Anda di halaman 1dari 4

Abante vs KJGS Fleet Management Manila

G.R.No.182430.December4,2009.*

LEOPOLDO ABANTE, petitioner,vs.KJGS FLEET MANAGEMENT MANILA and/or GUY DOMINGO A.


MACAPAYAG,KRISTIANGERHARDJEBSENSSKIPSRENDERIA/S,respondents.

Labor Law; Seafarers; Philippine Overseas Employment Administration (POEA) Standard Employment
Contract of 2000; While it is the companydesignated physician who must declare that the seaman suffers a
permanentdisabilityduringemployment,itdoesnotdeprivetheseafarerofhisrighttoseekasecondopinion.
Section20(B)(3)ofthePOEAStandardEmploymentContractof2000provides:xxxIfadoctorappointedby
theseafarerdisagreeswiththeassessment,athirddoctormaybeagreedjointlybetweentheEmployerand
theseafarer.Thethirddoctorsdecisionshallbefinalandbindingonbothparties.Clearly,theaboveprovisiondoes
not preclude the seafarer from getting a second opinion as to his condition for purposes of claiming disability
benefits,forasheldinNYKFilShipManagementv.Talavera,571SCRA183(2008):Thisprovisionsubstantially
incorporatesthe1996POEAStandardEmploymentContract.Passingonthe1996POEAStandardEmployment
Contract,thisCourtheldthat[w]hileitisthecompanydesignatedphysicianwhomustdeclarethatthe
seamansuffersapermanentdisabilityduringemployment,itdoesnotdeprivetheseafarerofhisright
toseekasecondopinion,hence,theContractrecognizestheprerogativeoftheseafarertorequesta
secondopinionand,forthispurpose,toconsultaphysicianofhischoice.

Same;Same;Same;Itisunderstandablethatacompanydesignatedphysicianismorepositivethanthatofa
physicianoftheseafarerschoice.ItbearsnotingthatDr.Limsmedicalfindingsdidnotsignificantlydifferfrom
thoseofDr.Cajas.Inessence,evenifDr.Limdeclaredpetitionertobefittoresumeseaduties,still,thefinal
diagnosisofforaminalstenosisandcentraldiscprotrusionremainedsixmonthspostsurgery.Itisunderstandable
thatacompanydesignatedphysicianismorepositivethanthatofaphysicianoftheseafarerschoice.Itisonthis
accountthataseafarerisgiventheoptionbythePOEAStandardEmploymentContracttoseekasecondopinion
from his preferred physician. Petitioners are, at this point, reminded that thePOEA standard employment
contractforseamenwasdesignedprimarilyfortheprotectionandbenefitofFilipinoseameninthe
pursuit of their employment on board oceangoing vessels. Its provisions must beconstrued and
appliedfairly,reasonablyandliberallyintheirfavor.Onlythencanitsbeneficentprovisionsbefullycarried
intoeffect.

Same;Same;Same;EmployeesCompensation;PermanentDisability;Whatdeterminespetitionersentitlement
topermanentdisabilitybenefitsishisinabilitytoworkformorethan120days.Astowhetherpetitionercanclaim
disabilitybenefits,theCourtrulesintheaffirmative.Permanentdisabilityreferstotheinabilityofaworkerto
performhisjobformorethan120days,regardlessofwhetherhelosestheuseofanypartofhisbody.What
determinespetitionersentitlementtopermanentdisabilitybenefitsishisinabilitytoworkformorethan120days.
Inthecaseatbar,itwasonlyonFebruary20,2001thattheCertificateofFitnessforWorkwasissuedbyDr.Lim,
morethan6monthsfromthetimehewasinitiallyevaluatedbythedoctoronJuly24,2000andafterheunderwent
operationonAugust18,2000.

Same; Attorneys Fees; Article 2208 of the New Civil Code allows recovery of attorneys fees in actions for
recoveryofwagesoflaborersandactionsforindemnityundertheemployersliabilitylaws.Theclaimforattorneys
feesisgrantedfollowingArticle2208oftheNewCivilCodewhichallowsitsrecoveryinactionsforrecoveryof
wagesoflaborersandactionsforindemnityundertheemployersliabilitylaws.Thesamefeesarealsorecoverable
whenthedefendantsactoromissionhascompelledtheplaintifftoincurexpensestoprotecthisinterestasinthe
present case following the refusal by respondent to settle his claims. Pursuant to prevailing jurisprudence,
petitionerisentitledtoattorneysfeesoftenpercent(10%)ofthemonetaryaward.

PETITIONforreviewoncertiorariofthedecisionandresolutionoftheCourtofAppeals.

ThefactsarestatedintheopinionoftheCourt.

ChristopherLycurgusQ.Moraniaforpetitioner.

AlvinRenaldA.Bedarforrespondents.

CARPIOMORALES,J.:

OnJanuary4,2000,LeopoldoAbante(petitioner)washiredbyrespondentKJGSFleetManagementManila
(KJGS)toworkasablebodiedseamanaboardM/TRathboyne,foraperiodofninemonthsandwithabasicsalaryof
US$535.00permonth.

Page 1 of 4
Abante vs KJGS Fleet Management Manila
SometimeinJune,2000,whilecarryingequipmentonboardthevessel,petitionerslippedandhurthisback.
UponthevesselsarrivalinKaohsiung,TaiwanonJuly4,2000,petitionerwasbroughttoahospitalwhereuponhe
wasdiagnosedtobesufferingfromlowerbackpainr/ooldfracturelesion4 thlumbarbody.Nevertheless,hewas
stilldeclaredtobefitforrestrictedworkandwasadvisedtoseeanotherdoctorinthenextportofcall.Unableto
bearthepain,petitionerwas,onhisrequest,repatriatedtothePhilippinesonJuly19,2000.

