1. G.R. No.
L-48488 April 25, 1980 vegetables and fruits with edible seeds which contain much
GLORIA D. MENEZ, vs. EMPLOYEES'
COMPENSATION COMMISSION, GOVERNMENT
SERVICE INSURANCESYSTEM (DEPARTMENT OF
EDUCATION & CULTURE),
FACTS:
Petitioner Gloria D. Menez was employed by the Department
(now Ministry) of Education& Culture as a school teacher.
She retired on August 31, 1975 under the disability retirement
plan at the age of 54 years after 32 years of teaching, due to
rheumatoid arthritis and pneumonitis. Before her retirement,
she was assigned at Raja Soliman High School in Tondo-
Binondo, Manila near a dirty creek. On October 21, 1976,
petitioner filed a claim for disability benefits under
Presidential Decree No. 626, as amended, with respondent
Government Service Insurance System. On October 25, 1976,
respondent GSIS denied said claim on the ground that
petitioner's ailments, rheumatoid arthritis and pneumonitis, are
not occupational diseases taking into consideration the nature
of her particular work. In denying aforesaid claim, respondent
GSIS thus resolved: Upon evaluation based on general
accepted medical authorities, your ailments are found to be the
least causally related to your duties and conditions of work.
We believe that your ailments are principally traceable to
factors which are definitely not work-connected. Moreover,
the evidences you have, submitted have not shown that the
said ailments directly resulted from your occupation as
Teacher IV of Raja Soliman High School,Manila
ISSUE: Whether or not the petitioners ailments are causally
related to her duties and conditions of work, hence, she is
entitled to disability benefit from the GSIS.
HELD:
It must be borne in mind that petitioner was a teacher of the
Raja Soliman High School which is located in the heart of
Binondo District. She was constantly exposed to the heavily
polluted air and congestion (squatter's area) characteristic of
the area. She was not only exposed to the elements - varying
degrees of temperature throughout the day and night - but also
had to withstand long hours of standing while performing her
teaching job. Likewise, she had to regularly negotiate long
trips from her home in Project 2, Quirino District, Quezon
City (her residence) to said high school in Binondo,
scampering from one ride to another, rain or shine, and
sweating in the process.
Furthermore, judicial notice should be taken of the fact that
our country is in a typhoon belt and that yearly we experience
torrential rains and storms. Needless to say, in her daily rides
from Quezon City to Binondo and back, she had to go through
the ordeal of perspiring and getting wet from downpours or
heavy rains, thus making her susceptible to contracting her
ailments. Moreover, petitioner was always in contact with 250
students who might have been carriers of contagious
respiratory diseases like flu and colds and who were
themselves inadequately nourished, residing as they do in a
depressed and congested area. And adding to the unhygienic
working atmosphere was her malnutrition or
undernourishment. More often than not, a teacher who has no
other source of income takes to aside from the poor man's
staple diet of tuyo, daing and rice legumes like mongo,
uric and.
Acute arthritis is inflammation of a joint marked by pain,
swelling, heat and redness; the result of rheumatism or gout (p.
56, The Simplified Medical Dictionary for Lawyers). Gout is a
disease characterized by painful inflammation of the joints, in
excessive amount of uric acid in the blood Poor man's gout is
caused by hard work, poor food and exposure (p. 268, supra).
It may thus be seen that uric acid eventually causes arthritis,
aside from excessive mental and physical stresses to which
teachers are subject of reason of their duties.
Consequently, this Court finds petitioner to have substantially
shown that the risk of contracting her ailments had been
increased by unfavorable working conditions
Republic Act 4670, otherwise known as the Magna Charta for
Public School Teachers, recognized the enervating effects of
these factors (duties and activities of a school teacher certainly
involve physical, mental and emotional stresses) on the health
of school teachers when it directed in one of its provisions that
"Teachers shall be protected against the consequences of
employment injury in accordance with existing laws. The
effects of the physical and nervous strain on the teachers'
health shall be recognized as compensable occupational
diseases in accordance with laws" (Pantoja vs. Republic, et al..
L-43317,December 29, 1978).
2. CLEMENTE V. GSIS
FACTS:
1. Pedro Clemente was a janitor of the Department of Health
for 10 years.
2. He was assigned at Ilocos Norte Skin Clinic, Laoag City.
3. On November 3 to 14, 1976, he was hospitalised at the
Central Luzon Sanitarium,Tala Sanitarium in Caloocan City
due to his ailment of nephritis. He was also found to be
suffering from such ailments as portal cirrhosis and leprosy
also known as Hansens Disease.
4. On November 14, 1976, he died of uremia due to nephritis.
5. His widow filed a claim for employees compensation under
the Labor Code but thesame was denied by GSIS on the
ground that the ailments of her husband are not occupational
diseases taking into consideration the nature of his work and
were not in the lease causally related to his duties and
conditions.
6. Petitioner contended that the ailments of her husband were
contracted in the course of employment and were aggravated
by the nature of his work. Being a janitor of Ilocos Norte Skin
Clinic, her husband worked in direct contact with people
suffering from different skin diseases and was exposed to
obnoxious dusts and other dirt which contributed to his
ailment of Hansens disease.
7. The ECC affirmed this denial of the claim by GSIS. It
contended that the decision of GSIS was anchored upon the
findings that the ailments were not listed as occupation
diseases and that there was no substantial evidence of causal
connections.
ISSUES
1. What is the quantum of proof required in claims for
