Professional Documents
Culture Documents
People V Hu
People V Hu
COMMISSION members of SSS. SSS pays priest for sickness, accident, disability or
FACTS: death... it is extended to him not as a priest but as a member of the
The Roman Catholic Archbishop Of Manila filed with the Social SSS.
Security Commission a request that “Catholic Charities and all W/N TAXING RELIGIOUS BELIEFS? No, this is for the protection of
religious and charitable institutions and organizations which are labor, it is contribution to be held in trust and returned because of
directly or indirectly, wholly or partially operated by the Roman disability, sickness or death
Catholic Archbishop of Manila be EXCEMPTED from compulsory The definition of the term employer is sufficiently comprehensive as
coverage of Social Security Law to include religious and charitable institutions or entities not
The request was based on the claim that the said act is a labor law organized for profit. This is made more evident by the fact that it
and does not cover religious and charitable institutions but is limited contains an exception in which said institutions or entities are not
to businesses and activities organized for profit. The Social Security included.
Commission DENIED the request
The Roman Catholic Archbishop of Manila reiterating its arguments
requested for reconsideration, however was DENIED by the POBLETE CONSTRUCTION CO., petitioner, vs. JUDITH ASIAIN, SOCIAL
Commission SECURITY COMMISSION, and BENITO MACRHON, in his capacity as
The coverage of the Social Security Law is predicated on the existence Sheriff of Rizal, respondents.
of an employer-employee relationship of more or less permanent
nature and extends to employment of all kinds except those expressly DOCTRINE:The collection of the employee's share is a duty imposed
exclude by law, and his unwillingness to have it deducted from his salary does
Appellant contends that the term employer as defined in the law not excuse the employer's failure to make the report aforesaid. It is
should – following the principle of ejusdem generis – be limited to precisely in this situation that the employer is liable, and there is no
those who carry on undertakings or activities which have the element question as to the amount of such liability in this case.
of profit or gain or which are pursued for profit or gain because the FACTS:
phrase activity or any kind in the definition is preceded by the words Miguel Asiain was an employee of the Poblete Construction Company
any trade, business, industry, undertaing from 1956 until his death on November 22, 1959, with a monthly
ISSUE: salary of P300.
W/N THE RULE OF EJUSDEM GENERIS BE APPLIED Upon his death his widow, Judith Asiain, for herself and her minor
RULING: children, filed a petition before the Social Security Commission against
No. It is not controlling where the plain purpose and intent of the the company and its manager, Domingo Poblete, to recover the
Legislature would thereby be hindered and defeated. following sums:
RA1161 – Excluded in the coverage of religious and charitable (1) P3,600.00 equivalent to one year's salary of the deceased;
institutions or entities not organized for profits (2) P600.00 representing his unpaid salary for two months;
RA1161 amended 1792 – specifically stated that it is included in the (3) P288,00 "representing the cash received by respondents from
coverage of religious and charitable institutions or entities not their laborers as contribution to the family of the deceased;" and
organized for profit P2,000.00 by way of attorney's fees.
received a report about him from his employer, the said employer
RESPONDENT: moved to dismiss the petitioner stating that SSS has no shall pay to the employee or his legal heirs damages equivalent to the
jurisdiction over the subject matter and that Judith has no capacity to benefits to which said employee would have been entitled had his
sue name been reported on time by the employer to the System."
It appears that although the deceased Miguel Asiain had been
SSC: denied respondent's motion and ordered respondent to file his employed in the Poblete Construction Company since 1956 and had
answer. When no answer was filed, SSS declared respondent in accomplished SSS Form E-1 (Employees' Date Record) and transmitted
default and allowed petitioner to present evidence. the same to the said company's Manila Office, it was never filed with
RESOLUTION: declared itself without jurisdiction to entertain the the Social Security System for the reason that he refused to have his
claims in the petition except the one for the sum of P3,600, which it share of the corresponding monthly contributions deducted from his
awarded based on the evidences presented. salary.
RESPONDENT: Motion for reconsideration was filed but the SSC The company maintains that the deceased was not a member of the
denied it. System when he died and hence the adjudication of the claim for
damages does not pertain to the Commission but to the courts of
RESPONDENT: Elevated the case for review before the CA which justice.
issued a writ of preliminary injunction We find the argument untenable – It was the duty of the employer to
comply with Section 24.
