Title
De Lim vs. Sun Life Assurance Co. of Canada
Case
G.R. No. 15774
Decision Date
Nov 29, 1920
Luis Lim applied for life insurance, paid the premium, and died before approval. Court ruled no binding contract existed, as provisional policy was conditional on head office approval, voiding the claim. Premium to be returned.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 15774)

Facts of the Case

The case revolves around an insurance application submitted by Luis Lim y Garcia on July 6, 1917, for a life insurance policy worth P5,000 through the Sun Life Assurance Company of Canada. Pilar C. de Lim, his wife, was named as the beneficiary. After paying the first premium of P433, a provisional policy was issued. However, Luis Lim y Garcia passed away on August 23, 1917, before the insurance application could be officially approved by the company’s head office.

Provisional Policy Analysis

The provisional policy stated that it was valid for four months, conditional upon the issuance of a firm policy by the insurance company's home office in Montreal. The provisional agreement clearly indicated that if the company did not approve and issue a policy, the agreement would be considered null and void from the outset. Consequently, the plaintiff sought to recover the amount specified in the provisional insurance document after her husband's death.

Contractual Condition and Validity

The court interpreted the document’s language as ambiguous, affirming that the provisional policy did not constitute a binding contract of insurance. A crucial point was the existence of conditional language within the policy that stipulated it would only take effect should the company confirm it through the issuance of a formal policy. A contract is not effective unless mutual consent exists, and the application remains a mere offer until accepted by the insurer.

Legal Principles Governing Insurance Contracts

Several principles regarding insurance contracts were highlighted, particularly referencing Joyce on Insurance. The first principle indicates that an agent's acceptance of the risk and issuance of a receipt binds the company only if it is beyond the agent's authority. In this case, the provisional policy included express conditions that contradicted an unconditional acceptance of the risk, negating the application of that principle.

The second principle mentioned emphasizes that even if an agent issues a receipt stating insurance will take effect upon acceptance, the agreement remains contingent on the company's approval. Thus, no liability attaches until the company's consent is received.

Relevant Jurisprudence

The judgment referenced similar precedential cases, including those from U.S. courts that dealt with the conditions surrounding an insurance application and receipts. In pertinent cases such as Steinle v. New York Life Insurance Co. and Cooksey v. Mutual Life Insurance Co., courts ruled that unless the application was accepted and a policy issued, there was no enforceable contract for insurance.

Court's Conclusion

The court affirmed the lower court’s decision to sustain th

...continue reading

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