Case

Whitegold Marine Services

vs. Pioneer Insurance

PhilamCare Health
Systems vs CA

Issue
w/n petitioner is engaged
in insurance business.

Whether answers made in good

faith, where matters of opinion or
judgment are called for, without
intent to deceive will avoid a
policy when they were untrue.
Allegation kasi ng philam may
concealment daw.

( hindi tlaga nya alam na

highblood sya. Nahospitalize and
eventually namatay sya dahil sa
heart attack + complications)

Fortune Insurance Insurity

Company vs CA,

Whether or not the General

exceptions precluded the
recovery of producer bank of the
Philippines.
(banks was insured by fortune
then na rob ng representative ng
bank and driver eh sbi sa G.E.
if robbery was perpetrated by the
employees , it cannot recover)

Enriquez vs Sun Life

Insurance of Canada

w/n the contract of

insurance was perfected
(si herrer kumuha ng
insurance, napprove,
umatras , namatay. No
actual or constructive
delivery n naganap.
Tinamad ata yung
employee na isend yung
policy.)

Doctrine
A P & I Club is a form of insurance against
third party liability, where the third party is
anyone other than the P & I Club and the
members.
If this will be asked cite the requisites of
insurance contract ;)
NO. Where matters of opinion or judgment are
called for, answers made in good faith and
without intent to deceive will not avoid a policy
even though they are untrue. Thus, although
false, a representation of the expectation,
intention, belief, opinion, or judgment of the
insured will not avoid the policy if there is no
actual fraud in inducing the acceptance of the
risk, or its acceptance at a lower rate of
premium, and this is likewise the rule although
the statement is material to the risk, if the
statement is obviously of the foregoing
character, since in such case the insurer is not
justified in relying upon such statement, but is
obligated to
make further inquiry.
Yes. It was its intention to exclude and exempt
from protection and coverage losses arising
from dishonest, fraudulent, or criminal acts of
persons granted or having unrestricted access to
Producers' money or payroll. The robbers were
considered as representative/employees of the
bank.

No. the contract for life annuity was

not perfected because it was not
proved that the acceptance came to
the knowledge of the applicant.
Acceptance made by letter or
telegram does not bind the offer
except from the time it came to his
knowledge.- civil code art 1319
Doctrine: An acceptance of an offer of
insurance not actually or
constructively communicated to the

Great Pacific Life

Assurance Co. vs CA

Whether the binding deposit

receipt constituted a temporary
contract of the life insurance in
question, and thus negate the
claim that the insurance contract
was perfected.
(the father wants to insure the
baby. Down payment was given
to the agent. Agent issued a
binding receipt. The insurance
offer was rejected by the
principal. The baby died.)
*reason for rejection=
disqualified due to age. 7 pataas
lang yung pwede sa insurance na
gusto ng tatay.

proposer does not make a contract of

insurance.
the binding deposit receipt is, manifestly, merely
conditional and does not insure outright. Where
an agreement is made between the applicant and
the agent, no liability shall attach until the
principal approves
the risk and a receipt is given by the agent.
The acceptance is merely conditional, and is
subordinated to the
act of the company in approving or rejecting the
application.