compensation?
2. Was the disease of the decedent occupation and thus
compensable?
HELD
1. Strict rules of evidence are not applicable in claims for
compensation. The degree of proof required under PD 626 is
merely substantial evidence, which means such relevant
evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to
support a conclusion. The claimant must show, at least, by
substantial evidence that the development of the disease is
brought largely by the conditions present in the nature of the
job. What the law requires is a reasonable work-connection
and not a direct causal relation. It is enough that the hypothesis
on which the workmens claim is bases is probable. Medical
opinion to the contrary can be disregarded especially where
there is some basis in the facts for inferring a work-
connection. Probability
and not certainty is the touchstone.
2. YES. The major ailments of the deceased could be traced to
bacterial and viral infections. In the case of leprosy, it is
known that the source of infection is the discharge from
lesions of persons with active cases. It is believed that the
bacillus enters the body through the skin or through the
mucous membrane of the nose and throat.
The husband of the petitioner worked in a skin clinic. As a
janitor of the skin clinic, he was exposed to different carriers
of viral and bacterial diseases. He had to clean the clinic itself
where patients with different illnesses come and go. He had to
put in order the hospital equipments that had been used. He
had to dispose of garbage and wastes that accumulated in the
course of each working day. He was the employee most
exposed to the dangerous concentration of infected materials
and not being a medical practitioner, least likely to known
how to avoid infection. It is therefore not unreasonable to
conclude that Mr. Clementes working conditions definitely
increased the risk of his contracting the diseases.
3. AMALIA NARAZO, Petitioner, v. EMPLOYEES
COMPENSATION COMMISSION AND
GOVERNMENT SERVICE INSURANCE SYSTEM
(Provincial Governors Office, Negros
Occidental), Respondents.
Geronimo Narazo was employed for thirty eight (38) years as
Budget Examiner in the Office of the Governor, Province of
Negros Occidental.
On 14 May 1984, Narazo died at the age of fifty seven (57).
His medical records show that he was confined three (3) times
at the Doa Corazon L. Montelibano Hospital in Bacolod City,
for urinary retention, abdominal pain and anemia. He was
thereafter diagnosed to be suffering from "obstructive
nepropathy due to benign prostatic hypertrophy", commonly
known as "Uremia."
Petitioner, as the widow of the deceased, filed a claim with the
Government Service Insurance System (GSIS) for death
benefits for the death of her husband, under the Employees
Compensation Law (PD 626, as amended). However, said
claim was denied on the ground that the cause of death of
Narazo is not listed as an occupational disease.
On appeal, the Employees Compensation Commission
affirmed the decision of the GSIS on the ground that the
ailments of the deceased could not be attributed to
employment factors and as impressed by medical experts,
benign prostatic hypertrophy is quite common among men
over fifty (50) years of age, regardless of occupation, while
uremia is a complication of obstructive nephtropathy due to
benign prostatic hypertrophy; 3 hence, this petition.
Petitioner avers the work of the deceased, which required long
sedentary work under pressure, aggravated the risk of
contracting the disease leading to his hospital confinement and
death. 4
In controversion, the ECC argues that petitioner failed to show
proof that the disease which caused the death of her husband is
work-connected; and that no credence could be given to
petitioners claim that her husbands delayed urination gave
rise to the development of his ailments, for lack of medical
bases.
Rule III, section 1, paragraph 3(b) of Presidential Decree No.
626, as amended, defines a "compensable sickness" as any
illness definitely accepted as an occupational disease listed by
the ECC or any illness caused by employment subject to proof
by the employee that the risk of contracting the same is
increased by working conditions. 6 The ECC is empowered to
determine and approve occupational diseases and work-related
illnesses that may be considered compensable based on
peculiar hazards of employment. 7
Thus, a sickness or death caused by said sickness is
compensable if the same is listed as an occupational disease. If
it is not so listed, compensation may still be recovered if the
illness was aggravated by employment. However, it is
incumbent upon the claimant to show proof that the risk of
contracting the illness was increased by his working
conditions.
The death of petitioners husband was caused by "Uremia due
to obstructive nephropathy and benign prostatic hypertrophy,"
which is admittedly not among those listed as occupational
diseases. 8 As per finding of the ECC, "Uremia is a toxic
clinical condition characterized by restlessness, muscular
twitchings, mental disturbance, nausea, and vomiting
associated with renal insufficiency brought about by the
retention in blood of nitrogeneous urinary waste products."
One of its causes is the obstruction in the flow of urinary
waste products. 9
Under the circumstances, the burden of proof was upon
petitioner to show that the conditions under which her
deceased husband was then working had increased the risk of
contracting the illness which caused his death.cralawnad
The degree of proof required is merely substantial evidence
which means such relevant evidence as will support a
decision, or clear and convincing evidence.
The nature of the work of the deceased as Budget Examiner in
the Office of the Governor dealt with the detailed preparation
of the budget, financial reports and review and/or examination
of the budget of other provincial and municipal offices. Full
concentration and thorough study of the entries of accounts in
the budget and/or financial reports were necessary, such that
