SOCIAL SECURITY SYSTEM, petitioner-appellee,
vs. CANDELARIA D. DAVAC, ET AL., respondents;
LOURDES TUPLANO, respondent-appellant
GR No. L-21642
July 30, 1966
FACTS:
The late Petronilo Davac, former
employee of Lianga Bay Logging Co., Inc became
a member of SSS on September 01, 1957 and
designated Candelaria Davac as his beneficiary
and indicated his relationship to her in the SSS
form E-1 (Member’s Record) as that of “wife”.
After his death each of the respondents
(Candelaria Davac and Lourdes Tuplano) filed
their claims for death benefir with the SSS.
Based on the documents, 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 conflicting claims, the processing
thereof was held in abeyance, whereupon SSS
filed a petition praying that the respondents be
required to interpose and litigate between
themselves their conflicting claims over the
death benefits in question.
The SSS issued the resolution naming
Candelaria Davac as the valid beneficiary. Not
satisfied with the resolution, Lourdes Tuplano
brought the appeal.
ISSUE:
Whether or not the SSS acted correctly
in declaring respondent Candelaria Davac
(second wife) as the person entitled to receive
the death benefits in question.
HELD:
YES. SSS resolution affirmed.
Section 13, Republic Act No. 1161
provides:
1. SEC. 13. Upon the covered employee’s
death or total and permanent disability
under such conditions as the
Commission may define …his
beneficiaries, shall be entitled to the
following benefit…
The beneficiary “as recorded” by the
employee’s employer is the one entitled to
the death benefits. The appellant contend
that the designation made in the person of
the second and bigamous wife is null and
void, because (1) it contravenes the
provisions of the Civil Code, and (2) it
deprives the lawful wife of her share in the
conjugal property as well as of her own and
her child’s legitime in the inheritance.
As to the first point, appellant argues
that Art. 739 (Donations void due to adultery
and concubinage at the time of donation)
and Art. 2012 (Persons forbidden to be
beneficiary under Art. 739) of the Civil Code
prohibits persons who cannot receive
donations from being beneficiaries of a
policy. The provisions aren’t applicable to
Candelaria Davac because she was not guilty
of concubinage, there being no proof that
she had knowledge of the previous marriage
of her husband.
Regarding the second point, THE
BENEFITS ACCRUING FROM MEMBERSHIP
IN THE SSS DON’T FORM PART OF THE
PROPERTIES OF THE CONJUGAL
PARTNERSHIP OF THE COVERED MEMBER.
They are disbursed from a public special fund
created by Congress in pursuance to the
declared policy of the Republic. The sources
of this special fund are from salary
contributions.
Under other provisions, if there is a
named beneficiary and the designation is not
invalid, it is not the heirs of the employee
who are entitled to receive the benefits
(unless they are the designated beneficiaries
themselves). It is only when there is no
designated beneficiaries or when the
designation is void that the laws of the
succession are applicable. THE SOCIAL
SECURITY ACT IS NOT A LAW OF
SUCCESSION.
WHEREFORE, in view of the foregoing
considerations, the resolution of the Social
Security Commission appealed from is
hereby affirmed, with costs against the
appellant.
So ordered.