Week 7 Case 19 G.R. No. 204736 Flashcards
Facts: Rescission of Contracts due to Concealment or Misrepresentation of Material Facts
Did the CA commit any reversible error in affirming the RTC decision dismissing Manulife’s Complaint for rescission of insurance
contracts for failure to prove concealment on the part of the insured?
No.
Manulife’s Complaint for rescission of the insurance policies in question was totally bereft of factual and legal bases because it had utterly failed to prove that the insured had committed the alleged misrepresentation/s or concealment/s of material facts imputed against him.
What are the reasons for the dismissal of the petition?
(1) The RTC correctly held that the CDH’s medical
records that might have established the insured’s purported misrepresentation/s or concealment/s was inadmissible for being hearsay,
given the fact that Manulife failed to present the physician or any responsible official of the CDH who could confirm or attest to the due
execution and authenticity of the alleged medical records.
(2) Manulife had utterly failed to prove by convincing evidence that it had been beguiled,
inveigled, or cajoled into selling the insurance to the insured who purportedly with malice and deceit passed himself off as thoroughly sound and healthy, and thus a fit and proper applicant for life insurance. Manulife’s sole witness
gave no evidence at all relative to the particulars of the purported concealment or misrepresentation allegedly perpetrated by the insured. In fact, Victoriano merely perfunctorily identified the documentary exhibits
adduced by Manulife; she never testified in regard to the circumstances attending the execution of these documentary exhibits much less in regard to its contents. Of course, the mere mechanical act of identifying these documentary exhibits, without the testimonies of the actual participating parties thereto, adds up to nothing. These documentary exhibits did not
automatically validate or explain themselves. “The fraudulent intent on the part of the insured must be established to entitle the insurer to rescind the contract. Misrepresentation as a defense of the insurer to avoid liability is an
affirmative defense and the duty to establish such defense by satisfactory and convincing evidence rests upon the insurer.” For failure of Manulife to prove intent to defraud on the part of the insured, it cannot validly sue for rescission of insurance contracts.
