G.R. No.

L-25245 December 11, 1967

FRANKLIN BAKER COMPANY OF THE PHILIPPINES, petitioner,

vs.

MAURICIO ALILLANA and WORKMEN’S COMPENSATION COMMISSION, respondents
Bengson, J.P., J:


Facts:



Franklin Baker Co. is a domestic company engaged in producing copra. On July 19, 1947, they have
employed Mauricio Alillana as a truck loader. Whereas to pick up unshelled coconuts from a moving
conveyor and place them in a caratilla to hand over to the shellers.

On April 21, 1958, Alillana started feeling pains at his ribs and was found to have bronchitis. The pain
continued however he was able to resume work. startingMay 31, 1958 , from time to time he complained
about cough with chest and back pain. He was found to have “far advanced pulmonary tuberculosis at the
left lung associated with bronchitis”. He then retired from work on July 7, 1958. He was paid by Franklin
Baker Co of disability benefit plan of P188.16 and P699.12 as retirement benefit.


Alillana then filed a claim for Disability Compensation under the Worksmen’s Compensation Act on Feb
28, 1963 and was awarded disability benefits. On July 25 , 1964 Franklin Baker Co, paid said award of
P3,015.06.


On August 10,1964, Alillana filed a motion in the same case for additional compensation because his
disability is still continuing. He was physically examined on Sept 16, 1964. After the said examination,
Sept 7, 1965, it was found out that he is still suffering from temporary total disability due to his ailment.
Having said, the Worksmen’s Compensation Commission issued an order for an additional compensation
of P984.94 thus raising the total award to the statutory maximum of P4000.00.

Franklin baker Co, moved for reconsideration , however the Worksmen’s Compensation Commission en
bank denied their motion stating that the period off disability can be extended beyond 208 weeks under
sec. 19 of the Act.



Hence, this petition was filed by Franklin Baker Co. to raise an appeal from he Worksmen’s
Compensation Commission orders.



Issue:


1. Does the Workmen’s Compensation Commission have power under Sec. 18 to extend the period of
disability under Sec. 14 of the Act?
2.Whether or not Alillana upon signing the satisfactory receipt will constitute a waiver?



Held:



Yes. The Workmen’s Compensation Commission have power under Sec. 18 to extend the period of
disability under Sec. 14 of the Act.
Section 14 provides such weekly payments shall in no case continue after disability has ceased, nor shall
they extend over more than two hundred and eight weeks. But by virtue of an innovation introduced by
Rep. Act 772 amending Section 18 (last par.) of the original Workmen’s Compensation Law, it provided
that after the payment has been made for the period specified by the Act in each case, the Workmen’s
Compensation Commissioner may from time to time cause the examination of the condition of the
disabled laborer, with a view to extending, if necessary. The period od compensation which shall not
however, exceed the said amount of Four Thousand Pesos.

In the case at bar The Workmen’s Compensation Commission find it necessary to extend the period of
disability when it ordered a physical examination of Alillana finding that the latter is still suffering from
temporary total disability due to his ailment, Clearly, therefore, the Workmen’s Compensation
Commission did not incur in any error in extending to cover beyond 208 weeks the period of Alillana’s
disability compensation.

Alillana’s having signed a satisfaction receipt cannot result in waiver; the law does not consider as valid
any agreement to receive less compensation than what the worker is entitled to recover under the Act
(Sec. 29).

The appealed order of the Workmen’s Compensation Commission are hereby affirmed. No costs.