View full case

RIZAL SURETY v. CA

FACTS:

Rizal Surety & Insurance Company issued a fire insurance policy to Transworld Knitting Mills, Inc. The policy initially covered a value of One Million Pesos and was later increased to One Million Five Hundred Thousand Pesos. The policy covered the period from August 14, 1980 to March 13, 1981. It specified that it covered stocks of finished and/or unfinished products, raw materials and supplies, which were properties of the insured and/or held by them in trust, on commission, or on joint account with others. The insured property was located in the premises occupied by Transworld in their compound at Magdalo Street, Barrio Ugong, Pasig, Metro Manila. The insured buildings were described as a four-span lofty one storey building with mezzanine portions, constructed of reinforced concrete and hollow blocks under a galvanized iron roof. The building was used as a hosiery mills, garment and lingerie factory, transistor-stereo assembly plant, offices, warehouse, and caretaker's quarters. The buildings were surrounded by other structures, open spaces, and Magdalo Street.

On January 12, 1981, a fire broke out in the Transworld compound, causing damage to the buildings and the goods stored therein. Transworld filed insurance claims with Rizal Insurance and New India Assurance Company but was not compensated. Transworld then sued the insurance companies for payment of the losses. The trial court ordered Rizal Insurance to pay Transworld the amount of P826, 500.00 representing the actual value of the losses. Both Rizal Insurance and Transworld appealed to the Court of Appeals, which modified the decision and required New India to pay P1,818,604.19 and Rizal Insurance to pay P470,328.67 based on the actual losses. Rizal Insurance then appealed to the Supreme Court, arguing that the insurance policy did not cover the goods stored in the two-storey annex building.

ISSUES:

  1. Whether the annex building where the bulk of the burned properties were stored was included in the coverage of the insurance policy issued by Rizal Surety & Insurance Company to Transworld Knitting Mills, Inc.

  2. Whether the premises occupied by Transworld, where the insured properties were located, sustained only partial damage as shown by photographs.

  3. Whether Transworld acted in palpable bad faith and malice in filing the civil action, making them liable to pay Rizal Surety & Insurance Company moral and punitive damages, plus attorney's fees and expenses of litigation.

RULING:

  1. The annex building was considered an integral and inseparable part of the four-span building described in the policy. Consequently, the goods and items stored therein were covered by the fire insurance policy.

  2. The resolution of whether the premises sustained only partial damage was not conclusive to alter the liability of Rizal Surety & Insurance Company to indemnify the insured for their loss as the policy covered properties stored within the compound occupied by Transworld.

  3. There was no sufficient basis to conclude that Transworld acted in bad faith or malice in filing the civil action, and thus Rizal Surety & Insurance Company was not entitled to moral and punitive damages, nor to attorney’s fees and expenses of litigation.

PRINCIPLES:

  • Coverage and Interpretation of Insurance Policies: Terms in an insurance policy, which are ambiguous, are to be construed strictly against the insurer and liberally in favor of the insured.

  • Doctrine of Estoppel and Conclusive Judgment: A matter already adjudicated by the court cannot be re-litigated, especially when involving the same facts and parties.

  • Article 1377 of the Civil Code: The interpretation of obscure words or stipulations in a contract shall not favor the party who caused the obscurity.

  • Protection Against Literal Interpretation Trap: Contracts of adhesion, particularly insurance policies, should be interpreted with greater strictness and vigilance to protect the weaker party from potential abuses.