the deceased had to sit for hours, and more often that not,
delay and even forego urination in order not to interrupt the
flow of concentration. In addition, tension and pressure must
have aggravated the situation. In the case of Ceniza v. ECC,
12 the Court held that:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph
Under the foregoing circumstances, we are persuaded to hold
that the cause of death of petitioners husband is work-
connected, i.e. the risk of contracting the illness was
aggravated by the nature of the work, so much so that
petitioner is entitled to receive compensation benefits for the
death of her husband.
WHEREFORE, the petition is GRANTED. The decision of
the Employees Compensation Commission denying
petitioners claim for benefits under PD 626, as amended,
arising from the death of her husband, is hereby REVERSED
and SET ASIDE.
SO ORDERED.
4. DEBATIAN V. GOVERNMENT SERVICE
INSURANCE SYSTEM
FACTS
1. Sigfredo Dabatian was employed as a Garbage Truck Driver
in the General Services Department of the City Government of
Cagayan de Oro City.
2. He was usually assigned mostly in the night shift. At the
time of his death, his shift started from 10:00 PM to 6:00 AM.
3. Dabatian was a heavy coffee drinker which was his way of
warding off sleepiness.
4. He was observed to have been getting paler and weaker
while at work until the time he collapsed.
5. Despite hospitalization, Dabatian died two weeks after he
collapsed.
6. When his widow, Hilaria Dabatian filed a claim from GSIS,
the same was denied on the ground that the decedents
ailment, Peptic Ulcer, is not an occupational disease as listed
under the present law on compensation.
7. Petitioner argues that the decedents predisposition to
drinking coffee heavily aggravated his contraction of the
disease resulting to his death. Petitioners argument is hinged
on the presumption of compensability and principle of
aggravation as sufficient ground for entitlement under the
Workmens Compensation Act.
ISSUE
Whether or not under the premises the death of Sigfredo
Dabation is compensable.
HELD
NO. Petitioner died on July 3, 1976 when the old
compensation law had already been abrogated. The present
Labor Code as amended, abolished the presumption of
compensability and the rule on aggravation of illness caused
by the nature of employment, the reason being to restore a
sensible equilibrium between the employers obligation to pay
workmens compensation and the employees right to receive
reparation for work connected death or disability.
Under the present law, in order for the employee to be entitled
to sickness or death benefits, the sickness or death resulting
therefrom must be or must have resulted from either:
a) any illness definitely accepted as an occupational disease
listed by the Commission; or
b) any illness caused by employment subject to proof that the
risk of contracting the same is increased by working
conditions.
Since peptic ulcer is not included in the list of occupational
diseases as drawn up by the Commission, then petitioner has
the burden of proving that the nature of her husbands work
increased the risk of contracting the disease.
Aside from the undisputed fact that the diseased is a heavy
coffee drinker, which was his way of warding off sleepiness,
no evidence was ever adduced by petitioner to bolster the
theory that her husbands work increased the risk of
contracting the ailment.
Being a heavy coffee drinker may have aggravated his peptic
ulcer, but, aggravation of an illness is no longer a ground for
compensation under the present law.
5. G.R. No. 48664 May 20, 1987
GLICERIA C. CASUMPANG, petitioner,
vs.
EMPLOYEES COMPENSATION COMMISSION,
GOVERNMENT SERVICE INSURANCE SYSTEM AND
BUREAU OF PRISONS, respondents.
Jose Casumpang, then working as Prison
Guard of the Bureau of Prisons with
assignment at the San Ramon Prison and
Penal Farm, Zamboanga City. Upon its
conversion to a claim for income benefits for
death following the demise of said Jose
Casumpang due to Cancer of the Stomach,
the claim is now being prosecuted (sic) on
appeal to this Commission by the herein
appellant-widow, Gliceria Casumpang.
The preponderance of mandatory legal
postulate requiring proof of causation once
an ailment upon which a claim is based is
not considered an occupational disease as
defined and understood under Presidential
Decree No. 626, as amended, would
subserve the respondent System's findings
that the above-titled claim is not
compensable since there is no showing that
the risk of contracting gastric carcinoma was
increased by the deceased's working
conditions.
The doctrine of presumptive compensability
which was then expressly provided under
the old Workmen's Compensation Act (Act
3428) is not recognized under Presidential
Decree No. 626, as amended, the present
law on employees' compensation. In the
latter law, proof of causation by the claimant
is imperative, such burden being
incompatible with the presumption of
compensability.
The main issue in the case at bar is whether or not cancer of
the stomach is an occupational disease and hence,
compensable under Presidential Decree No. 626, as amended.
This case falls under the New Labor Code, which fact is
admitted by the petitioner herself (Casumpang's Petition for
Certiorari, p. 3).
After a close perusal of the records of the case, nowhere does
it appear that Jose Casumpang contracted his disease or
ailments before January 1, 1975. There are no medical
findings. reports, affidavits or any indication that he was
suffering from any pain or discomfort prior to the effectivity
of the Labor Code which by liberal interpretation may have
worked in his favor.
There is no dispute that prior to his demise Jose Casumpang
had ruptured duodenal ulcer with generalized peritonitis. 'This
condition according to medical findings on record, worsened
into cancer of the stomach which disease finally caused his
death\
It is Presidential Decree No. 626, as amended, therefore,
which is applicable in this case and not the Workmen's
Compensation Act.
