04-White Gold Marine Services Inc. v. Pioneer Insurance and Surety Corp
04-White Gold Marine Services Inc. v. Pioneer Insurance and Surety Corp
DECISION
QUISUMBING, J : p
This petition for review assails the Decision 1 dated July 30, 2002 of the
Court of Appeals in CA.-G.R. SP No. 60144, affirming the Decision 2 dated May
3, 2000 of the Insurance Commission in I.C. Adm. Case No. RD-277. Both
decisions held that there was no violation of the Insurance Code and the
respondents do not need license as insurer and insurance agent/broker.
The facts are undisputed.
White Gold Marine Services, Inc. (White Gold) procured a protection and
indemnity coverage for its vessels from The Steamship Mutual Underwriting
Association (Bermuda) Limited (Steamship Mutual) through Pioneer Insurance
and Surety Corporation (Pioneer). Subsequently, White Gold was issued a
Certificate of Entry and Acceptance. 3 Pioneer also issued receipts evidencing
payments for the coverage. When White Gold failed to fully pay its accounts,
Steamship Mutual refused to renew the coverage.
Steamship Mutual thereafter filed a case against White Gold for collection
of sum of money to recover the latter's unpaid balance. White Gold on the
other hand, filed a complaint before the Insurance Commission claiming that
Steamship Mutual violated Sections 186 4 and 187 5 of the Insurance Code,
while Pioneer violated Sections 299, 6 300 7 and 301 8 in relation to Sections
302 and 303, thereof. STaCIA
The Insurance Commission dismissed the complaint. It said that there was
no need for Steamship Mutual to secure a license because it was not engaged
in the insurance business. It explained that Steamship Mutual was a Protection
and Indemnity Club (P & I Club). Likewise, Pioneer need not obtain another
license as insurance agent and/or a broker for Steamship Mutual because
Steamship Mutual was not engaged in the insurance business. Moreover,
Pioneer was already licensed, hence, a separate license solely as agent/broker
of Steamship Mutual was already superfluous.
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. © 2023 cdasiaonline.com
The Court of Appeals affirmed the decision of the Insurance
Commissioner. In its decision, the appellate court distinguished between P & I
Clubs vis-à-vis conventional insurance. The appellate court also held that
Pioneer merely acted as a collection agent of Steamship Mutual.
Simply, the basic issues before us are (1) Is Steamship Mutual, a P & I
Club, engaged in the insurance business in the Philippines? (2) Does Pioneer
need a license as an insurance agent/broker for Steamship Mutual?
The parties admit that Steamship Mutual is a P & I Club. Steamship Mutual
admits it does not have a license to do business in the Philippines although
Pioneer is its resident agent. This relationship is reflected in the certifications
issued by the Insurance Commission. ECcTaS
The same provision also provides, the fact that no profit is derived from
the making of insurance contracts, agreements or transactions, or that no
separate or direct consideration is received therefor, shall not preclude the
existence of an insurance business. 12
The test to determine if a contract is an insurance contract or not,
depends on the nature of the promise, the act required to be performed, and
the exact nature of the agreement in the light of the occurrence, contingency,
or circumstances under which the performance becomes requisite. It is not by
what it is called. 13
Basically, an insurance contract is a contract of indemnity. In it, one
undertakes for a consideration to indemnify another against loss, damage or
liability arising from an unknown or contingent event. 14
SO ORDERED.
Footnotes
1. Rollo , pp. 28-41. Penned by Associate Justice Delilah Vidallon-Magtolis, with
Associate Justices Candido V. Rivera, and Sergio L. Pestaño concurring.
2. CA Rollo , pp. 43-51.
3. Id. at 103.
4. SEC. 186. No person, partnership, or association of persons shall transact
any insurance business in the Philippines except as agent of a person or
corporation authorized to do the business of insurance in the Philippines,
unless possessed of the capital and assets required of an insurance
corporation doing the same kind of business in the Philippines and invested
in the same manner; nor unless the Commissioner shall have granted to him
or them a certificate to the effect that he or they have complied with all the
provisions of law which an insurance corporation doing business in the
Philippines is required to observe.