G.R. No. L-22135. December 27, 1963. VISAYAN STEVEDORE-TRANSPORTATION CO., petitioner, vs. THE WORKMEN’S COMPENSATION COMMISSION AND EXALTACION BARRION, for herself and in behalf of her minor children ELVIRA, ERLINDA and SHIRLEY, all surnamed GUTANA, respondents.
FACTS

Graciano Gutana was a laborer for petitioner Visayan Stevedore-Transportation Co., assigned to load sugar onto the ship “Hiyeharu Maru” anchored off Pulupandan. On May 19, 1958, after a regular eight-hour shift, the laborers were on a meal break before scheduled overtime work. Due to insufficient sanitary facilities on the ship, Gutana and others went to relieve themselves on a barge tied alongside the vessel. While Gutana was on the barge, another raft bumped it, causing the barge to hit the ship. Gutana was pinned between structures and suffered fatal injuries. The employer was notified, shouldered all funeral expenses, and a compensation claim was later filed by Gutana’s widow and children.
The Regional Office awarded death compensation. Petitioner appealed to the Workmen’s Compensation Commission, which affirmed the award. Petitioner now appeals to the Supreme Court, contending the claim had prescribed and that Gutana’s death resulted from his own notorious negligence.

ISSUE

1. Did the claim for compensation prescribe for being filed beyond the statutory period?
2. Did the accident arise out of and in the course of employment, or was it caused by the employee’s notorious negligence?

RULING

The Supreme Court dismissed the petition and affirmed the Commission’s award. On the first issue, the claim did not prescribe. Section 24 of the Workmen’s Compensation Act dispenses with the requirement of filing a claim within the statutory period if the employer has voluntarily made compensation payments. Burial expenses are considered death benefits under Section 8. Since petitioner voluntarily paid Gutana’s burial expenses, the late filing of the formal claim is not fatal.
On the second issue, the accident arose out of and in the course of employment and was not due to notorious negligence. The inadequate sanitary facilities on the ship compelled the laborers to use the barge. The barge was logically an extension of the work premises, as the laborers were on a meal break in preparation for imminent overtime work and were not free to leave. The necessity of answering a call of nature is a natural bodily function, and attending to it under the constrained circumstances was incidental to the employment. No evidence supported the claim of notorious negligence. Therefore, the death is compensable.