Case was certified to this Court for the reason that when the Section 5(a) of the Social Security Act provides that "the filing,
respondents below were declared in default they lost their standing determination and settlement of claims shall be governed by the rules
before the Commission, and not having regained the same by a and regulations promulgated by the Commission;" and the rules and
motion to set aside or petition for relief, they had no right to appeal regulations thus promulgated state that "the effectivity of
from the default judgment; and that in any event no questions of fact membership in the System, as well as the final determination and
are involved and hence, if at all appealable, the appeal should be settlement of claims, shall be vested in the Commission."
directly to this Court
Respondent Sulpicio Lines, Inc. hired Nacague as "hepe de viaje" or LA rendered a decision in favor of Nacague and declared that Sulpicio
the representative of Sulpicio Lines on board its vessel M/V Princess Lines illegally dismissed Nacague.
of the World. REASON OF LA: The drug test result from S.M. Lazo Clinic was
questionable because the clinic is not accredited by the Dangerous
Sulpicio Lines received an anonymous letter reporting the use of Drug Board and not under its supervision.
illegal drugs on board the ship.
NLRC reversed the Labor Arbiter’s decision.
Ceasar T. Chico, a housekeeper on the ship, submitted a report REASON OF NLRC: Nacague, who was performing a task involving trust
regarding the drug paraphernalia found inside the Mopalla Suite and confidence, was found positive for using illegal drugs, he was
Room and the threat on his life made by Nacague and Chief Mate guilty of serious misconduct and loss of trust and confidence.
Reynaldo Doroon after he found the drug paraphernalia.
MR denied.
Sulpicio Lines sent a notice of investigation to Nacague informing him
of the charges against him for use of illegal drugs and threatening a CA affirmed NLRC’s decision.
co-employee. REASON OF CA: Sulpicio Lines complied with both the procedural and
substantive requirements of the law when it terminated the
When the ship docked in the port of Manila on, some crew members employment of Nacague.
of the ship, together with Nacague, were subjected to a random drug
test. They were taken to S.M. Lazo Medical Clinic and were required to ISSUE:
submit urine samples. Nacague was found positive for
methamphetamine hydrochloride or shabu. Whether or not the termination was valid.
Hence, this petition. Myocardial infarction, also known as coronary occlusion or just a
coronary, is a life threatening condition. Predisposing factors for
ISSUE: myocardial infarction are the same for all forms of Coronary Artery
Disease, and these factors include stress. Stress appears to be
Whether or not Bernardos illness was work-related and/or the risk of associated with elevated blood pressure. (Government Service
contracting the illness was increased by the nature of his work? Insurance System (GSIS) v. Cuanang, G.R. No. 158846)
The conclusions of the two agencies totally disregarded the stressful Included cardio-vascular diseases in the list of occupational diseases,
and strenuous conditions under which Bernardo toiled for almost 29 making them compensable, subject to any of the conditions stated in
long years as a laborer and as a metro aide. By so doing, they closed its enabling Resolution No. 432.With the resolution, it should be
the door to other influences that caused or contributed to Bernardos obvious that by itself, a heart disease, such as myocardial infarction,
fatal heart problem an ailment aggravated with the passage of time by can be considered work-related, with or without the complicating
the risks present in the difficult working conditions that Bernardo had factors of other non-occupational illnesses. Thus, the Court so ruled in
Rases v. ECC (504 Phil. 340, 345 (2005)) where it emphasized that the The case emanates from a claim for Employees’ Compensation death
incidence of acute myocardial infarction, whether or not associated benefits filed by the petitioner, who is surviving spouse of Rosario D.
with a non-listed ailment, is enough basis for compensation. Lorenzo (Rosario), a GSIS member who during her lifetime served as
Elementary Teacher I at the DepEd.
Resolution No. 432 provides (as one of the conditions) that a heart vRecords of the benefit claim show that on October 2001, Rosario was
disease is compensable if it was known to have been present during admitted at the Medical City Hospital due to Hematoma on the
employment, there must be proof that an acute exacerbation was Tongue, Left Inner Lip and Right Cheek with Associated Gingival
clearly precipitated by the unusual strain by reason of the nature of Bleeding.
his work. Based on the evidence on record, we find as the CA did, that
the nature of Bernardos duties and the conditions under which he That prior to her hospitalization, she was previously diagnosed by the
worked were such as to eventually cause the onset of his myocardial same hospital for Chronic Myelogenous Leukemia and was confined
infarction. The stresses, the strain, and the exposure to street therein on July 2001 because of Pneumonia, which was a result of
pollution and to the elements that Bernardo had to bear for almost 29 immuno-compromise secondary to leukemia. Rosario’s health
years all to real too be ignored. They cannot but lead to a condition was confirmed by means of a bone marrow examination.
deterioration of health particularly with the contributing factors of On 27 December 2001,Rosario died of Cardio-Respiratory Arrest due
diabetes and pulmonary disease. to Terminal Leukemia.
CA AFFIRMED.
Petitioner, being the surviving spouse, claimed for Employees
Compensation death benefits from the GSIS but was denied on the
ground that the Medical Evaluation and Underwriting Department
G.R. No. 188385 October 2, 2013 (MEUD) found Rosario’s ailments and cause of death, a non-
BENITO E. LORENZO, Petitioner, vs.GOVERNMENT SERVICE occupational diseases contemplated under P.D. No. 626, as amended.
