G.R. No.

L-54171 October 28, 1980

JEWEL VILLACORTA, assisted by her husband, GUERRERO

VILLACORTA, petitioner,
vs.
THE INSURANCE COMMISSION and EMPIRE INSURANCE
COMPANY, respondents.

TEEHANKEE, Acting C.J.:

FACTS: Villacorta had her Colt Lancer car insured with the respondent company for a
general check-up and repair and while the car was in the repair shop, the car was
allegedly taken by six (6) persons for a joyride. This resulted to the death of the driver
and some of the passengers as well as to extensive damage to the car. Villacorta filed a
claim for total loss with the said insurance company, but the claim was denied.
ISSUE: Whether or not the Empire Insurance Company be held liable for the total loss
of the insured vehicle?
RULING: Yes, the Empire Insurance Company is liable for the total loss of the insured
vehicle.
An "Authorized driver" clause is that a person other than the insured owner, who
drives the car on the insured's order, such as his regular driver, or with his permission,
such as a friend or member of the family or the employees of a car service or repair
shop must be duly licensed drivers and have no disqualification to drive a motor
vehicle. A car owner who entrusts his car to an established car service and repair shop
necessarily entrusts his car key to the shop owner and employees who are presumed to
have the insured's permission to drive the car for legitimate purposes of checking or
road-testing the car.
In this case, the insured’s car was wrongfully taken without the insured’s consent from
the car service and repair shop to whom it had been entrusted for check-up and repairs,
respondent insurer is liable and must pay insured for the total loss of the insured
vehicle under the Theft Clause of the policy. Moreover, despite the totally inadequate
evidence, that the taking was “temporary” and for a “joy ride”, a person who takes
possession of a vehicle belonging to another, without the consent of its owner, he is
guilty of theft because his intent to gain is evident since he derives utility, satisfaction,
enjoyment and pleasure.

.ACC LAW GOT TALENT MECHANICS:

The competition is open to all the bona fide Juris Doctor students of Aklan Catholic College.

Each year level must have at least two (2) representatives who will perform at the event. Group,
duo, or solo performance are welcome. No minimum or maximum number of performers. They
may showcase a dance number, song number, play or a combination of any other talents.

No dangerous stunts are allowed. Use of fire, pyrotechnics, dangerous stunts (i.e. lifting), foul
language and disrespectful gestures are strictly prohibited. The presentation, as much as
possible, is in line with the theme.

An allotted time of five (5) minutes minimum and a maximum of eight (8) minutes presentation
per performer is permitted. Preparation for the presentation is included in the time allotted for
each performer.

No daring costumes are allowed.

The tabulators assigned by the College of Law: Law Week Committee will be in-charge for the
computation of scores.

There will be three (3) judges that will come from the Faculty of ACC College of Law.

The decision of the judges is final.

Performers who will not abide with the mechanics provided, shall be disqualified.

There shall be only one winner who garnered the highest score.

ACC LAW GOT TALENT SCORING SHEET

Contestant: _________________________________________________________

CRITERIA RATING

Talent/Performance – 50%

Originality – 25%

Creativity of Performance – 10%

Audience Impact – 10%

Costume/Props – 5%
 TOTAL SCORE:

REFERENCES

CODE OF PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY

https://chanrobles.com/codeofprofessionalresponsibility.html#.ZDkslXZBzIU

A DAY IN THE LIFE OF A LAWYER

https://www.indeed.com/career-advice/finding-a-job/day-in-the-life-of-
lawyer#:~:text=While%20not%20a%20specific%20requirement,all%20their
%20responsibilities%20and%20commitments.

ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEDGES

https://www.iadclaw.org/assets/1/7/17.23_Philippine_Chapter.pdf

CHARACTER OF THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN A LAWYER AND HIS

CLIENT

https://www.batasnatin.com/law-library/legal-ethics-and-practical-exercises/legal-
ethics/709-character-of-the-relationship-between-a-lawyer-and-his-client.html
 COMMUNICATIONS

https://communications.tufts.edu/marketing-and-branding/social-media-overview/
#:~:text=Social%20media%20refers%20to%20the,Instagram%2C%20LinkedIn%20and
%20YouTube%20accounts.

NEGLIGENCE
https://www.lsc.qld.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0008/655829/negligence-july-2020.pdf

USING SOCIAL MEDIA IN THE PRACTICE OF LAW

My interviewee has a social media account but does not really gain clients
through it. But maybe in a way, like for example, someone in Manila is looking for
a lawyer in Aklan. Someone told them that they know one and that her name is
Atty. Grecelle Rovero. Then of course, that prospective client automatically
searches you on Facebook. And in that way, it really helps to have social media
because the prospective client can put a face to the name.

POSTING AS A LAWYER OR A PRIVATE INDIVIDUAL

She often posts but post as a mom on social media and not as a lawyer. She
never posts as a lawyer.

SHARING YOUR THOUGHTS AS A PRIVATE INDIVIDUAL

Being a lawyer affects my interviewee as a private Filipino individual on sharing

her thoughts about matters in a certain thing or event. She always thinks of her
duty as a lawyer to always use tempered language. You can't speak badly or
rudely, though you're just human. You shouldn't be sarcastic or insulting. Use
honest tempered language only. Just try to be respectful in all possible means as
you can.

A NEGATIVE REVIEW OF YOUR LEGAL REPRESENTATION WAS POSTED

BY A CLIENT ON SOCIAL MEDIA

My interviewee hasn’t experienced or seen a negative review about her legal

representation that was posted by a client on social media. But if ever saw
one, she stated that she might be inclined to file the necessary legal action to
address it.

ASKING A CLIENT TO WRITE A POSITIVE FEEDBACK

It is not okay to ask a client to write a positive review about how you did your
work or legal presentation. But if the client did it voluntarily, it is okay. But not
while the case is pending. It should be done when the case is over, and that
client was already acquitted. But I would never ask that to be posted.