PROXIMATE CAUSE

It is the sufficient cause, which may be the most remote of an operation chain. It must be that which sets the others in motion and is to be distinguished from a mere preexisting condition upon which the effective cause operates, and must have been adequate to produce the resultant damage without the intervention of an independent cause.

Where the primary injury is shown to have arisen in the course of employment, every natural consequence that flows from the injury likewise arises out of the employment, unless it is the result of an independent intervening cause attributable to claimant’s own negligence or misconduct. Simply stated, all medical consequences and sequels that flow from the primary injury are compensable.

3.1. Illustrative Case: Proximate Cause

Belarmino vs. Employees’ Compensation Commission – The condition of the classroom floor caused Mrs. Belarmino to slip and fall and suffer injury as a result. The fall precipitated the onset of recurrent abdominal pains which culminated in the premature termination of her pregnancy with tragic consequences to her. Her fall on the classroom floor brought about her premature delivery which caused the development of septicemia postpartum which resulted in death. Her fall was the proximate or responsible cause that set in motion an unbroken chain of events leading to her, demise. True, that she probably would not have suffered lacerations of the vagina and would not have contracted the fatal infection. But she is not to blame for her inability to afford a hospital delivery and the services of a trained doctors and nurses. Penury compelled the deceased to scrimp by delivering her baby at home instead of the hospital.

Jojo Baetiong, Gel Baniqued, Elvira Castro, Denise Dy, Sheryl Harina, Giselle Remulla Page 76 of 103 3B – 2006-2007

3.2. Arising Out/In the Course of Employment

Hinoguin vs. Employee’s Compensation Commission – The death of Sgt. Hinoguin that resulted from his being hit by an accidental discharge of his companion’s rifle arose out of and in the course of his employment as a soldier on active duty status in the AFP, and hence compensable. The concept of “workplace” cannot always be literally applied to a soldier on active duty status. A soldier must go where his company is stationed. Sgt. Hinoguin and his companions had permission to proceed to Aritao. This is a place where soldiers have secured lawful permission to be and cannot be very different from a place where they are required to go by their commanding officer. Hinoguin and his companions were not on vacation leave. They are authorized to carry their firearms with which they were to defend themselves if NPA elements happen to attack them.

A soldier should be presumed to be on official duty unless he is shown to have clearly and unequivocally put aside that status or condition temporarily by, e.g. going on approved vacation leave. Even vacation leave may be preterminated by superior officers.

3.3. The 24-Hour Duty Doctrine and Its Qualifications; Moonlighting Policemen

Soldiers and policemen and even firemen by the nature of their work may be considered on duty round-the-

clock. But this doctrine, while it relaxes the workplace factor does not dispense with the work-connection requisite.

GSIS vs. CA and F. Alegre – From the cases (Hinoguin vs. ECC, Nitura vs. ECC and ECC vs. CA), it can be gleaned that the Court did not justify its grant of death benefits merely on account of the rule that soldiers or policemen, as the case may be, are virtually working round-the-clock. Note that the court likewise attempted in each case to find reasonable nexus between the absence of the deceased from his assigned place of work and the incident that led to his death.

Obviously, the matter SPO2 Alegre was attending to at the time he met his death that of ferrying passengers for a fee, was intrinsically private and unofficial in nature proceedings as it did from no particular directive or permission from his superior officer. In the absence of such as in the case of Hinoguin and Nitura, or peacekeeping nature of the act attended to by the policeman at the time he died even without the explicit permission or directive of a superior officer, as in Alavaran, there is no justification for holding that SPO2 Alegre met the requisites set forth in the ECC guidelines.

At any rate the 24-hour duty doctrine serves more as an after-the-fact validation of their acts to place them within the scope of the guidelines rather than a blanket

Jojo Baetiong, Gel Baniqued, Elvira Castro, Denise Dy, Sheryl Harina, Giselle Remulla Page 77 of 103 3B – 2006-2007

license to benefit them in all situations that may give rise to their deaths. In other words, the doctrine should not be sweepingly applied to all acts and circumstances causing the death of the police officer but only to those which, although not on official line of duty, are nonetheless, basically police service in character.

3.4. The “24-Hour Duty” Doctrine Requires Work- Connection; “Police Service” Activities

Valeriano vs. Employees’ Compensation Commission and GSIS – Petitioner Valeriano was not able to demonstrate solidly how his job as a firetruck driver was related to the injuries he has suffered. That he sustained the injuries after pursuing a purely personal and social function – having dinner with some friends. Because he was neither at his assigned work place nor in pursuit of the orders of his superiors when he met an accident and more importantly was not doing an act within his duty and authority as a firetruck driver, or any other act of such nature, at the time he sustained his injuries. There is not any reasonable connection between his injuries and his work as a firetruck driver.