Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 3

G.R. No.

L-66935 November 11, 1985 The liability of the insurance company is governed by cannot be guarded against by the ordinary exertion of
ISABELA ROQUE, doing business under the name law. Section 113 of the Insurance Code provides: human skill and prudence. Damage done to a vessel
and style of Isabela Roque Timber Enterprises In every marine insurance upon a ship or freight, or by perils of the sea includes every species of
and ONG CHIONG, petitioners, vs. HON. freightage, or upon any thing that is the subject of damages done to a vessel at sea, as distinguished
INTERMEDIATE APPELATE COURT and PIONEER marine insurance, a warranty is implied that the ship from the ordinary wear and tear of the voyage,
INSURANCE AND SURETY is seaworthy. and distinct from injuries suffered by the vessel in
CORPORATION, respondent. Section 99 of the same Code also provides in part. consequence of her not being seaworthy at the outset
Marine insurance includes: of her voyage (as in this case). It is also the general
FACTS: (1) Insurance against loss of or damage to: rule that everything which happens thru the inherent
On February 19, 1972, the Manila Bay Lighterage (a) Vessels, craft, aircraft, vehicles, goods, freights, vice of the thing, or by the act of the owners, master
Corporation (Manila Bay), a common carrier, entered cargoes, merchandise, ... or shipper, shall not be reputed a peril, if not
into a contract with the petitioners whereby the former otherwise borne in the policy.
would load and carry on board its barge Mable 10 It is quite unmistakable that the loss of the cargo was
about 422.18 cubic meters of logs from Malampaya From the above-quoted provisions, there can be no due to the perils of the ship rather than the perils of
Sound, Palawan to North Harbor, Manila. The mistaking the fact that the term "cargo" can be the the sea. The facts clearly negate the petitioners' claim
petitioners insured the logs against loss for subject of marine insurance and that once it is so under the insurance policy.
P100,000.00 with respondent Pioneer Insurance and made, the implied warranty of seaworthiness In the present case the entrance of the sea water into
Surety Corporation (Pioneer). immediately attaches to whoever is insuring the cargo the ship's hold through the defective pipe already
On February 29, 1972, the petitioners loaded on the whether he be the shipowner or not. described was not due to any accident which
barge, 811 pieces of logs at Malampaya Sound, Since the law provides for an implied warranty of
happened during the voyage, but to the failure of the
Palawan for carriage and delivery to North Harbor, seaworthiness in every contract of ordinary marine
Port of Manila, but the shipment never reached its insurance, it becomes the obligation of a cargo owner ship's owner properly to repair a defect of the
destination because Mable 10 sank with the 811 to look for a reliable common carrier which keeps its existence of which he was apprised. The loss was
pieces of logs somewhere off Cabuli Point in Palawan vessels in seaworthy condition. The shipper of cargo therefore more analogous to that which directly results
on its way to Manila. may have no control over the vessel but he has full from simple unseaworthiness than to that which result
Hence, petitioners commenced Civil Case No. 86599 control in the choice of the common carrier that will from the perils of the sea.
against Manila Bay and respondent Pioneer. transport his goods. Or the cargo owner may enter
into a contract of insurance which specifically provides GO TIACO VS UNION INSURANCE
DECISION OF LOWER COURTS: that the insurer answers not only for the perils of the
(1) Trial Court: found in favor of petitioners. sea but also provides for coverage of perils of the
(2) Intermediate Appellate Court: absolved the ship. Facts: A cargo of rice belonging to the Go Tiaoco
respondent insurance company from liability on the II. No, the IAC is correct. Brothers, was transported in the early days of May,
grounds that the vessel carrying the insured cargo In marine cases, the risks insured against are "perils 1915, on the steamship Hondagua from the port of
was unseaworthy and the loss of said cargo was of the sea" Saigon to Cebu. On discharging the rice from one of
caused not by the perils of the sea but by the perils of A policy does not cover a loss or injury that must the compartments in the after hold, upon arrival at
the ship inevitably take place in the ordinary course of things.
