FACTS: Hortillano, an employee of petitioner Continental Steel, filed a claim for

Paternity Leave, Bereavement Leave and Death and Accident Insurance for
dependent, pursuant to the CBA. The claim was for Hortillanos unborn child who
died. Hortillanos wife had a premature delivery while she was on her 38th week of
pregnancy. The female fetus died during the labor. The company granted
Hortillanos claim for paternity leave but denied his claims for bereavement leave
and death benefits. Hortillano claimed that the provision in CBS did not specifically
state that the dependent should have first been born alive or must have acquired
juridical personality. Petitioner argued that the said provision of CBA did not
contemplate death of an unborn child or a fetus without legal personality. They also
claimed that there are two elements for the entitlement of the benefit: 1) death;
and 2) status of legitimate dependent. None which existed in Hortillanos case. They
further contend that the only one with civil personality could die, based on Art 40-42
of Civil Code. Hence, according to petitioner, the unborn child never died. Labor
Arbiter Montana argued that the fetus had the right to be supported by the parents
from the very moment he/she was conceived. Petitioner appealed to CA but CA
affirmed Labor Arbiters decision. Hence, this petition.

ISSUE: W/N only one with juridical personality can die.

HELD: No. The reliance of Continental Steel on Articles 40, 41 and 42 of the Civil
Code for the legal definition of death is misplaced. Article 40 provides that a
conceived child acquires personality only when it is born, and Article 41 defines
when a child is considered born. Article 42 plainly states that civil personality is
extinguished by death. The issue of civil personality is irrelevant in this case. Arts
40-42 do not provide at all definition of death. Life is not synonymous to civil
personality. One need not acquire civil personality first before s/he could die. The
Constitution in fact recognizes the life of the unborn from conception.

ISSUE: W/N a fetus can be considered as a dependent.

HELD: Yes. Even an unborn child is a dependent of its parents. The fetus would have
not reached 38-39 weeks without depending upon its mother.

603 SCRA 621 Labor Law Labor Standards Death Benefits for the Death of a
Dependent A Fetus is a Dependent
Civil Law Civil Personality When does civil personality start When does life
begin

In January 2006, the wife of Rolando Hortillano had a miscarriage which caused the
death of their unborn child. Hortillano, in accordance with the collective bargaining
agreement, then filed death benefits claim from his employer, the Continental Steel
Manufacturing Corporation which denied the claim. Eventually, the issue was
submitted for arbitration and both parties agreed to have Atty. Allan Montao act as
the arbitrator. Montao ruled that Hortillano is entitled to his claims. The Court of
Appeals affirmed the decision of Montao.

On appeal, Continental Steel insisted that Hortillano is not entitled because under
the CBA, death benefits are awarded if an employees legitimate dependent has
died; but that in this case, no death has occurred because the fetus died inside
the womb of the mother, that a fetus has no juridical personality because it was
never born pursuant to Article 40 of the Civil Code which provides a conceived child
acquires personality only when it is born; that the fetus was not born hence it is not
a legitimate dependent as contemplated by the CBA nor did it suffer death as
contemplated under civil laws.

ISSUES:

1. Whether or not the fetus is a legitimate dependent?

2. Whether or not a person has to be born before it could die?

HELD:

1. Yes. In the first place, the fact of marriage between Hortillano and his wife was
never put in question, hence they are presumed to be married. Second, children
conceived or born during the marriage of the parents are legitimate. Hence, the
unborn child (fetus) is already a legitimate dependent the moment it was conceived
(meeting of the sperm and egg cell).

2. No. Death is defined as cessation of life. Certainly, a child in the womb has life.
There is no need to discuss whether or not the unborn child acquired juridical
personality that is not the issue here. But nevertheless, life should not be equated
to civil personality. Moreover, while the Civil Code expressly provides that civil
personality may be extinguished by death, it does not explicitly state that only
those who have acquired juridical personality could die. In this case, Hortillanos
fetus had had life inside the womb as evidenced by the fact that it clung to life for
38 weeks before the unfortunate miscarriage. Thus, death occurred on a dependent
hence Hortillano as an employee is entitled to death benefit claims as provided for
in their CBA.

Continental Steel Manufacturing Corp. Vs Hon. Accredited Voluntary Arbitrator GR

182836, Oct. 13, 2009 Parties:
1.

Rolando Hortillano >employee of Continental Steel; applied for bereavement leave

and other death benefits 2.

Atty. Montao>voluntary arbitrator; respondent 3.

Nagkakaisang Manggagawa ng Centro Steel Corporation-Solidarity of Trade Unions

in the Philippines for Empowerment and Reforms (the Union)>respondent 4.

