Title
Central Azucarera Don Pedro vs. Workmen's Compensation Commission
Case
G.R. No. L-24987
Decision Date
Jul 31, 1968
A worker with pulmonary tuberculosis claimed compensation, arguing his illness was work-related. The Supreme Court ruled in his favor, citing work conditions that aggravated his condition and affirming the presumption of compensability under labor law.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 118552)

Facts of the Case

Pedro Villanueva began his employment with the Central Azucarera Don Pedro in 1933, starting as a "palero," later becoming a "fogonero," and finally a "cabo palero." Villanueva claimed to have suffered from various health issues, including fever, chest and back pains, and fatigue, leading to his cessation of work on July 28, 1961. Despite showing no significant health problems during routine examinations until then, X-rays later revealed he had minimal pulmonary tuberculosis.

Legal Basis and Presumption of Workmen’s Compensation

The petitioner contested the award of compensation primarily asserting that Villanueva's illness was unrelated to his work and that his claim was submitted beyond the legal timeframe stipulated in Section 24 of the Workmen's Compensation Act. However, according to the law, there is a presumption that a worker's claim is compensable, which requires the employer to prove that the employee's injury or illness was not caused or aggravated by the conditions of their work.

Evidence Presented

To counter the presumption in favor of Villanueva’s claim, the petitioner presented testimonies suggesting adequate working conditions and ventilation. However, this evidence was deemed insufficient to overcome the presumption established by the law. The Commission noted that working at night and performing laborious tasks contributed to the deterioration of Villanueva’s health, activating dormant tuberculosis in conjunction with the adverse conditions he faced.

Delay in Filing Claim

The petitioner also argued that the delay in filing the compensation claim should invalidate it. However, precedent cases have evolved, indicating that such delays are now viewed as non-jurisdictional defects unless the employer can show actual prejudice. This aligns with the principle found in Ar

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur is a legal research platform serving the Philippines with case digests and jurisprudence resources.