Maternity Leave (2010, 2007, 2005 Bar) died last year. They had four (4) children.

hey had four (4) children. He then fell in

love with Jovy, his co-employee and they got married.
Q: A, single, has been an active member of the Social
Security System for the past 20 months. She became In October this year. Weto's new wife is expected to give
pregnant out of wedlock and on her 7th month of birth to her first child. He has accordingly filed his
pregnancy, she was informed that she would have to application for paternity leave, conformably with the
deliver the baby through caesarean section because of provisions of the Paternity Leave Law which took effect in
some complications. Can A claim maternity benefits? If yes, 1996. The HRD manager of the assurance firm denied his
how many days can she go on maternity leave? If not, why application, on the ground that Weto had already used up
is she not entitled? (2010 Bar) his entitlement under that law. Weto argued that he has a
new wife who will be giving birth for the first time,
A: Yes. The SSS Law does not discriminate based on the civil
therefore, his entitlement to paternity leave benefits would
status of a female member employee. As long as said female
begin to run anew. Whose contention is correct, Weto or
employee has paid at least three (3) monthly contributions in
the HRD manager? (2005 Bar)
the twelve-month period immediately preceding the
semester of her childbirth, she can avail of the maternity A: The contention of Weto is correct. The law provides that
benefits under the law. every married male is entitled to a paternity leave of seven
(7) days for the first four (4) deliveries of the legitimate
Q: AB, single and living-in with CD (a married man), is
spouse with whom he is cohabiting (Section 2, RA6187). Jovy
pregnant with her fifth child. She applied for maternity
is Weto's legitimate spouse with whom he is cohabiting. The
leave but her employer refused the application because she
fact that Jovy is his second wife and that Weto had 4
is not married. Who is right? Decide (2007 Bar)
children with his first wife is beside the point. The important
A: AB is right. The Social Security Law, which administers the fact is that this is the first child of Jovy with Weto. The law
Maternity Benefit Program does not require that the did not distinguish and we should therefore not distinguish.
relationship between the father and the mother of the child The paternity leave was intended to enable the husband to
be legitimate. The law is compensating the female worker effectively lend support to his wife in her period of recovery
because of her maternal function and resultant loss of and/or in the nursing of the newly born child (Sec. 3, RA
compensation. The law is morality free. 8187). To deny Weto this benefit would be to defeat the
rationale for the law.
Q: Mans Weto had been an employee of Nopolt Assurance
Company for the last ten (10) years. His wife of six (6) years Q: How many times may a male employee go on Paternity
died last year. They had four (4) children. He then fell in Leave? Can he avail himself of this benefit, for example, 50
love with Jovy, his co-employee and they got married. days after the first delivery by his wife? (2002 Bar)

In October this year, Weto's new wife is expected to give A: A male employee may go on Paternity Leave up to four (4)
birth to her first child. He has accordingly filed his children (Sec. 2, RA 8187). On the question of whether or not
application for paternity leave, conformably with the he can avail himself of this benefit 50 days after the delivery
provisions of the Paternity Leave Law which took effect in of his wife, the answer is: Yes, he can because the Rules
1996. The HRD manager of the assurance firm denied his Implementing Paternity Leave Act says that the availment
application, on the ground that Weto had already used up should not be later than 60 days after the date of delivery
his entitlement under that law. Weto argued that he has a
Special Leaves for women workers (Magna Carta for
new wife who will be giving birth for the first time,
Women) (2013 Bar)
therefore, his entitlement to paternity leave benefits would
begin to run anew. Is Jovy entitled to maternity leave Q: Because of the stress in caring for her four (4) growing
benefits? (2005Bar) children, Tammy suffered a miscarriage late in her
pregnancy and had to undergo an operation. In the course
A: Yes, if Jovy, as a female employee, has paid at least three
of the operation, her obstetrician further discovered a
(3) monthly contributions in the twelve-month period
suspicious-looking mass that required the subsequent
immediately preceding the semester of her childbirth.
