Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Case122 Aboitiz Vs Pepito Digest

    Uploaded by

    Cayen Cervancia Cabiguen
    10 views1 page
    1) Heirs of Demetrio Pepito filed a claim for death benefits stating that Demetrio Pepito, a crew member of the M/V P. Aboitiz, went missing while the vessel was navigating from Surigao to Tandag. 2) The regional administrator awarded death benefits without a hearing, accepting that Pepito's right to compensation was not controverted by the respondent. 3) The Supreme Court decided that Pepito's alleged death could not be taken as a fact, as legal implications of death require more evidence, and the respondent only admitted Pepito was lost or missing, not that he was dead. Pepito being lost or missing

    Original Description:

    law

    Original Title

    Case122 Aboitiz vs Pepito Digest

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    1) Heirs of Demetrio Pepito filed a claim for death benefits stating that Demetrio Pepito, a crew member of the M/V P. Aboitiz, went missing while the vessel was navigating from Surigao to Tandag. 2) The regional administrator awarded death benefits without a hearing, accepting that Pepito's right to compensation was not controverted by the respondent. 3) The Supreme Court decided that Pepito's alleged death could not be taken as a fact, as legal implications of death require more evidence, and the respondent only admitted Pepito was lost or missing, not that he was dead. Pepito being lost or missing

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    10 views1 page

    Case122 Aboitiz Vs Pepito Digest

    Uploaded by

    Cayen Cervancia Cabiguen
    1) Heirs of Demetrio Pepito filed a claim for death benefits stating that Demetrio Pepito, a crew member of the M/V P. Aboitiz, went missing while the vessel was navigating from Surigao to Tandag. 2) The regional administrator awarded death benefits without a hearing, accepting that Pepito's right to compensation was not controverted by the respondent. 3) The Supreme Court decided that Pepito's alleged death could not be taken as a fact, as legal implications of death require more evidence, and the respondent only admitted Pepito was lost or missing, not that he was dead. Pepito being lost or missing

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 1

    CABIGUEN, CAYEN C.

    ABOITIZ SHIPPING VS PEPITO


    GR NO. L- 21335(Dec. 16, 1966)

    TOPIC: The Law-Fact Distinction

    FACTS:
    Heirs of Demetrio Pepito filed to Department of Labor of Cebu City a notice and
    claim for compensation, asking for death benefits, and describing the circumstances
    of the alleged death of Demetrio Pepito a crew of M/V P. Aboitiz, that on the night of
    November 30, 1961 in the following manner, viz: "While the vessel was navigating
    from Surigao to Tandag, the herein deceased was lost or reported missing as per
    record of the deck log of the M/V P. Aboitiz". Without hearing, the Regional
    Administrator issued an award for death benefits to respondents, planted upon the
    ground that "the right to compensation of the claimant has not been controverted by
    respondent within the period provided for by law." HENCE, the petition

    ISSUE: Whether or not the alleged death of Demetrio Pepito can be taken as a fact.

    DECISION: NO

    REASON FOR THE DECISION:


    Legal implications such as right to compensation, succession, the legal status
    of the wife, are so important that courts should not so easily be carried to the
    conclusion that the man is dead. The result is that death cannot be taken as a fact.

    Non-controversion in compensation cases, as in the case of pleadings in


    ordinary civil cases, simply means admission of facts, not conclusions of law. The mere
    failure to controvert the statement that Demetrio Pepito is believed to be "dead" or
    "deceased" because he "was lost" or was "reported missing", does not import an
    admission that the man is actually dead, but that he was just lost or missing. Petitioner
    was directed to pay compensation without inquiry into the fact and circumstances of
    death. This trenches upon petitioner's right to due process enshrined in the
    Constitution.

    Demetrio Pepito was lost or missing while the boat was navigating, he could
    have been in danger of death. But of course, evidence must be taken that his existence
    has not been known for four years or thereafter.

    You might also like