G.R. No. L-43382 June 30, 1977
LEONORA VDA. DE CABARUBIAS, ET AL., petitioner, vs. WORKMEN’S COMPENSATION COMMISSION and TOP SERVICE, INC., respondents.

FACTS

Petitioner Leonora Vda. de Cabarubias, on behalf of herself and her four minor children, filed a claim for death benefits after her husband, Maximino Cabarubias, a pump operator for respondent Top Service, Inc., died from injuries sustained in a vehicular accident on December 23, 1974. The initial decision from the Department of Labor’s Regional Office No. 4 granted the claim, finding that the accident occurred while the deceased was performing his duty, assigned to the night shift from 6:00 p.m. to 6:00 a.m., and was on his way to inspect a pump station.
The respondent company appealed to the Workmen’s Compensation Commission, which reversed the regional office’s decision. The Commission found that the deceased had worked from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. on the day of the accident and that the mishap occurred at about 8:30 p.m. while he was on his way home. It ruled the accident did not arise out of and in the course of employment, applying the general rule that injuries sustained while going to or from work are not compensable, and noting the time and distance from the workplace negated any application of the “off-premises” exception.

ISSUE

Whether the death of Maximino Cabarubias resulting from the vehicular accident is compensable under the Workmen’s Compensation Act, i.e., whether it arose out of and in the course of his employment.

RULING

Yes, the death is compensable. The Supreme Court reversed the Commission’s decision, reinstating the award of death benefits. The Court’s ruling hinged on a factual determination that the deceased was actually on duty and performing a work-related task at the time of the accident, not merely commuting home.
The legal logic centered on resolving the conflicting evidence regarding the deceased’s work schedule and activity. The Commission relied on an unsworn daily time record indicating a day shift. However, the Supreme Court gave greater weight to the sworn affidavits of the deceased’s co-employee and his widow, which consistently stated his tour of duty was the night shift from 6:00 p.m. to 6:00 a.m. and that he was riding a company motorcycle to inspect a pump station when the accident occurred at 8:30 p.m. This constituted substantial evidence that the accident happened within his assigned working hours and while he was engaged in an activity integral to his duties as a pump operator.
Consequently, the accident arose out of and in the course of employment. The general rule denying compensation for injuries during commute was inapplicable because the evidence established he was not commuting but was actively traveling between work sites in the performance of a specific duty. Therefore, his death was service-connected and compensable. The Court ordered the respondent company to pay death compensation, burial expenses, attorney’s fees, and administrative costs.