removal of her uterus (hysterectomy). After surgery, her
Paternity Leave (2005, 2002 Bar) physician advised Tammy to be on full bed rest for six (6)
weeks. Meanwhile, the biopsy of the sample tissue taken
Q: Mans Weto had been an employee of Nopolt Assurance from the mass in Tammy's uterus showed a beginning
Company for the last ten (10) years. His wife of six (6) years malignancy that required an immediate series of
chemotherapy once a week for four (4) weeks. What
benefits can Tammy claim under existing social legislation? which, as already stated, accords with high constitutional
(2013 Bar) precepts. This answer does not contradict the ruling in Chua-
Qua where the teacher merely fell in love with a bachelor
A: Assuming she is employed, Tammy is entitled to a special
student and the teacher, also single, did not get pregnant
leave benefit of two months with full pay (Gynecological
out of wedlock. Stipulation against marriage (2012, 1998,
Leave) pursuant to RA 9710 or the Magna Carta of Women.
1995, 1991 Bar)
She can also claim Sickness Leave Benefit in accordance with
the SSS Law. Q: Fil-Aire Aviation Company (FIL-AIRE) is a new airline
company recruiting flight attendants for its domestic
WOMEN Discrimination (2000, 1998 Bar)
flights. It requires that the applicant be single, not more
Q: An airline which flies both the international and domestic than 24 years old attractive, and familiar with three (3)
routes requested the Secretary of Labor and Employment to major Visayan dialects, viz: Ilongo, Cebuano and Waray.
approve the policy that all female flight attendants upon Lourdes. 23 years old was accepted as she possessed all the
reaching age forty (40) with at least fifteen (15) years of qualifications. After passing the probationary period.
service shall be compulsorily retired; however, flight Lourdes disclosed that she got married when she was 18
attendants who have reached age forty (40) but have not years old but the marriage was already in the process of
worked for fifteen (15) years will be allowed to continue being annulled on the ground that her husband was
working in order to qualify for retirement benefits, but in no afflicted with a sexually transmissible disease at the time of
case will the extension exceed four (4) years. Does the the celebration of their marriage. As a result of this
Secretary of Labor and Employment have the authority to revelation, Lourdes was not hired as a regular flight
approve the policy? (1998 Bar) attendant. Consequently, she filed a complaint against FIL-
AIRE alleging that the pre-employment qualifications
A. Yes, the Secretary of Labor and Employment has the violate relevant provisions of the Labor Code and are
authority to approve a policy dealing with the retirement of against public policy. Is the contention of Lourdes tenable?
flight attendants of airlines. Article 132 (d) of the Labor Code Discuss fully. (1995 Bar)
provides that the Secretary of Labor and Employment shall
establish standards that will ensure the safety and health of A: The contention of Lourdes is tenable. When she was not
women employees, including the authority to determine hired as a regular flight attendant by FIL-AIRE because she
appropriate minimum age and other standards for disclosed that she got married when she was 18 years old,
retirement or termination in special occupations such as the airline company violated the provision of the Labor Code
those of flight attendants and the like. which states: “It shall be unlawful for an employer to require
as a condition of employment or continuation of
Q: An exclusive school for girls, run by a religious order, has employment that a woman employee shall not get married,
a policy of not employing unwed mothers, women with or to stipulate expressly or tacitly that upon getting married
live-in partners, and lesbians. a. Is the policy violative of a woman employee shall be deemed resigned or separated,
any provision of the Labor Code on employment of or to actually dismiss, discharge, discriminate or otherwise
women? prejudice a woman employee merely by reason of her
A: No, the policy does not violate the Labor Code. The marriage."
practice is a valid exercise of management function. Q: Mam-manu Aviation Company (Mammanu) is a new
Considering the nature and reason for existence of the airline company recruiting flight attendants for its domestic
school, it may adopt such policy as will advance its laudable flights. It requires that the applicant be single, not more
objectives. In fact, the policy accords with the constitutional than 24 years old, attractive, and familiar with three (3)
precept of inculcating ethical and moral values in schools. dialects, viz: llonggo, Cebuano and Kapampangan. lngga, 23
The school policy does not discriminate against women years old, was accepted as she possesses all the
solely on account of sex (Art. 135, Labor Code) nor are the qualifications. After passing the probationary period, lngga
acts prohibited under Art. 137 of the Labor Code. disclosed that she got married when she was 18 years old
b. The same school dismissed two female faculty members but the marriage was the ground that her husband was
on account of pregnancy out of wedlock. Did the school afflicted with a sexually transmissible disease at the time of
violate any provision of the Labor Code on employment of the celebration of their marriage. As a result of this
women? (2000 Bar) revelation, lngga was not hired as a regular flight attendant.
