Title
Supreme Court
Government Service Insurance System vs. Alcaraz
Case
G.R. No. 187474
Decision Date
Feb 6, 2013
Long-term MMDA laborer Bernardo Alcaraz died of myocardial infarction; SC ruled it work-related due to strenuous conditions, ordering GSIS to pay death benefits.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 240621)

Factual Background

Bernardo was diagnosed with Pulmonary Tuberculosis (PTB) and Community Acquired Pneumonia (CAP) in February 2004. He experienced significant health deterioration, leading to his hospital confinement from May 13 to May 19, 2004, where he was diagnosed with an acute myocardial infarction. He was found dead at the MMDA building on January 15, 2005. Following his death, Marilou filed for death benefits with the GSIS, which were ultimately denied.

GSIS Ruling and Appeal Processes

The GSIS denied Marilou’s claim based on the argument that myocardial infarction was a complication of diabetes, a condition not recognized as work-related under the law. Marilou appealed this decision to the Employees' Compensation Commission (ECC), which upheld the GSIS’s ruling. Consequently, Marilou turned to the Court of Appeals (CA) for relief, insisting that her husband's health issues, including his myocardial infarction, were aggravated by his work conditions.

Court of Appeals Decision

The CA overturned the ECC's ruling, indicating that, while myocardial infarction is not listed as an occupational disease, cardiovascular diseases could be compensable under certain conditions articulated in Resolution No. 432 by the ECC. The CA found sufficient evidence linking Bernardo's work as a laborer and metro aide to the aggravation of his health conditions, stating that the strenuous work environment contributed significantly to his ailment.

GSIS Petition for Reversal

The GSIS sought to reverse the CA decision, arguing that there was no substantial evidence linking the myocardial infarction to work-related causes and that the CA disregarded the factual determinations made by the GSIS and the ECC. They maintained the position that the myocardial infarction was merely a complication of a pre-existing non-occupational health condition.

Marilou's Counterarguments

In her response, Marilou contested the GSIS's assertions, claiming that evidence showed her husband's work conditions exacerbated his health problems. She pointed out that his diabetes alone could not account for the circumstances leading to his heart attack, highlighting earlier diagnoses of CAP and the physical strains associated with his working conditions.

Judicial Analysis and Ruling

The Court found in favor of Marilou, asserting that the prior rulings by the GSIS and ECC failed to consider the long-standing stressors linked to Bernardo's employment. The Court elaborated that workplace factors—such as workplace stress, exposure to the elements, and the nature of his physi

...continue reading

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