G.R. No. L-23276 November 29, 1968
Lessons Applicable: stipulation pour autrui (Insurance)
FACTS:
- December 1, 1961: Fieldmen's Insurance Company, Inc. issued in favor of the Manila Yellow Taxicab Co., Inc. (Manila) from December 1, 1961 to December 1, 1962
- February 10, 1962: A taxicab of Manila driven by Carlito Coquia, met a vehicular accident at Mangaldan, Pangasinana and died
- The insured filed a claim for P5,000 in which Fieldmen's replied with an offer to pay P2,000 by way of compromise
- The insured rejected it and countered with P4,000
- September 18, 1962: Carlito's parents filed a complaint against the Company for collection
- The company pleaded lack of cause of action
- RTC: ordered to pay the parents
ISSUE: W/N there is a stipulation pour autrui that exempts the general rule that the parents are not a party to the contract
HELD: YES. RTC affirmed.
- There is a stipulation that the Company "will indemnify any authorized Driver who is driving the Motor Vehicle" of the Insured and, in the event of death of said driver, the Company shall, likewise, "indemnify his personal representatives."
- typical of contracts pour autrui, this character being made more manifest by the fact that the deceased driver paid 50% of the corresponding premiums, which were deducted from his weekly commissions
- expressly stipulated and declared that it shall be a condition precedent to any right of action or suit upon this Policy that the award by such arbitrator, arbitrators or umpire of the amount of the Company's liability hereunder if disputed shall be first obtained
- both parties from the inception of their dispute proceeded in entire disregard of the provisions of the contract relating to arbitration
- conduct was as effective a rejection of the right to arbitrate
