41 89003   0... 78 .:770/ 43 .0 8:.2 ..43/943      .0-03.0 ../.7841.55.8 70.3.0.3/ 4907 706:89089 90 38:7.974:3/19.3.907.00380. .823/0/94/484 19057.03- 9038:70/-0..3.09.3.0 47 4.3  07 .04   .7203  .9 41 90 38:70/  ..1907 90 38:7.55.8 .07.041 909204113908.0.1./039 .9  &3/07 90 .43/943.3/4.3.0.5: 98 0791..943 147 38:7..47708543/370.39075709.2099038:7..0.0/ 94 90 38:7.78 9 8 54390/ 4:9 9.07 0.0 9054..843.3/10/908..55.3 07.550/3905708039.0 41 90 38:70/ .54.43903943 41 90 38:7.3.07440/8:.5: .0 41 #.9 80 84:/ .47547.0 147 .943.08890./05.0.0.3/ /82880/ 90 .990.30/ 90 .. ..7203  .8   #$  $&#  #! #%  .8 3 94 .550/147 90708543/03938:7.:9470/..90/07.47547.39.439./.14150784384.8 90.4397.3.0 ...2 147 90 574.47547.3899038:7072.3.80 :5430..890/:9419038:70/94 3490907284190.9 90 ..4.80834903990/9490574.843980194-.4.3-0.90478080390733949038:70/398.07 90 .3/.:843.7203  . 701:3/ 41 90 5702:2 9..0/ 075.99490 .039 920 147 90 57.-9945.9  9 8 0907 -0.888:0/90.904138:7.9431472 .70.943 70./ /0020/ 3 0894550  9 3. 90 30. 43 ::89     3 708893 90 .4.07.83:. /43 .4.3../  3 :30     50994307#03.07440/390../ .3147..31472.041 9050.9 80 5.84./  9 ..338:7.93 1.0.5078 .10/ :3/07 90 .943 47  974: 90 3003.09054.2039 415702:2 ..3.3/ 3:708  $0 10/ :5 90 -..0/94 .... .550/ 147  90 708543/039 38:7..4250903.943 3908.20/.425.90 805.90/ 57  80..07843 #4./08590.00380.780390701742 %097. 5074/41 /.3/  #    .28:3/079054.3.9  .3.00/8 41 90 38:7..  4.20/-0301.7841.00/8419038:7..0791.08  90 38:7.439..9 80 .3./039 3 90 479 .43899:90/.0 .90 41 38:7.4138:7.7 5.7841.0.0.07418:.98.1.090/.550/1479038:7.09.3.9.550/ 147  %070 .07.90 41 38:7..3/.47547..7..3/ 9070-..4397.8 147 ..3..3/897..55.943.3 0.0907043 .0 .943.55.8 94 -0 0110.:289.3.30/.   /43 3899:90/ 98 .904107-79..9410791. .3/ 90  &#%  #$% $% # #' "& % %$ $420920 3 57   .

425.389 488 47 /..2.308.398 .3/ 47.0..08 94 90 2479.03:0 %"  147 90 5:7.0/ 94 -0 38:70/ .1907:39902479.. 90  #% # .7008 9.-0.0.:70/ - .0-.990 479.0 00.3!   94 .-09490 #% %0 #% #070-770.3/ ... %0 57428847 34908 070 80.4.059.79070.4741%449.0. 88:0/ 1479 09   .3.20395.. .04-.0 .47 41 %" &3/07 90 00/ 41 .:90/31. # 4 ::89   $!$ #   # ''  .8 949.74 . ":043.0-..5074/414300.../.43 '.71742/......0.00.20398/:043574288473490800.32430 84/8-:780/8...-05.- .4.07.347.:80 90 5745079 2479.8838 94 574.3/.94381:5.47  .3/8.38948847/.425.338:7./039 9019./039  9019 .03.8  #$'$  %$ $54:808 .3.070.3/170147.0.9 90 .  %449.73907089..3/ 170  .-0.4:39 41 90  #% # 90 38:7.0 50994307854:8080709438:7090.80 41 .3/ 03/4780 .2.07 90 54.4.07389. 474.0 3 1..990479.90070419.:70 147 90 .:90/ - 90 50994307 854:808 43 90 .4.:94708 90  #% 47 98 .3/ /0.3/.

