This case has been cited 2 times or more.
|
2007-04-13 |
AUSTRIA-MARTINEZ, J. |
||||
| In Nitura v. Employees' Compensation Commission,[17] we struck down the ECC's finding that the death of Pfc. Regino S. Nitura was not compensable since the deceased was drunk and acted with notorious negligence, thus:x x x it has been held that even if it could be shown that a person drank intoxicating liquor it is incumbent upon the person invoking drunkenness as a defense to show that said person was extremely drunk. This is so because a person may take as much as several bottles of beer or several glasses of hard liquor and still remain sober and unaffected by the alcoholic drink. Thus, intoxication which does not incapacitate the employee from following his occupation is not sufficient to defeat the recovery of compensation, although intoxication may be a contributory cause to his injury. It must be shown that the intoxication was the proximate cause of death or injury and the burden of proof lies on him who raises drunkenness as a defense (Vda. de Yohanan v. Balena and WCC, 78 SCRA 348 [1977]). While it may be admitted that the deceased drank intoxicating liquor at the dance party, respondents ECC and GSIS have not established that the state of drunkenness of the deceased is the proximate cause of his death. | |||||
|
2004-06-03 |
YNARES-SATIAGO, J. |
||||
| Notwithstanding the abandonment of the presumption of compensability established by the old law, the present law has not ceased to be an employees' compensation law or a social legislation; hence, the liberality of the law in favor of the working man and woman still prevails, and the official agency charged by law to implement the constitutional guarantee of social justice should adopt a liberal attitude in favor of the employee in deciding claims for compensability,[26] especially in light of the compassionate policy towards labor which the 1987 Constitution vivifies and enhances.[27] Elsewise stated, a humanitarian impulse, dictated by no less than the Constitution itself under the social justice policy, calls for a liberal and sympathetic approach to legitimate appeals of disabled public servants.[28] Verily, the policy is to extend the applicability of the law on employees' compensation to as many employees who can avail of the benefits thereunder.[29] | |||||