Consequently, she filed a complaint against Mam-manu
A: No, because to tolerate pregnancy out of wedlock will be alleging that the preemployment qualifications violate
a blatant contradiction of the school’s laudable mission
relevant provisions of the Labor Code and are against public his arm over Pedrito's shoulder' and softly said: "You have
policy. Is the contention of lngga tenable? Why? (2012 Bar) great potential to become regular employee and I think I
can give you a favorable recommendation. Can you come
A: Yes. Man-manu’s pre-employment requirement cannot be
over to my condo unit on Saturday evening so we can have
justified as a “bona fide occupational qualification,” where
a little drink? I'm alone, and I'm sure you want to stay
the particular requirements of the job would justify it. The
longer with the company." Is Mr. Barak liable for sexual
said requirement is not valid because it does not reflect an
harassment committed in a work-related or employment
inherent quality that is reasonably necessary for a
environment? (2004 Bar)
satisfactory job performance (PT&T v. NLRC, G.R. No.
118978, May 23, 1997 citing 45A Am. Jur. 2d, Job A: Yes, the elements of sexual harassment are all present: a.
Discrimination, Sec. 506, p. 486). The act of Mr. Barak was committed in a workplace. b. Mr.
Barak, as supervisor of Pedrito Masculado, has authority,
Sexual Harassment (2009, 2006, 2005, 2004, 2003, 2000
influence and moral ascendancy over Masculado. c. Given
Bar)
the specific circumstances mentioned in the question like
Q: As a condition for her employment. Josephine signed an Mr. Barak following Masculado to the comfort room, etc.
agreement with her employer that she will not get married, Mr. Barak was requesting a sexual favor from Masculado for
otherwise, she will be considered resigned or separated a favorable recommendation regarding the latter's
from the service. Josephine got married. She asked Owen, employment. d. It is not impossible for a male, who is a
the personnel manager, if the company can reconsider the homosexual, to ask for a sexual favor from another male.
agreement. He told Josephine he can do something about
Q: Can an individual, the sole proprietor of a business
it, insinuating some sexual favors. She complained to
enterprise, be said to have violated the Anti-Sexual
higher authorities but to no avail. She hires you as her
Harassment Act of 1995 if he clearly discriminates against
counsel. What action or actions will you take? Explain.
women in the adoption of policy standards for employment
(2006 Bar)
and promotions in the enterprise? Explain. (2003 Bar)
A: As counsel for Josephine, I will file a complaint for work-
A: When an employer discriminates against women in the
related sexual harassment which, as in the case at bar,
adoption of policy standards for employment and promotion
occurs when a person who has authority, influence or moral
in his enterprise, he is not guilty of sexual harassment.
ascendancy over another demands, requests or otherwise
Instead, the employer is guilty of discrimination against
requires any sexual favor from the latter as a condition for,
women employees which is declared to be unlawful by the
inter alia, the continued employment of said individual (Sec.
Labor Code. For an employer to commit sexual harassment,
3, RA 7877). I will likewise file a complaint for illegal dismissal
he - as a person of authority, influence or moral ascendancy -
citing Art. 136 of the Labor Code which provides that it is
should have demanded, requested or otherwise required a
unlawful for an employer to require as a condition of
sexual favor from his employee whether the demand,
continued employment or continuation of employment that
request or requirement for submission is accepted by the
a woman employee shall not get married, or to stipulate
object of said act. In the question, no such act was
expressly or tacitly that upon getting married a woman
committed by the sole proprietor.