INSURANCE SYSTEM (GSIS) and DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
(DepEd), Respondents. Unconvinced, Petitioner elevated claim to the ECC for Review.
RULING
Gauging from the above, the ECC was correct in stating that, Rosario’s
The Court finds the petition unmeritorious. disease is occupational, which fact, however, does not thereby result
Sickness refers to any illness definitely accepted as an occupational in compensability in view of the fact that petitioner’s wife was not an
disease listed by the ECC, or any illness caused by employment, operating room personnel. As correctly pointed out by the ECC, the
subject to proof that the risk of contracting the same is increased by coverage of leukemia as an occupational disease relates to one’s
working conditions, as defined under of the Labor Code of the employment as an operating room personnel ordinarily exposed to
Philippines. anesthetics.
The present system is also administered by social insurance agencies – This is a petition for Review on Certiorari under
the Government Service Insurance System and Social Security System Rule 45 of the Rules of Court, Estrella Bañez
– under the Employees Compensation Commission. The intent was to (Petitioner) assails the Resolution of the Court of
restore a sensible equilibrium between the employer’s obligation to Appeals which dismissed her petition and affirmed
pay workmen’s compensation and the employee’s right to receive the denial of her claim for death benefits by the
reparation for work-connected death or disability. The open ended Employees' Compensation Commission (ECC).
Table of Occupational Diseases requires no proof of causation. A Likewise, subject of the petition is the Court of
covered claimant suffering from an occupational disease is Appeal's Resolution which denied petitioner's
automatically paid benefits. motion for reconsideration.
[ G.R. No. 196102, November 26, 2014 ] [Respondent's] disability claim was forwarded to GSIS,[6] but the
latter denied her claim for the reason that hypertension and
glaucoma, which were her illnesses, were not work[-]related. Her disability or death under P.D. 626, as amended, Rule III, Section l(b)
motion for reconsideration was likewise denied by the GSIS. thereof, specifically provides that the ailment must be listed by the
Commission as an occupational disease with the conditions set forth
Petitioner filed an appeal [with] the ECC, which rendered the assailed therein satisfied, otherwise, the conditions imposed under the
Decision,[7] the dispositive portion of which stated: Increased Risk Theory must be complied with.
Our Ruling The degree of proof required to validate the concurrence of the
above-mentioned conditions under P.D. No. 626 is merely substantial
The Court denies the Petition. evidence, that is, such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might
accept as adequate to support a conclusion. What the law requires is
In resolving this case, the case of Government Service Insurance a reasonable work-connection and not direct causal relation. It is
System v. Baul[24] comes into mind and lays the groundwork for a enough that the hypothesis on which the workmen's claim is based is
similar ruling. In said case, the Court held: probable. As correctly pointed out by the CA, probability, not the
ultimate degree of certainty, is the test of proof in compensation
proceedings. For, in interpreting and carrying out the provisions of the
Cerebro-vascular accident and essential hypertension are considered Labor Code and its implementing Rules and Regulations, the
as occupational diseases under Nos. 19 and 29, respectively, of Annex primordial and paramount consideration is the employee's welfare. To
"A" of the Implementing Rules of P.D. No. 626, as amended. Thus, it is safeguard the worker's rights, any doubt as to the proper
not necessary that there be proof of causal relation between the work interpretation and application must be resolved in [his] favor.
and the illness which resulted in the respondent's disability. The open-
ended Table of Occupational Diseases requires no proof of causation. In the instant case, medical reports and drug prescriptions of
In general, a covered claimant suffering from an occupational disease respondent's attending physicians sufficiently support her claim for
is automatically paid benefits. disability benefits. Neither the GSIS nor the ECC convincingly deny
their genuineness and due execution. The reports are made part of
However, although cerebro-vascular accident and essential the record and there is no showing that they are false or erroneous,
hypertension are listed occupational diseases, their compensability or resorted to [for the purpose] of deceiving the Court, hence, are
requires compliance with all the conditions set forth in the Rules. In entitled to due probative weight. The failure of respondent to submit
short, both are qualified occupational diseases. For cerebro-vascular to a full medical examination, as required by the rules, to substantiate
accident, the claimant must prove the following: (1) there must be a her essential hypertension, is of no moment. The law is that
history, which should be proved, of trauma at work (to the head laboratory reports such as X-ray and ECG are not indispensable
specifically) due to unusual and extraordinary physical or mental prerequisites to compensability, the reason being that the strict rules
strain or event, or undue exposure to noxious gases in industry; (2) of evidence need not be observed in claims for compensation.
