GR L 48664; (May, 1987) (Digest)
G.R. No. L-48664. May 20, 1987.
GLICERIA C. CASUMPANG, petitioner, vs. EMPLOYEES COMPENSATION COMMISSION, GOVERNMENT SERVICE INSURANCE SYSTEM AND BUREAU OF PRISONS, respondents.
FACTS
Jose Casumpang, a Prison Guard at the San Ramon Prison and Penal Farm in Zamboanga City, died from cancer of the stomach. His widow, Gliceria C. Casumpang, filed a claim for death benefits under the Employees’ Compensation Act. The Government Service Insurance System (GSIS) denied the claim, ruling that the cause of death was not an occupational disease nor was it a result of his employment as a prison guard. The Employees’ Compensation Commission (ECC) affirmed the GSIS decision, holding that the claimant failed to prove that the risk of contracting gastric carcinoma was increased by the deceased’s working conditions.
The petitioner argued that the ailment supervened in the course of employment and should be presumed compensable. The medical history indicated that Jose Casumpang was diagnosed with a ruptured duodenal ulcer in June 1976, traced to symptoms beginning in November 1975, which later developed into the cancer that caused his death. All these events occurred after January 1, 1975.
ISSUE
Whether the death of Jose Casumpang due to cancer of the stomach is compensable under Presidential Decree No. 626, as amended (the Labor Code).
RULING
The Supreme Court dismissed the petition and affirmed the decisions of the GSIS and ECC. The Court held that Presidential Decree No. 626, as amended, is the applicable law, not the old Workmen’s Compensation Act ( Act No. 3428 ). Under the old law, the presumption of compensability relieved the claimant of proving causation. However, the new law expressly removed this presumption and the principle of aggravation as grounds for compensation.
For a sickness to be compensable under the Labor Code, it must either be an occupational disease listed under Annex “A” of the implementing rules, with the conditions therein satisfied, or the claimant must prove that the risk of contracting the disease was increased by the working conditions. Cancer of the stomach is not listed as an occupational disease for prison guards; it is only considered occupational for specific workers like woodworkers, loggers, and employees in pulp and paper mills. The petitioner failed to provide substantial evidence demonstrating that the deceased’s working conditions—such as escorting inmates, being overtaken by rain, working at night, or missing meals—increased the risk of contracting stomach cancer or had a direct causal connection to the disease. Therefore, the claim was not compensable.