Case #29 FEDERAL EXPRESS CORPORATION VS. AMERICAN HOME ASSURANCE COMPANY, ET. AL. G.R. No. 150094 August 18, 2004 Ponente: Panganiban Nature of Case: Subrogation of rights FACTS: Shipper SMITHKLINE USA delivered to carrier Burlington Air Express, an agent of herein petitioner, a cargo shipment, insured with respondent which consists of 109 cartons of veterinary biologicals for delivery to consignee SMITHKLINE and French Overseas Company in Makati City with the words, ‘REFRIGERATE WHEN NOT IN TRANSIT’ and ‘PERISHABLE’ stamp marked on its face however 12 days after the cargoes arrived in Manila it was found out that the same were stored only in a room with 2 air conditioners running in the warehouse of Cargohaus Inc., to cool the place instead of a refrigerator. As a consequence of the result of the veterinary biologics test, SMITHKLINE abandoned the shipment and, declaring ‘total loss’ for the unusable shipment, filed a claim with AHAC through its representative in the Philippines, the Philam Insurance Co., Inc. (PHILAM) which recompensed SMITHKLINE for the whole insured amount. Thereafter, PHILAM filed an action for damages against the FEDEX imputing negligence on either or both of them in the handling of the cargo where it was decided that FEDEX is solidarily liable with Cargohaus Inc. ISSUE: Is FEDEX liable for damage to or loss of the insured goods? HELD: No. Upon receipt of the insurance proceeds, the consignee (Smithkline) executed a subrogation Receipt in favor of respondents authorizing them “to file claims and begin suit against any such carrier, vessel, person, corporation or government.” Undeniably, the consignee had a legal right to receive the goods in the same condition it was delivered for transport to petitioner and if that right was violated, the consignee would have a cause of action against the person responsible therefor. In the exercise of its subrogatory right, an insurer may proceed against an erring carrier and to all intents and purposes, it stands in the place and in substitution of the consignee.
WHEREFORE, the Petition is GRANTED, and the assailed Decision REVERSED insofar as it pertains to Petitioner Federal Express Corporation. No pronouncement as to costs.
Case # 30 ABOITIZ SHIPPING CORPORATION VS. INSURANCE COMPANY OF NORTH AMERICA GR No. 168402 August 6, 2008 Ponente: Reyes, R. T. Nature of case: Subrogation of rights FACTS: MSAS Cargo International Limited and/or Associated and/or Subsidiary Companies (MSAS) procured an "all-risk” marine insurance policy from ICNA UK Limited of London for its cargo, consisting of wooden work tools and workbenches purchased by consignee Science Teaching Improvement Project (STIP)which was later on received by Aboitiz and shipped to Cebu however upon arrival, the checker noted that the crates were slightly broken or cracked at the bottom causing the cargo to be withdrawn by the representative of the consignee, STIP and delivered to Don Bosco Technical High School, Punta Princesa, Cebu City where it was received by Mr. Bernhard Willig who later on reported the damage to Aboitiz. Consignee filed a claim against ICNA who then paid consignee and a subrogation receipt was duly signed by Willig. ICNA then advised Aboitiz of the receipt signed in its favor but received no reply so it filed for collection at the RTC. ISSUE: Whether or not ICNA can claim under the right of subrogation HELD: YES. Only when that foreign corporation is "transacting" or "doing business" in the country will a license be necessary before it can institute suits. It may, however, bring suits on isolated business transactions, which is not prohibited under Philippine law. The policy benefits any subsequent assignee, or holder, including the consignee, who may file claims on behalf of the assured.
WHEREFORE, the petition is DENIED and the appealed Decision AFFIRMED.