Case Digest (G.R. No. 247471) Core Legal Reasoning Model
Core Legal Reasoning Model
Facts:
In Joint Ship Manning Group, Inc. et al. v. Social Security System, G.R. No. 247471, decided En Banc on July 7, 2020, various manning associations, manning agencies and their officers (petitioners) challenged the constitutionality of Section 9-B of Republic Act No. 11199 (Social Security Act of 2018). Petitioners asserted that this provision mandatorily covers sea-based Overseas Filipino Workers (OFWs) under the Social Security System (SSS), treats manning agencies as employers, and makes them jointly and severally liable with foreign principals for SSS contributions, while land-based OFW recruitment agencies remain classified as self-employed and are not so burdened. They argued this classification violates substantive due process and equal protection guaranteed by the 1987 Constitution. The Office of the Solicitor General and the Office of the Government Corporate Counsel, representing the SSS and the Social Security Commission, countered that petitioners lacked standing and j Case Digest (G.R. No. 247471) Expanded Legal Reasoning Model
Expanded Legal Reasoning Model
Facts:
- Parties and Relief Sought
- Petitioners: Joint Ship Manning Group, Inc.; Philippine Association of Manning Agencies & Ship Managers, Inc.; Filipino Association for Mariners’ Employment, Inc.; Philippine-Japan Manning Consultative Council, Inc.; International Maritime Association of the Philippines; Top Ever Marine Management; Trans-Global Maritime Agency, Inc.; Barko International Inc.; Tara Trading Shipmanagement, Inc., Corp.; Capt. Oscar D. Orbeta; Michael J. Estaniel; Capt. Teodoro B. Quijano; Capt. Juanito G. Salvatierra, Jr.
- Respondents: Social Security System (SSS) and Social Security Commission (SSC), represented by President Aurora C. Ignacio and Vice Chairman.
- Prayer: Certiorari and prohibition to annul Sec. 9-B, R.A. No. 11199 (Social Security Act of 2018), claiming violation of substantive due process and equal protection; urgent request for temporary restraining order/preliminary injunction.
- Historical and Statutory Background
- Pre-existing Framework
- R.A. No. 1161 (1954): Established SSS; no OFW coverage.
- 1987 ILO 74th Maritime Session: Recognized seafarers’ right to social security; 18 signatory countries.
- 1988 SSS-DOLE Memorandum of Agreement: Made SSS coverage a condition in the Standard Employment Contract (SEC) for sea-based OFWs.
- Sta. Rita v. Court of Appeals (1995): Held that SEC stipulation binds seafarers and manning agencies to SSS coverage.
- R.A. No. 8282 (1997): Revised SSS Law; still no mandatory OFW coverage.
- 2006 ILO Maritime Labour Convention: Mandated social protection for seafarers.
- 2010 POEA SEC Amendment: Declared principal/employer/manning agencies duty-bound to secure seafarers’ SSS coverage.
- Enactment of R.A. No. 11199 (2019)
- Sec. 9-B(a): Compulsory SSS coverage for all sea- and land-based OFWs (≤ 60 years old).
- Sec. 9-B(b): Manning agencies deemed employers of sea-based OFWs; joint and several liability with principals for civil liabilities and SSS contributions; criminal liability of officers for penal acts “notwithstanding Sec. 28(f).”
- Sec. 9-B(c)–(g): Treatment of land-based OFWs, bilateral agreements, voluntary continuation, and permanent migrants.
- Procedural Posture
- Petition filed before Supreme Court En Banc.
- OSG Comment: Challenges to standing and ripeness; defended classification and reliance on existing joint-liability regime; supported rate increase under police power.
- SSS (OGCC) Opposition: Alleged lack of justiciability, standing, failure to exhaust remedies; argued administrative rules suffice.
Issues:
- Does Sec. 9-B of R.A. No. 11199 violate the constitutional guarantee of substantive due process?
- Does Sec. 9-B of R.A. No. 11199 violate the constitutional guarantee of equal protection of laws?
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)