Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
FACTS:
ISSUE: Whether or not Floresca et al can claim benefits and at the same time sue.
HELD:
Under the law, Floresca et al could only do either one. If they filed
for benefits under the WCA then they will be prohibited from proceeding with a civil
case before the regular courts. On the contrary, if they sued before the civil courts then
they would also be prohibited from claiming benefits under the WCA.
The SC however ruled that Floresca et al are excused from this deficiency due
to ignorance of the fact. Had they been aware of such then they may have not availed
of such a remedy. The SC ruled that the dismissal of the case in the lower court be
reversed and case is remanded for further proceedings.
However, if in case the petitioners win in the lower court, whatever award may
be granted, the amount given to them under the WCA should be deducted. The SC
emphasized that if they would go strictly by the book in this case then the purpose of
the law may be defeated. (Refer to excerpt below)
“WHEREFORE, THE TRIAL COURT’S ORDER OF DISMISSAL IS HEREBY REVERSED AND SET
ASIDE AND THE CASE IS REMANDED TO IT FOR FURTHER PROCEEDINGS. SHOULD A GREATER
AMOUNT OF DAMAGES BE DECREED IN FAVOR OF HEREIN PETITIONERS, THE PAYMENTS
ALREADY MADE TO THEM PURSUANT TO THE WORKMEN’S COMPENSATION ACT SHALL BE
DEDUCTED. NO COSTS.”