Sebastian, Ethan Joshua S.

Social Security Act of 2018

Agrarian Laws and Social Legislation Social Security Act of 2018
Case Digest SSS v Davac

SSS vs. Davac, et al.,

G.R. No. 21642, 30 July 1966

Facts:

The late Petronilo Davac, a former employee of Lianga Bay Logging Co., Inc. became a
member of SSS on September 1, 1957. The Deceased designated respondent Candelaria
Davac as his beneficiary and indicated his relationship to her as that of "wife". He died on April
5, 1959 and, thereupon, each of the respondents filed their claims for death benefit with the
SSS. It appears from their respective claims and the documents submitted in support thereof,
that the deceased contracted two marriages, the first, with claimant Lourdes Tuplano on August
29, 1946, who bore him a child, Romeo Davac, and the second, with Candelaria Davac on
January 18, 1949, with whom he had a minor daughter Elizabeth Davac. Due to their conflicting
claims, the processing thereof was held in abeyance, whereupon the SSS filed this petition
praying that respondents be required to interpose and litigate between themselves their
conflicting claims over the death benefits in question.

The Social Security Commission declared respondent Candelaria Davac as the person entitled
to receive the death benefits payable for the death of Petronilo Davac.

Issue/s:

WON Petronilo Davac is the one entitled of the death benefits

Ruling:

Yes, the court ruled that:

Section 13, Republic Act No. 1161, as amended by Republic Act No. 1792, in force at the time
Petronilo Davac's death on April 5, 1959, provides:
“SEC. 13. Upon the covered employee's death or total and permanent disability under
such conditions as the Commission may define, before becoming eligible for retirement
and if either such death or disability is not compensable under the Workmen's
Compensation Act, he or, in case of his death, his beneficiaries, as recorded by his
employer shall be entitled to the following benefit: ... . “
Under this provision, the beneficiary "as recorded" by the employee's employer is the one
entitled to the death benefits and not those heirs specifically. It is only when there is no
designated beneficiaries or when the designation is void, that the laws of succession are
applicable. And we have already held that the Social Security Act is not a law of succession as
ruled in Tecson v SSS.

Disposition:

Wherefore, in view of the foregoing considerations, the resolution of the Social Security
Commission appealed from is hereby affirmed, with costs against the appellant.