there must be a direct connection between the trauma or exertion in Medical findings of the attending physician may be received in
the course of the employment and the cerebro-vascular attack; and evidence and used as proof[s] of the fact in dispute. The doctor's
(3) the trauma or exertion then and there caused a brain hemorrhage. certification as to the nature of claimant's disability may be given
On the other hand, essential hypertension is compensable only if it credence as he or she normally would not make untruthful
causes impairment of function of body organs like kidneys, heart, eyes certification. Indeed, no physician in his right mind and who is aware
and brain, resulting in permanent disability, provided that, the of the far[-]reaching and serious effect that his or her statements
would cause on a money claim against a government agency would moment in time but rather over a period of time. It is possible that an
vouch indiscriminately without regarding his own interests and injury which at first was considered to be temporary may later on
protection. become permanent or one who suffers a partial disability becomes
totally and permanently disabled from the same cause. The right to
Significantly, even medical authorities have established that the exact compensation extends to disability due to disease supervening upon
etiology of essential hypertension cannot be accurately traced: and proximately and naturally resulting from a compensable injury.
Where the primary injury is shown to have arisen in the course of
The term essential hypertension has been employed to indicate those employment, every natural consequence that flows from the injury
cases of hypertension for which a specific endocrine or renal basis likewise arises out of the employment, unless it is the result of an
cannot be found, and in which the neural element may be only a independent intervening cause attributable to claimant's own
mediator of other influences. Since even this latter relationship is not negligence or misconduct. Simply stated, all medical consequences
entirely clear, it is more properly listed for the moment in the category that flow from the primary injury are compensable.
of unknown etiology. The term essential hypertension defines simply
by failing to define; hence, it is of limited use except as an expression P.D. No. 626, as amended, is said to have abandoned the presumption
of our inability to understand adequately the forces at work.[25] of compensability and the theory of aggravation prevalent under the
It bears stressing, however, that medical experiments tracing the Workmen's Compensation Act. Nonetheless, we ruled in Employees'
etiology of essential hypertension show that there is a relationship Compensation Commission v. Court of Appeals, that:
between the sickness and the nature and conditions of work, hi this
jurisdiction, we have already ruled in a number of cases the strenuous
office of a public schoolteacher. The case of Makabali v. Employees' Despite the abandonment of the presumption of compensability
Compensation Commission, which we have re-affirmed in the established by the old law, the present law has not ceased to be an
subsequent cases of De Vera v. Employees' Compensation employees'1 compensation law or a social legislation; hence, the
Commission, Antiporda v. Workmen's Compensation Commission, and liberality of the law in favor of the working man and woman still
De la Torre v. Employees' Compensation Commission, amply prevails, and the official agency charged by law to implement the
summarized, thus: constitutional guarantee of social justice should adopt a liberal
attitude in favor of the employee in deciding claims for
x x x x compensability, especially in light of the compassionate policy
towards labor which the 1987 Constitution vivifies and enhances.
The fact that the essential hypertension of respondent worsened and Elsewise stated, a humanitarian impulse, dictated by no less than the
resulted in a CVA at the time she was already out of service is Constitution itself under the social justice policy, calls for a liberal and
inconsequential. The main consideration for its compensability is that sympathetic approach to legitimate appeals of disabled public
her illness was contracted during and by reason of her employment, servants; or that all doubts to the right to compensation must be
and any non-work related factor that contributed to its aggravation is resolved in favor of the employee or laborer. Verily, the policy is to
immaterial. extend the applicability of the law on employees' compensation to as
many employees who can avail of the benefits thereunder.
Indeed, an employee's disability may not manifest fully at one precise [26] (Emphasis supplied)
We find it strange that both the ECC and the GS1S singled out the
Also, in Government Service Insurance System v. De Castro,[27] this presence of smoking and drinking as the factors that rendered De
Court made the following pronouncement: Castro's ailments, otherwise listed as occupational, to be non-
compensable. To be sure, the causes of CAD and hypertension that
the ECC listed and explained in its decision cannot be denied; smoking
Other than the given facts, another undisputed aspect of the case is and drinking are undeniably among these causes. Flowever, they are
the status of the ailments that precipitated De Castro's separation not the sole causes of CAD and hypertension and, at least, not under
from the military service - CAD and hypertensive cardiovascular the circumstances of the present case. For this reason, we fear for the
disease. These are occupational diseases. No less than the ECC itself implication of the ECC ailing if it will prevail and be read as definitive
confirmed the status of these ailments when it declared on the effects of smoking and drinking on compensability issues, even
that "Contrary to the ruling of the System CAD is a form of on diseases that are listed as occupational in character. The ruling
cardiovascular disease which is included in the list of Occupational raises the possible reading that smoking and drinking, by themselves,
Diseases." Essential hypertension is also listed under Item 29 in Annex are factors that can bar compensability.
