Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 12 views

    Wills & Succession

    Uploaded by

    Melgen
    This document discusses three legal cases related to the interpretation of insurance provisions: 1. Ty v. First National Surety examines whether partial disability was covered when the plaintiff's hand was disabled but not amputated as specified in the policy. 2. De la Cruz v. Capital Insurance considers if an accidental death during a non-pro boxing match was covered, finding that without an unintentional slip the insured may not have died. 3. Qua Chee Gan v. Law Union Insurer analyzes if gasoline could be considered "oil" to void a claim, determining any ambiguity must be interpreted in favor of the insured to avoid forfeiture.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Wills & Succession

    Uploaded by

    Melgen
    12 views1 page
    This document discusses three legal cases related to the interpretation of insurance provisions: 1. Ty v. First National Surety examines whether partial disability was covered when the plaintiff's hand was disabled but not amputated as specified in the policy. 2. De la Cruz v. Capital Insurance considers if an accidental death during a non-pro boxing match was covered, finding that without an unintentional slip the insured may not have died. 3. Qua Chee Gan v. Law Union Insurer analyzes if gasoline could be considered "oil" to void a claim, determining any ambiguity must be interpreted in favor of the insured to avoid forfeiture.

    Original Description:

    thanks

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    This document discusses three legal cases related to the interpretation of insurance provisions: 1. Ty v. First National Surety examines whether partial disability was covered when the plaintiff's hand was disabled but not amputated as specified in the policy. 2. De la Cruz v. Capital Insurance considers if an accidental death during a non-pro boxing match was covered, finding that without an unintentional slip the insured may not have died. 3. Qua Chee Gan v. Law Union Insurer analyzes if gasoline could be considered "oil" to void a claim, determining any ambiguity must be interpreted in favor of the insured to avoid forfeiture.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    12 views1 page

    Wills & Succession

    Uploaded by

    Melgen
    This document discusses three legal cases related to the interpretation of insurance provisions: 1. Ty v. First National Surety examines whether partial disability was covered when the plaintiff's hand was disabled but not amputated as specified in the policy. 2. De la Cruz v. Capital Insurance considers if an accidental death during a non-pro boxing match was covered, finding that without an unintentional slip the insured may not have died. 3. Qua Chee Gan v. Law Union Insurer analyzes if gasoline could be considered "oil" to void a claim, determining any ambiguity must be interpreted in favor of the insured to avoid forfeiture.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 1

    Construction in Insurance

    Rule in the interpretation of insurance provisions

    1. Ty v. First National Surety

    Whether Diosdado Ty is entitled to indemnity under the insurance policy for the disability of his left hand.
    While the Court sympathizes with the plaintiff or his employer, for whose benefit the policies were issued,
    it can not go beyond the clear and express conditions of the insurance policies, all of which define partial
    disability as loss of either hand by an amputation through the bones of the wrist.” There was no such
    amputation in the case at bar.

    2. De la Cruz v. Capital Insurance

    Eduardo de la Cruz was the holder of an accident insurance policy. Eduardo slipped and was hit by his
    opponent on the left part of the back of the head, causing Eduardo to fall and death in a non-pro boxing
    bout. Whether the death of the insured is covered by the policy. The terms “accident” and “accidental”
    have not acquired any technical meaning, and are construed by the courts in their ordinary and common
    acceptation. In the present case, while the participation of the insured in the boxing contest is voluntary, if
    without the unintentional slipping of the deceased, perhaps he could not have received that blow in the
    head and would not have died.

    Ambiguous provision interpreted against insurer

    1. Qua Chee Gan v. Law Union Insurer

    Whether gasoline may be construed as oil to warrant the forfeiture of claims under the insurance policy.
    By reason of the exclusive control of the insurance company over the terms and phraseology of the
    contract, the ambiguity must be held strictly against the insurer and liberally in favor of the insured,
    especially to avoid forfeiture. There is no reason why the prohibition of keeping gasoline in the premises
    could not be expressed clearly and unmistakably, in the language and terms that the general public can
    readily understand, without resort to obscure esoteric expression.

    You might also like