Title
Loyola Life Plans, Inc. vs. ATR Professional Life Assurance Corp.
Case
G.R. No. 228402
Decision Date
Aug 26, 2020
Loyola Life Plans insured Dwight Lumiqued under ATR’s policy. After his death, ATR denied claims, alleging unpaid premiums and forgery. Courts ruled in favor of Lumiqued’s widow, reinstating full benefits and awarding damages due to ATR’s bad faith.

Case Digest (G.R. No. 228402)
Expanded Legal Reasoning Model

Facts:

  • Parties and antecedents
    • Loyola Life Plans Inc. (now Loyola Plans Consolidated Inc.) is a pre-need company offering Timeplan (pension) and Lifeplan (memorial service) contracts, insured by ATR Professional Life Assurance Corporation (formerly GE Life).
    • On June 8, 1999, Loyola applied with ATR for a Group Creditors Life Insurance plan (Master Policy No. GCL-878) with supplementary Group Yearly Renewable Term Life and Accidental Death benefits, effective June 15, 1999.
  • Dwight L. Lumiqued’s Timeplan
    • On April 28, 2000, Dwight purchased a Loyola Timeplan payable in 120 monthly installments of ₱5,040. He paid via two Metrobank checks (₱2,824.75 and ₱600) and cash (₱1,615.25). An Official Receipt stated the payment was valid for downpayment only, subject to check clearance.
    • The checks were deposited on April 28; the cash was deposited on May 2; Dwight died on May 1, 2000 from multiple stab wounds.
  • Claim denial and procedural history
    • Angelita Lumiqued, as beneficiary, filed a claim. ATR denied it on April 17, 2001, citing incomplete premium payment and alleging forgery of Dwight’s application.
    • ATR filed suit to void Dwight’s coverage; Loyola (and Angelita by adoption) counterclaimed for benefits and damages.
    • The Regional Trial Court (RTC) on July 7, 2011, held coverage effective April 28, 2000, dismissed ATR’s complaint, and awarded ₱1,809,360 actual damages, ₱100,000 moral damages, ₱100,000 exemplary damages, ₱100,000 attorney’s fees, plus costs.
    • On February 4, 2016, the Court of Appeals (CA) affirmed policy effectivity but reduced benefits to ₱992,000 and deleted all damage awards. Both parties filed separate petitions to the Supreme Court, later consolidated.

Issues:

  • Authenticity of signature
    • Was Dwight’s Timeplan application signature forged?
  • Perfection of insurance contract
    • Did the initial payment on April 28, 2000 perfect the insurance contract, entitling beneficiaries to proceeds?
  • Coverage of risk
    • Is Dwight’s death from stab wounds a covered peril or excluded as “murder or provoked assault”?
  • Entitlement to benefits
    • Does the contract entitle the beneficiary to Group Creditors Life Insurance and Group Yearly Renewable Term Life benefits?
  • Damages awards
    • Did the CA correctly delete the awards of moral damages, exemplary damages, and attorney’s fees?

Ruling:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Ratio:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Doctrine:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster—building context before diving into full texts.