September 1961 - Philippine Supreme Court Decisions/Resolutions
Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence
Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence > Year 1961 > September 1961 Decisions >
G.R. No. L-16921 September 27, 1961 - VALERIO FAMORCA v. COMMISSIONER, WORKMEN’S COMPENSATION COM., ET AL:
EN BANC
[G.R. No. L-16921. September 27, 1961.]
VALERIO FAMORCA, Petitioner-Appellee, v. THE COMMISSIONER, WORKMEN’S COMPENSATION COMMISSION, BUREAU OF LABOR, and THE DEPUTY SHERIFF OF KIANGAN, MOUNTAIN PROVINCE, Respondents-Appellants.
Jesus B. Santos for Petitioner-Appellee.
E. R. Trillo for Respondents-Appellants.
SYLLABUS
1. WORKMEN’S COMPENSATION COMMISSION, NO POWER TO ISSUE WRIT OF EXECUTION. — The Workmen’s Compensation Commission has no power to issue a writ of execution of its awards or decision (Section 51, Act No. 3428, as amended).
2. ID.; HOW DECISION OF COMMISSION MAY BE ENFORCED. — The interested party may file in any Court of record, in the jurisdiction of which the accident occurred, a certified copy of the referee’s or Commissioner’s final decision, upon which the Court will render judgment, which may be enforced by a writ of execution to be issued by the said Court, pursuant to section 8, Rule 39, of the Rules of Court.
2. ID.; HOW DECISION OF COMMISSION MAY BE ENFORCED. — The interested party may file in any Court of record, in the jurisdiction of which the accident occurred, a certified copy of the referee’s or Commissioner’s final decision, upon which the Court will render judgment, which may be enforced by a writ of execution to be issued by the said Court, pursuant to section 8, Rule 39, of the Rules of Court.
D E C I S I O N
PADILLA, J.:
A claim for P335.57 under the Workmen’s Compensation Act was filed by Ernesto Sison for injury on one of his legs while in the employ of Valerio Famorca. Not having been controverted the Workmen’s Compensation Commission awarded the sum claimed as compensation. The award became final as no appeal had been taken therefrom. The Commission ordered the execution of the award and directed the deputy sheriff of Kiañgan, Mountain Province, to carry it out. A petition for a writ of prohibition was filed to prevent the Commission and the deputy sheriff from carrying it out, and after hearing the Court of First Instance of Kalinga, Bontoc and Ifugao granted the writ prayed for. From such judgment this appeal had been taken.
In Pastoral v. The Commissioners of the Workmen’s Compensation Commission, Et Al., G.R. No. L-12903, 31 July 1961, this Court held that —
. . . the Workmen’s Compensation Commission has no power to issue a writ of execution of its awards or decisions. Section 51 of Act No. 3428 as amended by Act No. 3812, by Comm. Act No. 210 and by Republic Act No. 772, approved on June 20, 1952, provides: —
"SEC. 51. Enforcement of award. — Any party in interest may file in any court of record in the jurisdiction of which the accident occurred a certified copy of a decision of any referee or the Commissioner, from which no petition for review or appeal has been taken within the time allowed therefor, as the case may be, or a certified copy of a memorandum of agreement duly approved by the Commissioner, whereupon the Court shall render a decree or judgment in accordance therewith and notify the parties thereof.
"The decree or judgment shall have the same effect, and all proceedings in relation thereto shall thereafter be the same as though the decree or judgment had been rendered in a suit duly heard and tried by the Court, except that there shall be no appeal therefrom.
"The Commissioner shall, upon application by the proper party or the Court before which such action is instituted, issue a certification that no petition for review or appeal within the time prescribed by section forty-nine hereof has been taken by the Respondent."cralaw virtua1aw library
The above legal provisions are clear and unequivocal, both in their language and purpose. The interested party may file in any court of record in the jurisdiction of which the accident occurred, a certified copy of the referee’s or Commissioner’s final decision and the Court will issue a judgment based upon said decision of the referee or Commissioner; and it is this judgment of the court that can be enforced by a writ of execution to be issued by the said court, considering Sec. 8, Rule 39, of the Rules of Court.
It would appear evident, therefore, that the powers given to the W.C.C. by the Reorganization Acts, cannot validly include the power to amend Sec. 51 of the Workmen’s Compensation Law, heretofore quoted, for to do so would be to diminish the jurisdiction and the judicial power and functions vested by law on the courts of record, by virtue of said section, to issue or order a writ of execution by the promulgation of a judgment, which power or authority the Workmen’s Compensation Commission never had, before the Reorganization Acts had been passed.
The judgment appealed from is affirmed, without pronouncement as to costs.
Bengzon, C.J., Labrador, Concepcion, Reyes, J.B.L., Paredes and De Leon, JJ., concur.
Barrera and Dizon, JJ., took no part.
In Pastoral v. The Commissioners of the Workmen’s Compensation Commission, Et Al., G.R. No. L-12903, 31 July 1961, this Court held that —
. . . the Workmen’s Compensation Commission has no power to issue a writ of execution of its awards or decisions. Section 51 of Act No. 3428 as amended by Act No. 3812, by Comm. Act No. 210 and by Republic Act No. 772, approved on June 20, 1952, provides: —
"SEC. 51. Enforcement of award. — Any party in interest may file in any court of record in the jurisdiction of which the accident occurred a certified copy of a decision of any referee or the Commissioner, from which no petition for review or appeal has been taken within the time allowed therefor, as the case may be, or a certified copy of a memorandum of agreement duly approved by the Commissioner, whereupon the Court shall render a decree or judgment in accordance therewith and notify the parties thereof.
"The decree or judgment shall have the same effect, and all proceedings in relation thereto shall thereafter be the same as though the decree or judgment had been rendered in a suit duly heard and tried by the Court, except that there shall be no appeal therefrom.
"The Commissioner shall, upon application by the proper party or the Court before which such action is instituted, issue a certification that no petition for review or appeal within the time prescribed by section forty-nine hereof has been taken by the Respondent."cralaw virtua1aw library
The above legal provisions are clear and unequivocal, both in their language and purpose. The interested party may file in any court of record in the jurisdiction of which the accident occurred, a certified copy of the referee’s or Commissioner’s final decision and the Court will issue a judgment based upon said decision of the referee or Commissioner; and it is this judgment of the court that can be enforced by a writ of execution to be issued by the said court, considering Sec. 8, Rule 39, of the Rules of Court.
x x x
It would appear evident, therefore, that the powers given to the W.C.C. by the Reorganization Acts, cannot validly include the power to amend Sec. 51 of the Workmen’s Compensation Law, heretofore quoted, for to do so would be to diminish the jurisdiction and the judicial power and functions vested by law on the courts of record, by virtue of said section, to issue or order a writ of execution by the promulgation of a judgment, which power or authority the Workmen’s Compensation Commission never had, before the Reorganization Acts had been passed.
The judgment appealed from is affirmed, without pronouncement as to costs.
Bengzon, C.J., Labrador, Concepcion, Reyes, J.B.L., Paredes and De Leon, JJ., concur.
Barrera and Dizon, JJ., took no part.