"A" of the Amended ECC Rules as an occupational disease.
We ask the question of whether these factors can be sole
Despite the compensable character of his ailments, both the GSIS and determinants of compensability as the ECC has apparently failed to
the ECC found De Castro's CAD to be non-work related and, therefore, consider other factors such as age and gender from among those that
non-compensable. To use the wording of the ECC decision, it denied the ECC itself listed as major and minor causes of atherosclerosis and,
De Castro's claim "due to the presence of factors which are not work- ultimately, of CAD. While age and gender are characteristics inherent
related, such as smoking and alcohol consumption." De Castro's own in the person (and thereby may be considered non-work related
military records triggered this conclusion as his Admitting Notes, factors), they also do affect a worker's job performance and may in
made when he entered the V. Luna General Hospital due to chest this sense, together with stresses of the job, significantly contribute to
pains and hypertension, were that he was a smoker and a drinker. illnesses such as CAD and hypertension. To cite an example, some
workplace activities are appropriate only for the young (such as the
As the CA did, we cannot accept the validity of this conclusion at face lifting of heavy objects although these may simply be office files), and
value because it considers only one side - the purely medical side - of when repeatedly undertaken by older workers, may lead to ailments
De Castro's case and even then may not be completely correct. The and disability. Thus, age coupled with an age-affected work activity
ECC itself, in its decision, recites that CAD is caused, among others, by may lead to compensability. From this perspective, none of the ECC's
atherosclerosis of the coronary arteries that in turn, and lists the listed factors should be disregarded to the exclusion of others in
following major causes: increasing age; male gender; cigarette determining compensability.
smoking; lipid disorder due to accumulation of too much fats in the
body: hypertension or high blood pressure; insulin resistance due to In any determination of compensability, the nature and characteristics
diabetes; family history of CAD. The minor factors are: obesity; of the job are as important as raw medical findings and a claimant's
physical inactivity; stress; menopausal estrogen deficiency; high personal and social history. This is a basic legal reality in workers'
carbohydrate intake; and alcohol. compensation law. We are therefore surprised that the ECC and the
GSIS simply brushed aside the disability certification that the military
issued with respect to De Castro's disability, based mainly on their development of her hypertension -or hypertensive cardiovascular
primacy as the agencies with expertise on workers' compensation and disease, as petitioner would call it.[31] Consequently, her age, work,
disability issues.[28] (Emphasis supplied) and hypertension caused the impairment of vision in both eyes due to
"advanced to late stage glaucoma", which rendered her "legally
This case should not have been difficult for the petitioner to resolve blind."[32]
on its own, given that so many cases have been decided in the past
which should have provided it the guiding hand to decide disability Contrary to petitioner's submissions, there appears to be a link
cases on its own rightly - instead of putting claimants in the between blood pressure and the development of glaucoma, which
unfortunate position of having to chase the benefits they are clearly leads the Court to conclude that respondent's glaucoma developed as
entitled to, and waste years prosecuting their claims in spite of their a result of her hypertension.
adverse circumstances in life. This Court should not have to parrot
over and over again what clearly has been the settled rule; in many
ways, this is a waste of time, and it only indicates that petitioner has Although intraocular pressure (IOP) remains an important risk factor
either not learned its lesson, or it refuses to realize it. for glaucoma, it is clear that other factors can also influence disease
development and progression. More recently, the role that blood
Applying Baul and De Castro to the instant case and looking at the pressure (BP) has in the genesis of glaucoma has attracted attention,
factual milieu, the Court agrees with the CA's conclusion and so as it represents a clinically modifiable risk factor and thus provides the
declares that respondent's illness is compensable. potential for new treatment strategies beyond IOP reduction. The
interplay between blood pressure and IOP determines the ocular
Respondent served the government for 30 long years; veritably, as the perfusion pressure (OPP), which regulates blood flow to the optic
ECC itself said, "[h]er duties were no doubt stressful and the same nerve. If OPP is a more important determinant of ganglion cell injury
may have caused her to develop her ailment, hypertension"[29] - than IOP, then hypotension should exacerbate the detrimental effects
which is a listed occupational disease, contrary to the CA's of IOP elevation, whereas hypertension should provide protection
pronouncement that it is not. And because it is a listed occupational against IOP elevation. Epidemiological evidence provides some
disease, the "increased risk theory" does not apply - again, contrary to conflicting outcomes of the role of systemic hypertension in the
the CA's declaration; no proof of causation is required. development and progression of glaucoma. The most recent study
showed that patients at both extremes of the blood pressure
It can also be said that given respondent's age at the time, and taking spectrum show an increased prevalence of glaucoma. Those with low
into account the nature, working conditions, and pressures of her blood pressure would have low OPP and thus reduced blood flow;
work as court stenographer which requires her to faithfully record however, that people with hypertension also show increased risk is
each and every day virtually all of the court's proceedings; transcribe more difficult to reconcile. This finding may reflect an inherent blood
these notes immediately in order to malee them available to the court flow dysregulation secondary to chronic hypertension that would
or the parties who require them; take down dictations by the judge, render retinal blood flow less able to resist changes in ocular
and transcribe them; and type in final form the judge's decisions, perfusion pressure.[33] x x x (Emphasis and underscoring supplied)
which activities extend beyond office hours and without additional
compensation or overtime pay[30] - all these contributed to the In recent years, we've learned a lot about ocular perfusion pressure
(OPP), i.e., the pressure difference between blood entering the eye compensation cases."[36] It does not preclude the Court from
and IOP. It's clear that three forces OPP, IOP and blood pressure are concluding that respondent's hypertension - apart from her age, work,
interconnected in the glaucoma disease process. The mechanics of and working conditions - impaired her vision as a result.
