Tan Chuco vs Yorkshire Fire and Life Insurance Company Facts: Tan Chuco files a claim under an open

n fire insurance policy for the alleged loss by fire of certain stock of goods insured by Yorkshire. CFI: Evidence did not sustain Yorkshires allegation that Tan Chuco or his agents had intentionally and fraudulently set the building on fire o But was of the opinion that the Tan Chuco failed to establish the value of the goods he alleges were destroyed by the fire. o He submitted fabricated written evidence and false testimony in support of his claim that the insured goods actually destroyed were worth more than the total amount of the insurance thereon. o CFI was of the opinion that the submitted inventory was not genuine and was fraudulently prepared. o Tan Chucos representatives and employees who were in the building when the fire took place, not only made no effort to extinguish the fire, or to save the goods from destruction, but also failed to save any of the books or papers connected with the business of which he was in charge ofthose could have corroborated with the data in the alleged inventory o The inventory submitted was dated January 1, not of custom to Tan Chuco who were of Chinese decent. o No explanation was offered which would account for the remarkable conduct of Tan Chucos manager in preparing an inventory two months after his employer had left for China and then instead of forwarding such inventory to his principal by mail, entrusted it for transmission to a friend who had not even left for China when the fire took place. o Indication that Tan Chuco had been experiencing adverse business conditions before the fire Issue: Whether or not Tan Chuco may claim under the fire insurance policy? Held: NO. We think that the action of the trial court in rejecting the proof offered by Tan Chuco as to the amount of the loss must be sustained. The contract of fire insurance being a contract of indemnity, Tan Chuco is only entitled to recover the amount of actual loss sustained by him. There being no express valuation in the policy, the

judgment was properly entered against him for lack of satisfactory proof of the amount of loss. Rule: In the absence of express valuation in a fire insurance policy, the insured is only entitled to recover the amount of actual loss sustained and the burden is upon him to establish such amount.