Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
Phil. Phoenix
We have v.woodworks
updated our privacy policy,
(1967)
effective May 25, 2018, to increase
transparency and reflect recent changes to EU
More info
privacy regulations. Read it here
"acts#
• Phoenix and Woodworks are both corporations duly organized and existing under the laws of
the Philippines.
• Woodworks obtained from Phoenix and was issued a fire insurance policy for the amount of
P300k. The premiums amounted to P6@0!".#! but Woodworks only paid P3@000.
• $espite se%eral demands made by Phoenix@ Woodworks failed to pay.
• Thus@ Phoenix filed a case to reco%er from Woodworks the unpaid balance of the premiums
&P3@!''.0#(.
• )*+ ,anila decided in fa%or of Phoenix. Woodworks appealed@ claiming that its non-payment
of the premium cancelled the policy and thus is not liable to pay for the premiums due.
Issue# WN/ the non-payment of the premium by Woodworks cancelled the contract of insurance
$atio%%Feld# 'o, nonHpay)ent o* pre)iu) due did not cancel the contract o* insurance.
• Ps the contract of insurance had already become perfected@ the parties could demand from
each other the performance of whate%er obligations they had assumed.
• +n the case of the insurer &Phoenix(@ it is ob%ious that it had the right to demand from the
insured &Woodworks( the completion of the payment of the premium due N1 sue for the
rescission of the contract.
• 2ince Phoenix chose to demand specific performance of WoodworkSs obligation to pay the
balance of the premium@ the latter4s duty to pay is indeed indubitable.
• +f the non-payment of the premium would cancel the policy@ it would place exclusi%ely in the
hands of one of the contracting parties the right to decide whether the contract should stand
or not.
+isposition# Wherefore@ the appealed decision being in accordance with law and the e%idence@
the same is hereby affirmed@ with costs.
ABOUT SUPPORT
Press Accessibility
Contact Us Publishers
Join today
Invite Friends
Gifts
LEGAL
Terms
Privacy
Copyright