G.R. No. L-29349 November 21, 1979
FRANKLIN BAKER COMPANY OF THE PHILIPPINES, petitioner, vs. FLORENCIO DIAMANTE and WORKMEN’S COMPENSATION COMMISSION, respondents.

FACTS

Florencio Diamante, employed as a shelter by Franklin Baker Company, contracted pulmonary tuberculosis. He filed a compensation claim (R05-WC Case No. 140), which was granted. The petitioner satisfied the decision, paying weekly benefits for 208 weeks, ending September 4, 1963. Subsequently, Diamante filed a Petition for Extension of Period of Compensation, which eventually reached the Supreme Court (G.R. No. L-22206) and was decided in his favor, extending compensation beyond 208 weeks up to the statutory limit.
Pending that extension petition, Diamante filed a Motion for Reimbursement for medical expenses amounting to P1,275.00 incurred for his treatment. The Workmen’s Compensation Commission initially dismissed this motion but, upon reconsideration, granted it through a resolution dated July 16, 1968. The petitioner company now seeks a review of that reimbursement order.

ISSUE

Whether the Workmen’s Compensation Commission erred in granting the claim for reimbursement of medical expenses after the main compensation case had been decided and satisfied, and without conducting a formal hearing.

RULING

The Supreme Court dismissed the petition and affirmed the Commission’s order. The legal logic is twofold. First, the claim for reimbursement is not a new or separate claim for disability compensation but a corollary to the established compensability of Diamante’s illness. The original decision in Case No. 140, sustained by the Commission en banc, explicitly required the petitioner to provide necessary medical services until the ailment was cured. This obligation did not terminate with the payment of the initial 208 weeks of compensation, as later affirmed by the Supreme Court in G.R. No. L-22206, which authorized an extension of the compensation period.
Second, the reimbursement is squarely mandated by Section 13 of the Workmen’s Compensation Act. This provision obligates the employer to provide medical services and supplies immediately after the employee contracts a sickness and during the subsequent disability. The Court found that the petitioner had contested compensability and refused to provide medical services initially. The expenses claimed were for past treatment already received and consumed by Diamante during his disability period. The employer’s subsequent offer to furnish future services did not extinguish its liability for expenses already incurred by the employee, which he was entitled to acquire at the employer’s expense under the law. The Commission’s grant of reimbursement without a formal hearing was proper, as the right to such expenses flowed directly from the established compensability of the illness and the statutory mandate.