Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 52 views

    MALAYAN Vs CA AND LACSON

    Uploaded by

    Henry Balteza
    Aurelio Lacson's Toyota Land Cruiser was insured with Malayan Insurance. He brought it to a shop for repairs and the shop employees took the vehicle without permission. One of the employees, Rogelio Mahinay, was driving the vehicle when it got into an accident. Malayan Insurance refused to pay Aurelio's claim, arguing the driver was not licensed. The court ruled that the unauthorized taking of the vehicle constituted theft under the insurance policy, so Malayan Insurance had to pay Aurelio's claim. Bacolod IFC also had a small financial interest in the vehicle but did not join the lawsuit, likely because their small stake was not worth intervening over Aurelio's much larger claim.

    Copyright:

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

    MALAYAN Vs CA AND LACSON

    Uploaded by

    Henry Balteza
    52 views2 pages
    Aurelio Lacson's Toyota Land Cruiser was insured with Malayan Insurance. He brought it to a shop for repairs and the shop employees took the vehicle without permission. One of the employees, Rogelio Mahinay, was driving the vehicle when it got into an accident. Malayan Insurance refused to pay Aurelio's claim, arguing the driver was not licensed. The court ruled that the unauthorized taking of the vehicle constituted theft under the insurance policy, so Malayan Insurance had to pay Aurelio's claim. Bacolod IFC also had a small financial interest in the vehicle but did not join the lawsuit, likely because their small stake was not worth intervening over Aurelio's much larger claim.

    Original Title

    MALAYAN vs CA AND LACSON

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Aurelio Lacson's Toyota Land Cruiser was insured with Malayan Insurance. He brought it to a shop for repairs and the shop employees took the vehicle without permission. One of the employees, Rogelio Mahinay, was driving the vehicle when it got into an accident. Malayan Insurance refused to pay Aurelio's claim, arguing the driver was not licensed. The court ruled that the unauthorized taking of the vehicle constituted theft under the insurance policy, so Malayan Insurance had to pay Aurelio's claim. Bacolod IFC also had a small financial interest in the vehicle but did not join the lawsuit, likely because their small stake was not worth intervening over Aurelio's much larger claim.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    52 views2 pages

    MALAYAN Vs CA AND LACSON

    Uploaded by

    Henry Balteza
    Aurelio Lacson's Toyota Land Cruiser was insured with Malayan Insurance. He brought it to a shop for repairs and the shop employees took the vehicle without permission. One of the employees, Rogelio Mahinay, was driving the vehicle when it got into an accident. Malayan Insurance refused to pay Aurelio's claim, arguing the driver was not licensed. The court ruled that the unauthorized taking of the vehicle constituted theft under the insurance policy, so Malayan Insurance had to pay Aurelio's claim. Bacolod IFC also had a small financial interest in the vehicle but did not join the lawsuit, likely because their small stake was not worth intervening over Aurelio's much larger claim.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 2

    MALAYAN INSURANCE vs CA and LACSON

    FACTS:
    Aurelio Lacson ,owner of a Toyota NP Land Cruiser, Model 1972, bearing
    Plate No. NY-362 and with engine Number F-374325 insured with Malayan
    Insurance Co
    Dec. 1, 1975: Aurelio brought it to the shop of Carlos Jamelo for repair
    Dec. 2, 1975: Rogelio Mahinay, together with Johnny Mahinay, Rogelio
    Macapagong and Rogelio Francisco took and drove the Toyota Land Cruiser
    and it met an accident with Bo
    Carlos reported the incident to the police and instituted a criminal case for
    Qualified Theft against his employees
    Rogelio Mahinay pleaded guilty and was convicted of theft
    Aurelio was not allowed to claim on the ground that the claim is not
    covered by the policy inasmuch as the driver of the insured vehicle at the
    time of the accident was not a duly licensed driver

    ISSUE: W/N the taking of the vehicle by another person without


    permission or authority from the owner or person-in-charge
    thereof is sufficient to place it within the ambit of the word theft
    in the policy
    RULING:
    The damages therefore were sustained in the course of the unlawful taking
    Bacolod IFCs interest in the insured vehicle was in the amount of
    P2,000.00 only compared to plaintiff's P26,000.00 it is well to presume
    that Bacolod IFC did not deem it wise to be impleaded as party-plaintiff in
    this case. This inaction on the part of BIFC will only show that it was not
    really interested to intervene.
    KEY CONCEPTS:
    The damages therefore were sustained in the course of the unlawful taking
    Bacolod IFCs interest in the insured vehicle was in the amount of
    P2,000.00 only compared to plaintiff's P26,000.00 it is well to presume
    that Bacolod IFC did not deem it wise to be impleaded as party-plaintiff in
    this case. This inaction on the part of BIFC will only show that it was not
    really interested to intervene.

    You might also like