that relationship, however, remain ambiguous.
The Court likewise disregards the ECC's finding, which petitioner relies
x x x x upon, that the primaiy and important risk factors for developing
hypertension are smoking, excess body weight, high salt intake,
The ties between hypertension and glaucoma are less well established nutritional factors, high alcohol consumption, physical inactivity and
but the data, in addition to my involvement in a new study (discussed psychological factors, including stress. As the Court held in De Castro,
below), have convinced me they probably do exist. Therefore, I these are not the sole causes of hypertension; age, gender, and work
believe potential hypertension, along with potential low blood stress significantly contribute to its development, and the nature and
pressure, should be investigated in patients whose glaucoma characteristics of the employment are as important as raw medical
continues to progress despite what appears to be well controlled IOP. findings and a claimant's personal and social history.
x x x x Finally, while the ECC possesses the requisite expertise and knowledge
in compensation cases, its decision in respondent's case is
We suspect there is a close relationship among IOP, OPP, blood nonetheless erroneous and contrary to law. The Court cannot uphold
pressure and glaucoma, but the exact nature of these associations its findings; its specialized training, experience and expertise did not
remains elusive. Complicating matters is the physiological serve justice well in this case. The medical certificates and relevant
phenomenon known as autoregulation.[34] reports issued by respondent's attending physicians Drs. Alfred I. Lim,
Elmer Montes, and Salvador R. Salceda as well as hospital records,
Abstract [37] deserve credence. The identical findings of these three eye
specialists simply cannot be ignored.
Aims: To determine whether systemic hypertension and glaucoma
might coexist more often than expected, with possible implications for In arriving at the above conclusions, the Court is well guided by the
treatment. principles, declared in Baul and De Castro, that probability, not
certainty, is the test of proof in compensation cases; that the
Methods: Case-control study using general practitioner database of primordial and paramount consideration is the employee's welfare;
patients with glaucoma matched with controls for age and sex. that the strict rules of evidence need not be observed in claims for
compensation; that medical findings of the attending physician may
Results: Hypertension was significantly more common in the 27[,]080 be received in evidence and used as proof of the facts in dispute; that
patients with glaucoma (odds ratio 1.29, 95% confidence intervals in any determination of compensability, the nature and characteristics
1.23 to 1.36, p<0.001) than in controls, x x x[35] of the job are as important as raw medical findings and a claimant's
personal and social history; that where the primary injury is shown to
While some of the above conclusions are not definitive, it must be have arisen in the course of employment, every natural consequence
stressed that probability, not certainty, is the test of proof in that flows from the injury likewise arises out of the employment,
unless it is the result of an independent intervening cause attributable Mirant Pagbilao assigned at petitioner corporations corporate office.
to claimant's own negligence or misconduct; and that the policy is to As Procurement Supervisor, his main task was to serve as the link
extend the application of the law on employees' compensation to as between the Materials Management Department of petitioner
many employees who can avail of the benefits thereunder. corporation and its staff, and the suppliers and service contractors in
order to ensure that procurement is carried out in conformity with set
WHEREFORE, the Petition is DENIED. The assailed October 30, 2009 policies, procedures and practices. In addition, respondent was put in
Decision and February 23, 2011 Resolution of the Court of Appeals in charge of ensuring the timely, economical, safe and expeditious
CA-G.R. SP No. 85908 are AFFIRMED. delivery of materials at the right quality and quantity to petitioner
corporations plant. Respondent was also responsible for guiding and
overseeing the welfare and training needs of the staff of the Materials
G.R. No. 181490 April 23, 2014 Management Department. Due to the nature of respondents
MIRANT (PHILIPPINES) CORPORATION AND EDGARDO A. functions, petitioner corporation considers his position as
BAUTISTA, Petitioners, confidential.
