XIII

Luisa is an unwed mother with 3 children from different fathers. In 2004, she became a
member of the Social Security System (SSS). That same year, she suffered a miscarriage
of a baby out of wedlock from the father of her third child. She wants to claim maternity
benefits under the SSS Act. Is she entitled to claim? (3%)

Yes. Provided Luisa has reported to her employer her pregnancy and date of expected
delivery and paid at least three monthly contributions during the 12-month period
immediately preceding her miscarriage then she is entitled to maternity benefits up to
four deliveries (Sec. 14-A, R.A. No. 1161). As to the fact that she got pregnant outside
wedlock, as in her past three pregnancies, this will not bar her claim because the SSS is
non-discriminatory.

XIV

Luis, a PNP officer, was off duty and resting at home when he heard a scuffle outside his
house. He saw two of his neighbors fighting and he rushed out to pacify them. One of the
neighbors shot Luis by mistake, which resulted in Luis's death. Marian, Luis's widow,
filed a claim with the GSIS seeking death benefits. The GSIS denied the claim on the
ground that the death of Luis was not service-related as he was off duty when the incident
happened. Is the GSIS correct? (3%)

No. The GSIS is not correct. Luis, a policeman, is covered by the 24-hour Duty Rule,
which provides that members of the national police are by the nature of their functions
technically on duty 24 hours a day, unless they are on vacation leave. By analogy and for
purposes of granting compensation under P.D. No. 626, policemen should be treated in
the same manner as soldiers. In the case at bar, Luis was not on official leave and he died
in the performance of a peace-keeping mission. Therefore, his death is compensable.

XV

Victor was hired by a local manning agency as a seafarer cook on board a luxury vessel
for an eight-month cruise. While on board, Victor complained of chronic coughing,
intermittent fever, and joint pains. He was advised by the ship's doctor to take complete
bed rest but was not given any other medication. His condition persisted but the degree
varied from day to day. At the end of the cruise, Victor went home to Iloilo and there had
himself examined. The examination revealed that he had tuberculosis.

(a) Victor sued for medical reimbursement, damages and attorney's fees, claiming that
tuberculosis was a compensable illness. Do you agree with Victor? Why or why not?
(2%)
(b) Due to his prolonged illness, Victor was unable to work for more than 120 days. Will
this entitle him to claim total permanent disability benefits? (2%)

a. Yes. TB is listed under Sec. 32-A of the POEA-SEC as a work-related disease. It was
also either contracted or aggravated during the effectivity of Victor’s contract. Having
shown its manifestations on board, Victor should have been medically repatriated for
further examination and treatment in the Philippines. This obligation was entirely omitted
in bad faith by the company when it waited for his contract to expire on him before
signing him off. On this basis, Victor is entitled to medical reimbursement, damages and
attorney’s fees.

b. No. Victors TB is work-related and it developed on board, thereby satisfying the twin
requisites of compensability. However, despite his knowledge of his medical condition,
he failed to report to his manning agent within three days from his arrival as required by
Sec. 20-B (3) of the POEA-SEC. since he already felt the manifestations of TB before his
sign-off, he should have submitted to post-employment medical examination (Jebsens
Maritime Inc. v. Enrique Undag, 662 SCRA 670). The effect of his omission is forfeiture
by him of disability benefits (Coastal Safeway Marine Services, Inc. v. Elmer T.
Esguerra, 655 SCRA 300). In effect, the 120-day rule has no application in the case at bar.