Title
Blue Bar Coconut Co. vs. Boo
Case
G.R. No. L-6920
Decision Date
Sep 28, 1954
Joaquin Boo, a dryer man, developed tuberculosis due to extreme work conditions. The Supreme Court ruled his illness compensable, affirming work-related aggravation and retroactive application of clarifying laws.
Font Size:

Case Digest (G.R. No. L-6920)

Facts:

  1. Employment and Work Conditions:

    • Joaquin Boo was employed by the Blue Bar Coconut Company as a dryer man. His duties included regulating the pressure and heat of a steam machine used for desiccating coconut and supervising workers in the compound.
    • His work exposed him to extreme heat and sudden changes in temperature, which allegedly contributed to his illness.
  2. Health Issues and Diagnosis:

    • In October 1951, Boo coughed up blood, a symptom of pulmonary tuberculosis, and was subsequently laid off due to his inability to work.
    • Medical reports from the company physician, Dr. Artemio Masangkay, and Dr. Bautista of the Quezon Institute confirmed that Boo suffered from moderately advanced bilateral pulmonary tuberculosis with a cavity on the left lung.
  3. Claim for Compensation:

    • Boo filed a claim for compensation under the Workmen's Compensation Act, arguing that his illness was caused or aggravated by the nature of his work.
    • The Workmen's Compensation Commission awarded him compensation, including medical expenses and weekly payments, but excluded the insurance carrier from liability.
  4. Legal Proceedings:

    • The petitioners (Blue Bar Coconut Company, The Employers' Liability Assurance Corporation, Ltd., and E. E. Elser, Inc.) contested the decision, arguing that the Deputy Workmen's Compensation Commissioner lacked jurisdiction and that Boo's illness was idiopathic (not work-related).

Issue:

  1. Whether the Deputy Workmen's Compensation Commissioner had jurisdiction to hear and decide the claim.
  2. Whether Joaquin Boo's tuberculosis was compensable under the Workmen's Compensation Act, considering it was allegedly idiopathic and not caused by his employment.
  3. Whether Republic Act No. 772, which took effect after Boo's disability, could be applied retroactively to his case.

Ruling:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Ratio:

  • (Subscriber-Only)


Jur is an AI-powered legal research platform in the Philippines for case digests, summaries, and jurisprudence. AI-generated content may contain inaccuracies; please verify independently.