Cebu, it was discovered that 1,473 sacks had been
There is no doubt that the term 'perils of the sea'
ISSUES: extends only to losses caused by sea damage, or by damaged by sea water. The loss so resulting to the
I. THE INTERMEDIATE APPELLATE COURT the violence of the elements, and does not embrace owners of rice, after proper deduction had been made
ERRED IN HOLDING THAT IN CASES OF MARINE all losses happening at sea. They insure against for the portion saved, was P3,875. The policy of
CARGO INSURANCE, THERE IS A WARRANTY OF losses from extraordinary occurrences only, such as insurance, covering the shipment, was signed upon a
SEAWORTHINESS BY THE CARGO OWNER. stress of weather, winds and waves, lightning, form long in use among companies engaged in
II. THE INTERMEDIATE APPELLATE COURT tempests, rocks and the like. These are understood to maritime insurance. It purports to insure the cargo
ERRED IN HOLDING THAT THE LOSS OF THE be the "perils of the sea" referred in the policy, and
from the following among other risks: "Perils . . . of the
CARGO IN THIS CASE WAS CAUSED BY "PERILS not those ordinary perils which every vessel must
OF THE SHIP" AND NOT BY "PERILS OF THE encounter. "Perils of the sea" has been said to include seas, men, of war, fire, enemies, pirates, rovers,
SEA.” only such losses as are of extraordinary nature, thieves, .jettisons, . . . barratry of the master and
encounter. "Perils of the sea" has been said to include mariners, and of all other perils, losses, and
RULING: only such losses as are of extraordinary nature, misfortunes that have or shall come to the hurt,
I. No. The IAC is correct. or arise from some overwhelming power, which detriment, or damage of the said goods and
merchandise or any part thereof." It was found out cover in terms whatever may be within the spirit of the Issue [2]: Whether there is an implied warranty on the
that the drain pipe which served as a discharge from cases previously enumerated, and so they have a seaworthy of the vessel in every marine insurance
the water closet passed down through the greater or less effect as a narrower or broader view is contract.
compartment where the rice in question was stowed taken of those cases. For example, if the expression
and thence out to sea through the wall of the "perils of the seas" is given its widest sense the Held [2]: YES. It is universally accepted that in every
compartment, which was a part of the wall of the ship. general words have little or no effect as applied to that contract of insurance upon anything which is the
The joint or elbow where the pipe changed its case. If on the other hand that expression is to receive subject of marine insurance, a warranty is implied that
direction was of cast iron; and in course of time it had a limited construction and loss by perils of the seas is the ship shall be seaworthy at the time of the
become corroded and abraded until a longitudinal to be confined to loss ex marine tempestatis inception of the voyage. This rule is accepted in our
opening had appeared in the pipe about one inch in discrimine, the general words become most important. own Insurance Law (Act No. 2427, sec. 106). It is also
length. This hole had been in existence before the But still, when they first became the subject of judicial well settled that a ship which is seaworthy for the
voyage was begun, and an attempt had been made to construction, they have always been held or assumed purpose of insurance upon the ship may yet be
repair it by filling with cement and bolting over it a strip to be restricted to cases "akin to" or "resembling" or unseaworthy for the purpose of insurance upon the
of iron. The effect of loading the boat was to "of the same kind as" those specially mentioned. I see cargo (Act No. 2427, sec. 106).
submerge the vent, or orifice, of the pipe until it was no reason for departing from this settled rule. In
about 18 inches or 2 feet below the level of the sea. marine insurance it is above all things necessary to G.R. No. 76145 June 30, 1987 CATHAY
As a consequence the sea water rose in the pipe. abide by settled rules and to avoid anything like novel INSURANCE CO., petitioner, vs. HON. COURT OF
APPEALS, and REMINGTON INDUSTRIAL SALES
Navigation under these conditions resulted in the refinements or a new departure. It must be considered
CORPORATION, respondents.
washing out of the cement-filling from the action of the to be settled, furthermore, that a loss which, in the
sea water, thus permitting the continued flow of the ordinary course of events, results from the natural and
salt water into the compartment of rice. An action on a inevitable action of the sea, from the ordinary wear FACTS:
policy of marine insurance issued by the Union and tear of the ship, or from the negligent failure of A complaint was filed by private respondent
Insurance Society of Canton, Ltd., upon the cargo of the ship's owner to provide the vessel with proper corporation against petitioner (then defendant)
rice belonging to the Go Tiaoco Brothers was filed. equipment to convey the cargo under ordinary company seeking collection of the sum of
P868,339.15 representing private respondent's losses
The trial court found that the inflow of the sea water conditions, is not a peril of the sea. Such a loss is
and damages incurred in a shipment of seamless
during the voyage was due to a defect in one of the rather due to what has been aptly called the "peril of steel pipes under an insurance contract in favor of the
drain pipes of the ship and concluded that the loss the ship." The insurer undertakes to insure against said private respondent as the insured, consignee or
was not covered by the policy of insurance. Judgment perils of the sea and similar perils, not against perils importer of aforesaid merchandise while in transit
was accordingly entered in favor of Union Insurance of the ship. There must, in order to make the insurer from Japan to the Philippines on board vessel SS
and Go Tiaoco Brothers appealed. liable, be "some casualty, something which could not "Eastern Mariner." The total value of the shipment
be foreseen as one of the necessary incidents of the was P2,894,463.83 at the prevailing rate of P7.95 to a
dollar in June and July 1984, when the shipment was
Issue [1]: Whether perils of the sea includes “entrance adventure. The purpose of the policy is to secure an
made. The trial court decided in favor of private
of water into the ship’s hold through a defective pipe.” indemnity against accidents which may happen, not respondent corporation by ordering petitioner to pay it
against events which must happen." Herein, the the sum of P866,339.15 as its recoverable insured
Held [1]: NO. It is determined that the words "all other entrance of the sea water into the ship's hold through loss equivalent to 30% of the value of the seamless
perils, losses, and misfortunes" are to be interpreted the defective pipe already described was not due to steel pipes; ordering petitioner to pay private
as covering risks which are of like kind (ejusdem any accident which happened during the voyage, but respondent interest on the aforecited amount at the
generis) with the particular risks which are rate of 34% or double the ceiling prescribed by the
to the failure of the ship's owner properly to repair a
Monetary Board per annum from February 3, 1982 or
enumerated in the preceding part of the same clause defect of the existence of which he was apprised. The 90 days from private respondent's submission of proof
of the contract. According to the ordinary rules of loss was therefore more analogous to that which of loss to petitioner until paid as provided in the
construction these words must be interpreted with directly results from simple unseaworthiness than to settlement of claim provision of the policy; and
reference to the words which immediately precede that which results from perils of the sea. ordering petitioner to pay private respondent certain
them. They were no doubt inserted in order to prevent amounts for marine surveyor's fee, attorney's fees
disputes founded on nice distinctions. Their office is to and costs of the suit.
