Scribd
Upload
9 views2 pages

Lopez Vs Del Rosario - G.R. No. 19189

The case involves Froilan Lopez and Salvador V. Del Rosario regarding a fire that destroyed a warehouse owned by Del Rosario, leading to disputes over insurance proceeds. The court ruled that Lopez is entitled to an additional P100.22 from the interest accrued on salvaged copra, but denied his claim for 12% interest due to lack of fraudulent behavior by the defendants. The court affirmed that the defendants acted as agents for Lopez in securing insurance, thus he is entitled to a share of the insurance proceeds, resulting in a final award of P81,093.65 with legal interest.

Uploaded by

Andeng del Rosario
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
9 views2 pages

Lopez Vs Del Rosario - G.R. No. 19189

The case involves Froilan Lopez and Salvador V. Del Rosario regarding a fire that destroyed a warehouse owned by Del Rosario, leading to disputes over insurance proceeds. The court ruled that Lopez is entitled to an additional P100.22 from the interest accrued on salvaged copra, but denied his claim for 12% interest due to lack of fraudulent behavior by the defendants. The court affirmed that the defendants acted as agents for Lopez in securing insurance, thus he is entitled to a share of the insurance proceeds, resulting in a final award of P81,093.65 with legal interest.

Uploaded by

Andeng del Rosario
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/ 2

FROILAN LOPEZ vs. SALVADOR V. DEL ROSARIO et.

al
G.R. No. 19189
Nov. 27, 1922

FACTS:

The events leading to the case unfolded in Manila, where Benita Quiogue de V. Del
Rosario owned a bonded warehouse that stored copra and other merchandise. On June 6,
1920, a fire completely destroyed the warehouse, resulting in a total loss of the building
and significant damage to the stored copra, with only P49,985 salvaged. Froilan Lopez
held fourteen warehouse receipts for copra stored in the warehouse, with a declared
value of P107,990.40. Although Lopez had paid for insurance up to May 18, 1920, he did
not continue payments thereafter. Mrs. Del Rosario had secured insurance for the
warehouse and its contents with several insurance companies, totaling P404,800.
Following the fire, an arbitration agreement was executed between Mrs. Del Rosario and
the insurance companies, leading to an award of P363,610, plus the salvaged amount,
totaling P414,258. While Mrs. Del Rosario settled with most depositors, she failed to
reach an agreement with Lopez, who insisted on receiving P88,595.43. The trial court
awarded Lopez P88,495.21, leading both parties to appeal the decision.

Issue:
1. Is Froilan Lopez entitled to the additional amount of P100.22 to participate in the
interest accrued from the salvaged copra? YES
2. Should Lopez be awarded interest at the rate of 12% per annum due to alleged
fraudulent behavior by the defendants? NO
3. Did the defendants act as agents for Lopez in securing insurance, and are they
liable for the insurance proceeds?YES

Ruling:
1. The court ruled in favor of Froilan Lopez, granting him the additional amount of
P100.22.
2. The court denied Lopez's claim for 12% interest, stating that the defendants did
not evade their obligations.
3. The court found that the defendants were liable for the insurance proceeds,
affirming that Lopez's rights to the insurance money were not forfeited despite his
failure to pay for insurance after May 18, 1920.

Ratio:
The court's decision to grant Lopez the additional P100.22 was based on the principle
that he should participate in the interest accrued from the salvaged copra, as the
defendants did not contest this claim. Regarding the interest rate, the court referenced
Article 1108 of the Civil Code, emphasizing that the claimed damages were too
speculative and remote to warrant a 12% interest rate. The court clarified that the
defendants had not evaded their legal obligations, and the dispute was a common
occurrence in litigation. On the issue of agency, the court determined that the
defendants acted as agents for Lopez in securing insurance, which entitled him to a
share of the insurance proceeds. The court also noted that the arbitration agreement and
the acknowledgment of responsibility by Mrs. Del Rosario reinforced Lopez's claim to the
insurance money. Ultimately, the court calculated Lopez's net entitlement after
deducting his share of the expenses and outstanding storage fees, resulting in a final
award of P81,093.65 with legal interest.

You might also like