G.R. No. L-43007. January 28, 1980. LEON JESALVA, in behalf of his brother, ORPINO JESALVA, petitioner, vs. WORKMEN’S COMPENSATION COMMISSION and REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES (Bureau of Public Highways), respondents.
FACTS

Juan Jesalva, employed as a carpenter by the Bureau of Public Highways, died on October 14, 1965, from coronary thrombosis due to hypertension. His son, Orpino Jesalva, represented by his brother Leon, filed a claim for death benefits under the Workmen’s Compensation Act on December 18, 1973. Orpino, born on October 16, 1945, was nearly 20 at his father’s death and is a congenital invalid suffering from severe ataxia. The acting referee awarded compensation, finding the illness work-connected and applying the presumption of compensability, as the employer failed to attend the hearing or controvert the claim. The employer’s motion for reconsideration, raising prescription for the first time, was denied as filed out of time.
The Workmen’s Compensation Commission reversed the award, dismissing the claim on two grounds: first, that Orpino, being over 18 at his father’s death, failed to prove he was “incapable of supporting himself” as required by Section 9 of the Act; second, that the claim was barred by prescription under Section 24 for not being filed within the statutory period. The Commission held the defense of prescription could be raised at any stage and that mere congenital disability did not automatically prove incapacity for self-support.

ISSUE

The primary issues were: (1) whether the claim was barred by prescription; and (2) whether Orpino Jesalva, though over 18, qualified as a dependent son under the Act due to incapacity for self-support.

RULING

The Supreme Court reversed the Commission and reinstated the award. On prescription, the Court held the defense was deemed waived. The employer failed to raise it during the initial hearing or in a timely motion for reconsideration before the referee. More critically, the employer did not comply with Sections 37 and 45 of the Act, which required the timely filing of a notice of controversion to challenge the claim. This non-compliance constituted a waiver of all non-jurisdictional defenses, including prescription. The employer’s absence from the hearing forfeited its right to raise new defenses later.
Regarding Orpino’s dependency, the Court found he was “incapable of supporting himself.” The medical certificate established his severe congenital ataxia, a permanent condition impairing muscular coordination. The circumstances—that his elder brother filed the claim as guardian, cared for him after their parents’ deaths, and provided for all his needs—strongly indicated his incapacity for self-support and made it improbable he was married. The Act’s provision for a son over 18 applies if “incapable of supporting himself,” which encompasses lifelong congenital invalidity. The Commission erred in requiring additional proof beyond the established permanent disability.
Finally, the presumption of compensability under the Act stood unrebutted. The illness and death supervened in the course of employment, and the employer failed to present evidence to overthrow the presumption. Thus, the claim was compensable. The employer was ordered to pay death benefits, burial and medical expenses, attorney’s fees, and administrative fees.