G.R. No. L-43139 December 28, 1979
MELANIO PEREZ, petitioner, vs. WORKMEN’S COMPENSATION COMMISSION and REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES (Bureau of Public Highways), respondents.

FACTS

Melanio Perez was employed as a carpenter by the Bureau of Public Highways from 1949. He stopped working on December 15, 1969, due to pulmonary tuberculosis (PTB) which he contracted during his employment. On September 6, 1974, he filed a claim for disability benefits under the Workmen’s Compensation Act. His claim included a Physician’s Report stating his PTB was caused and aggravated by the stress and strain of his employment, his Quezon Institute case record showing confinement and active TB, and his service record. The Acting Referee awarded Perez compensation, finding the claim uncontroverted by the employer and that the illness supervened in the course of employment.
The Republic, through the Solicitor General, appealed to the Workmen’s Compensation Commission (WCC). The WCC reversed the award, ruling the claim was filed beyond the statutory period under Section 24 of the Act. It reasoned that since Perez stopped working in December 1969, the claim filed in September 1974 was beyond the two-month period for non-disabling injuries and the two-year period for disabling injuries, counting from the date of separation.

ISSUE

Whether the claim for compensation was filed within the prescriptive period provided by the Workmen’s Compensation Act.

RULING

The Supreme Court reversed the WCC and reinstated the award. The Court held the claim was not time-barred. The prescriptive period under Section 24 of the Act does not run from the date of separation from employment, but from the time the disability manifests itself or the claimant becomes aware of its compensable character. Perez’s illness was a continuing condition. His disability for labor commenced on December 15, 1969, when he ceased work, and persisted. The Physician’s Report and medical records established his total and indefinite disability from that point. Therefore, the two-year prescriptive period for disabling injuries began from December 15, 1969. His claim filed on September 6, 1974, was thus beyond the two-year period.
However, the Court applied the doctrine that the prescriptive period is interrupted once the employer acquires knowledge of the injury, sickness, or disability, and fails to file the required Employer’s Report. The records showed Perez notified his superior of his ailment in December 1969. The employer’s failure to file the report or controvert the claim within the statutory period barred it from raising the defense of prescription. Consequently, Perez’s right to compensation was preserved, and the award by the Acting Referee was reinstated.