GR L 35531; (August, 1974) (Digest)
G.R. No. L-35531. August 30, 1974.
PASCUALA LOMBO, petitioner, vs. STANDARD CIGARETTE MANUFACTURING CO. AND THE WORKMEN’S COMPENSATION COMMISSION, respondents.
FACTS
Petitioner Pascuala Lombo worked as a “poucher” for respondent Standard Cigarette Manufacturing Co. from 1951 until June 5, 1967. She filed a claim for compensation, alleging she stopped working due to physical disability (PTB minimal, heart disease, and high blood pressure) contracted and aggravated in the course of her employment. She claimed she first felt chest pains in 1965, that her working conditions aggravated her illness, and that she incurred medical expenses. The respondent company controverted the claim.
During trial, evidence showed Lombo’s work involved making cigarette packs while seated, finishing 3,000 to 4,000 packs daily. Testimony on working conditions was inconsistent, with later cross-examination revealing the work area had windows and electric fans. Company witnesses testified that Lombo stopped work after being implicated in the loss of company labels found under her table, following which she did not return. Evidence also indicated she subsequently worked for another cigarette company.
ISSUE
Whether petitioner’s illness arose out of or was aggravated by the nature of her employment, making it compensable under the Workmen’s Compensation Act.
RULING
The Supreme Court affirmed the denial of compensation. While the Workmen’s Compensation Act is to be construed liberally in favor of employees, and certain presumptions of compensability exist under Section 44, these principles are unavailing when the facts clearly show the sickness is not compensable. The Hearing Officer and the Commission found that Lombo’s work was light, requiring no extra physical effort that would lower body resistance or cause her illnesses. There was no substantial evidence presented that her illnesses, which were in their inception stage, were caused or aggravated by her work. The Court emphasized that findings of fact by the Commission, when supported by substantial evidence and absent a showing of grave abuse of discretion, are binding. Since the factual findings concluded no causal link between her employment and her ailments, the claim was properly denied. Costs were imposed on the petitioner.