4.00/ 7057080393 :35.9439480.841.0/.943 41 90 920 03 90 93 8 94 -0 /0.9438 43 90 5742884734908..438/070/ 3 /01.843 3 1.870.:9 3 90 5071472.80 9879945.550./03.0741!488088439#050.0. 7:0  /02.943 94 0110.0780/-904:79 41550.0/.050994307.07.0/ 94 /02.0.4.014790.80 .3.39900974549.9907 8 5.0   %0 $:57020 4:79 0/ 9..0 706:708 9. 4:79 703/070/ .3. 5.8 702-:780/!  -.:70/ 90 30.0  .:7094 3491 90 2479.3/70.9038:7.0/3803903.8 895:.90 //93493147257.8344-.425 9 907 4-.0.0931. 90 00/ 41 .88:23908.8 .07.088.0.3 %7.0 38:70/ 147 90 5074/ 41 .110/947.0/9.0/. 057088 84 /0.7  90 708543/039 1.0  0 7:0 9.3/ 8 706:70/ -01470 . .943 94 38:70 90 2479.05702:284.:90/ 43 907 4-./ .3/ 94 90 509943078 147!   .0 347/07940990 %449.8 ..0.07 90 54.943 41 90 .0 98509943  $$& 0907 90 509943078 1.0.4397.9509943078.3.20398 94 90 38:7.99038:70/902479.07  /02.990 479.0/ .:70/ - 50994307 854:808 4. 9.7  30:907041 708543/039/02...:9 40.9 90 2479.3.708   03 1742 90 3.3 .9 #%.3.0  708543/039 .7 38:7..7347/079.9439438:70902479.91: .0.3.90/390309570. -0 .3/-.2.0/ .8 03 90 4-47 .0 98:3/078944/9..0.3307.70/947834930./ 349 /01. 10/.43/9438306:..3.3.3.0 :3/07 90 00/ 41 .907 .00 81.0 5702:28  98 4:79 0/ 9.550.3/9.3/ 5.94-07    .425.990 479..0.:289../ 349 /01.:90/  3 90 .9:70 . 83.9 509943078 // 349 /01.20.0/ .3:.0/.0 -:9 // 349 /0.070/ 47 90 807.7  708543/0398039.3.0  0974549.3. 94 57.:947994574.4713..338:7.0 .088.9/0.3/4:/ -0 :80088  .439743249.3.3:.-80/   ./ 90 2479.0 54...9 90 509943078 .0 848 9.943 94 38:70 90 8:-0.70 9.3.9 90 /083.9.947  03/02.3/ 90 .0  443 80990/ :7857:/03.20 94 90 708543/039 :39 .9 7030.00/ /:0 94 90 38:7.8.0 !09943078. 4-9.202.4250/ 9 90 4-.0 41 907 4-.43806:03.703908.059438 .9 50994307854:8088:7703/07902479.08 41 90 4-.907041 %4008.3.990 479.0/.0 8 94 -0 703/070/.478 .07908:-0.070/5488088434190 2479...474.7 38:7.79417050.0 .4:7941!.8. 80.81742349.-4:991907.943  8 .880790/9.:70 90 30.3.79 2.3/90.014790089. 907041  9 8 -:9 4.9 90 38:7.0.:7038:7.0203941.87.943 9 ..8 703/070/ 9 -043/ 8 5407 94 5071472  430 41 90 0.089  03904-.0425.!   38:7.3/2479.3.47 5747 94 .39147#0.9419038:7./ 4-.08 84 03/4780/ 94 90 708543/0394390/.7.07 90 8.0 .8349-003089.8 03.907 474357   90708543/039.3/ 708543/039 -.20 :094902479.9 90 50994307 854:808 1.088.419000..9434790 .55.9 .0/ 94 .4:394190 #% # %0 0./06:..07.0 5702:2 %0 38:7.343147708543/03994007.4.9 9 84:/ 70..0.9 90 509943078 94   80.:7038:7.3  30-7:.3 %7..0 1742  :39  47 90 5074/ 41 ::89    94 ::89    50994307 854:808 574.94394 .07 90 2479.4.80  1 50994307 .14702039430/.8.70 5708039 3 98 .774:9.42599074-..0/ .4.3/   /0.11720/-90#043.-820394190.9 -..0.78 9.90 708543/0398 .0-014709801.3/0/9.30/ - 708543/039 .47 41509943078  %08.:94341982479.3 /010.4:79-:903.%7.9 ..0 .3.90708543/039.03.425.0.0.0.8:3/0734 4-. /0.0. 09907 41 /02.09 90 00/ 41 .:80/9003147.3.8 3.7    8 .3.0147902479.0 54.94-07    94 .