CASE DIGEST: Alba v. Bulaong

 

MARIA PAZ S. ALBA, ETC., ET AL., petitioners, vs. DR. HORACIO BULAONG, ET AL., respondents
G.R. Nos. L-10308 & L-10385-8                    |              April 30, 1957

FACTS:

Early morning on March 12, 1955, petitooners and 2 others were ordered by Dr. Bulaong to go to Bariio Baringan, Malolos, Bulacan to thresh palay. On their way, the thresher that was pulling the tractor that they were riding collided with a speeding Victory Liner bus. As a result those on board were violently thrown out. Engracio Alba and Vicente Sebastian died; Gregorio de la Cruz, Pedro C. Bulaong and Pacifico Bulaong sustained physical injuries.

Five separate claims were filed against respondent before the Workmen's Compensation Commission. Three defenses were set up by him: (a) claimants were not his employees, but industrial partners, (b) the injuries were not sustained in the course of employment and (c) the claims, if any, had been extinguished by virtue of the monetary settlements which petitioners had concluded with the Victory Liner Inc.

The referee, having found that the 5 men were killed or injured in the course of employment, ruled in favour of the petitioners. However on appeal, the WC Commissioner absolved Dr. Bulaong from all liability, because he found that the claimants had received, after the mishap, various amounts of money from the owner of the colliding bus, the Victory Liner Inc.

Claimants, the Commissioner declared, had elected to hold the Liner responsible for the accident, and could not thereafter turn around to recover compensation from their employer.

ISSUE:

Whether or not petitioners can file for an action for damages against employer when they have already received compensation from 3^rd parties

RULING:

There is no question that the Liner was a "third party" within the meaning of section 6 of the law. There is also no question that petitioner have not sued the Liner for damages. Wherefore they are not deemed to have made the election specified in section 6. However, the plain intent of the law is that they shall not receive payment twice for the same injuries. Hence if without suing they receive full damages from the third party, they should be deemed to have practically made the election under the law, and should be prevented from thereafter suing the employer.  Where the injured employee is offered, by the third party, compensation which he deems insufficient, he may reject it and thereafter litigate with such third party. Or choose instead to complain against his employer.

Nevertheless there is nothing in the law to prevent him from accepting such insufficient compensation but expressly reserving at the same time his right to recover additional damages from his employer. If the third party agrees to the reservation, such partial payment may legally be made and accepted. The employer cannot validly object to such reservation by the employee, because in effect the settlement helps to reduce the amount he will afterwards have to disgorge.

The moneys received from Victory Liner Inc. did not necessarily have the effect of releasing Dr. Bulaong. Inasmuch as the five men were his employees, and they were injured by reason of and in the course of their employment, he must pay compensation to be fixed in accordance with law. Bearing in mind, however, the law's intention not to give double compensation, the amounts they have received from the Victory Liner shall be deducted from the sums so determined.