100% found this document useful (3 votes)
2K views2 pages

Insular V Ebrado Digest

Buenaventura Ebrado died with an existing life insurance policy naming his common-law wife, Carponia Ebrado, as the beneficiary. However, Buenaventura was still legally married to Pascuala Ebrado. Both Carponia and Pascuala claimed the insurance benefits. The Supreme Court upheld the trial court's ruling that Carponia could not claim the benefits as donations between persons engaged in adultery or concubinage are prohibited under law. A criminal conviction for adultery or concubinage is not required to disqualify a common-law spouse from insurance benefits.

Uploaded by

Kath
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
100% found this document useful (3 votes)
2K views2 pages

Insular V Ebrado Digest

Buenaventura Ebrado died with an existing life insurance policy naming his common-law wife, Carponia Ebrado, as the beneficiary. However, Buenaventura was still legally married to Pascuala Ebrado. Both Carponia and Pascuala claimed the insurance benefits. The Supreme Court upheld the trial court's ruling that Carponia could not claim the benefits as donations between persons engaged in adultery or concubinage are prohibited under law. A criminal conviction for adultery or concubinage is not required to disqualify a common-law spouse from insurance benefits.

Uploaded by

Kath
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 2

THE INSULAR LIFE ASSURANCE COMPANY, LTD., vs CARPONIA T. EBRADO and PASCUALA VDA.

DE EBRADO
G.R. No. L-44059; October 28, 1977; MARTIN, J.:

SUMMARY: Buenaventura Ebrado died. He has an existing insurance policy from Insular and he delegated Carponia Ebrado, his
common law wife as his beneficiary. Carponia clamed for benefits. Pascuala, Buenaventura’s legal wife also claimed for benefits.
Insular filed for an interpleader with the CFI. CFI ruled to disqualify Carponia. SC held that Carponia cannot claim as in insurance,
donations between persons guilty of adultery or concubinage is prohibited. A conviction is not necessary. CFI decision affirmed.

DOCTRINE: Conviction for a crime of adultery or concubinage is not needed to disqualify a mere common law wife from claiming
insurance benefits

FACTS:

 Buenaventura Cristor Ebrado was issued by The Life Assurance Co., Ltd., a whole life policy which included a rider for
Accidental Death. Buenaventura C. Ebrado designated Carponia T. Ebrado as the revocable beneficiary in his policy.
 On October 21, 1969, Buenaventura C. Ebrado died as a result of when he was hit by a failing branch of a tree. Insular
Life is then liable to pay the coverage (P11,745.73, face value plus rider amount, less unpaid premiums)
 Carponia T. Ebrado filed with the insurer a claim for the proceeds of the Policy as the designated beneficiary therein,
although she admits that she and the insured Buenaventura C. Ebrado were merely living as husband and wife
without the benefit of marriage.
 Pascuala Vda. de Ebrado also filed her claim as the widow of the deceased insured. She asserts that she is the one entitled
to the insurance proceeds, not the common-law wife, Carponia T. Ebrado.
 In doubt, The Insular Life Assurance Co., Ltd. commenced an action for Interpleader before the Court of First Instance
of Rizal on April 29, 1970.
 The trial court rendered judgment declaring among others, Carponia T. Ebrado disqualified from becoming
beneficiary. CFI held Art. 739 of the NCC a criminal conviction for adultery or concubinage is not essential in order to
establish the disqualification mentioned therein. It is only essential that such adultery or concubinage exists at the time
defendant Carponia T. Ebrado was made beneficiary in the policy in question for the disqualification and incapacity to
exist such fact be established by preponderance of evidence in the trial.
 CA brought the case to the SC

ISSUE: WON a common-law wife named as beneficiary in the life insurance policy of a legally married man claim the proceeds
thereof in case of death of the latter? (No)

HELD: NO

 During the pre-trial conference it was stated


o 3) that during the lifetime of Buenaventura Ebrado, he was living with his common-wife, Carponia Ebrado, with
whom she had 2 children although he was not legally separated from his legal wife;
 Since the Insurance Act does not contain any specific provision grossly resolutory of the prime question at hand, the
general rules of civil law should be applied to resolve this void in the Insurance Law.

 Article 2011 of the New Civil Code states: "The contract of insurance is governed by special laws. Matters not expressly
provided for in such special laws shall be regulated by this Code."

 Common-law spouses are, definitely, barred from receiving donations from each other. Article 739 of the new Civil Code
provides:
The following donations shall be void:

Those made between persons who were guilty of adultery or concubinage at the time of donation;…

 In essence, a life insurance policy is no different from a civil donation insofar as the beneficiary is concerned. Both are
founded upon the same consideration: liberality. A beneficiary is like a donee, because from the premiums of the policy
which the insured pays out of liberality, the beneficiary will receive the proceeds or profits of said insurance.

 As a consequence, the proscription in Article 739 of the new Civil Code should equally operate in life insurance contracts.
The mandate of Article 2012 cannot be laid aside: any person who cannot receive a donation cannot be named as
beneficiary in the life insurance policy of the person who cannot make the donation
 Policy considerations and dictates of morality rightly justify the institution of a barrier between common law spouses
in record to Property relations. A conviction for adultery or concubinage is not needed before the disabilities mentioned
in Article 739 may effectuate. More specifically, with record to the disability on "persons who were guilty of adultery or
concubinage at the time of the donation," Article 739 itself provides:

In the case referred to in No. 1, the action for declaration of nullity may be brought by the spouse of the donor or
donee; and the guilty of the donee may be proved by preponderance of evidence in the same action.

 The clause neatly conveys that no criminal conviction for the offense is a condition precedent. Prosecution is not needed.

 In this case, the requisite proof of common-law relationship between the insured and the beneficiary has been
conveniently supplied by the stipulations between the parties in the pre-trial conference of the case. It case agreed upon
and stipulated therein that the deceased insured Buenaventura C. Ebrado was married to Pascuala Ebrado with whom
she has six legitimate children; that during his lifetime, the deceased insured was living with his common-law wife,
Carponia Ebrado, with whom he has two children. These stipulations are nothing less than judicial admissions which, as
a consequence, no longer require proof and cannot be contradicted

DISPOSITIVE: CFI decision affirmed

You might also like