GOVERNMENT
SERVICE INSURANCE SYSTEM, Petitioner, -versus- VICTORIOUSA B. VALLAR, Respondent. |
G.R. No. 156023 Present: pUNO, C.J., Chairperson, Sandoval-Gutierrez, AZCUNA, and GARCIA,
JJ. Promulgated: |
x-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------x
SANDOVAL-GUTIERREZ, J.:
For our resolution is the instant Petition for Review on Certiorari seeking to reverse the
Decision[1] of
the Court of Appeals (Second Division) promulgated on November 15, 2002 in
CA-G.R. SP No. 69620.
The undisputed facts are:
From 1991 to 1996, former Judge Teotimo Vallar presided over
the Municipal Circuit Trial Court (MCTC) of Catarman-Sagay,
During his tenure, Judge Vallar suffered chronic obstructive
pulmonary disease (COPD). From
From January 8 to
On
His surviving spouse, Victoriousa Vallar, convinced that
her husband’s ailment was work-related, filed a claim for death benefits with
the Government Service Insurance System (GSIS) pursuant to Presidential Decree (P.D.)
No. 626, as amended.[2] However, the GSIS, in its Decision dated
On appeal by Victoriousa, the Employees Compensation Commission
(ECC) rendered a Decision affirming the GSIS judgment.
Victoriousa elevated the matter to the Court of Appeals by
way of a petition for review under Rule 43 of the 1997 Rules of Civil
Procedure, as amended.
On
Premises considered, the
petition is GRANTED. The decision of
the ECC is reversed and set aside. The
petitioner and the legitimate children of the decedent Teotimo Vallar are
hereby awarded full benefits pursuant to the provisions of Presidential Decree
No. 626, as amended.
SO ORDERED.
In granting respondent’s claim, the Court of Appeals held:
Petition is well-taken.
Contrary to the assertion of the respondent, we acquiesce with
petitioner’s contention that the risk exposed to her spouse in contracting neuromyelitis
optica, the underlying decedent’s illness, was triggered by environmental work
conditions.
Pursuant to the provision of the law on employee’s compensation, also
known as P.D. 626, reasonable work connection suffices for compensability. Probability, not certainty is the touchstone
(Bonilla v. CA, 340 SCRA 764,
Neuromyelitis optica or also known as Devic’s disease is a disorder,
the spinal cord (usually, but not invariably, in the thoracic region) and the
optic nerves or chiasm are affected by demyelinating lesions in close temporal
association (William Weiner, Emergent and Urgent Neurology, Philadelpia: J.B.
Lippincott Co., 1992, p. 346).
The clinical picture is one of unilateral or bilateral visual
impairment together with paraparesis or paraplegia (paralysis of lower limbs
due to injuries of spinal cord (J.P. Chaplin, Dictionary of Psychology, (2nd
Edition), 1985) and a sensory level.
Visual impairment may progress rapidly over a course of several
hours. Spinal cord involvement manifests
as transverse myelitis (William Weiner, Emergent and Urgent Neurology,
Philadelpia: J.B. Lippincott Co., 1992, supra). Transverse Myelitis is the inflammation of
the whole cross-sectional area of the cord (Raymund Adams, Maurice Victor and
Allan H. Ropper, Principles of Neurology, (6th edition), New York:
Mcgraw-Hill, 1997, p. 1237). The pathogenesis of this disease is disordered
immune response to an infection rather than the direct effect of an infectious
agent (Raymund Adams, Maurice Victor and
Allan H. Ropper, Principles of Neurology, [6th edition],
It is of judicial notice that the judiciary is beset with the
gargantuan task in unclogging dockets, not to mention the shortage of judges
occupying positions in far flung areas such as in the herein case. Apart from presiding in the trial of cases,
justices and judges are required to resolve the same within a prescribed period
mandated by law.
In the case at bar, the decedent was compelled to render constant
overtime work in order to study and formulate decisions. The petitioner described her husband’s
routine as MCTC Judge of Camiguin in the following manner:
x x x. By the nature of his work
as a judge, he has to read voluminous records of cases, transcript of
stenographic notes, law books, legal periodicals and other legal materials
often at night and with the use of strong light. All these involved prolonged use of the eyes,
making them highly susceptible to visual fatigue, stress and strain. The eyes like the brain bear the brunt of
the judge’s strenuous work. A judge
works under continuous time pressure, hence, he also does his work at home and
even during weekends. x x x (Rollo, p. 25).
