Philippine Supreme Court Resolutions > Year 2010 > February 2010 Resolutions > [G.R. No. 190438 : February 03, 2010] RENATO O. DASIG, PETITIONER, V. SOCIAL SECURITY SYSTEM (SAN MIGUEL BREWERY, INC.), RESPONDENT. :

Quoted hereunder, for your information, is a resolution of this Court dated 03 February 2010:

G.R. No. 190438 - RENATO O. DASIG, petitioner, v. SOCIAL SECURITY SYSTEM (San Miguel Brewery, Inc.), respondent.

The petitioner Renato O. Dasig (petitioner), represented by his wife and attorney-in-fact Priscilla C. Dasig, challenges the decision and resolution of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. SP No. 107488,^[1] affirming the findings of the Employees Compensation Commission (ECC) and the Social Security Commission (SSS) denying the petitioner's claim for permanent partial disability.

The SSS DENIED the petitioner's claim and declared that his illness was caused by other factors such as diabetes mellitus, smoking, dyslipidemia, obesity and a family history of cardiovascular disease, not by the nature of the petitioner's occupation, The petitioner was employed by San Miguel Brewery (SMB) in 1998 as a forklift operator when he was 58 years old. His duties included the loading and unloading of pallets of cases of beer bottles from trailer trucks to a warehouse and vice versa. He allegedly worked 12-hour shifts until 2000, when the company reduced his working time to eight hours. In the performance of his duties, he was allegedly exposed to changing weather and the smoke emissions of the truck's diesel engines.

On appeal, the ECC likewise denied the claim and accordingly dismissed the appeal. The ECC cited as legal basis for the dismissal Annex A of the Amended Rules on Employee Compensation under which the compensability of cardiovascular diseases are specifically subject to the following conditions:

1. If the heart disease was known to have been present during employment, there must be proof that an acute exacerbation was clearly precipitated by the unusual strain by reasons of the nature of his work;
   
   
2. The strain of work that brings about an acute attack must be of sufficient severity and must be followed within 24 hours by the clinical signs of a cardiac insult to constitute causal relationship;
   
   
3. A person who was apparently asymptomatic before being subjected to strain at work showed signs and symptoms of cardiac injury during the performance of his work and such symptoms and signs persisted, it is reasonable to claim a casual relationship.
   

These three conditions, according to the ECC, required that a relationship be established between the work performed and the illness for which compensation is claimed. The ECC found that none of these conditions was met since the petitioner failed to establish that the cardiac injury was precipitated by strain at work that was sufficiently severe. It affirmed the finding that the cause of the petitioner's cardiac disease was not occupational, but consisted of several factors such as age, smoking habits, family history and affliction with diabetes.

The Court of Appeals AFFIRMED the findings of the ECC and SSS. The CA found that the petitioner's failure to present a physician's report establishing work-connection for his ailment was fatal to his case. It noted that the petitioner's work of operating forklifts was not sufficiently stressful to cause cardiac injury, since petitioner merely operated a machine and the machine did all the heavy lifting without need for any substantial physical effort on the part of the operator. The CA also found that his allegation that he inhaled diesel smoke does not conclusively establish a causal relationship with his illness.

The petitioner raises as issue in his petition the correctness of the finding that his cardiac ailment was not work-related.

After due consideration of the petition, the assailed decision and resolution of the Court of Appeals, and the records of the case, we resolve to DENY the petition for failure to show of any reversible error in the assailed rulings.

As the Court of Appeals correctly found, the petitioner failed to establish a causal connection between the illness for which he sought compensation and the conditions of his work. This is an element found in all the three instances recognized in Annex A of the Amended Rules on Employee Compensation which governs the grant of disability benefits for employees suffering heart diseases. Given this finding that the petition does not in any way rebut nor contradict, the CA cannot but be correct in its ruling affirming the denial by the SSS and the ECC of the petitioner's claim.

WHEREFORE, we DENY the petition outright for failure to show any reversible error in the assailed ruling.

SO ORDERED.

WITNESS the Honorable Antonio T. Carpio, Chairperson, Honorable Arturo D. Brion, Roberto A. Abad, Mariano C. Del Castillo and Jose P. Perez, Members, Second Division, this 3^rd day of February, 2010.

Endnotes:

---

^[1] CA decision penned by Associate Justice Ali�o Hormachuelos, and concurred in by Associate Justice Fernanda Lampas-Peralta and Associate Justice Ramon R. Garcia.