lance court room observation
1. EGUARAS vs. GREAT EASTERN
33 PHIL 263
FACTS:
Francisca Eguaras filed a written complaint in court, alleging as a cause of action that her son-in-law Dominador Albay had applied in writing to the defendant insurance company to insure his life for the sum of P5,000, naming as the beneficiary in case of his death the plaintiff FranciscaEguaras; that after compliance with the requisites and the investigation carried on by the defendant company, it accepted the application for insurance and issued the policy; that, said policy being in force, the insured died, and despite the fact that the beneficiary submitted satisfactory proofs of his death and that the defendant company investigated the event, still it refused and continues to refuse to pay to the plaintiff the value of the policy. Defendant set forth in special defense that the insurance policy issued in the name of Dominador Albay had been obtained through fraud and deceit known and consent to by theinterested parties and is therefore completely illegal, void, and ineffective.
A criminal case for frustrated estafa was filed by defendant against Ponciano Remigio, CastorGarcia and Francisca Eguaras. They were acquitted, and claim that the judgment produces theeffect of res judicata in the present suit.
ISSUE: WON the life insurance obtained by Dominador Albay was issued through fraud and deceit
HELD: YES.Ratio
In a contract where one of the contracting parties may have given his consent through error,violence, intimidation, or deceit, and in any of such cases the contract is void, even though, despite thisnullity, no crime was committed. There may not have been estafa in the case at bar, but it wasconclusively demonstrated by the trial that deceit entered into the insurance contract, fulfillmentwhereof is claimed, and therefore the conclusions reached by the court in the judgment it rendered inthe criminal proceedings for estafa do not affect this suit, nor can they produce in the
33 PHIL 263
FACTS:
Francisca Eguaras filed a written complaint in court, alleging as a cause of action that her son-in-law Dominador Albay had applied in writing to the defendant insurance company to insure his life for the sum of P5,000, naming as the beneficiary in case of his death the plaintiff FranciscaEguaras; that after compliance with the requisites and the investigation carried on by the defendant company, it accepted the application for insurance and issued the policy; that, said policy being in force, the insured died, and despite the fact that the beneficiary submitted satisfactory proofs of his death and that the defendant company investigated the event, still it refused and continues to refuse to pay to the plaintiff the value of the policy. Defendant set forth in special defense that the insurance policy issued in the name of Dominador Albay had been obtained through fraud and deceit known and consent to by theinterested parties and is therefore completely illegal, void, and ineffective.
A criminal case for frustrated estafa was filed by defendant against Ponciano Remigio, CastorGarcia and Francisca Eguaras. They were acquitted, and claim that the judgment produces theeffect of res judicata in the present suit.
ISSUE: WON the life insurance obtained by Dominador Albay was issued through fraud and deceit
HELD: YES.Ratio
In a contract where one of the contracting parties may have given his consent through error,violence, intimidation, or deceit, and in any of such cases the contract is void, even though, despite thisnullity, no crime was committed. There may not have been estafa in the case at bar, but it wasconclusively demonstrated by the trial that deceit entered into the insurance contract, fulfillmentwhereof is claimed, and therefore the conclusions reached by the court in the judgment it rendered inthe criminal proceedings for estafa do not affect this suit, nor can they produce in the