Facts:

> Appeal consolidates two cases.

> Asia life insurance Company (ALIC) was incorporated in Delaware.

rtretretstantino v.
> For the sum of 175.04 as annrtertretrtrual

Asia Life- Non-

paymenrtgertertrwtt Facts:
> Appeal consolidates two cases.
> Asia life insurance Company (ALIC) was incorporated in Delaware.

rtretretstantino v.
> For the sum of 175.04 as annrtertretrtrual

Asia Life- Non-

paymenrtgertertrwtt Cont of
Insurance Premiums
87 PHIL 248
Facts:
> Appeal consolidates two cases.
> Asia life insurance Company (ALIC) was incorporated in Delaware.

rtretretstantino v.
> For the sum of 175.04 as annrtertretrtrual

Asia Life- Non-

paymenrtgertertrwtt of
Insurance Premiums
87 PHIL 248
Facts:
> Appeal consolidates two cases.
> Asia life insurance Company (ALIC) was incorporated in Delaware.

 > For the sum of 175.04 as annrtertretrtrual premium duly paid to ALIC, it issued Policy No.
93912 whereby it insured the life of Arcadio Constantino for 20 years for P3T with Paz
Constantino as beneficiary. Effective Aug. 1, 1941, the mode of payment was changed from
annually to quarterly and such quarterly premiums were paid until Nov. 18, 1941.
 Last payment covered the period until Jan. 31, 1942.
 Tomas Ruiz died on Feb. 16, 1945 with Agustina Peralta as his beneficiary.

> Due to Jap occupation, it became impossible and illegal for the insured to deal with ALIC. Aside
from this the insured borrowed from the policy P234

 First premium covered the period up to Sept. 26, 1942. No further premiums were paid after
the first premium and Arcadio died on Sept. 22, 1944.

> Due to Jap occupation, ALIC closed its branch office in Manila from Jan. 2 1942-1945.
> On Aug. 1, 1938, ALIC issued Policy no. 78145 covering the lives of Spouses Tomas Ruiz and
Agustina Peralta for the sum of P3T for 20 years. The annual premium stipulated was regularly paid
from Aug. 1, 1938 up to and including Sept. 30, 1940.

 Effective Aug. 1, 1941, the mode of payment was changed from annually to quarterly and
such quarterly premiums were paid until Nov. 18, 1941.
 Last payment covered the period until Jan. 31, 1942.
 Tomas Ruiz died on Feb. 16, 1945 with Agustina Peralta as his beneficiary.

> Due to Jap occupation, it became impossible and illegal for the insured to deal with ALIC. Aside
from this the insured borrowed from the policy P234.00 such that the cash surrender value of the
policy was sufficient to maintain the policy in force only up to Sept. 7, 1942.
> Both policies contained this provision: All premiums are due in advance and any unpunctuality in
making such payment shall cause this policy to lapse unless and except as kept in force by the
grace period condition.
> Paz Constantino and Agustina Peralta claim as beneficiaries, that they are entitled to receive the
proceeds of the policies less all sums due for premiums in arrears. They also allege that non-
payment of the premiums were caused by the closing of ALIC’s offices during the war and the
impossible circumstances by the war, therefore, they should be excused and the policies should not
be forfeited.
> Lower court ruled in favor of ALIC.

Issue:

May a beneficiary in a life insurance policy recover the amount thereof although the insured died
after repeatedly failing to pay the stipulated premiums, such failure being caused by war?

Held:
NO.
Due to the express terms of the policy, non-payment of the premium produces its avoidance. In
Glaraga v. Sun Life, it was held that a life policy was avoided because the premium had not been
paid within the time fixed; since by its express terms, non-payment of any premium when due or
within the 31 day grace period ipso fact caused the policy to lapse.

When the life insurance policy provides that non-payment of premiums will cause its forfeiture, war
does NOT excuse non-payment and does not avoid forfeiture. Essentially, the reason why punctual
payments are important is that the insurer calculates on the basis of the prompt
payments. Otherwise, malulugi sila.

It should be noted that the parties contracted not only as to peace time conditions but also as to war-
time conditions since the policies contained provisions applicable expressly to wartime days. The
logical inference therefore is that the parties contemplated the uninterrupted operation of the
contract even if armed conflict should ensue.