employee shall be deemed resigned or separated, or to
actually dismiss, discharge, discriminate or otherwise Q: Atty. Renan, a CPA-lawyer and Managing Partner of an
prejudice a woman employee merely by reason of her accounting firm, conducted the orientation seminar for
marriage. newly-hired employees of the firm, among them, Miss
Maganda. After the seminar, Renan requested Maganda to
Q: Pedrito Masculado, a college graduate from the
stay, purportedly to discuss some work assignment. Left
province, tried his luck in the city and landed a job as
alone in the training room, Renan asked Maganda to go out
utility/maintenance man at the warehouse of a big
with him for dinner and ballroom dancing. Thereafter, he
shopping mall. After working as a casual employee for six
persuaded her to accompany him to the mountain highway
months, he signed a contract for probationary employment
in Antipolo for sight-seeing. During all these, Renan told
for six months. Being well-built and physically attractive,
Maganda that most, if not all, of the lady supervisors in the
his supervisor, Mr. Hercules Barak, took special interest to
firm are where they are now, in very productive and
befriend him. When his probationary period was about to
lucrative posts, because of his favorable endorsement. Did
expire, he was surprised when one afternoon after working
Renan commit acts of sexual harassment in a work-related
hours, Mr. Barak followed him to the men's comfort room.
or employment environment? Reasons. (2009 Bar)
After seeing that no one else was around, Mr. Barak placed
A. Yes. Atty. Renan is guilty of sexual harassment. This responsibility of his parents or guardian and his employment
conclusion is predicated upon the following consideration: a. should not in any way interfere with his schooling.
Atty. Renan has authority, influence or moral ascendancy
c. A 15-year old girl working as a library assistant in a girls’
over Miss Maganda; b. While the law calls for a demand,
high school.
request or requirement of a sexual favor, it is not necessary
that the demand, request or requirement of a sexual favor A: No, she should not be prohibited from working as a library
be articulated in a categorical oral or written statement. It assistant because the prohibition in the Labor Code against
may be discerned, with equal certitude from the acts of the employment of persons below 18 years of age merely
offender; (Domingo vs. Rayala, 546 SCRA 90 [2008]); c. The pertains to employment in an undertaking which is
acts of Atty. Renan towards Miss Maganda resound with hazardous or deleterious in nature as identified in the
deafening clarity the unspoken request for a sexual favor, guidelines issued by the DOLE Secretary. Working as a library
regardless of whether it is accepted or not by Miss Maganda; assistant is not one of undertakings identified to be
d. In sexual harassment, it is not essential that the demand, hazardous under D.O. No. 04 Series of 1999.
request or requirement be made as a condition for
continued employment or promotion to a higher position. d. A 16-year old girl working as model promoting alcoholic
beverages.
It is enough that Atty. Renan’s act result in creating an
intimidating, hostile or offensive environment for Miss A: Yes, she should be prohibited from working as a model
Maganda. promoting alcoholic beverages. RA 7610 categorically
prohibits the employment of child models in all commercials
MINORS (2007, 2006, 2004, 2002 BAR) or advertisements promoting alcoholic beverages and
intoxicating drinks, among other things.
Q: Determine whether the following minors should be
prohibited from being hired and from performing their e. A 17 -year old boy working as dealer in a casino
respective duties indicated hereunder: (2006 Bar)
A: Yes, he should be prohibited from working as a dealer in a
A 17-year old boy working as a miner at the Walwaldi Mining casino, because Art. 140 of the Labor Code prohibits the
Corporation. employment of persons below 18 years of age in an
undertaking which is hazardous or deleterious in nature as
A: Yes, he should be prohibited from being hired and from
identified in the guidelines issued by the DOLE Secretary.
performing the duties of a miner because such constitutes
Working as a dealer in a casino is classified as hazardous
hazardous work under D.O. No. 04 Series of 1999. Art. 139
under D.O. No. 04 Series of 1999 as it exposes children to
(c) of the Labor Code expressly prohibits the employment of
physical, psychological or sexual abuses.
persons below 18 years of age in an undertaking which is
hazardous or deleterious in nature as determined by the Q: You were asked by 3 paint manufacturing company
Secretary of Labor . regarding the possible employment as a mixer of a person,
aged seventeen (17), who shall be directly under the care of
b. An 11-year old boy who is an accomplished singer and
the section supervisor. What advice would you give?
performer in different parts of the country.
