American Surety of New York, et al. v. Prudencio Batangan
Supreme Court
Republic of the Philippines
SUPREME COURT
Manila
EN BANC
G.R. No. L-6002 March 18, 1911
THE AMERICAN SURETY OF NEW YORK and THE FIDELITY AND DEPOSIT COMPANY OF MARYLAND,plaintiffs-appellants,
vs.
PRUDENCIO BATANGAN,defendant-appellee.
O'Brien and De Witt for appellants.
Alberto Barretto for appellee.
CARSON,J.:
The facts in this case and the principles on which it must be decided are well stated in the opinion of the court below.
The trial court, however, was manifestly led into error as to the law applicable to the case by the imperfect and incorrect official Spanish version of the last paragraph of section 41 of Act No. 1402. The English version provides that: "The officer shall be liable for all losses, resulting from any cause, except an act of God or the public enemy, unless relieved therefrom as herein provided." In the Spanish version the words "an act of God" are inaccurately rendered by the technical term"fuerza mayor" (force majeure).
The loss in question in this case was occasioned by an armed band of robbers, and the trial judge was of opinion that under the circumstances the officer was not liable therefor, because as he held, the existence offuerza mayor (force majeure)was undoubtedly established by the proof of the robbery by an armed band. But under the provisions of Act No. 63, and its amendments, the English text of the Act must "govern," and it is hardly necessary to point out that the depredations of an armed band of robbers can not be said to have resulted from "an act of God."
Upon the facts as found by the trial judge, which are fully sustained by the evidence of record, the judgment entered in the court below must be reversed, and twenty days hereafter judgment will be entered in favor of the plaintiffs for the sum of P3,443.33, with legal interest from the date of the complaint. Thereafter let the record be returned, as provided by law, to the court whence it came for execution. So ordered.
Arellano, C.J., Mapa, Moreland, and Trent, JJ.,concur.
Related decisions
Decisions on similar questions that neither cites the other: they rely on the same precedents, are cited together, or apply the same law.
- L-3688 December 19 v. Hazley1907both apply Act 1402
- L-3687 January 10 v. Hazley1908both apply Act 1402
- L-7806 July 12 v. Phipps1912both apply Act 63
- L-45375 April 12 v. Appellan1939both apply Act 63
- L-32999 October 15 v. Tandayag1982both apply Act 63
- L-301 April 7 v. Republic1948both apply Act 63
- L-29397 March 29 v. Republic1983both apply Act 63
- L-24530 October 31 v. Callano1968both apply Act 63
Laws it applies
Links and connections are read from the text by pattern matching, not checked by a person. A guide, not a finding.