Title
Social Security System vs. Davac
Case
G.R. No. L-21642
Decision Date
Jul 30, 1966
A deceased SSS member's second wife, designated as beneficiary, was upheld as rightful recipient of death benefits despite a prior marriage, per SSS Act provisions.

Case Summary (G.R. No. L-21642)

Facts of the Case

The main issue arises from the conflicting claims of the two wives regarding the entitlement to death benefits under the SSS. Petronilo Davac was married to Lourdes Tuplano on August 29, 1946, and had one child, Romeo Davac. He later married Candelaria Davac on January 18, 1949, with whom he had another child, Elizabeth Davac. After Petronilo's death, both wives filed claims for the death benefits, leading the SSS to request that the parties interplead and resolve the conflicting claims.

Social Security Commission's Resolution

On February 25, 1968, the Social Security Commission ruled in favor of Candelaria Davac, declaring her the rightful beneficiary. Lourdes Tuplano appealed this decision to a higher court, challenging the Commission’s conclusion.

Legal Framework

The decision is grounded in Section 13 of Republic Act No. 1161, as amended by Republic Act No. 1792, which stipulates that the benefits payable upon an employee's death are to be received by the designated beneficiary as recorded by the employee's employer. The provision was interpreted in a previous case, Tecson vs. Social Security System, which emphasized the clarity and explicit nature of the law's provisions regarding beneficiary eligibility.

Arguments of the Appellant

Lourdes Tuplano contends that the designation of Candelaria as a beneficiary is void due to her status as Petronilo's second wife in a bigamous marriage. She argues that this designation violates the Civil Code, specifically Article 2012, which pertains to the disqualification of beneficiaries who are involved in adultery or concubinage. Article 739 of the Civil Code, which outlines void donations between parties guilty of such acts, was also cited to support her position.

Court's Analysis on Concubinage

The court found it unnecessary to classify the relationship between Petronilo and Candelaria as a donation analogous to life insurance beneficiary relationships. It determined that since Candelaria was not aware of Petronilo's prior marriage, the disqualification under Article 739 does not apply. Thus, the court ruled that Candelaria could still be considered a valid beneficiary.

Distinction of Assets

The court identified that the benefits from the SSS do not form part of the conjugal property governed by marriage laws. Instead, they are derived from a special fund established by Congress to protect employees against risks such as death, disability, and sickness. The court highlighted that benefits accrued from the SSS are based on contributions from the employee, employer, and government, and thus should not be classified as property earned during Petronilo's lifetime.

Non-Transferability and Acquisition of Benefits

Moreover, the court stated that the benefits under the Social Security Act are not tran

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster—building context before diving into full texts.