G.R. No. L-43587 November 29, 1978
GENERAL TEXTILES, INC., vs. WORKMEN’S COMPENSATION COMMISSION and BIENVENIDO BERNARDO

FACTS

The private respondent, Bienvenido Bernardo, filed a claim for disability benefits against his employer, General Textiles, Inc., alleging he contracted pulmonary tuberculosis (PTB) during his employment. He worked as a factory carpenter for thirteen years, performing strenuous labor. Medical reports confirmed he suffered from moderately advanced, bilateral PTB. He was separated from service on October 25, 1974, and received separation pay. The Acting Referee dismissed his claim on October 14, 1975, citing the absence of an employer-employee relationship at the time of filing. Bernardo filed a motion for reconsideration. The Assistant Chief of the Regional Office denied this motion on March 5, 1976, but explicitly noted it was filed within the 15-day reglementary period and elevated the records to the Workmen’s Compensation Commission (WCC) for review.
The WCC reversed the dismissal. It found that Bernardo was already afflicted with PTB during his employment, applying the legal presumption that an illness arising or aggravated during employment is compensable. It awarded him compensation benefits totaling P3,400.18, plus attorney’s fees and costs. General Textiles petitioned for review, arguing the motion for reconsideration was filed 87 days late, rendering the Referee’s dismissal order final and unappealable.

ISSUE

The primary issue is whether the claimant’s motion for reconsideration was filed on time, thereby vesting the Workmen’s Compensation Commission with jurisdiction to review and reverse the order of dismissal.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the WCC’s decision. On the procedural issue, the Court held that the petitioner failed to prove that the motion for reconsideration was filed out of time. The record did not conclusively show that Bernardo’s counsel received a copy of the October 14, 1975 dismissal order. The illegible notation on the order’s copy was insufficient evidence of receipt. Crucially, the Assistant Chief’s March 5, 1976 order expressly stated the motion was filed within the 15-day reglementary period. This official act carries a presumption of regularity, which the petitioner did not rebut.
On the merits, the Court sustained the WCC’s factual findings and legal conclusions. The medical evidence established that Bernardo’s PTB existed during his employment. Given the strenuous nature of his carpentry work, the legal presumption under the Workmen’s Compensation Act that the illness arose out of or was aggravated by his employment was properly invoked. The employer failed to present substantial evidence to rebut this presumption. Consequently, the illness was compensable. The WCC’s computation of benefits based on Bernardo’s wage and disability rating was correct. The award of attorney’s fees was also upheld as mandated by the Act for appealed cases.