Case Digest (G.R. No. 64677)
Facts:
Nora Lumibao v. The Honorable Intermediate Appellate Court and Eugenio Trinidad, G.R. No. 64677, September 13, 1990, Supreme Court Third Division, Cortes, J., writing for the Court.Petitioner Nora Lumibao was a life insurance agent and member of Bescon Insurance Agencies, Inc., representing Manila Bankers Life Insurance Corporation. In January 1975 she solicited respondent Eugenio Trinidad, then Vice‑President and General Manager (and principal stockholder) of Victory Liner Inc., to take a P1,000,000 life insurance policy. Because Trinidad’s medical exam disclosed diabetes, the insurer set the first annual premium at P93,180.
To induce Trinidad to accept the policy at that premium, Lumibao orally promised to return to him an amount equivalent to her commission, i.e., fifty percent (50%) of the first premium (P46,590). Trinidad agreed and on April 30, 1975 issued two postdated checks, each for P46,590, payable to Manila Bankers Life Insurance Corporation; the checks were cashed by the insurer. Lumibao received her commission of P51,249 from Bescon on June 4, 1975 but did not remit the promised P46,590. Trinidad’s counsel sent a demand letter dated July 7, 1975; Lumibao, through counsel, denied making the promise.
On August 6, 1975 Trinidad filed Civil Case No. 3653 against Lumibao for specific performance and damages. Lumibao answered and counterclaimed on September 29, 1975, denying the alleged verbal rebate. The trial court, in a decision dated September 15, 1976, found as a fact that Lumibao had promised the 50% rebate but dismissed Trinidad’s complaint and Lumibao’s counterclaim on the ground that the agreement was void as contrary to Presidential Decree No. 612 (Insurance Code) and public policy.
Lumibao appealed to the Intermediate Appellate Court (AC‑G.R. CV No. 61200). On June 30, 1983 the appellate court affirmed the trial court’s factual findings, sustained dismissal of Lumibao’s counterclaim, but in a split decision reversed the trial court insofar as it dismissed Trinidad’s complaint and ordered Lumibao to pay Trinidad P46,590 with interest from filing...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Did the Intermediate Appellate Court err in holding that petitioner violated Section 361 of Presidential Decree No. 612?
- Did the Intermediate Appellate Court err in ordering petitioner to pay private respondent P46,590 ...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)