GR 43089; (February, 1978) (Digest)
G.R. No. L-43089. February 28, 1978. CIRILA LIGASON, petitioner, vs. WORKMEN’S COMPENSATION COMMISSION and REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES (Bureau of Public Schools), respondents.
FACTS
This case involves a Motion for Reconsideration and Correction of Spelling of Petitioner’s Surname filed by petitioner’s counsels. The motion sought two amendments to the Supreme Court’s decision dated January 31, 1977. First, it requested the correction of a clerical error in the spelling of the petitioner’s surname from “Legason” to “Ligason,” as the latter is the correct spelling used consistently in the petition and all records. Second, it prayed for an adjustment of the awarded attorney’s fees.
The underlying case originated from a workmen’s compensation claim. The Court’s January 1977 decision had reversed the Workmen’s Compensation Commission and reinstated the Labor Referee’s award in favor of the petitioner, Cirila Ligason, which included P6,000.00 in disability benefits and P300.00 as attorney’s fee. The motion now sought to increase the attorney’s fee award.
ISSUE
The primary issues for resolution were: (1) whether the clerical error in spelling the petitioner’s surname should be corrected; and (2) whether the awarded attorney’s fees should be increased from P300.00 to P600.00 in accordance with Section 31 of the Workmen’s Compensation Act.
RULING
The Supreme Court granted the motion for reconsideration as meritorious. On the first issue, the Court held that the correction of the misspelled surname was a proper ministerial act to rectify a clerical error. The record clearly established that the petitioner’s correct surname was “Ligason,” as evidenced by her petition and all documents on file. The Court thus authorized the Clerk of Court to make the necessary correction in the January 31, 1977 decision to reflect the accurate spelling.
On the second issue, the Court amended the dispositive portion of its prior decision to increase the attorney’s fees from P300.00 to P600.00. This modification was based on the mandate of Section 31 of the Workmen’s Compensation Act, as amended, which provides for attorney’s fees equivalent to ten percent (10%) of the compensation awarded. Since the disability benefit awarded was P6,000.00, the correct statutory attorney’s fee amounted to P600.00. The original award of P300.00 was therefore insufficient and not in full compliance with the law. Consequently, the Court’s final amended decision revived the referee’s award but modified the attorney’s fee to the legally prescribed amount.