Garcia v. HongKong Fire and Marine Insurance Co. - Wrong Policy

45 PHIL 122

Facts:

>  Garcia had his merchandise insured by Hongkong Fire and Marine Insurance Co.

>  The insurance company however made a mistake and issued a policy covering the building where the merchandise was stored. (The building was not owned by Garcia)

>  The policy was written in English, of which Garcia was ignorant, so he could not have noticed the error of the insurance company.

>  Said policy was later on assigned by Garcia to PNB to secure a loan.  PNB acknowledged receipt of said policy, referring to it as a policy covering the merchandise.

>  The insurance company made the necessary endorsements to PNB.

>  The building which housed the merchandise was later razed by fire.  The insurance company refused to pay due to the fact that the policy indicates insurance on the building and not on the merchandise.

Issue:

Whether or not Garcia can collect.

Held:

YES.

The defense of the insurer is purely technical.  The mistake was obviously on the part of the insurer when it issued a wrong policy.  It cannot deny such allegation due to the fact that it even confirmed with PNB the nature of said policy when it was endorsed.  Garcia could not have noticed the mistake due to his ignorance of the English language.