Perez v. CA (323 SCRA 613)

*Cyril Rufino C. Pelayo (Aj’s group member) VIRGINIA A. PEREZ, petitioner, vs. COURT OF APPEALS and BF LIFEMAN INSURANCE CORPORATION, respondents.

G.R. No. 112329 January 28, 2000  YNARES-SANTIAGO,  YNARES-SANTIAGO, J . Facts: Primitivo Perez has been isured with the BF Lifeman Insurance Corporation since 1980 for  P20,000. Sometime in 1987, Rodolfo Lalog, an agent of BF, convinced him to apply for additional insurance coverage of P50, 000. Perez accomplished the application form and passed the required medical exam. He also paid P2,075 to Lalog for premium.

On Nov. 25, 1987, perez died while riding a banca which which capsized during a storm. During this time his application papers for the additional insurance coverage was still in the office of BF. Without knowing that Perez died, BF approved Perez’s application and issued the corresponding policy for P50,000. Virginia Perez, his wife, claimed the benefits of the insurance policy for her deceased husband but she was only able to obtain P40,000 under the first insurance policy. BF refused to pay the proceeds amounting to P150,000 under the additional policy coverage of P50,000 because they maintain that such policy had not been perfected. On Sept. 21, 1990, BF filed a complaint against Mrs. Perez seeking recission and declaration of nullity of  the insurance contract in question. Mrs. Perez file a counterclaim for the collection collection of P150,000 plus damages. Issue: Whether or not there was a consummated contract of insurance between Perez and BF. Held: No. An essential requisite of a valid contract is consent. Consent must be manifested by the meeting of the offer and acceptance upon the thing and the cause which are to constitute the contract.

The offer must be certain and the acceptance absolute. When Perez filed the application , it was subject to the acceptance of BF. The perfection was also further conditioned upon upon 1) issuance of the policy; 2) payment of the premium and; 3) the delivery to and acceptance by the applicant in good health. The delivery and acceptance by the applicant was a suspensive condition which was not fulfilled inasmuch as the applicant was already dead at the time the policy was issued. The non-fulfillment of the condition resulted in the non-perfection of the contract.  An application for insurance is m erely an offer which requires the o vert act of the insurer for it to ripen to a contract. Delay in acting on the application does not constitute acceptance even though the insured has has forwarded his first premium with his application. Delay, in this case, does not constitute gross negligence because the application was granted within the normal processing time. WHEREFORE, the decision rendered by the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. CV No. 35529 is AFFIRMED insofar as it declared Insurance Policy No. 056300 for P50,000.00 issued by BF Lifeman Insurance Corporation of no force and effect and hence null and void. No costs.