Scribd
Upload
27 views

G.R. No. 60506 August 6, 1992 VDA. DE MAGLANA Versus HON. F. CONSOLACION Facts

An accident involving a jeep owned by Destrajo and driven by Pepito Into killed Lope Maglana. Maglana's heirs filed a case against Destrajo, AFISCO as the insurer, and Pepito for homicide. The RTC found AFISCO secondarily liable. On appeal, the court ruled that while third parties can directly sue an insurer under an indemnity contract, the insurer's liability is based on contract and is not solidary with the insured or other parties found at fault, whose liability is based on tort.

Uploaded by

Oscar E Valero
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
27 views

G.R. No. 60506 August 6, 1992 VDA. DE MAGLANA Versus HON. F. CONSOLACION Facts

An accident involving a jeep owned by Destrajo and driven by Pepito Into killed Lope Maglana. Maglana's heirs filed a case against Destrajo, AFISCO as the insurer, and Pepito for homicide. The RTC found AFISCO secondarily liable. On appeal, the court ruled that while third parties can directly sue an insurer under an indemnity contract, the insurer's liability is based on contract and is not solidary with the insured or other parties found at fault, whose liability is based on tort.

Uploaded by

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

6 G.R. No. 60506 August 6, 1992 VDA. DE MAGLANA versus HON. F.

CONSOLACION
FACTS:
A PUJ jeep owned by Destrajo, driven by Pepito Into and insured by AFISCO met an accident
which killed Lope Maglana while on the way to his workplace as employee of the Bureau of
Customs. Maglanas heirs filed an action for damages against Destrato and AFISCO and
Homicide thru Reckless imprudence against Pepito.RTC held AFISCO as secondarily liable.
Unacceptable to the heirs of Maglana, they appealed the decision contending that insurer's
liability is "direct and/or solidary with the operator of the vehicle.
ISSUE: Whether or not insurers liability is solidary with the insured which figured in an accident
causing death of a third person?
RULINGS:
No. While it is true that where the insurance contract provides for indemnity against liability to
third persons, such third persons can directly sue the insurer, however, the direct liability of the
insurer under indemnity contracts against third party liability does not mean that the insurer can
be held solidarily liable with the insured and/or the other parties found at fault. The liability of the
insurer is based on contract; that of the insured is based on tort.

You might also like