Case Digest (CA-No. 773, 774, 775)
Facts:
Dionisia Abueg et al. v. Bartolome San Diego, CA-No. 773; Marciana de Salvacion et al. v. Bartolome San Diego, CA-No. 774; Rosario Oching et al. v. Bartolome San Diego, CA-No. 775, December 17, 1946, Supreme Court En Banc, Padilla, J., writing for the Court.
The plaintiffs in the three consolidated actions were widows (Dionisia Abueg, Marciana de Salvacion, and Rosario Oching) who sued for compensation under the Workmen’s Compensation Act after their husbands — Amado Nunez, Victoriano Salvacion and Francisco Oching, respectively — perished when the vessels on which they served foundered. The defendant-appellant, Bartolome San Diego, was owner of the motor ships San Diego II and Bartolome S., which were engaged in fishing operations around Mindoro Island and were sunk by a typhoon on October 1, 1941. The deceased were a machinist, a machinist, and a captain/master respectively, and the vessels were uninsured.
The Court of First Instance of Manila rendered judgment awarding plaintiffs the compensation provided by the Workmen’s Compensation Act. The record was forwarded to the Court of Appeals for review; because there was no question of fact, the Court of Appeals forwarded the record to the Supreme Court. The appeal had been pending at the outbreak of the Pacific War and the record was destroyed and later reconstituted before final disposition.
On appeal the owner contended that maritime law provisions (Articles 587, 837 and 643 of the Code of Commerce) limited or extinguished his liability when the vessel and freight were totally lost or abandoned, and that the vessels — being engaged in fishing — were not engaged in the coastwise and inter-island trade as contemplated in section 38 of the Workmen’s Compensation Act, as amended ...(Pro-only)
Issues:
- Does the limitation or extinction of shipowners’ liability under the maritime provisions of the Code of Commerce (e.g., articles 587, 837, 643) bar recovery of compensation under the Workmen’s Compensation Act for employees who perish when a vessel is totally lost?
- Were the motor ships engaged in fishing excluded from the scope of the Workmen’s Compensation Act because they were not engaging in "coastwise and inter-island trade" under section 38 of the Act, and/or were the deceased nonetheless "industrial employ...(Pro-only)
Ruling:
- (Pro-only)
Ratio:
- (Pro-only)
Doctrine:
- (Pro-only)