SSS v. Azote Case Digest

SSS v. Azote

April 15, 2015 : SC 2nd Division

Petitioner: Social Security Commission (SSC) Respondent: Edna A. Azote Ponente: J. Mendoza Facts: 1994: Edgardo submitted Form E-4 to the Social Security System (SSS) with Edna and their 3 older children as designated beneficiaries. In 2001, Edgardo submitted another Form E-4 designating their 3 younger children as additional beneficiaries. 2005: Edgardo passed away. Thereafter, Edna filed her claim for death benefits with the SSS as the wife of a deceased-member. However, SSS records showed the Edgardo had submitted another Form E-4 in 1982 with a different set of beneficiaries, namely: Rosemarie Azote, as spouse, and Elmer Azote, as dependent. Consequently, Edna's claim was denied, but her 6 children were adjudged as beneficiaries. 2007: Edna filed a petition with the SSC to claim benefits, insisting she was the legitimate wife. Due to the conflicting information in the forms, summons was published in a newspaper of general circulation directing the alleged 1st wife Rosemarie to file her answer, but no one replied. 2010: SSC dismissed Edna's petition for lack of merit, because Edgardo did not revoke the previous designation of Rosemarie as wife-beneficiary, and Rosemarie was still presumed to be the legal wife. SSC also noted that the NSO records revealed the marriage of Edgardo and Rosemarie was registered in 1982. Hence, Edgardo's marriage with Edna was not valid as there was no showing that his 1st marriage had been annulled or dissolved. 2013: CA reversed and set aside the resolution & order of the SSC, and held that the SSC could not make a determination of the validity of the marriage of Edna to Edgardo. The CA also denied SSC's motion for reconsideration. Thus, the present petition for review on certiorari on the assailed CA decision. Issue: W/N Edna Azote is entitled to the SSS death benefits as the wife of a deceased member. Held: NO --> Edna cannot be the beneficiary because she is not considered the legal spouse of Edgardo as their marriage took place during the existence of a previously contracted marriage. The law in force at the time of Edgardo's death was RA 8282[1]. Sec 8 (e) and (k) expressly provide that it is the legal spouse who would be entitled to receive benefits from an SSS deceased-member. In this case, there is concrete proof (NSO certification) of Edgardo's earlier contracted marriage with Rosemarie, making her the first and legal wife. At the time of the celebration of the 2nd marriage of Edgardo with Edna, the Family Code was already in force. Article 41 states "a marriage contracted by any person during the subsistence of a previous marriage shall be null and void..." In claiming benefits, the settled rule from Signey v. SSS [2] is that "whoever claims entitlement benefits provided by law should establish his or her right by substantial evidence". In the case, Edna failed to establish that there was no impediment at the time of the celebration of their marriage. 1

[] RA 8282 : An Act Further Strengthening the Social Security System thereby Amending for this Purpose, RA 1161, as amended, otherwise known as the Social Security Law. 2 [] Signey v. Social Security System, 566 Phil, 617, 627 (2008).

Lastly, although the SSC is not intrinsically empowered to determine the validity of marriages, it is required by Sec 4(b)(7) of RA 8282 to examine available statistical and economic data to ensure that the benefits fall into the rightful beneficiaries. In the case, SSC's denial of Edna's claim is correct as it determined Edna's eligibility on the basis of available statistical data and database documents. Petition: GRANTED. CA Decision and Resolution are REVERSED and SET ASIDE. Accordingly, petition for entitlement of SS death benefits filed by respondent is DENIED for lack of merit.