CARLOS ESPINO, PETITIONER, VS. WORKMEN’S COMPENSATION COMMISSION AND VICTORIAS MILLING CO., INC., RESPONDENTS.

This is a petition for review on certiorari of the
decision dated December 26, 1975
of the Workmen’s Compensation Commission in R07-WCC No. 1815 reversing the
decision dated October 3, 1975
of Unit Chief and Referee Felicito D. Ciocon of the Department of Labor, Sub-Regional Office No. VII, Bacolod City.

On February 11, 1975,
petitioner filed a workmen’s compensation claim (p. 98, WCC rec.) against
respondent Victorias Milling Company, Inc., with the Department of Labor,
Sub-Regional Office No. VII, Bacolod City.

On October 3, 1975,
the sub-regional office decided in favor of petitioner (Annex “A”,
pp. 15-16, rollo).

On October 22, 1975,
respondent Victorias Milling Company, Inc. filed a motion for reconsideration
and/or petition for review, which was denied on November 5, 1975 by the Unit Chief and Referee who elevated
the case to the Workmen’s Compensation Commission (p. 9, WCC rec.).

On December 26, 1975, respondent Workmen’s Compensation
Commission reversed the decision of the Unit Chief and Referee, absolving
respondent Victorias Milling Company, Inc. from any liability under the
Workmen’s Compensation Act (Annex “B” of Petition, pp. 18-19, rollo),
anchoring its action on the observation and opinion of the Department of Labor
Compensation Rating Medical Officer who stated that “gout is an inborn error
of metabolism, and the duodenal ulcer was induced by the anti-gout medication
taken by the claimant and wherefore nature of employment has no
service-connection.”

The decision of the Workmen’s Compensation Commission should be
set aside.

Respondent Victorias Milling Company, Inc. admits that claimant
rose from the ranks since he joined the company on April 28, 1947. 
From a mere remelter centrifugal in the Boiling House Department, he rose to the position of evaporator tender,
pan man, evaporator capataz, relief foreman, regular foreman, until he became
boiling house technician on November 1, 1968 up to the time of his retirement
on December 31, 1973, due to intractable propyloric ulcer and gouty arthritis.

In awarding his claim for compensation benefits in the amount of
Six Thousand (P6,000.00) Pesos and the reimbursement of medical expenses
amounting to Fourteen thousand nine hundred eight and 71/100 Pesos
(P14,908.71), the Unit Chief and Referee found that the “gouty arthritis
and duodenal ulcer” suffered by claimant while in the employ of respondent
Victorias Milling Company, Inc. is compensable, stating that:

“x x x x.  The
extraordinary exertion in the performance of his work would naturally result in
the disease which he suffered.  The
stress of work and the position that he ultimately occupied as foreman of such
a big company in the boiling house
where the manufacture of sugar is done would ultimately lead not only to
the gouty arthritis but also to the attack of ulcer which, according to the
doctors, was brought about by the drugs that he was taking to counteract the
arthritis, but if I may add it may also be due to the stress of the work and
the position he occupied as foreman.  In
all the treatment of the claimant, he spent a total of P14,908.71.  It is true that the first operation was
performed at the respondent’s hospital
but the expenses were charged to him and were deducted from his salary and
later on the expenses for his operation in Manila were deducted from his retirement
benefits.  The above amount was supported
by receipts which are attached to the records of this case”(pp. 15-16,
rollo).

It will be noted that respondent Victorias Milling Company, Inc.
never controverted claimant’s allegations that after liberation, the employees
were subjected to medical examination by the company every year; that he was
found well until 1966 when, due to the nature of his work and the conditions of
the working place in the boiling house where the temperature is quite warm, he began to suffer gouty arthritis
which attacked his right shoulder, and later affected also his left shoulder;
that he had to exert physical effort while actually operating the old
centrifugal basket; that sometimes he could not eat his meals on time; that in
1966 he was operated on for ulcer because of the reaction of the arthritis
drugs that he was taking; that after the operation, he went back to work as
boiling house technician but still in the same place where the working
condition is so injurious to his health that his gouty arthritis continued
until he had to retire ultimately in 1973 because of physical disability.

The records disclose that claimant-petitioner was instructed to
submit to medical examination by Dr. Antonio M. Habana, Compensation Rating
Medical Officer of the Department of Labor, Sub-Regional Office No. VII,
Bacolod City, who found him with rheumatoid arthritis of the right shoulder
joint, affecting the right extremity; that there was a recurrence of duodenal
ulcer secondary to anti-gout drug; that the blood pressure was high and did not
go down to normal level even at rest and after a long period of treatment; that
his illness had greatly affected his ordinary physical activity that rendered
him unfit for service; and that his disability evaluation was 50% N.S.D.
(Section 18) [p. 90, WCC rec.].

