Seguros del Estado S.A. was insurer to Trans SRC & Cia. S. en C, a company which transported Parmalat’s goods. In turn, Parmalat also held insurance with Seguros Generales Suramericana S.A. (“Suramericana”). Due to the occurrence of a loss during the transport of the goods, Suramericana paid compensation to Parmalat and, by doing so, subrogated itself as creditor of the carrier company that had caused the loss. The appealed ruling held that the documentary evidence provided did not prove the payment made by the insurer to Parmalat and, thus, denied the reimbursement by the carrier to the insurer. Against the appeal filed by Suramericana, the Supreme Court of Justice affirmed the decision from the first instance court because neither the payment of the compensation by the appellant in favor of Parmalat, nor the amount of damages caused due to the non-delivery of the transported goods were duly proved.
Supreme Court of Justice, Civil Cassation Division. File: 1100131030032007-00461-01. Justice Fernando Giraldo Gutiérrez. March 7, 2012.