Respondent MICI had all the opportunity to prove before the RTC that its liability under the insurance policy it issued to Rhoda, was limited; yet, respondent MICI failed to do so. The failure of respondent MICI to rebut that which would have naturally invited an immediate, pervasive, and stiff opposition from it created an adverse inference that either the controverting evidence to be presented by respondent MICI would only prejudice its case, or that the uncontroverted evidence of petitioners indeed speaks of the truth. (Poe v. Malayan, G.R. No. 156302, April 7, 2009)
No comments:
Post a Comment