Clearly, petitioner’s claim is meritorious.  This Court has in no uncertain terms
pronounced in the many cases brought before It that there is a statutory
presumption of compensability so that the burden is on the employer to
establish by substantial evidence that the illness was not in fact aggravated
by the nature of the job (National Shipyards & Steel Corp. vs. WCC, Jan. 31, 1967, No. L-22628; National
Development Co. vs. WCC, No. L-21724, April
27, 1967; National Development Co. vs. Ayson, No. L-23450, May 24, 1967; Magalona vs. WCC, No.
L-21849, Dec. 11, 1967;
Vda. de Forteza vs. WCC, No. L-21718, Jan.
29, 1968; Abana vs. Quisumbing, No. L-23489, Mar. 27, 1968; Rebar Bldgs., Inc. vs. WCC, No.
L-27486, April 30, 1968;
Central Azucarera Don Pedro vs. WCC, No. L-24987, July 31, 1968; Isberto vs. Republic, No. L-22769, Aug. 30, 1968; C.A. Chiong Shipping
Co. vs. WCC, No. L-24202, Sept. 23,
1968; Manila Pest
Control vs. WCC, No. L-27662, Oct.
29, 1968; Seven-Up Bottling Co. of the Phil.
vs. Mimerata, No. L-24349, Dec. 24,
1968; Operators’ Incorporated vs. Cacatian, No. L-26172, Oct. 21, 1969; Vargas vs. Phil.
American Embroideries, Inc. No. L-23762, Aug. 31, 1970; Manila Electric Co. vs. WCC, No. L-31591, June 30, 1971; Vda. de Leorna, et al.
vs. WCC, et al., No. L-42543, Sept.
30, 1976; Arzadon vs. WCC, et al., No. L-42404, Dec. 8, 1976).  There is no showing that respondent Victorias
Milling Company has proven by substantial evidence that the illness of the
petitioner could have arisen out of factors other than the nature of his
employment.  In fact, the yearly
examination of its employees conducted by respondent company evinces that
petitioner was physically and mentally agile to perform the duties of his
position until he was operated on for ulcer. 
But even after the operation he went back to work as boiling house
technician but still working in the same place where the working condition was
deleterious to health as his gouty arthritis continued until he ultimately
retired in 1973 at the early age of fifty-five (55) when a man normally is
still in the prime of life.  Indeed, the
stance taken by respondent must perforce fail considering that it only relied
on the opinion of the Compensation Rating Medical Officer who even then was not
categorical in her findings.  It is
well-settled that once it is shown that the illness supervened during the
employment, as in this case, there is the legal presumption that the illness
arose out of or was aggravated by the employment.  Respondent, having failed to rebut the
presumption of compensability, should satisfy petitioner’s claim.

WHEREFORE, THE DECISION DATED DECEMBER 26, 1975
OF RESPONDENT WORKMEN’S COMPENSATION COMMISSION IS HEREBY SET ASIDE, AND THE
RESPONDENT VICTORIAS MILLING COMPANY, INC. IS HEREBY ORDERED

I. TO PAY:

A.  THE CLAIMANT

(1) THE SUM OF SIX THOUSAND (P6,000.00)
PESOS AS DISABILITY COMPENSATION; AND

(2) THE SUM OF
FOURTEEN THOUSAND NINE HUNDRED EIGHT AND 71/100 (P14,908.71) PESOS REPRESENTING
REIMBURSEMENT FOR MEDICAL EXPENSES
INCURRED;

B. THE CLAIMANT’S
COUNSEL, ATTY. FELICISIMO DIVINO, TEN PERCENT (10%) OF THE RECOVERABLE AMOUNT,
AS ATTORNEY’S FEES;

C.  THE WORKMEN’S
COMPENSATION COMMISSION THE SUM OF SIXTY-ONE (P61.00) PESOS AS ADMINISTRATIVE
FEES; AND

D.  THE COSTS; AND

II. TO PROVIDE THE CLAIMANT WITH SUCH SERVICES, APPLIANCES AND
SUPPLIES AS THE NATURE OF HIS DISABILITY AND THE PROCESS OF HIS RECOVERY MAY
REQUIRE; AND THAT WHICH WILL PROMOTE HIS EARLY RESTORATION TO THE MAXIMUM LEVEL
OF HIS PHYSICAL CAPACITY.

SO ORDERED.

Teehankee, (Chairman), Muñoz Palma, Martin, Fernandez, and Guerrero, JJ., concur.