Ilang linggo matapos ilibing si Danny ay naalala ko ang insurance niya. Sa aking paghahanap ng kanyang insurance policy ay nadiskubre ko ang isang insurance policy ni Danny na pangalan ng ibang babae ang beneficiary. Siya ang mistress ni Danny.
Pinuntahan ko ang address ng babaing nakalagay na beneficiary sa insurance policy ni Danny. Inamin n’yang matagal na silang may relasyon ng asawa ko.
Galit na galit po ako. Wala po s’yang karapatang mag-claim ng pera sa insurance na ‘yon. Kaming tunay na pamilya ni Danny ang dapat na makakuha niyon.
Tama naman po ako di ba? –Mrs. Alice Romero, San Miguel, Manila
Tama. Dapat lamang na sa ‘yo mapunta ang insurance benefits bilang tunay na asawa ni Danny. Ito ang ipinag-uutos ng Article 1306 of the New Civil Code, which states that: The contracting parties may establish such stipulations, clauses, terms and conditions they deem convenient, provided they are not contrary to law, morals, good customs, public order or public policy.
An insurance is a contract. Now when the insurance provides that the benefits should go to a mistress instead to the legal wife and family, that provision is against public policy and morals of society. It is a public policy not to encourage such illicit relations and against the morals of society to have a relationship with another person outside of the marriage. If the law will allow the insurance benefits to go to the mistress, in effect, the law will reward the mistress for having an illicit relationship with a married man and punishing the legal wife. This is clearly NOT the intention of the law.
Moreover, naming a person to be a beneficiary in an insurance is in the nature of a donation because the same arose out of the pure liberality of the insured. Under Article 739 of the New Civil Code, it states that a donation between persons found guilty of concubinage or adultery at the time of the donation is void. In the same article, it states that an action to declare the nullity of such a donation may be brought by the spouse of the donor or the donee and may be proved by a simple preponderance of evidence in the same action.
Kahit ang mistress ni Danny man ang ginawa n’yang beneficiary, ‘di pa rin ito valid defense. Such a defense will not be sustained in a court of law dahil ito ay ‘di ayon sa public policy and morals. The law cannot give legal effect to a contractual stipulation that rewards a mistress for having an illicit relationship and penalizes the legal wife.
Bilang legal na asawa, sa ‘yo dapat ibigay ang insurance benefits, Alice, at hindi sa kabit ni Danny.