Explain briefly. (2002 Bar)
A: No, he should not be prohibited from being hired and
A: I will advise the paint manufacturing company that it
from performing as a singer. Under Art. VIII Sec. 12 par. 2 of
cannot hire a person who is aged seventeen (17). Art. 139 (c)
RA 7610 as amended by RA 7658, this constitutes an
of the Labor Code provides that a person below eighteen
exception to the general prohibition against the employment
(18) years of age shall not be allowed to work in an
of children below 15 years of age, provided that the
undertaking which is hazardous or deleterious in nature as
following requirements are strictly complied with: (a) the
determined by the Secretary of Labor. Paint manufacturing
employer shall ensure the protection, health, safety and
has been classified by the Secretary of Labor as a hazardous
morals of the child; (b) the employer shall institute measures
work.
to prevent the child’s exploitation or discrimination taking
into account the system and level of remuneration, and the KASAMBAHAY (2015, 2014, 2012, 2009, 2007, 2000, 1998
duration and arrangement of working time; and ( BAR)
c) the employer shall formulate and implement, subject to Q: Soledad, a widowed school teacher, takes under her
the approval and supervision of competent authorities, a wing one of her students, Kiko, 13 years old, who was
continuing program for training and skill acquisition of the abandoned by his parents and has to do odd jobs in order
child. Moreover, the child must be directly under the sole to study. She allows Kiko to live in her house, provides him
with clean clothes, food, and a daily allowance of 200 A: The driver is a househelper. A person is a househelper or
pesos. In exchange, Kiko does routine housework, is engaged in domestic or household service if he/she
consisting of cleaning the house and doing errands for renders services in the employer's home which are usually
Soledad. One day, a representative of the DOLE and the necessary or desirable for the maintenance and enjoyment
DSWD came to Soledad's house and charged her with thereof and includes ministering to the personal comfort and
violating the law that prohibits work by minors. Soledad convenience of the members of the employer's household
objects and offers as a defense that she was not requiring including the services of family drivers. A family driver who
Kiko to work as the chores were not hazardous. Further, drives the family van to fetch merchandise from suppliers
she did not give him chores regularly but only and delivers the same to a boutique in a mall owned by the
intermittently as the need may arise. Is Soledad's defense family for whom he works should be paid the minimum daily
meritorious? (2015 Bar) wage of a driver in a commercial establishment. The Labor
Code (in Article 143) provides that no househelper shall be
A: Soledad’s defense is meritorious. Sec. 4(d) of the
assigned to work in a commercial, industrial or agricultural
Kasambahay Law (RA 10361) provides that the term
enterprise at a wage or salary rate lower than that provided
“Domestic Worker” shall not include children who are under
by law for agricultural or nonagricultural workers.
foster family arrangement, and are provided access to
education and given an allowance incidental to education, Coverage and Exclusions (2015, 2007, 2009, 2010, 2004,
i.e. “baon”, transportation, school projects and school 2000, 1997, 1995, 1993, 1989 Bar)
activities.
Q: Luisa is an unwed mother with 3 children from different
Q: Linda was employed by Sectarian University (SU) to cook fathers. In 2004, she became a member of the Social
for the members of a religious order who teach and live Security System (SSS). That same year, she suffered a
inside the campus. While performing her assigned task, miscarriage of a baby out of wedlock from the father of her
Linda accidentally burned herself. Because of the extent of third child. She wants to claim maternity benefits under the
her injuries, she went on medical leave. Meanwhile, SSS Act. Is she entitled to claim? (2000, 2007, 2010, 2015
engaged a replacement cook. Linda filed a complaint for Bar)
illegal dismissal, but her employer SU contended that Linda
A: Yes. Provided, Luisa has reported to her employer her
was not a regular employee but a domestic househelp.
pregnancy and date of expected delivery and paid at least
Decide. (2014 Bar)
three monthly contributions during the 12-month period
A: The employer's argument that Linda was not a regular immediately preceding her miscarriage then she is entitled
employee has no merit. The definition of domestic servant or to maternity benefits up to four deliveries. As to the fact that
househelper contemplates one who is employed in the she got pregnant outside wedlock, as in her past three
employer’s home to minister exclusively to the personal pregnancies, this will not bar her claim because the SSS is
comfort and enjoyment of the employer’s family. The non-discriminatory.