These strenuous working conditions weakened the immune system of the
late Judge Teotimo Vallar and caused him to contact neuromyelitis which further
brought complications to his health and eventually to his death.
The development of the decedent’s illness which occurred when he was
still a member of the judiciary is duly supported by medical reports.
Petitioner was able to prove with substantial evidence that her husband’s
illness was reasonably work-connected to be entitled compensation.
Although P.D. 626, as amended, eliminated the principle of presumption
of compensability, liberality in the application of the law must be upheld.
The
issue before us is whether the Court of Appeals erred in holding that the
diseases which caused the demise of Judge Vallar are compensable under the law.
We
sustain the findings of the Court of Appeals.
Section 1 of P.D. No. 626, as amended, defines a
compensable sickness as “any illness definitely accepted as an occupational
disease listed by the Commission or any
illness caused by
employment subject to proof by the employee that the risk of contracting the same is increased by
his working conditions.” Under the
Amended Rules on Employee Compensation, for the sickness and the resulting
disability or death to be compensable, the claimant must prove that: (a) the
sickness must be the result of an occupational disease listed under
Annex “A” of the Rules with the conditions set therein satisfied, or (b) it
must be shown that the risk of contracting the disease is increased by the
working conditions.[3]
It is true that “neuromyelitis
optica” or “Davic’s
disease,” a disorder of the spinal cord, is not listed as an occupational
disease in Annex “A” of the Amended Rules on Employee Compensation. However, this will not bar a claim for
benefits under the law if the complainant can adduce substantial evidence that
the risk of contracting the illness is increased or aggravated by the working
conditions to which the employee is exposed to.
The late Judge Vallar was a
front-line officer in the administration of justice, being the most
visible living representation of this country’s legal and judicial system.[4] As a magistrate in the far-off
As visible representations of the law and the justice
system, trial judges, like Judge Vallar, are bound to dispose of the court’s
business and to decide cases within the required period. In order to achieve this, they are expected to
keep abreast of all laws and prevailing jurisprudence.[5] Judicial competence requires no less.
Judge Vallar evidently did his best to live up to
these exacting standards. He worked long hours and burned the
We note that as per Certification[6]
dated
Respondent
herein, Judge Vallar’s surviving spouse, is now 82 years old. She has been pursuing an arduous struggle in
claiming her benefits for over a decade now. As the public agency charged by law in
implementing P.D. No. 626, petitioner GSIS should not lose sight of the fact
that the constitutional guarantee of social justice towards labor demands a liberal
attitude in favor of the employee in deciding claims for compensability.
WHEREFORE, we DENY the petition. The Decision of the Court of Appeals (Second
Division) promulgated on November 15, 2002 in CA-G.R. SP No. 69620 is AFFIRMED.
Petitioner GSIS is ordered to pay
respondent Victoriousa B. Vallar, upon notice, the full benefits she is
entitled to under P.D. No. 626, as amended.
SO ORDERED.
ANGELINA
SANDOVAL-GUTIERREZ
Associate Justice
WE
CONCUR:
REYNATO S. PUNO
Chief Justice Chairperson |
|
RENATO C. CORONA Associate Justice |
ADOLFO S. AZCUNA Associate Justice |
CANCIO C. GARCIA Associate Justice |
Chief Justice
[1] Rollo, pp. 36-40. Per Associate Justice Buenaventura J. Guerrero and concurred in by Associate Justice Teodoro P. Regino (both retired) and Associate Justice Mariano C. Del Castillo.
[2] Employees’ Compensation And State Insurance Fund.
[3] Salalima v. Employees Compensation
Commission, G.R. No. 146630,
[4] Junio v. Rivera, Jr., A.M. No.
MTJ-91-565,
[5] Pascual v. Javellanos, A.M. No.
MTJ-02-1429,
[6] Rollo, p. 133.