Case Digest (G.R. No. 177131)
Facts:
Malayan Insurance Co., Inc. v. Philippines First Insurance Co., Inc. and Reputable Forwarder Services, Inc., G.R. No. 184300, July 11, 2012, Supreme Court Second Division, Reyes, J., writing for the Court. Petitioner Malayan Insurance Co., Inc. seeks review of the Court of Appeals’ Decision dated February 29, 2008 and Resolution dated August 28, 2008 in CA-G.R. CV No. 71204, which affirmed with modification the judgment of the Regional Trial Court (RTC), Branch 38, Manila.Since 1989 Wyeth Philippines, Inc. contracted annually with respondent Reputable Forwarder Services, Inc. to transport Wyeth’s products. On November 18, 1993 Wyeth procured a marine insurance policy (Marine Policy No. MAR 13797) from respondent Philippines First Insurance Co., Inc. covering Wyeth’s goods while in transit (limit P6,000,000 per land vehicle). On December 1, 1993 Wyeth’s contract of carriage with Reputable was signed by Reputable but not by any Wyeth representative; nevertheless the parties acted under its terms. Reputable’s contract required it to procure insurance on Wyeth’s goods; Reputable procured a Special Risk Insurance Policy (SR Policy No. SR-0001 02577) from Malayan on February 11, 1994 for P1,000,000.
On October 6, 1994 a truck carrying 1,000 boxes of Promil (value P2,357,582.70) was hijacked and the cargo stolen; the truck was recovered two weeks later without the cargo. Philippines First, as insurer of Wyeth under the Marine Policy, paid Wyeth P2,133,257.00 on March 8, 1995 and was subrogated to Wyeth’s rights against Reputable; it then demanded reimbursement from Reputable, which ignored the demand.
Philippines First filed suit against Reputable on August 12, 1996 (Civil Case No. 96-79498). Reputable answered, claiming it was a private carrier and that the hijacking was a force majeure event; Reputable impleaded Malayan as third-party defendant to recover under the SR Policy. Malayan denied liability and relied on Section 5 of the SR Policy (no cover where a marine policy already insures the property) and on Section 12 (other-insurance/ratable contribution clause).
After trial the RTC found Reputable liable to Philippines First for the indemnity paid and found Malayan liable to indemnify Reputable up to P1,000,000; it awarded attorney’s fees and costs. Reputable and Malayan both appealed. The Court of Appeals affirmed the RTC with modification (deleting the award of attorneys’ fees in favor of Reputable), holding: (1) Reputable is a private carrier and estopped from assailing the carriage contract for lack of Wyeth’s signature; (2) Reputable was bound by the contract’s broad risk alloca...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Is Reputable a private (special) carrier or a common carrier?
- If Reputable is a private carrier, is it strictly bound by the stipulations in its contract of carriage with Wyeth, including liability for theft/hijacking and force majeure?
- Did the RTC and CA err in holding that Sections 5 and 12 of Malayan’s SR Policy are inapplicable — i.e., whether “other insurance” or “over insurance” clauses bar or limit Malayan’s liability?
- Should Reputable and Malayan be held solidarily...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)