Supreme Court already held that the mere fact that the
NOTE: The law merely says “a female employee”. It does not
househelper is working in relation to or in connection with
qualify the term to mean legally married woman (Sec. 14-A,
its business warrants the conclusion that such househelper
Social Security Act of 1997)
or domestic servant is and should be considered as a regular
employee (Apex Mining Co., Inc. v. NLRC, G.R. No. 94951, Q: Tito Paciencioso is an employee of a foundry shop in
April 22, 1991). Here, Linda was hired not to minister to the Malabon, Metro Manila. He is barely able to make ends
personal comfort and enjoyment of her employer's family meet with hissalary of P4, 000.00 a month. One day, he
but to attend to other employees who teach and live inside asked his employer to stop deducting from his salary his SSS
the campus. monthly contribution, reasoning out that he is waiving his
social security coverage. If you were Tito’s employer, would
Q: The weekly work schedule of a driver is as follows:
you grant his request? Why? (2008 Bar)
Monday, Wednesday, Friday - Drive the family car to bring
and fetch the children to and from school. Tuesday, A: No. As Tito’s employer, I am bound by law to remit to SSS
Thursday, Saturday - Drive the family van to fetch Tito’s monthly contribution. The SSS law covers any person
merchandise from suppliers and deliver the same to a natural, juridical, domestic or foreign, carrying in the
boutique in a mall owned by the family. Is the driver a Philippines trade, business, industry, undertaking or activity
househelper? (2012, 1998 Bar) and uses the services of another under his order as regards
employment (Sec. 89 [c]). The compulsory coverage of
employers and employees under the SSS law is actually a
legal imposition on the employers and employees, designed years after his contract ended and after he was
to provide social security to workingmen. Membership in SSS repatriated.
is in compliance with a lawful exercise of the police power of
2. ECC Rules specifically requires for compensability
the State, and may not be Waived by agreement of any party
that pneumonia must have been contracted under
(Phil. Blooming Mills, Co., Inc. v. SSS, 17 SCRA 1077(1966]).
the certain conditions: (p. 92) And so supported
Q: Can a member of a cooperative be deemed an employee
under POEA
for purposes of compulsory' coverage under the Social
Security Act? Explain. (2009 Bar) 3. The long road to pneumonia started from an
underlying cause – AIDS – that rendered him
Dependents, beneficiaries (2008, 1992, 1990, 1987 Bar)
susceptible to the antecedent cause of tuberculosis,
Q: Luis, a PNP officer, was off duty and resting at home and to pneumonia as the immediate cause of death.
when he heard a scuffle outside his house. He saw two of AIDS, described in Eduardo’s death certificate as the
his neighbors fighting and he rushed out to pacify them. underlying cause of death, is a human disease
One of the neighbors shot Luis by mistake, which resulted characterized by a marked decrease of helper-
in Luis's death. Marian, Luis's widow, filed a claim with the induced T-lymphocyte cells, resulting in a general
GSIS seeking death benefits. The GSIS denied the claim on breakdown of the body’s immune system. \
the ground that the death of Luis was not service-related as
4. The evidence reveals that Eduardo had undergone a
he was off duty when the incident happened. Is the GSIS
previous PEME on October 29, 1997 (or two years
correct? (2015 Bar)
before his deployment with the respondents) as a
A: No. The GSIS is not correct. Luis, a policeman, just like a prerequisite for his employment with another
soldier, is covered by the 24-Hour Duty Rule. He is deemed agency – Southfield Agencies (Southfield).
on round-the clock-duty unless on official leave, in which
5. Liberal construction is not a license to disregard the
case his death outside performance of official peace-keeping
evidence on record or to misapply our laws. That the
mission will bar death claim. In this case, Luis was not on
petitioners have now secured the execution of the
official leave and he died in the performance of a peace-
NLRC decision involving a very sizeable sum is
keeping mission. Therefore, his death is compensable.
unfortunate, but is a situation that is not
SUBSTANTIVE EQUALITY irremediable since the parties themselves agreed
that this would be a live issue subject to the final
- Full and equal enjoyment of rights and freedoms and
outcome of the case.
outcomes
Manuel M. Barsolo (Manuel), "was employed as a
TEMPORARY SPECIAL MEASURES
seaman by various companies from 1988 to 2002.
- a variety of legislative, executive, administrative and
 Vela was his last employer before he died in 2006.
regulatory instruments, policies & practices aimed at
After his separation from employment with Vela,
accelerating de facto equality of women in specific areas....to
Manuel was diagnosed with hypertensive
be discontinued when their objectives have been met.
cardiovascular disease, coronary artery disease,
CASE 1 : and osteoarthritis. The autopsy report listed
myocardial infarction as his cause of death.
