GR L 26361; (March, 1967) (Digest)
G.R. No. L-26361 March 18, 1967
MA-AO SUGAR CENTRAL CO., INC., petitioner, vs. SINFOROSO CAÑETE, respondent.
FACTS
On May 8, 1963, Sinforoso Cañete filed a claim for compensation with Regional Office No. VII, Bacolod City, against his employer, Ma-ao Sugar Central Co., Inc., for pulmonary tuberculosis allegedly acquired due to his employment as a locomotive brakeman and operator. The corporation controverted the claim. The acting referee initially held the claim was not compensable. On review, the Workmen’s Compensation Commission reversed the decision, finding the claim compensable under the theory of “aggravation of pre-existing illness.” The Commission also found the corporation had waived its right to contest the claim by failing to timely controvert it despite knowledge of the illness as early as September 8, 1961. It awarded Cañete P4,000 as compensation for total disability from October 3, 1961, to May 24, 1966, plus medical services. The corporation appealed to the Supreme Court. Pending appeal, Cañete moved for execution of the monetary award, citing his critical physical condition and destitution. The petitioner opposed, arguing the decision was erroneous and that Cañete would not die before the Court’s decision. The Court initially denied the motion for insufficient verified data on workdays but later reconsidered upon submission of supporting affidavits and data.
ISSUE
Whether execution of the Workmen’s Compensation Commission’s monetary award pending appeal should be granted based on good reasons and urgent circumstances.
RULING
Yes, execution pending appeal is granted. The Supreme Court found superior reasons and urgent circumstances justifying immediate execution. The Court was satisfied that Cañete had been afflicted with active, moderately advanced pulmonary tuberculosis since October 3, 1961, was under constant medical care, was destitute and unable to work, and was in constant danger of death. These constituted “compelling reasons of urgency or justice.” The Court rejected the petitioner’s objections regarding computation errors, noting the petitioner’s uncooperative stance in failing to submit its own data and merely criticizing Cañete’s verified submission without substantive comment. Based on Cañete’s verified data showing he worked an average of 335 days a year, the Court upheld the Commission’s computation, which entitled him to the maximum compensation of P4,000 for 208 weeks of disability. The petitioner was ordered to pay Cañete P4,000 without delay.