It is important to determine which law is applicable.
Under the former Workmen's Compensation Act or Act No.
3428 as amended. the claimant was relieved of the duty to
prove causation as it was then legally presumed that the illness
arose out of the employment'. under the presumption of
compensability (Tortal v. Workmen's Compensation
Commission, 124 SCRA 211).
However, under the new law, the principles of aggravation and
presumption of compensability have been stricken off by the
lawmaker as grounds for compensation (Milano v. Employees'
Compensation Commission, 142 SCRA 52).
Under Article 167 (b) of the New Labor Code and Section I
(b), Rule Ill of the Amended Rules on Employees
Compensation, for the sickness and the resulting disability or
death to be compensable, the sickness must be the result of an
occupational disease listed under Annex "A" of the Rules with
the conditions set therein satisfied; otherwise, proof must be
shown that the risk of contracting the disease is increased by
the working conditions (De Jesus v. Employees Compensation
Commission, 142 SCRA 92).
Under the Labor Code, cancer of the stomach is not an
occupational disease considering the decedent's employment
as prison guard.
We agree with the Solicitor General that:
... In ECC Resolution No. 247-A dated April
13, 1977, cancer of the stomach and other
lymphatic and blood forming, vessels was
considered occupational only among
woodworkers; wood products industry
carpenters, loggers and employees in pulp
and paper mills and plywood mills. The
complained illness is therefore not
compensable under the first group provided
in the Labor Code.
Under the second ground for
compensability, it should be shown that an
illness is caused by employment and that the
risk of contracting the same is increased by
working conditions. In her letter dated
December 6, 1977 to respondent ECC
(Annex B), petitioner claims that her
deceased husband escorted inmates to work
in the hinterlands of San Ramon; that at
times he was overtaken by rain; that he had
to work at night in case of prison escapes,
and that he missed his meals owing to the
nature of his duties. It should be noted
however, that said conditions do not bring
about cancer of the stomach. Thus: 'On the
basis, (however), of the papers and evidence
on record which you have submitted, it
appears that you have not established that
your employment had any causal
relationship with the contraction of the
ailment.' Petitioner did not demonstrate that
the adverse conditions mentioned above had
direct causal connection with his job which
would develop into cancer of the stomach.
(Rollo, pp. 125-126).
WHEREFORE, the petition is DISMISSED.,
6. RODRIGUEZ V. ECC
178 SCRA 1989
REGALADO, J.
FACTS
1. Hector Rodriguez was a public school teacher assigned at
Salaan Elementary School in Mangaldan, Pangasinan.
2. On November 19, 1975, he went on sick leave and was
hospitalised at Pangasinan Provincial Hospital after he
complained of severe stomach pains accompanied by nausea
and vomiting. He was later diagnosed to have an Intestinal
Lipomatis of the Large Colon with Obstruction of the
Ascending Colon.
3. He underwent surgery but the same was unsuccessful. He
died on December 2, 1975.
4. When his widow filed a claim with GSIS, the same was
denied. GSIS contended that the nature of the deceased duties
as a teacher could not have directly caused his ailment which
eventuated in his subsequent death.
5. The ECC affirmed the decision of the GSIS.
6. Petitioner does not dispute the fact that the principal duties
of her husband as a classroom teacher alone would not have
any connection with the disease. However, she posits that the
deceaseds auxiliary activities as a classroom teacher directly
affected his physical consatitution and caused him to have
sustained some trauma in his abdominal cavity and other parts
of the body.
ISSUE
Whether or not the death of the deceased caused by Intestinal
Lipomatis of the Large Colon with Obstruction of the
Ascending Colon, is compensable.
HELD
NO. Claims on death benefits under Art. 194 must result from
an occupational disease. A compensable disease means any
illness accepted and listed by the ECC or any illness caused by
the employment subject to proof by the employee that the risk
of contracting the same was increased by the working
conditions.
If the disease is listed in Annex A, no proof of causation is
required. If it is not so listed, it has been held that the
employee, this time assisted by his employer, is required to
prove, a positive proposition, that is, that the risk of
contracting the disease is increased by working conditions.
Proof of direct causal relation is indispensably required. It is
enough that the claimant adduces proof of reasonable work
connection, whereby the development of the disease was
brought about largely by the conditions present in the nature of
the job. Strict rules of evidence, which has been held to be
such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as
sufficient to support a conclusion.
The circumstances alleged by the petitioner and the evidence
she presented are not enough to discharge the required
quantum of proof, liberal as it is. There is no clear evidence as
to when the diseased commenced and supervened; the tumors
which developed in the deceaseds colon may have been
growing for many years even before he was employed as a
teacher. The trauma that was supposed to have caused or at
least contributed to the disease was neither satisfactorily
clarified nor adequately proved.
7. G.R. No. L-46654 August 9, 1988
LUPO S. CARBAJAL, petitioner,
vs.
GOVERNMENT SERVICE INSURANCE SYSTEM
(Municipality of San Julian, Eastern Samar), and
EMPLOYEES COMPENSATION
COMMISSION, respondents.
The undisputed facts of the case are as follows:
The late Nenita P. Carbajal was employed as Campaign Clerk
in the Municipal Treasurer's Office of San Julian, Eastern
Samar. On February 2, 1976 while typing tax declarations and
making entries in their books, which were her duties aside
from campaigning for tax collections, she suffered from
