Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 102 views

    Case No. 13: Jose Rago vs. Social Security Commission and Social Security System

    Uploaded by

    Almira
    The Supreme Court reversed the decision of the Social Security Commission regarding Jose Rago's claim for permanent total disability benefits. Rago, an electrician, was injured on the job in 1993 and filed a claim to convert his monthly pension from permanent partial disability to permanent total disability, but it was denied. The Court of Appeals and Supreme Court found that the Commission exercised grave abuse of authority and violated Rago's right to due process. The Supreme Court ruled that Rago's injury, which prevented him from working for over 120 days, constituted permanent total disability under the law. While ensuring funds are not depleted by unjustified claims, disability rules should not be interpreted too strictly such that deserving employees' capabilities are diminished do not receive full

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Case No. 13: Jose Rago vs. Social Security Commission and Social Security System

    Uploaded by

    Almira
    102 views3 pages
    The Supreme Court reversed the decision of the Social Security Commission regarding Jose Rago's claim for permanent total disability benefits. Rago, an electrician, was injured on the job in 1993 and filed a claim to convert his monthly pension from permanent partial disability to permanent total disability, but it was denied. The Court of Appeals and Supreme Court found that the Commission exercised grave abuse of authority and violated Rago's right to due process. The Supreme Court ruled that Rago's injury, which prevented him from working for over 120 days, constituted permanent total disability under the law. While ensuring funds are not depleted by unjustified claims, disability rules should not be interpreted too strictly such that deserving employees' capabilities are diminished do not receive full

    Original Title

    CASE 13

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The Supreme Court reversed the decision of the Social Security Commission regarding Jose Rago's claim for permanent total disability benefits. Rago, an electrician, was injured on the job in 1993 and filed a claim to convert his monthly pension from permanent partial disability to permanent total disability, but it was denied. The Court of Appeals and Supreme Court found that the Commission exercised grave abuse of authority and violated Rago's right to due process. The Supreme Court ruled that Rago's injury, which prevented him from working for over 120 days, constituted permanent total disability under the law. While ensuring funds are not depleted by unjustified claims, disability rules should not be interpreted too strictly such that deserving employees' capabilities are diminished do not receive full

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    102 views3 pages

    Case No. 13: Jose Rago vs. Social Security Commission and Social Security System

    Uploaded by

    Almira
    The Supreme Court reversed the decision of the Social Security Commission regarding Jose Rago's claim for permanent total disability benefits. Rago, an electrician, was injured on the job in 1993 and filed a claim to convert his monthly pension from permanent partial disability to permanent total disability, but it was denied. The Court of Appeals and Supreme Court found that the Commission exercised grave abuse of authority and violated Rago's right to due process. The Supreme Court ruled that Rago's injury, which prevented him from working for over 120 days, constituted permanent total disability under the law. While ensuring funds are not depleted by unjustified claims, disability rules should not be interpreted too strictly such that deserving employees' capabilities are diminished do not receive full

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 3

    CASE NO.

    13
    Jose Rago vs. Social Security Commission and Social Security System
    G.R No. 152058
    September 27, 2004
    Davide, Jr.

    Facts:
    Private respondent Jose Rago worked as an electrician for Legend Engineering in Basak,
    Pardo, Cebu City. On 1 December 1993, at about 6:15 p.m., while working he got accident.
    Respondent requests to convert his monthly pension from permanent partial disability to
    permanent total disability but it was denied by the SSC Case No. 4-15009-2000. He appealed in
    Court of Appeals to review and reiterating his claim for permanent disability benefits but the
    SSS argued that Rago had already been granted the maximum partial disability benefits. The
    petition was docketed as CA-G.R. SP No. 63389. In its decision, the Court of Appeals reversed
    the SSC’s resolution. The SSS seasonably filed a motion for reconsideration for its reason that
    Rago lacked the required number of contributions mentioned in Section 13-A (a) of R.A. 1161,
    as amended. The CA denied the motion for reconsideration. What prompted the Social Security
    Commission to issue its clarificatory order is not made clear in its motion for reconsideration, nor
    in the clarificatory order itself. In any case, any modification of the tenor and justification of the
    assailed resolution of the Commission by the same body effectively altered the tenor of the
    earlier ruling, amounting to a violation of the petitioner’s right to due process and fair play, and,
    therefore, null and void.

    Issues:
    Whether or not an employee suffers from permanent total disability is a showing of the capacity
    of the employee to continue performing his work notwithstanding the disability he incurred.

    Decision:
    The Court of Appeals and SC reverse the decision of AB involved (SSC) due to an exercise of
    grave abuse of authority amounting to lack and/or excess of jurisdiction. The said order was
    issued at a time when the Commission itself was knowledgeable of the petition for review
    pending before this Court. It must be pointed out that when petitioner timely filed his petition for
    review, the appeal from the Commission’s resolution had thus become perfected, and it is this
    Court which therefore had jurisdiction over the matter, and sole authority to make any
    affirmation or modification of the assailed resolution. The AB’s should be expert in their own
    fields for the reason that the case of employee has rights to appealed in which the benefit
    should be granted as a whole in contribution of respondent’s work. The Court deems it the
    height of injustice for the Commission to add to and bolster its final ruling with additional
    observations and justifications, not otherwise embodied in the original ruling, after the losing
    claimant had already perfected and was actively pursuing his appeal.
    In Section 2 (b), Rule VII of the Amended Rules on Employees Compensation which defines a
    disability to be total and permanent if, as a result of the injury or sickness, the employee is
    unable to perform any gainful occupation for a continuous period exceeding 120 days, and
    Section 1, b (1) of Rule XI of the same Amended Rules which provides that a temporary total
    disability lasting continuously for more than 120 days, shall be considered permanent.
    In this case, Rago’s x-ray report clearly shows the degenerative condition of his injury, that he
    was no longer able to work and he should be given the benefits he deserved. The CA correctly
    observed that Rago’s injury made him unable to perform any gainful occupation for a continuous
    period exceeding 120 days. One final note, the SSS and the SSC should be commended for
    their vigilance against unjustified claims that will deplete the funds intended to be disbursed for
    the benefit only of deserving disabled employees, they should be cautioned against a very strict
    interpretation of the rules lest it results in the withholding of full assistance from those whose
    capabilities have been diminished, if not completely impaired, as a consequence of their
    dedicated service.

    Ratio Decidendi:
    A humanitarian impulse, dictated by no less than the Constitution under its social justice policy,
    calls for a liberal and sympathetic approach to the legitimate appeals of disabled workers like
    Rago. Compassion for them is not a dole out but a right.
    Gist:
    This is an appeal from the Decision of the Court of Appeals which affirmed that Rago is entitled
    to permanent disability benefits.
    Bunio, Maria Jolina L.

    Yasay, Domata R.

    You might also like