of a divisible contract of insurance and, consequently, was more than ¾ of the amount lost, showing a
ISSUE: WON the rusting of steel pipes in the course a constructive total loss. constructive total loss.
of a voyage is a "peril of the sea" in view of the toll on The SC, however, said that although the logs were
the cargo of wind, water, and salt conditions. Held: No. Petition granted. placed in two barges, they were not separately valued
by the policy, nor separately insured. Of the entirety of
RULING: Ratio: 1,208, pieces of logs, only 497 pieces thereof were
Perla v CA- The terms of the contract constitute the lost or 41.45% of the entire shipment. Since the cost
There is no question that the rusting of steel pipes in measure of the insurer liability and compliance of those 497 pieces does not exceed 75% of the value
the course of a voyage is a "peril of the sea" in view of therewith is a condition precedent to the insured's of all 1,208 pieces of logs, the shipment can not be
the toll on the cargo of wind, water, and salt right to recovery from the insurer. said to have sustained a constructive total loss under
conditions. At any rate if the insurer cannot be held “Whether a contract is entire or severable is a Section 139(a) of the Insurance Code.
accountable therefor, We would fail to observe a question of intention to be determined by the
cardinal rule in the interpretation of contracts, namely, language employed by the parties. The policy in
that any ambiguity therein should be construed question shows that the subject matter insured was
against the maker/issuer/drafter thereof, namely, the the entire shipment of 2,000 cubic meters of apitong
insurer. Besides the precise purpose of insuring cargo logs. The fact that the logs were loaded on two
during a voyage would be rendered fruitless. Be it different barges did not make the contract several
noted that any attack of the 15-day clause in the and divisible as to the items insured. The logs on the
policy was foreclosed right in the pre-trial conference. two barges were not separately valued or separately
insured. Only one premium was paid for the entire
shipment, making for only one cause or consideration.
Oriental v CA G.R. No. 94052 August 9, 1991 The insurance contract must, therefore, be considered
J. Melencio-Herrera indivisible.”
Also, the insurer's liability was for "total loss only" as
Facts: stipulated. A total loss may be either actual or
Panama Sawmill shipped 1208 pieces of apitog logs constructive. An actual total loss under Sec 130 of the
to Manila and insured the logs with Oriental for the Insurance Code is caused by:
value of Php 1 million. Two barges were loaded with (a) A total destruction of the thing insured;
610 and 598 logs. At sea, typhoons ravaged one of (b) The irretrievable loss of the thing by sinking, or by
the barges, resulting in the loss of 497 of 598 of the being broken up;
logs. (c) Any damage to the thing which renders it valueless
The Insurance contract provided for indemnity under to the owner for the purpose for which he held it; or
the following conditions: (d) Any other event which effectively deprives the
Warranted that this Insurance is against TOTAL owner of the possession, at the port of destination, of
LOSS ONLY. Subject to the following clauses: the thing insured.
— Civil Code Article 1250 Waiver clause A constructive total loss, gives to a person insured a
— Typhoon warranty clause right to abandon and it means:
— Omnibus clause. SECTION 139. A person insured by a contract of
Oriental didn’t give an indemnity because there wasn’t marine insurance may abandon the thing insured, or
total loss of the shipment. any particular portion thereof separately valued by the
The sawmill filed a civil case against Oriental and the policy, or otherwise separately insured, and recover
court ordered it to pay 410,000 as value for the for a total loss thereof, when the cause of the loss is a
missing logs. The CA affirmed the lower court peril injured against,
judgment but reduced the legal interest. Hence this (a) If more than three-fourths thereof in value is
appeal by Oriental. actually lost, or would have to be expended to recover
it from the peril;
Issue: (b) If it is injured to such an extent as to reduce its
Whether or not Oriental Assurance can be held liable value more than three-fourths
under its marine insurance policy based on the theory The appellate court considered the cargo in one barge
as separate from the other and ruled that 497 of 598