bleeding per vaginum due to incomplete abortion. Her
hospitalization and treatment at the Bagacay Mines Hospital
due to profuse hermorrhage of one month duration secondary
to complete abortion and shock were of no avail for on March
8,1976, petitioner's wife died.
On June 3, 1976, the Senior Assistant General Manager of the
Underwriting and Claims Department of GSIS, Mr. Domingo
N. Garcia, denied the petitioner's claim stating that the
ailments of his wife were not occupational.
On June 27, 1977, the respondent ECC rendered its questioned
decision in ECC Case No. 0168 based upon the findings of its
Medical Officer, Dr. Mercia C. Abrenica, that there is no proof
to establish the compensability of the sickness in relation to
claimant's occupation. Neither was there an increased risk
arising from the working conditions affirming the GSIS
decision denying the claim.
Hence, this petition.
The sole issue raised in the case at bar is the compensability of
petitioner's wife's ailments.
Section 1, P.D. No. 626, amending Article 165 of the Labor
Code, defines a compensable sickness as "any illness
definitely accepted as occupational disease listed by the
Commission, or any illness caused by employment subject to
proof by the employee that the risk of contracting the same is
increased by the working conditions."
Respondent ECC in its decision denying petitioner's claim,
stressed that the causes of abortion are: (1) fetal, as when there
is defective development of the fertilized ovum; (2) maternal,
as in acute infections, disease, and when the spermatozoa is
inadequate to give ovum the necessary generative impulse
(Obstetrics, J.P. Greenhill, 12th Edition, 1060).
Respondent ECC asserted that there is absence of any proof
that the abortion suffered by petitioner's wife was caused by
her employment and that petitioner failed to establish risk of
his wife's contracting it was increased by working conditions
attendant in her employment.
Petitioner contends that the decision of the ECC overlooked
the nature and conditions of employment of his late wife.
Petitioner claims that the risk of contracting the disease was
aggravated/increased by the working conditions as evidenced
by Report of Injury/Sickness/Death, Municipal Mayor Matilda
A. Operario of San Julian, Eastern Samar (ECC, Records, p.
11); Medical Certificate of the two attending physicians of the
deceased (ECC, Records, Annex "A," p. 15; Annex "B," p.
14); and the affidavit of the Municipal Treasurer of the
aforementioned town (ECC, Records, Annex "C," p. 13)
which confirmed that the illness was connected with her work
as Campaign Clerk in the Municipal Treasurer's Office.
Further, petitioner cites the travels of his wife and the of heavy
tax declaration books in connection with her work thereby
causing her "two attacks of vaginal bleeding and hypogastric
pain."
Claimant's contention is meritorious.
Under Article 1167 (I), Presidential Decree No. 626, as
amended, a "compensable sickness means (1) any illness
definitely accepted as an occupational disease listed by the
ECC; or (2) any illness caused by employment subject to proof
by the employee that the risk of contracting the same is
increased by working conditions."
Records reveal that petitioner's wife while working as
Campaign Clerk in the Treasurer's Office of San Julian,
Eastern Samar, suffered "two attacks of vaginal bleeding and
hypogastric pain" attributing said ailment to the lifting of
heavy tax declaration books, due to abortion incomplete.
This opinion of the decedent's physicians is in accord with the
findings/analysis of medical authorities which read as follows:
Pregnant women become tired more readily,
therefore, the prevention of fatigue must be
stressed very emphatically. The body is
made up of various types of cells, each type
with a specific function. Depletion of nerve-
cell energy results in fatigue, and fatigue
causes certain reactions in the body that are
injurious. (Maternity Nursing 12th Edition,
by Fitzpatrick, Reeder and Mastroianni, Jr.).
It is not considered desirable for pregnant
women to be employed in the following
types of occupation and they should, if
possible, be transferred to lighter and more
sedentary works:
(a) occupation that involve
heavy lifting or other
heavy work;
(b) occupation involving
continous standing and
moving about. (One of the
Standards for Maternity
Case and Employment of
Mothers recommended by
the Children's Bureau of
the United States). (Rollo,
p. 12,).
Moreover, spontaneous abortion may result from the influence
of periodicity as the uterine muscle reaches a certain state of
detention; or in various accidents as a fall, strain or
overmuscular exertion when the uterus reacts and expels its
load. (Emphasis supplied; "Anatomy and Allied Sciences for
Lawyers, W.F. English, p. 181).
Therefore, the opinion of the ECC Medical Officer (ECC
Record, p. 20) that there was no causal relation between the
ailment of petitioner's spouse and the nature and/or conditions
of his wife's employment cannot overcome the substantial
evidence submitted by petitioner
Moreover, "this kind of interpretation gives meaning and
substance to the liberal and compassionate spirit of the law as
embodied in Article 4 of the New Labor Code which states
that "all doubts in the implementation and interpretation of the
provisions of this Code including its implementing rules and
regulations shall be resolved in favor of labor.'" (Cristobal v.
ECC, supra). The policy is to extend the applicability of the
decree to a greater number of employees who can avail of the
benefits under law, which is in consonance with the avowed
policy of the State to give maximum aid and protection to
labor (Acosta v. ECC, 109 SCRA 209 cited in Sarmiento v.
ECC and GSIS, L-65648, September 24, 1986, 144 SCRA
421).
WHEREFORE, IN VIEW OF THE FOREGOING, the
petition is GRANTED
8. ELIGIO P. MIRASOL, petitioner,
vs.
EMPLOYEE'S COMPENSATION COMMISSION and
GOVERNMENT SERVICE INSURANCE SYSTEM
(Department of Education and Culture), respondents.

