Case Digest (G.R. No. L-22769)
Facts:
Juan Isberto v. Republic of the Philippines (Bureau of Public Highways) and Workmen's Compensation Commission, G.R. No. L-22769, August 30, 1968, the Supreme Court En Banc, Angeles, J., writing for the Court.Petitioner Juan Isberto was first employed on August 1, 1951 as a Construction Foreman (emergency status) in the Office of the District Engineer of Pangasinan and was appointed Building Foreman with permanent status effective February 1, 1957, with a salary of P2,040.00 per annum. As Building Foreman in charge of the 5th Congressional District of Pangasinan his duties involved supervising, investigating and completing construction and repair projects across the district, which frequently required travel by public conveyance, animal-drawn vehicles, or hiking into barrios.
Sometime in September 1957 he began to feel pains in his back. He filed sick leave on December 23, 1957 and was confined at Eastern Pangasinan Emergency Hospital from December 23, 1957 to April 30, 1958. Dr. Gudelia Nicu‑Jose diagnosed him with "Tuberculosis of the bones or Pott's disease"; he was pronounced completely recovered on June 15, 1961. Petitioner alleged that neither medical nor hospital expenses were shouldered by his employer despite a visit from his immediate supervisor, Engineer Padilla, during confinement.
On December 19, 1960 petitioner filed a Notice of Injury and Claim for compensation with the Department of Labor, Regional Office No. 1, Dagupan City. A Hearing Officer of the Department of Labor awarded compensation in the total amount of P5,250.00 (including attorney's fees) by decision dated July 17, 1962. The Workmen's Compensation Commission reversed that award. Petitioner sought reconsideration before the Commission en banc, which denied it in a resolution dated April 3, 1964. Petitioner then filed a petition for review by certiorari with the Supreme Court contesting the Commission's reversal.
The parties disputed whether petitioner's Pott's disease arose out of and in the course of employment within the meaning of Act No. 3428 (Workmen's Compensation Law), and whether respondents lost the right to controvert the claim by failing to comp...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Did petitioner establish that his Tuberculosis of the bones (Pott's disease) arose in the course of and hence is presumed to have arisen out of his employment, entitling him to compensation under Section 2 of Act No. 3428?
- Did the respondents forfeit the right to controvert petitioner’s claim by failing to comply with the reporting and notice requirements of Secti...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)