Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 14 views

    G.R. No. 60506 August 6, 1992 VDA. DE MAGLANA Versus HON. F. CONSOLACION Facts

    Uploaded by

    Oscar E Valero
    An accident involving a jeep owned by Destrajo and driven by Pepito Into killed Lope Maglana. Maglana's heirs filed a case against Destrajo, AFISCO as the insurer, and Pepito for homicide. The RTC found AFISCO secondarily liable. On appeal, the court ruled that while third parties can directly sue an insurer under an indemnity contract, the insurer's liability is based on contract and is not solidary with the insured or other parties found at fault, whose liability is based on tort.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    G.R. No. 60506 August 6, 1992 VDA. DE MAGLANA Versus HON. F. CONSOLACION Facts

    Uploaded by

    Oscar E Valero
    14 views1 page
    An accident involving a jeep owned by Destrajo and driven by Pepito Into killed Lope Maglana. Maglana's heirs filed a case against Destrajo, AFISCO as the insurer, and Pepito for homicide. The RTC found AFISCO secondarily liable. On appeal, the court ruled that while third parties can directly sue an insurer under an indemnity contract, the insurer's liability is based on contract and is not solidary with the insured or other parties found at fault, whose liability is based on tort.

    Original Description:

    case digest

    Original Title

    6

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    An accident involving a jeep owned by Destrajo and driven by Pepito Into killed Lope Maglana. Maglana's heirs filed a case against Destrajo, AFISCO as the insurer, and Pepito for homicide. The RTC found AFISCO secondarily liable. On appeal, the court ruled that while third parties can directly sue an insurer under an indemnity contract, the insurer's liability is based on contract and is not solidary with the insured or other parties found at fault, whose liability is based on tort.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    14 views1 page

    G.R. No. 60506 August 6, 1992 VDA. DE MAGLANA Versus HON. F. CONSOLACION Facts

    Uploaded by

    Oscar E Valero
    An accident involving a jeep owned by Destrajo and driven by Pepito Into killed Lope Maglana. Maglana's heirs filed a case against Destrajo, AFISCO as the insurer, and Pepito for homicide. The RTC found AFISCO secondarily liable. On appeal, the court ruled that while third parties can directly sue an insurer under an indemnity contract, the insurer's liability is based on contract and is not solidary with the insured or other parties found at fault, whose liability is based on tort.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    You are on page 1of 1

    6 G.R. No. 60506 August 6, 1992 VDA. DE MAGLANA versus HON. F.

    CONSOLACION
    FACTS:
    A PUJ jeep owned by Destrajo, driven by Pepito Into and insured by AFISCO met an accident
    which killed Lope Maglana while on the way to his workplace as employee of the Bureau of
    Customs. Maglanas heirs filed an action for damages against Destrato and AFISCO and
    Homicide thru Reckless imprudence against Pepito.RTC held AFISCO as secondarily liable.
    Unacceptable to the heirs of Maglana, they appealed the decision contending that insurer's
    liability is "direct and/or solidary with the operator of the vehicle.
    ISSUE: Whether or not insurers liability is solidary with the insured which figured in an accident
    causing death of a third person?
    RULINGS:
    No. While it is true that where the insurance contract provides for indemnity against liability to
    third persons, such third persons can directly sue the insurer, however, the direct liability of the
    insurer under indemnity contracts against third party liability does not mean that the insurer can
    be held solidarily liable with the insured and/or the other parties found at fault. The liability of the
    insurer is based on contract; that of the insured is based on tort.

    You might also like