FERNANDEZ, J.:
This is a petition to review the decision of the Employee's
Compensation Commission in ECC Case No. 0134 entitled
"Eligio Mirasol, Claimant, versus, Government Service
Insurance System (Department of Education and Culture),
Respondent" affirming the decision of the Government
Service Insurance System denying the claim for compensation
of Eligio P. Mirasol on the ground that the claimant's ailments,
hypertension and rheumatic infection in both knees, are not
occupational diseases arising from his employment. 1
The petitioner, Eligio P. Mirasol, while in good health, was
appointed as classroom teacher on August 1, 1945 in the
public school in Libmanan, Camarines Sur. In 1960, he was
appointed as District Food Production Coordinator and
Attendant Teacher in the same school. He became a District
Revolution Coordinator and Attendant Teacher in 1972. In
1974, the petition was given additional assignment as District
Vocational Coordinator. The district was composed of forty
eight (48) central barrio schools, eighteen (18) of which were
in the mountains which could be reached only on foot. Eight
(8) schools were 30 kilometers and the nearest was 10
kilometers from the petitioner's headquarters in the town
proper of Libmanan, Camarines Sur. It was the petitioner's
duty to visit monthly all the district schools. On August 25,
1973, he experienced for the first time symptoms of malignant
hypertension and rheumatoid arthritis. The ailments of the
petitioner persisted. He was under continuous medical
treatment until he retired on February 28, 1976 after having
been in the government service for thirty one (31) years, more
or less. His retirement was brought about by ailments
diagnosed as high blood pressure and rheumatoid arthritis,
both knees. 2
The petitioner applied for compensation benefits under P.D.
No. 626 to the Government Service Insurance System (GSIS)
in 1976. In a letter dated March 8, 1976, the Senior Assistant
General Manager, Domingo N. Garcia, of the GSIS denied the
claim on the ground that the ailments of hypertension and
rheumatic infection, both knees, are not occupational diseases
and that the working conditions of the petitioner's employment
could not have directly caused such ailments. 3
The motion for reconsideration filed by the petitioner was
denied by the Senior Assistant General Manager of the
Government Service Insurance System in a letter dated May
17, 1976. 4
The petitioner appealed to the Employee's Compensation
Commission which affirmed the decision of the Government
Service Insurance System denying the claim.
It is a fact that part of the duties of the petitioner was to make
monthly visits to various schools which are not accessible by
road. To reach these mountainous schools, the petitioner had
to hike through muddy ricefields and climb slippery mountains
during sunny and rainy days. During these monthly visits, the
petitioner fell down many times because of the slippery paths
in the ricefields and trails in the mountains. The ailments of
hypertension and rheumatoid arthritis, both knees, must have
been caused by the exposure to the elements of the petitioner
and his falling down many times while hiking in muddy
ricefields and on slippery mountain trails under all kinds of
weather conditions on his way to the barrio schools not
accessible by road.
There is sufficient substantial evidence of record to show that
the ailments of the petitioner were caused by the duties of his
employment and that the risk of contracting said ailments was
increased by the working conditions. He is entitled to
permanent total disability compensation.
The record also discloses that the petitioner received medical
treatment.
WHEREFORE, the decision of the Employee's Compensation
Commission sought to be reviewed is hereby set aside and the
Government Service Insurance System is ordered:
1) To pay the petitioner the amount of Six
Thousand Pesos (P6,000.00) as disability
benefit;
2) To reimburse the petitioner the medical
expenses he incurred, supported by proper
receipts; and
3) To pay the petitioner the amount of Six
Hundred Pesos (P600.00) as attorney's fees.
SO ORDERED.
9. VILLONES V. ECC
FACTS
1. Rolando Villones was employed as a secondary public
school teacher assigned at Dayhagan Barrio Highschool in
Bongabon, Oriental Mindoro from July 3, 1972 up to the time
of his death on September 2, 1975.
2. He died of pulmonary tuberculosis.
3. When his father filed a claim with the GSIS together with
the following documents:
a. Medical certificate showing that the deceased was on sick
leave from December 4 to 20, 1972 due to influenza.
b. Medical certificate issued by Dr. Fernando B. Viloria,
Municipal Health Officer of Bongabon certifying that he
examined Rolando Villones on July 19, 1972 and found him to
be physically and mentally fit for employment.
c. A certification from the principal to the effect that the actual
duties of the deceased were teaching secondary school
subjects such as chemistry, science, history and English. He
also led students in other extra-curricular activities.
4. GSIS denied the claim on the ground that although
pulmonary tuberculosis is listed as an occupational diseases,
the petitioner failed to satisfy other conditions in order to be
compensable. According to GSIS, for it to be compensable,
the employee manifesting this disease should have an
occupation involving close and frequent contact with a source
or sources of tuberculosis infection by reason of employment:
(a) in the medical treatment or nursing of a person suffering
from tuberculosis; (b) as a laboratory worker, pathologist or
post mortem worker.
5. The ECC affirmed this decision of the GSIS.
ISSUES
1. Whether or not the death of Villones from pulmonary
tuberculosis is compensable.
2. Whether or not the provisions of the Workmens
Compensation Act is applicable in this case.
HELD
1. YES. Records reveal that prior to the employment of the
deceased, he was physically and mentally fit to perform his
duties. While he was employed as a teacher, he went on sick
leave for 16 days. His physician diagnosed the sickness as
influenza. Considering however the medical facilities in
municipal health centers, it is possible that what was
diagnosed as influenza was actually pulmonary tuberculosis in
its incipient stage, which may not be easily detected by
physical examination but by extensive x-ray. Tuberculosis is
not an instantaneous disease, it is an imperceptible germ
disease that feeds on the lungs whose presence in the body
cannot be easily discerned and its incipient stage may not be
readily discovered. Considering the nature of the deceaseds