A seaman (engineer) was issued with medical clearance: Petitioner is bound to comply with all the
“fit to work”, but barely 2 months he got sick and was conditions required [under Annex A of the
declared “unfit for regular duty” and “unfit to travel”. He Amended Rules on Employee's Compensation] to
died 2 years after being repatriated and he died of warrant the grant of benefits (p. 1) She insists that
pulmonary disease and found out that the underlying cause Manuel's case falls under the third
is: AIDS Petitioners contend that his nature of work as condition27 under Annex "A"of the Amended Rules
engineer in-charge with engines he was then exposed to on Employee Compensation.
harmful fumes which caused his death thus, compensable.
Petitioner contends that although Manuel did not
1. RULING: THE SUPREME COURT DENIED THE exhibit symptoms while he was employed with Vela, it
PETITION BEING UNMERITORIOUS. Eduardo did not was not unreasonable to assume that he was already
die on board the respondents’ ship, or while suffering from the illness, which prompted him to visit
travelling to or from the ship, so as to entitle him to
death compensation under the CBA. He died 2
the Philippine Heart Center, four (4) months after his  As a bookkeeper, the CA assumed that Elma had
employment contract ended. been exposed to voluminous dusty records and
other harmful substances that aggravated her
there must be proof that: first, the person was
respiratory disease.
asymptomatic before beginning employment and
second, he had displayed symptoms during the  GSIS asserts that the liberal attitude to grant
performance of his duties. Such symptoms should have benefits should not be used to defeat the mandate
persisted long enough to establish that his work caused of the GSIS to provide meaningful protection to all
his heart problem. However, petitioner offered no government employees who are actually working
proof that her husband suffered any of the symptoms under hazardous circumstances.
during his emp
 Accdg to PD 626 (AS AMENDED) compensable
37
The Medical Certificate  did not help petitioner's sickness as "any illness definitely accepted as an
cause, as this only shows that Manuel was already occupational disease listed by the Commission, or
suffering from hypertension even before his pre- any illness caused by employment subject to proof
employment examination, and that he did not contract by the employee that the risk of contracting the
it during his employment with Vela. Having had a pre- same is increased by the working conditions."
existing cardio vascular disease classifies him under the
 There was, therefore, no basis for the CA to simply
first condition.Manuel died on September 24,
categorize her illness as an occupational disease
2006, four years after he disembarked from MV Polaris
without first establishing the nature of Elma’s work.
Star Manuel was a smoker. The presence of a different
Both the law and the implementing rules clearly
major causative factor, which could explain his illness
state that the given alternative conditions must be
and eventual death, defeats petitioner's claim.
satisfied for a disease to be compensable.
 G.R. No. 199780               -
 “misplaced compassion for victims of diseases or
 GOVERNMENT SERVICE INSURANCE SYSTEM,  injuries would prejudice the very same workers and
their beneficiaries in times of need”
 Petitioner,vs. JOSE M. CAPACITE, Respondent.
 GSIS v. Vicencio
Elma) was an employee in the Department of Agrarian
Reform (DAR) – Eastern Samar Provincial Office,  IPRA LAW
Borongan, Eastern Samar, who successively held the
 Petitioners argued that respondents' acts of
following positions between the periods of November
demolishing and bulldozing the subject land, which
8, 1982 to July 15, 2009: Due to persistent cough
caused the destruction of small and full grown trees
coupled with abdominal pain, Elma was admitted at the
and sayote plants and other resources of the
Bethany Hospital. On July 16, 2009, Elma died due to
petitioners, violated their rights pursuant to the
"Respiratory Failure secondary to Metastatic Cancer to
IPRA; violated environmental laws, specifically PD
the lungs; Bowel cancer with Hepatic and
1586, as respondents' project poses grave and/or
Intraperitoneal Seeding and Ovarian cancer.“ Jose, filed
irreparable danger to environment, life, and
a claim for ECC death benefits before the Government
property, and also violated the Environmental
Service Insurance System (GSIS) Catbalogan Branch
Compliance Certificate (ECC) issued to them
Office, alleging thatElma’s stressful working condition
caused the cancer that eventually led to her death  Was the court a quo's outright dismissal of the case
proper?
