G.R. No. 103883, 14 November 1996, 264 SCRA 137

FACTS:

Marcelino Gabriel was employed by Emerald Construction & Development Corporation (Emerald Construction for brevity) at its construction project in Iraq. He was covered by a personal accident insurance in the amount of P100,000.00 under a group policy procured from Fortune Insurance and Surety Company (Fortune Insurance for brevity) by Emerald Construction for its overseas workers. The insured risk was for bodily injury caused by violent accidental external and visible means which injury would solely and independently of any other cause result in death or disability.

On May 22, 1982, within the life of the policy, Gabriel died in Iraq. On July 12, 1983, Emerald Construction reported Gabriel’s death to Fortune Insurance by telephone. Among the documents thereafter submitted to Fortune Insurance were a copy of the death certificate issued by the Ministry of Health of the Republic of Iraq which stated that an autopsy report by the National Bureau of Investigation was conducted to the effect that due to advanced state of post-mortem decomposition, the cause of death of Gabriel could not be determined.

Because of this development, Fortune Insurance ultimately denied the claim of Emerald Construction on the ground of prescription. Gabriel’s widow, Jacqueline Jimenez, went to the lower court. In her complaint against Emerald Construction and Fortune Insurance, she averred that her husband died of electrocution while in the performance of his work.

Fortune Insurance alleged that since both the death certificate issued by the Iraqi Ministry of Health and the autopsy report of the NBI failed to disclose the cause of death of Gabriel, it denied liability under the policy. In addition, private respondent raised the defense of prescription, invoking section 384 of the Insurance Code.

ISSUE:

Whether or not Jacqueline Jimenez vda. De Gabriel’s claim against Fortune Insurance should be denied on the ground of prescription.

HELD:

Yes. The notice of death was given to Fortune Insurance, concededly, more than a year after the death of Gabriel. The prescription referred to was not the one-year period from denial of the claim within which to file an action against an insurer but obviously to the written notice of claim that had to be submitted within six months from the time of the accident.

The insurance policy expressly provides that to be compensable, the injury or death should be caused by violent accidental external and visible means. In attempting to prove the cause of Gabriel’s death, all that Jacqueline could submit were a letter sent to her by her husband’s co-worker, stating that her husband died when he tried to haul water out of a tank while its submerged motor was still functioning and her sworn affidavit. The said affidavit were considered hearsay under the law for it suffers from procedural infirmity as it was not even testified to or identified by Jacqueline herself.

In summary, evidence is utterly wanting to establish that the insured suffered from an accidental death, the risk covered by the policy.

*Case digest by Maria Novie Taruc, LLB-IV, Andres Bonifacio College Law School, SY 2018-2019