employment as certified by the principal, it is not surprising
that he contracted tuberculosis so that only after 5 months
employed as a teacher, he was forced to go on sick leave by
reason of the aforesaid illness.
When he was able to resume work, he was again exposed to
the same working conditions thus aggravating his illness until
he suddenly died of severe hemoptysis due to PTB. The Court
has consistently held that the disease of tuberculosis is an
occupational disease or work-connected in such occupations
as that of teacher, labourer, driver, land inspector and such
other occupations, hence compensable.
2. In the instant case, the cause of action accrued as early as
December 4, 1972 when Rolando Villones contracted his
illness and continued to run until September 2, 1975 when he
died by reason thereof; hence the cause of action accrued
before the That in all things, God may be glorified. The
governing law in the prosecution of the cause of action which
accrued of said cause of action. Since the Workmens
Compensation Act was then in full force and effect, then it
should govern in the case at bar. It must be pointed out that as
early as December 4 to 20, 1972, the deceased was already
entitled to disability benefits under Sec. 14 of the Workmens
Compensation Act because his illness prevented him from
reporting to his work for more than 3 days and under such a
situation, his employer was obligated under Sec. 37 to file a
notice of illness with the Workmens Compensation
Commission and to manifest its intention of whether or not to
controvert his right to compensation.
Failure to comply with said sections constitutes a renunciation
of the employers right to controvert the claim resulting in the
waiver of all its non-jurisdictional defenses, such as non-
compensability of the claim.
INTERORIENT MARITIME ENTERPRISES, INC.,
FIRCROFT SHIPPING CORPORATION and TIMES
SURETY & INSURANCE CO., INC., petitioners,
vs.
NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION and
CONSTANCIA PINEDA, respondents.
FACTS:
The proceedings below originated as a claim for death
compensation benefits filed by Constancia Pineda as heir of
her deceased son, seaman Jeremias Pineda, against Interorient
Maritime Enterprises, Inc. and its foreign principal, Fircroft
Shipping Corporation and the Times Surety and Insurance Co.,
Inc. The following facts were found by the POEA
Administrator:
As can be gathered from the records of the case, it was alleged
that deceased seaman, Jeremias Pineda was contracted to work
as Oiler on board the vessels, "MV Amazonia", owned and
operated by its foreign principal, Fircroft Shipping
Corporation for a period of nine (9) months with additional
three (3) months upon mutual consent of both parties with a
monthly basic salary of US$276.00 plus fixed overtime rate of
US$83.00 and a leave pay of 2 1/2 days per month; that on
October 2, 1989, he met his death when he was shot by a Thai
Policeman in Bangkok, Thailand; that considering that the
deceased seaman was suffering from mental disorders
aggravated by threats on his life by his fellow seamen, the
Ship Captain should not have allowed him to travel alone.
The instant petition seeks the reversal and/or modification of
the Resolution dated March 30, 1994 of public respondent
National Labor Relations Commission dismissing the appeals
of petitioners and affirming the decision dated November 16,
1992 of Philippine Overseas Employment Administration
(POEA) Administrator Felicisimo C. Joson, which ordered
that.
WHEREFORE, in view of the foregoing consideration,
respondents are hereby jointly and severally held liable to pay
the complainant the following amounts:
1. P130,000.00 as death compensation benefits.
2. P18,000.00 as burial expenses.
ISSUE:
Are the local crewing or manning agent and its foreign
principal (the shipowner) liable for the death of a Filipino
seaman-employee who, after having been discharged, was
killed in transit while being repatriated home?
HELD:
Petitioner's reliance on De Jesus is misplaced, as the death and
burial benefits being claimed in this case are not payable by
the Employee's Compensation Commission and chargeable
against the State Insurance Fund. These claims arose from the
responsibility of the foreign employer together with the local
agency for the safety of the employee during his repatriation
and until his arrival in this country, i.e., the point of hire.
Through the termination of the employment contract was duly
effected in Dubai, still, the responsibility of the foreign
employer to see to it that Pineda was duly repatriated to the
point of hiring subsisted. Section 4, Rule VIII of the Rules and
Regulations Governing Overseas Employment clearly
provides for the duration of the mandatory personal accident
and life insurance covering accident death, dismemberment
and disability of overseas workers:
Sec. 4. Duration of Insurance Coverage. The minimum
coverage shall take effect upon payment of the premium and
shall be extended worldwide, on and off the job, for the
duration of the worker's contract plus sixty (60) calendar days
after termination of the contract of employment; provided that
in no case shall the duration of the insurance coverage be less
than one year. (Emphasis supplied)
The foreign employer may not have been obligated by its
contract to provide a companion for a returning employee, but
it cannot deny that it was expressly tasked by its agreement to
assure the safe return of said worker. The uncaring attitude
displayed by petitioners who, knowing fully well that its
employee had been suffering from some mental disorder,
nevertheless still allowed him to travel home alone, is
appalling to say the least. Such attitude harks back to another
time when the landed gentry practically owned the serfs, and
disposed of them when the latter had grown old, sick or
otherwise lost their usefulness.
WHEREFORE, premises considered, the petition is hereby
DISMISSED and the Decision assailed in this petition is
AFFIRMED. Costs against petitioners.
MABUHAY SHIPPING SERVICES, INC. V. NLRC
193 SCRA 141
GANCAYCO, J.
FACTS
1. Romulo Sentina was hired as 4th Engineer by Mabuhay
Shipping Services for and in behalf of Skippers Maritime Co.,
Ltd. to work aboard the M/V Harmony I for a period
of 1 year.
2. On January 16, 1988, while the vessel was docked
alongside Drapetona Pier, Piraeus, Greece, Sentina arrived
aboard the ship from the shore visibly drunk.
3. He went to the messhall and took an axe and challenged
those who are eating there.
4. He was pacified by his shipmates who led him to his cabin.
However, he later went out and became violent.

