G.R. No. L-24349 December 24, 1968
Seven-Up Botttlng Company of the Philippines, petitioner, vs. Virgilio Rimerata and the Workmen’s Compensation Commission, respondents.

FACTS

Claimant Virgilio Rimerata worked as a laboratory helper in petitioner’s production department from March 17, 1953, until April 6, 1962, when he stopped working due to peptic ulcer. His duties included tasting syrup preparations, mixing ingredients like citric acid and caustic soda, and carrying heavy sacks of sugar. After three or four years, he felt abdominal pain. On April 6, 1962, he suffered stomach pains and vomited at work. He was treated by the company physician, Dr. Gil Angeles, who diagnosed peptic ulcer and advised home confinement. After showing no improvement under Dr. Angeles’ care until June 26, 1962, he consulted other doctors. Petitioner terminated his services on December 15, 1962, due to his continued illness. The Workmen’s Compensation Commission ordered petitioner to pay compensation, provide medical services, and reimburse medical expenses. Petitioner sought a review, contesting the compensability of the illness and the duration of disability.

ISSUE

1. Whether the Commission erred in finding that Rimerata was disabled for work up to January 15, 1965.
2. Whether the Commission erred in not holding that the claimant had the burden of proving that his disability persisted until January 15, 1965.
3. Whether the Commission erred in finding that the claimant’s peptic ulcer developed through his employment, specifically from tasting syrup and mixing ingredients.
4. Whether the Commission erred in finding the ailment compensable.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the decision of the Workmen’s Compensation Commission.
1. & 2. On the first and second assignments of error, the Court held that the question of who had the burden of proof regarding the duration of disability was of no great consequence. The Commission’s finding that the disability lasted until January 15, 1965, was supported by substantial evidence and could not be reviewed.
3. On the third assignment of error, the Court found petitioner’s contention untenable. The testimony of the foreman and assistant manager, along with the medical certificate of Dr. Harn, sufficiently showed that the ingredients Rimerata had to taste and swallow in his duties probably irritated his stomach lining and produced or aggravated his peptic ulcer. The test for compensability—that the ailment is attributable to, reasonably connected with, or aggravated by the nature and conditions of work—was met.
4. The fourth assignment of error was a consequence of the previous three and required no further discussion. The appealed decision was in accordance with law and evidence.