Nothing Special   »   [go: up one dir, main page]

PREMIUM: An Insurance Premium Is The Consideration Paid An Insurer For Undertaking To

Download as odt, pdf, or txt
Download as odt, pdf, or txt
You are on page 1of 3

PREMIUM: An insurance premium is the consideration paid an insurer for undertaking to

indemnify the insured against the specified peril

General Rule: Sec. 77. An insurer is entitled to payment of the premium as soon as the thing
insured is exposed to the peril insured against.

Notwithstanding any agreement to the contrary, no policy or contract of insurance issued by


an insurance company is valid and binding unless and until the premium thereof has been
paid.

Exemption:
1. In the case of a life or an industrial life policy whenever the grace period provision applies.

2. Sec. 79. An acknowledgment in a policy or contract of insurance or the receipt of premium


is conclusive evidence of its payment, so far as to make the policy binding, notwithstanding
any stipulation therein that it shall not be binding until the premium is actually paid.

3. if the parties have agreed to the payment in installments of the premium and partial
payment has been made at the time of loss, not only that. (Tuscany v CA)

4. if the insurer has granted the insured a credit term for the payment of the premium and loss
occurs before the expiration of the term, recovery on the policy should be allowed even
though the premium is paid after the loss but within the credit term. (Tuscany v CA)

Note: there is nothing in Section 77 which prohibits the parties in an insurance contract to
provide a credit term within which to pay the premiums. That agreement is not against the
law, morals, good customs, public order or public policy. The agreement binds the parties.

5. Estoppel

Return of Premium
• when the thing is not exposed to the peril insured against
• time policy: when the policy is returned before the expiration of the stipulated time
• voidable contract which is subsequently annulled
• annulment of contract on account of fraud or misrepresentation of the insurer or his  agent or on
account of facts the existence of which the insured was ignorant of without his fault
• when by any default of the insured other than actual fraud, the insurer never incurred liability
under the policy
• over-insurance by several insurers
Cases:

A. General Rule
1. PHILIPPINE PHOENIX SURETY vs WOODWORK INC

That “no contract of insurance issued by an insurance company is valid and binding unless
and until the premium thereof has been paid, notwithstanding any agreement to the contrary.”
Since the premium had not been paid, the policy must be deemed to have lapsed.

Ruling:
Under the insurance code, “no contract of insurance issued by an insurance company is valid
and binding unless and until the premium thereof has been paid, notwithstanding any
agreement to the contrary.”

Since the premium had not been paid, the policy must be deemed to have lapsed. The non-
payment of premiums does not merely suspend but put, an end to an insurance contract,
since the time of the payment is peculiarly of the essence of the contract.

2. TIBAY et al vs CA – May a fire insurance policy be valid, binding and enforceable upon
mere partial payment of premium?

Note: If the policy requires full payment = General Rule

Where the premium has only been partially paid and the balance paid only after the peril
insured against has occurred, the insurance contract did not take effect and the insured
cannot collect at all on the policy.

Ruling:
Insurance is a contract whereby one undertakes for a consideration to indemnify another
against loss, damage or liability arising from an unknown or contingent event. The
consideration is the premium, which must be paid at the time and in the way and manner
specified in the policy, and if not so paid, the policy will lapse and be forfeited by its own
terms.

Here, Since the Policy provides for payment of premium in full and no other indications
relating to the exemptions of article 77 of the insurance code. Thus Accordingly, where the
premium has only been partially paid and the balance paid only after the peril insured against
has occurred, the insurance contract did not take effect and the insured cannot collect at all
on the policy.
3. Valenzuela vs CA – May a person be held liable for non payment of premium?

Under Jurisprudence, the burden is on an insured to keep a policy in force by the payment of
premiums, rather than on the insurer to exert every effort to prevent the insured from allowing
a policy to elapse through a failure to make premium payments. The continuance of the
insurer’s obligation is conditional upon the payment of premiums, so that no recovery can be
had upon a lapsed policy, the contractual relation between the parties having ceased. "the
non-payment of premiums does not merely suspend but puts an end to an insurance contract
since the time of the payment is peculiarly of the essence of the contract."

Here, Since admittedly the premiums have not been paid, the policies issued have lapsed.
The insurance coverage did not go into effect or did not continue and the obligation of insurer
ceased. Hence, the insurer which had no more liability under the lapsed and inexistent
policies to demand, much less sue the insured for the unpaid premiums would be the height
of injustice and unfair dealing.

B. Exemption
1. UCPB vs Masagana telemart

Ruling: in the instant case, it would be unjust and inequitable if recovery on the policy would
not be permitted against Petitioner, which had consistently panted a 60- to 90-day credit term
for the payment of premiums despite its full awareness of Section 77. Estoppel bars it from
taking refuge under said Section, since Respondent relied in good faith on such practice.
Estoppel then is the fifth exception to Section 77

2. Tuscany v CA

Ruling:
While it may be true that under Section 77 of the Insurance Code, the parties may not agree
to make the insurance contract valid and binding without payment of premiums, there is
nothing in said section which suggests that the parties may not agree to allow payment of the
premiums in installment, or to consider the contract as valid and binding upon payment of the
first premium. Otherwise, we would allow the insurer to renege on its liability under the
contract, had a loss incurred before completion of payment of the entire premium, despite its
voluntary acceptance of partial payments, a result eschewed by a basic considerations of
fairness and equity.

C. Payment Using Check

Ruling: In the instant case, the best evidence of such authority is the fact that petitioner
accepted the check and issued the official receipt for the payment. It is, as well, bound by its
agent’s acknowledgment of receipt of payment. And Under Art. 79 of the Insurance Code: An
acknowledgment in a policy or contract of insurance of the receipt of premium is conclusive
evidence of its payment, so far as to make the policy binding, notwithstanding any stipulation
therein that it shall not be binding until the premium is actually paid.

Payment through agent: Authorized to receive in behalf of the insurance company which is
due on such policy or contract of insurance

You might also like