Republic of the
PhilippinesSUPREME COURTEN BANC
LIM JUCO,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
G.
R.
No. 982
January
4, 1904
-versus-
LIM
YAP,
Defendant-Appellee.
D E C I S I
O N
TORRES, J:
The plaintiff, Lim
Juco,
sued the defendant, Lim Yap, for damages in the sum of 13,000 Pesos for
breach of a contract to insure a cargo of rice. The defendant in his
answer
denied that he was under any obligation to pay this sum, upon the
ground
that the second contract of insurance represented by the policy
introduced
in evidence by the plaintiff is void.
The
Court below, in
view of the evidence adduced by the parties and in consideration of the
facts admitted and agreed upon between them, rendered judgment for the
defendant, with the costs against the plaintiff.
The
complaint upon
which it is sought to recover the sum of 13,000 Pesos as damages is
based
upon the failure of the defendant to fulfill his obligation of
executing
a valid and enforceable policy of insurance upon a cargo of rice.
The
parties-litigant
agree that long prior to June 14, 1900, when a contract of insurance
was
entered into between the plaintiff, Lim Juco, and the defendant, Lim
Yap,
as representative of the King Yuen Insurance Company, Limited, insuring
3,000 sacks of rice, valued at 13,000 Pesos, loaded on the barkentine
Registro,
they had entered into the agreement which appears in Section 9, Page 2
of the bill of exceptions. This agreement, the plaintiff contends,
constituted
a contract of insurance between him and the firm of Germann & Co.,
the agents of La Federal Insurance Company, for the insurance of the
same
3,000 sacks of rice before referred to for their total value.
The
brig in question,
which sailed from the port of Dagupan June 15, 1900, for this city,
carrying
the 3,000 sacks of rice so insured, was wrecked on the following day,
the
16th, near the port of Vigan, Island of Luzon, the entire cargo being
lost.
On the 17th of the same month Pio Acosta, the skipper, together with
some
of the members of the shipwrecked vessel, entered, before the customs
inspector
in the port of Vigan, a ship's protest in due form, with respect to the
said shipwreck. Upon their arrival in this city this protest was
repeated
before the notary public, Enrique Barrera. Of all these facts the
defendant
had immediate notice.
The
plaintiff has been
completely indemnified for the loss of the 3,000 sacks of rice which
went
down in the wreck of the brig Registro. On the 11th of August 1901, he
received from the firm of Germann & Co. the sum of 13,000 Pesos,
the
amount of insurance underwritten by that firm in favor of the
plaintiff.
[Bill of exceptions, pp. 6 and 7]. The manager of the firm testified to
this fact, and stated that he had written a letter to the defendant
notifying
him that he had paid the amount of the insurance on the lost rice
belonging
to the plaintiff, Lim Juco.
Article
782 of the
Code of Commerce provides that if different contracts of insurance have
been entered into concerning the same thing, in the absence of fraud
only
the first contract shall subsist, provided it covers the full value of
the things insured. Subsequent insurers shall be relieved from
responsibility,
and received one-half of 1 per cent of the amount insured.
If
the first contract
does not cover the entire value of the thing insured, then the
liability
for the excess shall fall upon the subsequent insurers in order of
priority.
The
only error assigned
by the appellant is that the court erred in the rendering judgment for
the defendant and in imposing the costs upon the plaintiff, Lim Juco.
The
plaintiff has not
demanded from the defendant , Lim Yap, the value of the rice insured by
him as agent of the Panag Khean Guan Insurance Company, Limited, nor
has
he affirmed or denied the validity or enforceability of the policy
executed
in his favor by the defendant, notwithstanding the fact that it was the
second contract of insurance upon the same thing.
The
plaintiff, Lim
Juco, realizing that no action had accrued to him and that his policy
was
unenforceable from his point of view - that is, for the reason that it
was defective in form and not because of the existence of a former
contract
of insurance, covering the same 3,000 sacks of rice - commenced this
suit
against the insurance agent to recover damages for the amount of the
injury
occasioned by the loss of the rice. The action was based upon the
alleged
nullity of the policy, which in the opinion of the plaintiff was
deficient
and had been executed without the formalities required by law.
We
do not deem it
necessary
to make any decision as to the conditions of the said policy, inasmuch
as the plaintiff has not suffered damage by reason of the deficiency
resulting
from a failure to comply with the formal requisites prescribed by the
Article
738 of the Code of Commerce.
The
unenforceability
of this policy, even if all the legal formalities had been complied
with
in its execution, is due to the prohibition established by the law
against
the double recovery of the value of a cargo of property insured and
lost
by any maritime accident.
It
is a fact disclosed
by the evidence that the plaintiff has recovered the entire amount of
the
value of 3,000 sacks of rice insured and subsequently lost by the
wrecking
of the vessel. Therefore, in accordance with the provisions of Article
782 of the Code of Commerce, the second or subsequent insurer, the
defendant
herein, is free from all liability. The law will not permit Lim Juco,
after
having collected from Germann & Co. an amount in excess of the
value
of the rice insured, to collect for the second time from a second
insurer.
The latter's obligation in the premises has been annulled by the
provisions
of the law.
It
is unnecessary to
discuss the condition of the contract of insurance signed by Germann
&
Co. on behalf of the Federal Insurance Company, in view of the
unquestionable
fact that the plaintiff collected and received from the said firm more
than the entire value of the rice lost. For this reason, whatever may
have
been the defects in the policy issued by the insurer, no action has
accrued
to the plaintiff for the recovery of damages. Upon the facts of the
case
there is no law which sanctions such an action. It is a demand as
unjust
as it is immoral, and seeks to elude the prohibition of a double
recovery
of the value of the property insured.
As
the second contract
of insurance entered into is null and void and, therefore, by express
provision
of the law, produces no obligation with respect to the Chinese Company
represented by the defendant, the plaintiff having recovered the total
amount of the insurance from the first insurer, there is no legal
reason
upon which the agent of the company can be compelled to pay the amount
of the second policy of insurance, from which, as above stated, this
agent
was freed by operation of law. Neither can an action for damage be
successfully
maintained against the agent, as none of the Articles of the Code of
Commerce
which deal with commission agents, factors, and clerks create such an
obligation.
Nor is such an obligation created by any of the Articles of the same
Code
concerning marine insurance.
For
the reasons given,
the action against the defendant, Lim Yap, is dismissed and the
judgment
below affirmed, with the costs to the plaintiff. Judgment will be
entered
and the case remanded to the court below twenty days from the date of
the
notification of this decision. So ordered.
Arellano, C.J.,
Cooper, Willard, Mapa, and McDonough, JJ., concur.
Johnson, J.,
did not sit in this case. |
