GR L 42630; (June, 1982) (Digest)
G.R. No. L-42630 June 29, 1982
JESUS SIERBO, petitioner, vs. WORKMEN’S COMPENSATION COMMISSION and NEGROS NAVIGATION CO., INC., respondents.
FACTS
Petitioner Jesus Sierbo was employed as Chief Steward by respondent Negros Navigation Co., Inc. On June 6, 1971, aboard the M/V “Don Vicente,” Sierbo was reprimanded by Second Mate Hernani Magbanua for reporting late and not being in uniform. A violent altercation ensued, resulting in an exchange of gunfire. Magbanua died from multiple gunshot wounds, and Sierbo sustained serious injuries, including a bullet wound penetrating his abdomen, damaging his ureter, duodenum, and liver. The employer paid death benefits to Magbanua’s heirs but controverted Sierbo’s claim, alleging he was the aggressor who assaulted an unarmed Magbanua.
The Acting Referee of the Workmen’s Compensation Unit awarded compensation to Sierbo, accepting his version that Magbanua initiated the assault with a Coca-Cola bottle, forcing Sierbo to act in self-defense. The Workmen’s Compensation Commission (WCC) reversed this decision. The WCC found the employer’s witnesses more credible, concluding that Sierbo provoked the incident and that his injuries resulted from a personal quarrel unrelated to his employment duties.
ISSUE
Whether the injuries sustained by Jesus Sierbo arose out of and in the course of his employment, making them compensable under the Workmen’s Compensation Act.
RULING
The Supreme Court affirmed the decision of the Workmen’s Compensation Commission, denying the claim. The legal logic hinges on the requirement that for an injury to be compensable, it must both arise “out of” and “in the course of” employment. An injury occurs “in the course of employment” when it takes place within the period of employment at a place where the employee may reasonably be while performing duties. It arises “out of employment” when there is a causal connection between the injury and the work, indicating the risk was incidental to the employment.
The Court upheld the WCC’s factual findings that the shooting was the culmination of a personal quarrel originating from Sierbo’s tardiness and improper attire. While the incident occurred at the workplace and during work hours, satisfying the “in the course of” element, the altercation was deemed to have arisen from a personal controversy—a “detour from duty”—and not from an inherent risk of his work as a Chief Steward. The cause of the injury was the personal ill-will between the individuals, not the performance of their duties. Since the requisite causal link between the employment and the injury was absent, the claim was not compensable. The Court deferred to the WCC’s assessment of witness credibility and the substantial evidence supporting its conclusion.