Continental Steel Manufacturing Corporation>petitioner

Facts:
Hortillano an employee of Continen
tal Steel and a member of the Union filed a claim for
for Paternity Leave, Bereavement Leave and Death and Accident Insurance for
dependent, pursuant
to a CBA between Continental and the Union. Hortillano filed the said claims due
to the death
of his unborn child while his wife was on her 38
th
week of pregnancy. Continental Steel granted
Hortillanos claim for paternity leave but denied his other claims. This prompted
the Union to seek reversal of the denial of Hortillanos claim for Bereavement
Leave
and Death and Accident Insurance for dependent, through a grievance machinery
provided for in the CBA. However, the parties failed to settle their dispute, which
led the case to be brought before the NCMB and was submitted for voluntary
arbitration under Atty. Montao.
During the arbitration, the Union argued that Hortillano was entitled to the said
death benefits

provided by the CBA, because Art. X and Art. XVIII of the said CBA did not
specifically state that the dependent should have first been born alive or must have
acquired juridical capacity to be covered by the CBA. Continental Steel on the other
hand reasoned out that Hortillano was not qualified to claim the death benefits for
dependent, because, according to Continental Steel, the child of Hortillano or the
fetus who was stillborn cannot be considered as a dependent because it never
acquired juridical personality and only one with juridical personality can die, basing
their argument on Art. 40,41, and 42 of the Civil Code. The voluntary arbitrator,
Atty.
Montao, ruled in favor of Hortillano and the Union.
Aggrieved, Continental steel elevated the case to the CA which affirmed the ruling
of the voluntary arbitrator.
Issue:

1. Whether o not life is synonymous with civil personality? 2. Whether or not a

stillborn child can be considered as dependent?
Held:
Life is not synonymous with civil personality. One need not acquire civil personality
first before he/she could die. Even a child inside the womb already has life. No less
than the Constitution recognizes the life of the unborn from conception, that the
State must protect equally with the life of the mother. If the unborn already has life,
then the cessation thereof even prior to the child being delivered, qualifies as death.
Likewise, the unborn child can be considered a dependent under the CBA. As
Continental Steel
itself defines, a dependent is one who relies on another for support; one not able to
exist or sustain oneself without the power or aid of someone else. Under said
general definition, even
an unborn child is a dependent of its parents. Hortillanos child could not have
reached 38
-39
weeks of its gestational life without depending upon its mother, Hortillanos wife, for
sustenance. Additionally, it is explicit in the CBA provisions in question that the
dependent may be the parent, spouse, or child of a married employee; or the
parent, brother, or sister of a single employee. The CBA did not provide a
qualification for the child dependent, such that the child must have been born or
must have acquired civil personality, as Continental Steel avers. Without such
qualification, then child shall be understood in its more general sense, which
includes the unborn fetus in the mothers womb

Doctrines:
Life is not synonymous with civil personality. One need not acquire civil personality
first before he/she could die. Even a child inside the womb already has life.

In case of doubt in the interpretation of any law or provision affecting labor, such
should be interpreted in favor of labor.

Facts:
Hortillano, an employee of petitioner Continental Steel Manufacturing Corporation
(Continental Steel) filed a claim for Paternity Leave, Bereavement Leave and Death
and Accident Insurance for dependent, pursuant to the Collective Bargaining
Agreement (CBA).

The claim was based on the death of Hortillanos unborn child. Hortillanos wife had
a premature delivery while she was in the 38th week of pregnancy. The female fetus
died during labor due to fetal Anoxia secondary to uteroplacental insufficiency.

Petitioner immediately granted Hortillanos claim for paternity leave but denied his
claims for bereavement leave and other death benefits.

It was maintained by Hortillano, through the Labor Union, that the provisions of the
CBA did not specifically state that the dependent should have first been born alive
or must have acquired juridical personality so that his/her subsequent death could
be covered by the CBA death benefits.

Petitioner argued that the express provision of the CBA did not contemplate the
death of an unborn child, a fetus, without legal personality. It claimed that there are
two elements for the entitlement to the benefits, namely: (1) death and (2) status
as legitimate dependent, none of which existed in Hortillanos case. Continental
Steel contended that only one with civil personality could die, relying on Articles 40,
41 and 42 of the Civil Code which provides:

Article 40. Birth determines personality; but the conceived child shall be considered
born for all purposes that are favorable to it, provided it be born later with the
conditions specified in the following article.

Article 41. For civil purposes, the fetus is considered born if it is alive at the time it is
completely delivered from the mothers womb. However, if the fetus had an intrauterine life of less than seven months, it is not deemed born if it dies within twentyfour hours after its complete delivery from the maternal womb.

Article 42. Civil personality is extinguished by death. The effect of death upon the
rights and obligations of the deceased is determined by law, by contract and by will.

Hence according to the petitioner, the unborn child never died because it never
acquired juridical personality. Proceeding from the same line of thought, Continental
Steel reasoned that a fetus that was dead from the moment of delivery was not a
person at all. Hence, the term dependent could not be applied to a fetus that never
acquired juridical personality.

Labor arbiter Montao argued that the fetus had the right to be supported by the
parents from the very moment he/she was conceived. The fetus had to rely on
another for support; he/she could not have existed or sustained himself/herself
without the power or aid of someone else, specifically, his/her mother.

Petitioner appealed with the CA, who affirmed the Labor Arbiters resolution. Hence
this petition.

