Scribd
Upload
62 views1 page

GUINGON vs. DEL MONTE

The insured owned jeepneys that were insured against accidents with third party liability. One of the jeepney drivers bumped and killed Guingon, leading Guingon to file damages against the owner, driver, and insurance company. The insurance company argued it had no liability. The court held that the insurance policy agreed to indemnify against legal liability for death or injury to others. As this was a stipulation pour autrui (for the benefit of third parties), the injured party could sue the insurer directly since the insured was liable to the third party. Therefore, the insurance company must pay the claimants.

Uploaded by

wuplawschool
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
62 views1 page

GUINGON vs. DEL MONTE

The insured owned jeepneys that were insured against accidents with third party liability. One of the jeepney drivers bumped and killed Guingon, leading Guingon to file damages against the owner, driver, and insurance company. The insurance company argued it had no liability. The court held that the insurance policy agreed to indemnify against legal liability for death or injury to others. As this was a stipulation pour autrui (for the benefit of third parties), the injured party could sue the insurer directly since the insured was liable to the third party. Therefore, the insurance company must pay the claimants.

Uploaded by

wuplawschool
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 1

GUINGON vs.

DEL MONTE
G.R. No. L-22042, August 17, 1967
BENGZON, J.P., J.
FACTS:
The insured owned a fleet of jeepneys.  He insured the operation of his jeepneys
against “accidents with third part liability” with Capital Insurance and Surety Co. One
day, one of his jeepney dirivers, bumped and killed Guingon. An action for damages
was then filed against the owner-insured, the driver and the company. The company
sought to dismiss the charges against it on the ground of lack of cause of action against
it.

ISSUE:
Whether or not there is a cause of action against the company.

HELD:
YES. The right of a person injured to sue the insurer of the party at fault depends
on whether the contract of insurance was intended to benefit third persons.  The test
applied here is: Where the contract provides for indemnity against liability to third
persons, then third persons to whom the insured is liable, can sue the insurer.  On the
other hand, where the contract is for indemnity against actual loss or payment, then
third persons cannot proceed against the insurer, the contract being solely to reimburse
the insured for liability actually discharged by him through payment to third persons,
said third persons' recourse being thus limited to the insured alone

The policy in the present case, is one whereby the insurer agreed to indemnify
the insured "against all sums. which the Insured shall become legally liable to pay in
respect of: a. death of or bodily injury to any person . . ." Clearly, therefore, it is one for
indemnity against liability from the fact then that the insured is liable to the third person,
such third person is entitled to sue the insurer.

Since the policy in questioned contained a stipulation pour autrui, then the
insurance company must deliver the proceeds to the claimants.

You might also like