Short answer. No. Workmen's compensation insurance policies and indemnity bonds that existed before the Labor Code took effect were expressly preserved — they remained valid until their own expiration dates or until December 31, 1974, whichever came first. Claims for causes of action that arose under those policies could still be filed.
What the law says
Claims may be filed against the insurance carriers and/or self-insured employers for causes of action which accrued during the existence of said policies or authority to self-insure.
Labor Code, Article 297 — Existing Policies And Bonds. Read the full provision →
What the transitional rule says
Article 297 of the Labor Code dealt with the transition from the old workmen's compensation system to the new framework the Code introduced. It provided that all workmen's compensation insurance policies and indemnity bonds for self-insured employers existing upon the effectivity of this Code shall remain in force and effect until the expiration dates of such policies or the lapse of the period of such bonds, as the case may be, but in no case beyond December 31, 1974. The Code did not wipe out existing coverage; it let it run its course.
Claims could still be filed under the old policies
The article made clear that existing coverage was not just formally preserved — it remained enforceable. Claims may be filed against the insurance carriers and/or self-insured employers for causes of action which accrued during the existence of said policies or authority to self-insure. This means that a worker who was injured or became ill while the old policy was in force retained the right to make a claim against the insurer or the self-insured employer, even after the Labor Code came into effect. The trigger is when the cause of action arose, not when the claim was filed.
Why this transitional provision mattered
When a new law replaces an existing compensation regime, a gap can open between the old system shutting down and the new one becoming fully operational. Workers who suffered injuries under the old system but had not yet filed claims could have been left without a remedy if their policies were simply cancelled upon the Code's effectivity. Article 297 closed that gap by letting outstanding policies continue to run, giving affected workers and their families time to pursue claims under the coverage that was already in place when their injuries occurred.
A historical provision
It is important to understand that Article 297 is a transitional rule that has fully spent its force. The hard cutoff of December 31, 1974 means no policy coverage could have survived beyond that date under this provision. The article is no longer actionable today; its purpose was to manage the handover from the old workmen's compensation scheme to the new system at the time the Labor Code was enacted. It remains part of the Code as a record of that transition, but no new claims can be brought under it. The Labor Code has been administratively renumbered over the years, so the same provision may appear under a different number in some editions.