Issues:
1. Whether or not only one with juridical personality can die
2. Whether or not a fetus can be considered as a dependent
3. Whether or not any ambiguity in CBA provisions shall be settled in favor of the
employee

Held:
1. No. The reliance of Continental Steel on Articles 40, 41 and 42 of the Civil Code
for the legal definition of death is misplaced. Article 40 provides that a conceived
child acquires personality only when it is born, and Article 41 defines when a child is
considered born. Article 42 plainly states that civil personality is extinguished by
death. The issue of civil personality is not relevant in this case.

The above provisions of the Civil Code do not provide at all a definition of death.
Moreover, while the Civil Code expressly provides that civil personality may be
extinguished by death, it does not explicitly state that only those who have acquired
juridical personality could die.

Life is not synonymous with civil personality. One need not acquire civil personality
first before he/she could die. Even a child inside the womb already has life.

No less than the Constitution recognizes the life of the unborn from conception, that
the State must protect equally with the life of the mother. If the unborn already has
life, then the cessation thereof even prior to the child being delivered, qualifies as
death.

2. Yes. Even an unborn child is a dependent of its parents. Hortillanos child could
not have reached 38-39 weeks of its gestational life without depending upon its
mother, Hortillanos wife, for sustenance. The CBA did not provide a qualification for
the child dependent, such that the child must have been born or must have
acquired civil personality. Without such qualification, then child shall be understood
in its more general sense, which includes the unborn fetus in the mothers womb.

3. Time and again, the Labor Code is specific in enunciating that in case of doubt in
the interpretation of any law or provision affecting labor, such should be interpreted
in favor of labor. In the same way, the CBA and CBA provisions should be
interpreted in favor of labor. As decided by this Court, any doubt concerning the
rights of labor should be resolved in its favor pursuant to the social justice policy.
(Terminal Facilities and Services Corporation v. NLRC [199 SCRA 265 (1991)])

Bereavement leave and other death benefits are granted to an employee to give aid
to, and if possible, lessen the grief of, the said employee and his family who
suffered the loss of a loved one. It cannot be said that the parents grief and sense
of loss arising from the death of their unborn child, who, in this case, had a
gestational life of 38-39 weeks but died during delivery, is any less than that of
parents whose child was born alive but died subsequently.

As expected, and despite protestations to the contrary, they are now floating the
idea of legalizing abortion or the taking of the life of an innocent, defenseless,
unborn child in the mothers womb. This latest move just confirms the long held
view that the so-called reproductive health and reproductive rights of women,
provided for in the RH bill, necessarily presupposes access not only to contraception
but also to abortion.

This is indeed a brazen and aggressive move as it is directly in violation of the

constitutional mandate protecting the life even of an unborn child in the womb
(Article 2, Section 12). In fact in this latest case, the Supreme Court has clearly and
categorically declared that the term child as used in this Section includes the
unborn fetus in the mothers womb.

This is the case of Rolly, an employee of a steel manufacturing company (CSMC)

and a member of a labor union (Union) which has a collective bargaining agreement
(CBA) with CMSC. Among the provisions in the CBA are the grant of 7 to 11 days
bereavement leave with pay and death and accident benefits amounting to P11,550
to any employee in case of death of the employees legitimate (dependent) parents,
spouse, children brothers and sisters.

On January 5, 2006, Rollys wife Fe who was then on the 38th week of pregnancy
had a premature delivery. According to the Certificate of Fetal Death dated January
7, the female fetus died during labor due to fetal Anoxia secondary to uteroplacental insufficiency.

So on January 9, 2006 Rolly filed a claim for Paternity Leave, Bereavement Leave
and Death and Accident Insurance for dependent pursuant to the CBA. CSMC
granted Rollys claim for paternity leave but denied his claims for bereavement and
other death benefits particularly the death and accident insurance.

According to the CSMC, the CBA did not contemplate the death of an unborn
child, a fetus without legal personality. It reasoned out that a fetus that was dead
from the moment of delivery was not a person at all. Hence the term dependent
could not be applied to a fetus that never acquired juridical personality. A fetus that
was delivered dead could not be considered dependent since it never needed any
support, nor did it ever acquire the right to be supported. Was CSMC correct?

No. The rights to bereavement leave and other death benefits in the instant case
pertain directly to the parents of the unborn child upon the latters death. While the
Civil Code expressly provides that civil personality may be extinguished by death, it

does not explicitly state that only those who have acquired juridical personality
could die.

Death is the cessation of life. Life is not synonymous with civil personality. One
need not acquire civil personality first before he/she could die. Even a child inside
the womb already has life. No less than the Constitution recognizes the life of the
unborn from conception, that the State must protect equally with the life of the
mother. If the unborn already has life, then the cessation thereof even prior to the
child being delivered, qualifies as death.

Likewise, the unborn child can be considered a dependent under the CBA. Even
an unborn child is a dependent of its parents. Rollys child could not have reached
38-39 weeks of its gestational life without depending upon its mother for
sustenance. The CBA did not provide a qualification for the child dependent, such
that the child must have been born or must have acquired civil personality. Without
such qualification, then child should be understood in its more general sense, which
includes the unborn fetus in the mothers womb. So Rolly is entitled to the
bereavement leave pay of P4,939 and other death benefits amounting to P11,550.