Facts:

• The case of Francisco v. Consing (G.R. No. 44753) was decided on August 26, 1936, by the Philippine Supreme Court.
• Plaintiffs-appellees: Adoracion Francisco, Leonila Francisco, and Antonio Francisco, Jr., represented by their guardian ad litem Policarpio Carballo.
• They are the legal heirs of the deceased Antonio Francisco.
• Defendant-appellant: Feliciano Consing.
• Antonio Francisco was employed by Consing as a laborer for loading and unloading sugar cane and sugar cane seedling nibs onto and from Consing's trucks.
• Incident date: August 2, 1930, in Escalante, Negros Occidental.
• A truck loaded with sugar cane points collided with a carabao, causing Antonio Francisco to jump from the truck and sustain fatal injuries.
• The trial court ruled in favor of the plaintiffs, awarding them P299.52 with interest and costs.
• The defendant appealed, arguing that Antonio Francisco was a farm laborer and not entitled to benefits under the Workmen's Compensation Act.

Issue:

• (Unlock)

Ruling:

• The Supreme Court affirmed the decision of the trial court, ruling that Antonio Francisco was entitled to benefits...(Unlock)

Ratio:

• The Court's decision was based on the interpretation of Section 39(d) of Act No. 3428, as amended by Act No. 3812.
• This section defines "industrial employment" to include all employment or work at a trade, occupation, or profession exercised by an employer for the purpose of gain, except agriculture, charitable institutions, and domestic service.
• Employees involved in the operation of mechanical implements in agriculture are entitled to the benefits of the Act.
• Antonio Francisco's work of loading and unloading sugar cane points onto and from a motor truck fell within the scope of "industrial employment" as it involved the use of mechanical implements.
• The Court referenced similar cases from Louisiana, where ...continue reading