vs. Respondent filed a complaint for illegal dismissal and money claims
JOSELITO A. CARO, Respondent. for 13th and 14th month pay, bonuses and other benefits, as well as
the payment of moral and exemplary damages and attorneys fees. It is
PRINCIPLE: the contention of respondent that he was illegally dismissed by
A corporation has a personality separate and distinct from its officers petitioner corporation due to the latters non-compliance with the
and board of directors who may only be held personally liable for twin requirements of notice and hearing. He asserts that while there
damages if it is proven that they acted with malice or bad faith in the was a notice charging him of unjustified refusal to submit to random
dismissal of an employee. Absent any evidence on record that drug testing, there was no notice of hearing and petitioner
petitioner Bautista acted maliciously or in bad faith in effecting the corporations investigation was not the equivalent of the hearing
termination of respondent, plus the apparent lack of allegation in the required under the law which should have accorded respondent the
pleadings of respondent that petitioner Bautista acted in such opportunity to be heard.
manner, the doctrine of corporate fiction dictates that only petitioner In a decision dated August 31, 2005, Labor Arbiter Aliman D.
corporation should be held liable for the illegal dismissal of Mangandog found respondent to have been illegally dismissed. The
respondent. Labor Arbiter also found that the quitclaim purportedly executed by
FACTS: respondent was not a bona fide quitclaim which effectively discharged
Petitioner Edgardo A. Bautista (Bautista) was the President of petitioners of all the claims of respondent in the case at bar. If at all,
petitioner corporation when respondent was terminated from the Labor Arbiter considered the execution of the quitclaim as a clear
employment. attempt on the part of petitioners to mislead its office into thinking
Respondent was hired by Mirant Pagbilao on January 3, 1994 as its that respondent no longer had any cause of action against petitioner
Logistics Officer. In 2002, when Southern Company was sold to corporation.
Mirant, respondent was already a Supervisor of the Logistics and On appeal to the NLRC, petitioners alleged that the decision of the
Purchasing Department of petitioner. At the time of the severance of Labor Arbiter was rendered with grave abuse of discretion for being
his employment, respondent was the Procurement Supervisor of contrary to law, rules and established jurisprudence, and contained
serious errors in the findings of facts which, if not corrected, would as to what comes under its purview. To be sure, the fact that the
cause grave and irreparable damage or injury to petitioners. The courts and entities involved in this case had to engage in semantics –
NLRC, giving weight and emphasis to the inconsistencies in and come up with different constructions – is yet another glaring
respondents explanations, considered his omission as unjustified proof that the subject policy is not clear creating doubt that
refusal in violation of petitioner corporations drug policy. Respondent respondent’s dismissal was a result of petitioner corporation’s valid
filed a motion for reconsideration, while petitioners filed a motion for exercise of its management prerogative.
partial reconsideration of the NLRC decision. In a Resolution dated Second. The penalty of termination imposed by petitioner corporation
June 30, 2006, the NLRC denied both motions. upon respondent fell short of being reasonable. Company policies and
ISSUE: regulations are generally valid and binding between the employer and
Whether or not the Court of Appeals correctly held that Edgardo A. the employee unless shown to be grossly oppressive or contrary to
Bautista (President of petitioner corporation) should be personally law50 – as in the case at bar. Recognizing the ambiguity in the subject
liable for respondent’s dismissal. policy, the CA was more inclined to adopt the recommendation of
RULING: petitioner corporation’s own Investigating Panel over that of Sliman
NO. and the NLRC.
First. The policy was not clear on what constitutes "unjustified refusal" To be sure, the unreasonableness of the penalty of termination as
when the subject drug policy prescribed that an employee’s imposed in this case is further highlighted by a fact admitted by
"unjustified refusal" to submit to a random drug test shall be petitioner corporation itself: that for the ten-year period that
punishable by the penalty of termination for the first offense. To be respondent had been employed by petitioner corporation, he did not
sure, the term "unjustified refusal" could not possibly cover all forms have any record of a violation of its company policies.
of "refusal" as the employee’s resistance, to be punishable by As to the other issue relentlessly being raised by petitioner
termination, must be "unjustified." To the mind of the Court, it is on corporation that respondent’s petition for certiorari before the CA
this area where petitioner corporation had fallen short of making it should have been considered moot as respondent had already
clear to its employees – as well as to management – as to what types previously executed a quitclaim discharging petitioner corporation
of acts would fall under the purview of "unjustified refusal." Even from all his monetary claims, we cannot agree. Quitclaims executed
petitioner corporation’s own Investigating Panel recognized this by laborers are ineffective to bar claims for the full measure of their
ambiguity. legal rights,52 especially in this case where the evidence on record
The fact that petitioner corporation’s own Investigating Panel and its shows that the amount stated in the quitclaim exactly corresponds to
Vice President for Operations, Sliman, differed in their the amount claimed as unpaid wages by respondent under Annex
recommendations regarding respondent’s case are first-hand proof A53 of his Reply54 filed with the Labor Arbiter. Prima facie, this
that there, indeed, is ambiguity in the interpretation and application creates a false impression that respondent’s claims have already been
of the subject drug policy. The fact that petitioner corporation’s own settled by petitioner corporation – discharging the latter from all of
personnel had to dissect the intended meaning of "unjustified refusal" respondent’s monetary claims. In truth and in fact, however, the
is further proof that it is not clear on what context the term amount paid under the subject quitclaim represented the salaries of
"unjustified refusal" applies to. It is therefore not a surprise that the respondent that remained unpaid at the time of his termination – not
Labor Arbiter, the NLRC and the CA have perceived the term the amounts being claimed in the case at bar.
