Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

This case has been cited 2 times or more.

	GR No. 209741 2015-04-15	SOCIAL SECURITY COMMISSION v. EDNA A. AZOTE MENDOZA, J.
On June 19, 1992, respondent Edna and Edgardo, a member of the Social Security System (SSS), were married in civil rites at the Regional Trial Court, Branch 9, Legazpi City, Albay (RTC). Their union produced six children[4] born from 1985 to 1999. On April 27, 1994, Edgardo submitted Form E-4 to the SSS with Edna and their three older children as designated beneficiaries. Thereafter or on September 7, 2001, Edgardo submitted another Form E-4 to the SSS designating his three younger children as additional beneficiaries.[5]
	GR No. 176150 2008-06-25	IBARRA P. ORTEGA v. SOCIAL SECURITY COMMISSION CARPIO MORALES, J.
Claims under the Labor Code for compensation and under the Social Security Law for benefits are not the same as to their nature and purpose. On the one hand, the pertinent provisions of the Labor Code govern compensability of work-related disabilities or when there is loss of income due to work-connected or work-aggravated injury or illness.[55] On the other hand, the benefits under the Social Security Law are intended to provide insurance or protection against the hazards or risks of disability, sickness, old age or death, inter alia, irrespective of whether they arose from or in the course of the employment.[56] And unlike under the Social Security Law, a