Iloilo Doc & Engineering Co. V.

Workmens
Compensation Commission
27 SCRA 103
FACTS:
Teodoro Pablo and Rodolfo Galopez, had just finished
overtime work at 5:00 pm and was going home. At around
5:02 pm, while Pablo and Galopez were walking along the
IDECO road, about20 meters from the IDECO main gate,
Pablo was shot by Martin Cordero. The motive for the crime
was and still unknown since Martin Cordero was himself
killed before he could be tried for Pablos death.
ISSUES:
1.
Whether or not Pablos death occurred in the course of
employment and arising out of the employment.
2.
Whether the PROXIMITY RULE should apply in this case.
3.
Whether the death of Pablo was an accident within the
purview of the Workmens Compensation Act.
HELD:
1.
YES. Workmens compensation is granted if the injuries
result from an accident which arises out of and in the course
of employment. Both the arising factor and the course
factor must be present. If one factor is weak and the other
is strong, the injury is compensable but not where both
factors are weak. Ultimately, the question is whether the
accident is work connected. The words arising out of refer
to the origin or cause of the accident and are descriptive of
its character, while the words in the course refer to the
time, place and circumstances under which the accident
takes place. The presumption that the injury arises out of
and in the course of employment prevails where the injury
occurs on the employers premises. While the IDECO does
not own the private road, it cannot be denied that it was
using the same as the principal means of ingress and
egress. The private road leads directly to its main gate. Its
right to use the road must then perforce proceed from
either an easement of right of way or a lease. Its right
therefore is either a legal one or a contractual one. In either
case the IDECO should logically and properly be charged
with security control of the road.
2.

YES. The general rule in workmens compensation law

known as going and coming rule provides that in the
absence of special circumstances, an employee injured in
going to, or coming from his place of work is excluded from
the benefits of workmens compensation acts. The following

are the exceptions: a. Where the employee is proceeding to

or from his work on the premises of his employer b. Where
the employee is about to enter or about to leave the
premises of his employer by way of exclusive or customary
means of ingress and egress. Where the employee is
charged while on his way to or from his place of
employment or at his home or during his employment, with
some duty or special errand connected with his
employment. Where the employer, as an incident of the
employment provides the means of transportation to and
from the place of employment. The second exception is
known as the proximity rule. The place where the
employee was injured being immediately proximate to his
place of work, the accident in question must be deemed to
have occurred within the zone of his employment and
therefore arose out of or in the course thereof.
3.

YES. An assault although resulting from a deliberate act

of the slayer, is considered an accident within the
meaning of the Workmens Compensation Act since the
word accident is intended to indicate that the act causing
the injury shall be casual or unforeseen, an act for which
the injured party is not legally responsible.