SSS v. Davac
The lat late Petronilo Davac, a former employee of Lianga Bay Logging Co., Inc. became a member of the Social Security System (SSS. In SSS form !"# ($ember%s &ecor' hich he accomplishe' an' )le' ith the SSS SSS, he 'esignate 'esignate' ' respon'e respon'ent nt Can'e Can'elar laria ia Davac Davac as his bene) bene)cia ciary ry an' in'icate' his relationship to her as that of *ife*. +e 'ie' an', thereupon, Can'e Can'elar laria ia Davac Davac an' Lour' Lour'es es Tupla Tuplano no )le' their claims for 'eath bene)t ith the SSS. It appe appear ars s from from thei theirr resp respec ecti tive ve claims claims an' the 'ocume 'ocuments nts submi submitte tte' ' in support thereof, that the 'ecease' contracte' to marriages, the )rst, ith claimant Lour'es Tuplano, ho bore him a chil', &omeo Davac, an' the secon', ith Can' Can'el elar aria ia Dava Davac, c, i ith th h hom om he ha' ha' a minor minor 'aughter 'aughter !liabeth !liabeth Davac. Davac. Due to their their con-ic con-ictin ting g claims claims,, the proce processi ssing ng thereof as hel' in abeyance, hereupon the the SSS SSS )le' )le' this this peti petiti tion on pray prayin ing g that that respon'ents be reuire' to interpose an' litigate beteen themselves their con-icting claims over the 'eath bene)ts in uestion.1äwphï1.ñët !ventually, the Social Security Commission issue' a resolution 'eclaring Can'elaria Davac as the person entitle' to receive the 'eath bene)ts payable for the 'eat 'eath h of Petro etroni nilo lo Dava Davac. c. /ot /ot sati satis) s)e' e' ith i th the the sai' sai' reso resolu luti tion on,, res respon' pon'en entt Lour'es Tuplano brought to us the present appeal.
force at the time Petronilo Davac%s 'eath on 4pril 9, #797, provi'es0
#. S!C. #3. :pon the covere' employee%s 'eath or total an' perm perman anen entt 'isa 'isabi bili lity ty un'e un'err such such con'it con'ition ions s as the Commis Commissio sion n may 'e)ne, before becoming eligible for retirement an' if either such 'eath or 'isa 'isabi bili lity ty is not not comp compen ensa sabl ble e un'er the 1or;men%s Compensation 4ct, he or, or, in case of his 'eath, his benef benefci ciar arie ies, s, as reco record rded ed by his his employer shal shalll be entit ntitle le' ' to the the foll follo oin ing g bene bene)t )t00 ... ... . (emp (empha hasi sis s supplie'.
:n'er :n'er this provision, provision, the bene)ciary bene)ciary *as recor'e'* by the employee%s employer is the one entitle' to the 'eath bene)ts.
But appellant conten's that the 'esignation herein ma'e in the person of the secon' an', therefore, bigamous ife is null an' voi', because (# it contravenes the provisions of the Civil Co'e, an' (8 it 'eprives the laful ife of her share in the con
ISSUE0
1ho 1ho is enti entitl tle' e' to the the bene bene)t )ts2 s2 Can'elaria or Lour'es2 4rticle 8=#8 of the /e Civil Co'e Co'e provi'es0
HELD0
Section #3, &epublic 4ct /o. ##5#, as amen'e' by &epublic 4ct /o. #678, in
4&T. 4&T. 8=#8. 4ny person ho is forbi''en from receiving any 'onation un'er 4rticle
insurance policy by the person ho cannot ma;e any 'onation to him accor'ing to sai' article. 4n' 4rticle 637 of the same Co'e prescribes0 4&T. 637. The folloing 'onations shall be voi'0 (# Those ma'e beteen persons ho ere guilty of a'ultery or concubinage at the time of the 'onation> ???
???
???
1ithout 'eci'ing hether the naming of a bene)ciary of the bene)ts accruing from membership in the Social Security System is a 'onation, or that it creates a situation analogous to the relation of an insure' an' the bene)ciary un'er a life insurance policy, it is enough, for the purpose of the instant case, to state that the 'isuali)cation mentione' in 4rticle 637 is not applicable to herein appellee Can'elaria Davac because she as not guilty of concubinage, there being no proof that she ha' ;nole'ge of the previous marriage of her husban' Petronilo.
&egar'ing the secon' point raise' by appellant, the bene)ts accruing from membership in the Social Security System 'o not form part of the properties of the con
The sources of this special fun' are the covere' employee%s contribution (eual to 8"@ per cent of the employee%s monthly compensation>3 the employer%s contribution (euivalent to 3"@ per cent of the monthly compensation of the covere' employee>A an' the overnment contribution hich consists in yearly appropriation of public fun's to assure the maintenance of an a'euate or;ing balance of the fun's of the 9 System. 4''itionally, Section 8# of the Social Security 4ct, as amen'e' by &epublic 4ct #678, provi'es0
S!C. 8#. Government Guarantee . The bene)ts prescribe' in this 4ct shall not be 'iminishe' an' to guarantee sai' bene)ts the overnment of the &epublic of the Philippines accepts general responsibility for the solvency of the System.
rom the foregoing provisions, it appears that the bene)t receivable un'er the 4ct is in the nature of a special privilege or an arrangement secure' by the la, pursuant to the policy of the State to provi'e social security to the or;ingmen. The amounts that may thus be receive' cannot be consi'ere' as property earne' by the member 'uring his lifetime. +is contribution to the fun', it may be note', constitutes only an insigni)cant portion thereof. Then, the bene)ts are speci)cally 'eclare' not transferable, an' e?empte' from ta? legal processes, an' lien. urthermore, in the settlement of claims thereun'er the proce'ure to be observe' is governe' not by the general provisions of la, but by rules an' regulations promulgate' by the Commission. Thus, if the money is payable to the estate of a 'ecease' member, it is the Commission, not the probate or regular court that 'etermines the person or persons to hom it is payable. that the bene)ts un'er the Social Security 4ct are not inten'e' by the
lama;ing bo'y to form part of the estate of the covere' members may be gathere' from the subseuent amen'ment ma'e to Section #9 thereof, as follos0
S!C. #9. Non-transerability o beneft. ! The system shall pay the bene)ts provi'e' for in this 4ct to such persons as may be entitle' thereto in accor'ance ith the provisions of this 4ct. Such bene)ts are not transferable, an' no poer of attorney or other 'ocument e?ecute' by those entitle' thereto in favor of any agent, attorney, or any other in'ivi'ual for the collection thereof in their behalf shall be recognie' e?cept hen they are physically an' legally unable to collect personally such bene)ts0 "rovided, however , That in the case of 'eath bene)ts, if no bene)ciary has been 'esignate' or the 'esignation
there of is voi', sai' bene)ts shall be pai' to the legal heirs in accor'ance ith the las of succession. (&ep. 4ct 859E, amen'ing &ep. 4ct ##5#.
In short, if there is a name' bene)ciary an' the 'esignation is not invali' (as it is not so in this case, it is not the heirs of the employee ho are entitle' to receive the bene)ts (unless they are the 'esignate' bene)ciaries themselves. It is only hen there is no 'esignate' bene)ciaries or hen the 'esignation is voi', that the las of succession are applicable. 4n' e have alrea'y hel' that the Social Security 4ct is not a la of succession.
