SC denies property firm’s petition on 2007 Glorietta 2 explosion
THE SUPREME Court (SC) has denied a petition by Ayala Land Inc. to hold insurance company Standard Insurance liable for the explosion in Glorietta 2 on Oct. 19, 2007.
In a five-page resolution dated Oct. 17 and released Wednesday, the SC’s 1st Division affirmed the Court of Appeals’ April 13 decision and Aug. 7 resolution, both of which in turn affirmed the Jan. 26, 2017 decision of the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Makati, Branch 65 dismissing Ayala Land’s complaint for Specific Performance and Damages against Standard Insurance.
The court cited Ayala Land’s “all risk” policy with Standard Insurance. “In the present case, Standard Insurance under(took) to indemnify Ayala Land in any sudden and accidental physical destruction or damage of its property except if the damage or destruction was caused by an excluded risk,” the court said, citing further, among these “excluded risks or perils,” “acts of terrorism” as well as “pollution, whatever the cause.”
“Here, Standard Insurance has discharged its burden by proving that the destruction of the G2 (Glorietta 2) was caused by an excluded peril,” the high court said.
“Ayala Land has numerously declared, and as found by Ayala Land’s own investigators, that the explosion was caused by an explosive device, which constitute as an act of terrorism. In fact, Ayala Land released an Official Press Statement stating its disappointment as to the finding of (the) Multi-Agency Task Force that the cause of the explosion was the build-up of methane gas and diesel vapor at the basement and not due to an explosive device….”
“To suddenly claim that the explosion was not caused by an explosive device simply because Malayan Insurance denied its claim under its Terrorism policy with the latter is merely an afterthought that cannot be considered by this Court,” SC said.
“Ayala Land has numerously declared, and as found by Ayala Land’s own investigators, that the explosion was caused by an explosive device, which constitute as an act of terrorism. In fact, Ayala Land released an Official Press Statement stating its disappointment as to the finding of (the) Multi-Agency Task Force that the cause of the explosion was the build-up of methane gas and diesel vapor at the basement and not due to an explosive device….”
“To suddenly claim that the explosion was not caused by an explosive device simply because Malayan Insurance denied its claim under its Terrorism policy with the latter is merely an afterthought that cannot be considered by this Court,” SC said.
“Nevertheless, even if we are to rule that the explosion was caused by the build-up of methane gas and diesel vapor at the basement, the same does not help Ayala Land’s cause,” the court said further, citing pollution as an excluded risk.
“Thus, we see no cogent reason to deviate from the findings of the RTC and CA without any evidence of such nature that would convince the Court to overturn, much less, modify the findings of the lower courts,” SC said.
The resolution identified the first division as consisting of Justices Lucas P. Bersamin as acting chairperson, Marvic Mario Victor F. Leonen as additional member, and Alexander G. Gesmundo as acting member, with Francis H. Jardeleza having no part.
