Bank of the Philippine Islands vs. Posadas (Insurance Law)

 

Bank of the Philippine Islands vs. Posadas

(Insurance Law)

56 Phil 215 (G.R. No. 34583)

October 22, 1931

 

Petitioners:	Bank of the Philippine Islands administrator of the estate of the late Adolphie Oscar Schuetze
Respondents:	Juan Posadas, Jr., Collector of Internal Revenue

 

J. Villareal:

 

FACTS:

 

BPI, as administrator of the estate of deceased Adolphe Schuetze, appealed to CFI Manila absolving defendant, Collector of Internal Revenue, from the complaint filed against him in recovering the inheritance tax amounting to ₱ 1,209.00 paid by the plaintiff, Rosario Gelano Vda. De Schuetze, under protest, and sum of ₱ 20,150 representing the proceeds of the insurance policy of the decease.

 

Rosario and Adolphe were married in January 1914. The wife was actually residing and living in Germany when Adolphe died in December 1927. The latter while in Germany, executed a will in March 1926, pursuant with its law wherein plaintiff, was named universal heir. The deceased possessed not only real property situated in the Philippines but also shares of stocks in 19 domestic corporation. Included in the personal property is a life insurance policy issued at Manila on January 1913 for the sum of $10,000.00 by the Sun Life Assurance Company of Canada, Manila Branch.

 

In the insurance policy, the estate of the deceased was named the beneficiary without any qualification. Rosario is the sole and only heir of the deceased. BPI as administrator of the decedent’s estate and attorney in fact of the plaintiff, having been demanded by Posadas to pay the inheritance tax paid under protest. Notwithstanding various demands made by plaintiff. Posadas refused to refund such amount.

 

ISSUE:

 

Whether or not plaintiff is entitled to the proceeds of the insurance.

 

HELD:

 

Yes. The proceeds of a life insurance policy payable to the insured person’s estate, on which the premiums paid by the conjugal partnership, constitute community property, and belong one-half to the husband exclusively, and the other half to the wife.

If the premiums were paid partly with paraphernal and partly conjugal funds, the proceeds are in like proportion paraphernal part and conjugal in part.