"unjustified refusal" on different prisms due to the lack of parameters
Finally, the petition avers that petitioner Bautista should not be held forms, summons was published in a newspaper of general circulation
personally liable for respondent’s dismissal as he acted in good faith directing the alleged 1st wife
and within the scope of his official functions as then president of Rosemarie to le her answer, but no one replied.2010: SSC dismissed
petitioner corporation. We agree with petitioners. Both decisions of Edna's petition for lack of merit, because Edgardo did not revoke
the Labor Arbiter and the CA did not discuss the basis of the personal the previous designation of Rosemarie as wife-bene ciary, and
liability of petitioner Bautista, and yet the dispositive portion of the Rosemarie was still presumed to be the legal wife. SSC also noted that
decision of the Labor Arbiter - which was affirmed by the appellate the NSO records revealed the marriage of Edgardo and Rosemarie was
court - held him jointly and severally liable with petitioner registered in 1982. Hence, Edgardo's marriage with Edna was not valid
corporation. as there was no showing that his 1st marriage had been annulled or
A corporation has a personality separate and distinct from its officers dissolved.
and board of directors who may only be held personally liable for 2013: CA reversed and set aside the resolution & order of the SSC,
damages if it is proven that they acted with malice or bad faith in the and held that the SSC could not make a determination of the validity
dismissal of an employee.57 Absent any evidence on record that of the marriage of Edna to Edgardo. The CA also denied SSC's motion
petitioner Bautista acted maliciously or in bad faith in effecting the for reconsideration. Thus, the present petition for review on certiorari
termination of respondent, plus the apparent lack of allegation in the on the assailed CA decision.
pleadings of respondent that petitioner Bautista acted in such manner, the Issue: W/N Edna Azote is entitled to the SSS death bene ts as the wife
doctrine of corporate fiction dictates that only petitioner corporation should of a deceased member.
be held liable for the illegal dismissal of respondent.
Held: NO --> Edna cannot be the bene ciary because she is not
considered the legal spouse of Edgardo as their marriage took place
SSS v. Azote during the existence of a previously contracted marriage.
April 15, 2015 : SC 2nd Division The law in force at the time of Edgardo's death was RA 8282[1]. Sec 8
Petitioner: Social Security Commission (SSC) Respondent: Edna A. (e) and (k) expressly provide that it is the legal spouse who would be
AzotePonente: J. Mendoza entitled to receive bene ts from an SSS deceased-member. In this
Facts:1994: Edgardo submitted Form E-4 to the Social Security System case, there is concrete proof (NSO certi cation) of Edgardo's earlier
(SSS) with Edna and contracted marriage with Rosemarie, making her the rst and legal
their 3 older children as designated bene ciaries. In 2001, Edgardo wife.
submitted another At the time of the celebration of the 2nd marriage of Edgardo with
Form E-4 designating their 3 younger children as additional bene Edna, the Family Code was already in force. Article 41 states "a
ciaries.2005: Edgardo passed away. Thereafter, Edna led her claim for marriage contracted by any person during the subsistence of a
death bene ts with the SSS as the wife of a deceased-member. previous marriage shall be null and void..." In claiming bene ts, the
However, SSS records showed the Edgardo had submitted another settled rule from Signey v. SSS [2] is that "whoever claims entitlement
Form E-4 in 1982 with a di erent set of bene ciaries, namely: bene ts provided by law should establish his or her right by substantial
Rosemarie Azote, as spouse, and Elmer Azote, as dependent. evidence".
Consequently, Edna's
claim was denied, but her 6 children were adjudged as bene ciaries. In the case, Edna failed to establish that there was no impediment at
2007: Edna led a petition with the SSC to claim bene ts, insisting she the time of the celebration of their marriage.
was the legitimate wife. Due to the con icting information in the
1[] RA 8282 : An Act Further Strengthening the Social Security System
thereby Amending for this Purpose, RA 1161, as amended, otherwise
known as the Social Security Law.
2[] Signey v. Social Security System, 566 Phil, 617, 627 (2008).