The Philippines is a typhoon-prone country, with approximately twenty tropical cyclones entering its area of responsibility per year, including the recent Tino (Kalmeigi) and Uwan (Fung-wong).
Social media is swamped with photos and videos of the impact of these weather disturbances: residents trapped on their roofs as floodwaters quickly rose, streets turn into rivers, cars sink under floodwater, landslides, homes and roads destroyed across the country’s most populous island along with displacement, injuries and death. Fierce wind and rain flood leave enormous piles of debris – including felled trees, frunitures and entire metal roofs.
Typhoon Yolanda, internationally known as Typhoon Haiyan, is the deadliest typhoon to have affected the country in recorded history, killing more than 6,300 people as it crossed the Visayas region in November 2013.
The aftermath of repair on damaged properties usually touch upon insurance and the Acts of God coverage.
An “act of God” is a legal term for an event caused by natural forces beyond human control, such as a hurricane, earthquake, typhoons, flood, or volcanic eruptions. for which no human can be held legally responsible. It is often used as a defense against liability for damages caused by these extreme and unforeseen events.
This is available as an add-on to property insurance and is an optional coverage that supplements a comprehensive insurance policy.
Not many knew about Acts of God until the destructive 2009 Typhoon Ondoy that caused severe flooding with 80 percent of Metro Manila submerged in floodwaters. One month’s worth of rain fell in just 12 hours resulting in lives lost and thousands of homes and properties damaged.
Many found out that they could not receive any compensation in their property insurance since these were not covered by Acts of God.
An Act of God, also referred to as a Fortuitous Event, may exempt a party from liability and its obligations under contract, but only if it met specific criteria under Article 1174 of the Civil Code, (a) the cause of the breach of the obligation must be independent of the will of the debtor (b) the event must be either unforeseeable or unavoidable (c) the event must be such as to render it impossible for the debtor to fulfill its obligation in a normal manner (d) the debtor must be free from any participation in, or aggravation of the injury to the creditor including but not limited to acts of negligence (Nakpil & Sons v. CA, GR No. L- 47851,, October 3, 1986).
In the old case of National Power Corporation vs. CA (G.R. No. L-47379, 16 May 1988), the court said that although a typhoon is an act of God, Napocor cannot escape liability because its negligence was the proximate cause of the loss and damage.
Napocor was found to be negligent because it opened the spillway gates of the Angat Dam only at the height of typhoon “Welming”. NPC knew of the coming typhoon at least four days before it actually struck. NPC also knew it was safer to have opened the spillway gates gradually and earlier
If upon the happening of a fortuitous event or an act of God, there concurs a corresponding fraud, negligence, delay or violation or contravention in any manner of the tenor of the obligation as provided for in Article 1170 of the Civil Code, which results in loss or damage, the obligor cannot escape liability.
This doctrine strictly requires that the act must be one occasioned exclusively by the violence of nature and human agencies are to be excluded from creating or entering into the cause of the mischief.
When the effect, the cause of which is to be considered, is found to be in part the result of the participation of man, whether it be from active intervention or neglect, or failure to act, the whole occurrence is removed from the rules applicable to the acts of God.
To be exempt from liability for loss because of an act of God, he must be free from any previous negligence or misconduct by which the loss or damage may have been occasioned. (Limpangco Sons v. Yangco Steamship Co. 34 Phil. 597)
Recent mass actions centered on a series of allegations of corruption, mismanagement, and irregularities in government-funded flood management projects.
The controversy centers on billions of pesos allocated for flood management initiatives, reports of “ghost” projects, substandard construction, and the alleged cornering of contracts by a small group of favored contractors
Some argue that the floods are the direct result of negligence, corruption & theft at the highest levels. Billions have been poured into flood control projects, many of them ghost projects or substandard works, yet every downpour drowns the country.