
While they were returning to the car, petitioner accelerated the Vitara and moved backward as if to hit them. Petitioner appeared to be hostile, hence, the private complainant instructed his wife and daughter to go back to the CRV. This prompted the private complainant's wife and daughter, namely, Susan and Mary Ann, respectively, to alight from the CRV and confront the petitioner. The side view mirror of the Vitara was pushed backward and naturally, the side view mirror of the CRV was pushed forward.

The CRV was ahead of the queue, but the Vitara tried to overtake, which resulted the touching of their side view mirrors. When they were about to queue at the corner to pay the parking fees, the respective vehicles were edging each other.

Pedro Ang (private complainant) was driving his Honda CRV (CRV) from the 3rd basement parking, while Robert Taguinod (petitioner) was driving his Suzuki Vitara (Vitara) from the 2nd basement parking. This case started with a single incident on at the parking area of the Rockwell Powerplant Mall. Vandalism and malicious mischief can be written as an endorsement to a standard policy, such as the standard fire policy, in the event that the policy requires a separate endorsement for this type of coverage.For this Court's consideration is the petition for review 1 dated Februof petitioner Robert Taguinod seeking to reverse the Decision 2 of the Court of Appeals (CA) dated Septemand its Resolution 3 dated Decemaffirming the Decisions of the Regional Trial Court of Makati City (RTC) 4 and the Metropolitan Trial Court of Makati City (MeTC) 5 dated Septemand November 8, 2006, respectively.

Vandalism and mischief are described as the intentional injury or destruction of property. How Vandalism and Malicious Mischief Insurance Worksĭue to the risk and frequency of loss, this coverage typically carries a higher deductible for properties that are known to be unoccupied for certain hours of the day, including churches and schools.
