View full case

ZENITH INSURANCE CORPORATION v. CA

FACTS:

Private respondent Lawrence Fernandez insured his car for "own damage" under a private car policy with petitioner Zenith Insurance Corporation. The car figured in an accident and suffered damages. After being given the run around by Zenith for two months, Fernandez filed a complaint for sum of money and damages against Zenith. Fernandez claimed actual damages, interests, moral damages, exemplary damages, attorney's fees, and litigation expenses. Zenith filed an answer alleging that it offered to pay the claim but it was rejected by Fernandez. The pre-trial was scheduled but was moved to explore settlement options. Zenith failed to appear in court and did not present evidence. The trial court issued an order submitting the case for decision without Zenith's evidence. Zenith filed a petition for certiorari with the Court of Appeals but it was denied. The trial court rendered a decision in favor of Fernandez, ordering Zenith to pay damages, interest, moral damages, exemplary damages, attorney's fees, and litigation expenses. Fernandez moved for execution of the decision pending appeal and it was granted. Zenith filed a notice of appeal and assigned errors before the Court of Appeals. The Court of Appeals affirmed the decision of the trial court. Zenith's motion for reconsideration was denied. Zenith filed a petition before the Supreme Court.

ISSUES:

  1. Whether the Court of Appeals had legal basis in awarding moral damages, exemplary damages, and attorney's fees in an amount more than prayed for in the complaint.

  2. Whether the trial court erred in awarding actual damages of P3,640.00 instead of P1,927.50.

RULING:

  1. The Court of Appeals had legal basis in awarding moral damages, exemplary damages, and attorney's fees in an amount more than prayed for in the complaint. The court ruled that the trial court's denial of Fernandez's right to adduce evidence was a closed matter, as previously dismissed in a separate petition by Zenith.

  2. The trial court did not err in awarding actual damages of P3,640.00 instead of P1,927.50. No ruling on this issue was mentioned in the partial digest provided.

PRINCIPLES:

  • Denial of party's right to adduce evidence is a closed matter if the issue has been previously dismissed in a separate petition.

  • The court may award damages in an amount more than prayed for in the complaint if it finds sufficient justification for doing so.