 ECC held that colorectal cancer is not listed as an
occupational and compensable disease under  The Court’s Ruling
Annex "A" of the Amended Rules on Employee’s
Compensation.  We answer in the negative. Administrative Order
(AO) No. 23-2008,23 in relation to Batas Pambansa
 Although its item 17 provides that “cancer of the Blg. (BP) 129,24 designated the court a quo as a
lungs, liver and brain shall be compensable," the special court to hear, try, and decide violations of
rules required" that it had been incurred by environmental laws committed within its territorial
employees working as vinyl chloride workers, or jurisdiction. Respondents' intrusion and usurpation
plastic workers.“ was also alleged, and that respondents' earthmoving
activities therein caused destruction of small and full
 grown trees and sayote plants in their ancestral land.  Section 4. Acts of Trafficking in Persons. - It shall be
Further, a violation of the Environmental Compliance unlawful for any person, natural or juridical, to
Certificate (ECC) issued in favor of the respondents commit any of the following acts:
was likewise alleged.
 (a) To recruit, transport, transfer; harbor, provide,
 Section 66 shows that the NCIP shall have or receive a person by any means, including those
jurisdiction over claims and disputes involving done under the pretext of domestic or overseas
rights of ICCs/IPs only when they arise between or employment or training or apprenticeship, for the
among parties belonging to the same ICC/IP. This purpose of prostitution, pornography, sexual
can be gathered from the qualifying provision that exploitation, forced labor, slavery, involuntary
"no such dispute shall be brought to the NCIP servitude or debt bondage; (Emphases and
unless the parties have exhausted all remedies underscoring supplied).
provided under their customary laws.
 Relatedly, Section 3 (d) of RA 9208 in its original
 The qualifying provision requires two conditions form defines the term "forced labor and slavery" as
before such disputes may be brought before the "the extraction of work or services from any person
NCIP, namely: (1) exhaustion of remedies under by means of enticement, violence, intimidation or
customary laws of the parties, and (2) compliance threat, use of force or coercion, including
with condition precedent through the said deprivation of freedom, abuse of authority or
certification by the Council of Elders/Leaders. moral ascendancy, debt-bondage or deception."

 Petitioners' cause of action is grounded upon the  The victim's consent is rendered meaningless due
alleged earthmoving activities and operations of to the coercive, abusive, or deceptive means
the respondents within petitioners' ancestral land, employed by perpetrators of human trafficking.
which violated and continue to violate petitioners'
 Even without the use of coercive, abusive, or
environmental rights under the IPRA and PD 1586
deceptive means, a minor's consent is not given out
as the said activities were averred to have grave
of his or her own free will.“
and or irreparable danger to the environment, life,
and property  ANTI-HUMAN TRAFFICKING IN PERSONS ACT
 G.R. No. 241834  G.R. No. 213760 REYNALDO SANTIAGO, JR. y
SANTOS, Petitioner
 FERNANDO B. ARAMBULLO,* Petitioner
vs.  vs. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Respondent
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Respondent
 Here, the offense was committed on September 30,
 For money, profit and consideration, did then and 2011,58 prior to the amendment. Thus, the original
there willfully, unlawfully and feloniously recruit provisions of Republic Act No. 9208 are applicable.
minors AAA, 13 years old, BBB, 16 years old, CCC,
14 years old, for the purpose of committing  Confidential informants are usually not presented
robbery, to the damage and prejudice of the by the prosecution. One is the need to hide their
aforesaid minors and in violation of the identity and preserve their invaluable service to the
aforementioned law. police.

 RTC opined that petitioner's aforesaid acts  “Human beings are not chattels whose sexual
constitute Qualified Trafficking in Persons not only favors are bought or sold by greedy pimps. Those
because the victims were minors, but also because who profit in this way by recruiting minors are
it is considered "in large scale" as it involved three rightfully, by law, labeled as criminals. They should
(3) or more victims be the subject of aggressive law enforcement,
prosecuted, tried, and when proof beyond
 ANTI-HUMAN TRAFFICKING IN PERSONS ACT reasonable doubt exists, punished.”
 Section 4 (a) of RA 9208 in its original form, which
reads: