G.R. No. L-43202. May 31, 1977.
Rodrigo Landayan, petitioner, vs. Workmen’s Compensation Commission and Atlantic Gulf & Pacific Co. of Manila, Inc., respondents.

FACTS

Petitioner Rodrigo Landayan was employed as a carpenter by respondent Atlantic Gulf & Pacific Co. of Manila, Inc. (AG&P) since October 1966. In June 1968, the company physician, Dr. Bataclan, found him to be suffering from pulmonary tuberculosis. He was subsequently diagnosed by his attending physician, Dr. Amadeo Jorge, with “pulmonary tuberculosis moderately advanced, active with cavity, bronchiectasis.” His employment was terminated on June 6, 1968, and he has been unable to work since due to his ailment.
On June 29, 1975, Landayan filed a claim for disability compensation, supported by a Physician’s Report (Form No. 4). The Acting Labor Referee granted the claim, awarding him P6,000.00. However, the Workmen’s Compensation Commission, upon AG&P’s motion for reconsideration, reversed the award and dismissed the case. The Commission held that the Physician’s Report was insufficient for lack of corroborating laboratory findings or chest x-ray reports.

ISSUE

Whether a Physician’s Report, without attached x-ray or laboratory findings, is sufficient to support a claim for compensation under the Workmen’s Compensation Act.

RULING

The Supreme Court reversed the decision of the Workmen’s Compensation Commission and reinstated the award. The legal logic is clear: the Physician’s Report (Form No. 4) does not, by its terms, require the attachment of x-ray examinations or laboratory findings to validate the physician’s diagnosis. Their absence does not invalidate the report. The Court inferred that a prior x-ray examination must have been conducted, as the detailed diagnosis of “moderately advanced, active” tuberculosis with cavity and bronchiectasis could not have been made without such objective means.
Furthermore, the respondent company is estopped from denying the illness, as its own physician, Dr. Bataclan, was the first to diagnose the petitioner’s tuberculosis, which led directly to the termination of his services. Since the petitioner complied with the requirements of Section 23 of the Workmen’s Compensation Act by submitting to examination and providing the Physician’s Report, there was no legal basis to deny his claim. His total disability was duly established, entitling him to compensation under Sections 2 and 14 of the Act. The Court thus revived the referee’s award, with the additional modification for AG&P to pay duly receipted medical expenses and attorney’s fees.