5. He smashed and threw a cup towards the head to an oiler,

Emmanuel Ero. Ero touched his head and noticed blood. This
infuriated Ero which led to a fight between
the two.

6. Sentina was taken to the hospital where he passed away on

January 17, 1988.

7. Cecilia Sentina filed a complaint against the petitioners with

the POEA for payment
of death benefits, burial expenses, unpaid salaries on board
and overtime pay with damages.

8. POEA ordered the petitioners to pay the claim.

9. Petitioners appealed to the NLRC although such appeal was
dismissed.

ISSUE

Is the employer exempted from liability in a case of one who

ran amuck or who in the state of intoxication provoked a fight
as a result of which he was killed?

HELD
YES. The mere death of the seaman during the term of his
employment does not automatically give rise to compensation.
The circumstances which led to the death as well as the
provisions of the contract, and the right and obligation of the
employer and seaman must be taken into consideration, in
consonance with the due process and equal protection clauses
of the Constitution. There are limitations to the liability to pay
death benefits.

When the death of the seaman resulted from a deliberate or

wilful act on his own life, and it is directly attributable to the
seaman, such death is not compensable. No doubt a case of
suicide is covered by this provision.

By the same token, when as in this case the seaman, in a state

of intoxication, ran amuck, or committed an unlawful
aggression against another, inflicting injury on the latter, so
that in his own defense the latter fought back and in the
process killed the seaman, the circumstances of the death of
the seaman could be categorized as a deliberate and wilful act
on his own life directly attributable to him.