OnJuly21,2000,petitionerreportedtoKJGSandwasreferredtoacompanydesignatedphysician,Dr.Roberto
D. Lim (Dr. Lim), at the Metropolitan Hospital. After a series of tests, he was diagnosed to be suffering
fromForaminal stenosis L3L14 and central disc protrusion L4L5on account of which he
underwentLaminectomy and Discectomyon August 18, 2000, the cost of which was borne by KJGS. He was
dischargedfromthehospital10dayslater,butwasadvisedtocontinuephysicaltherapy.HewasseenbyDr.Lim
around10timesfromthetimehewasdischargeduntilFebruary20,2001whenhewaspronouncedfittoresume
seaduties.He,however,refusedtosignhisCertificateofFitnessforWork. 1

Petitionerlatersoughttheopinionofanotherdoctor, Dr.JocelynMyraR.Caja,whodiagnosedhimtohave
failedbacksyndromeandgaveagrade6disabilityrating 2whichratingrenderedhimmedicallyunfittowork
againasaseamanandcalledfortheawardofUS$25,000.00disabilitybenefitsdrawinghimtofileonApril27,
2001aComplaint3beforetheNationalLaborRelationsCommission(NLRC),docketedasNLRCOFWCaseNo.01
04073600, for disability compensation in the amount of US$25,000.00, moral and exemplary damages and
attorneysfees.

ByDecision4ofJuly24,2003,LaborArbiterJovencioLl.Mayor,Jr.dismissedthecomplaint,holdingthatunder
Philippine Overseas Employment Administration (POEA) Memo Circular No. 9, series of 2000, in the event of
conflictbetweentheassessmentofthecompanydesignatedphysicianandthedoctorchosenbytheseafarer,the
opinion ofathirddoctor agreedonbyboth the employerandtheseafarer shouldbesought. Hence, theLabor
Arbiterheldthatpetitionersimmediatefilingofthecomplaint,insistingonhisownphysiciansassessment,was
prematureand,therefore,theassessmentofthecompanydesignatedphysicianthatheisstillfittoworkprevails.

Onpetitionersappeal,theNLRC,byDecision5ofJanuary31,2005,orderedtheremandofthecasetotheLabor
Arbiterforfurtherproceedings.Itheldthatsincethereweretwoconflictingdiagnosesastopetitionersfitnessto
work,themattermustbereferredtoathirddoctortodeterminehisentitlementtodisabilitybenefitsunderthenew
POEAStandardEmploymentContractforseafarers.KJGSsMotionforReconsiderationofsaidDecisionwasdenied
byResolution6ofNovember3,2006,hence,itappealedtotheCourtofAppeals.

ByDecision7ofDecember10,2007,theappellatecourtreversedandsetasidetheNLRCrulingand
reinstatedthe
LaborArbitersDecision.ItheldthatSec.20(B)ofPOEAMemoCircularNo.9,seriesof2000,whichrequiresa
thirddoctorincaseofconflictingassessments,isinapplicable.NotingthattheemploymentcontractbetweenKJGS
andpetitionerwasexecutedonJanuary4,2000,theappellatecourtheldthatthecontractisgovernedbyMemo
CircularNo.55,seriesof1996,whichdidnothaveasimilarprovision,hence,itisthedeterminationorassessment
ofthecompanydesignatedphysicianwhichisdeemedcontrolling.Petitionersmotionforreconsiderationhaving
beendeniedbyResolution8ofApril1,2008,heinterposedthepresentpetition,insistingthatheisentitledtoGrade
6disabilitybenefitsunderthenewPOEAStandardEmploymentContract.

Thepetitionismeritorious.

Section20(B)(3)ofthePOEAStandardEmploymentContractof2000provides:

SECTION20.COMPENSATIONANDBENEFITSFORINJURYANDILLNESS

The liabilities of the employer when the seafarer suffers workrelated injury or illness during the term of his
contractareasfollows:

xxxx

3.Uponsignofffromthevesselformedicaltreatment,theseafarerisentitledtosicknessallowanceequivalentto
his basic wage until he is declared fit to work or the degree of permanentdisability has been assessed by the
companydesignatedphysicianbutinnocaseshallthisperiodexceedonehundredtwenty(120)days.

For this purpose, the seafarer shall submit himself to a postemployment medical examination by a company
designatedphysicianwithinthreeworkingdaysuponhisreturnexceptwhenheisphysicallyincapacitatedtodoso,
inwhichcase,awrittennoticetotheagencywithinthesameperiodisdeemedascompliance.Failureoftheseafarer
tocomplywiththemandatoryreportingrequirementshallresultinhisforfeitureoftherighttoclaimtheabove
benefits.

Page 2 of 4
Abante vs KJGS Fleet Management Manila
Ifadoctorappointedbytheseafarerdisagreeswiththeassessment,athirddoctormaybeagreedjointly
betweentheEmployerandtheseafarer. Thethirddoctorsdecisionshallbefinalandbindingonbothparties.
(emphasissupplied)

Clearly,theaboveprovisiondoesnotprecludetheseafarerfromgettingasecondopinionastohisconditionfor
purposesofclaimingdisabilitybenefits,forasheldinNYKFilShipManagementv.Talavera: 9

Thisprovisionsubstantiallyincorporatesthe1996POEAStandardEmploymentContract.Passingonthe1996
POEAStandardEmploymentContract,thisCourtheldthat[w]hileitisthecompanydesignatedphysician
who must declare that the seaman suffers a permanent disability during employment,it does not
deprive the seafarer of his right to seek a second opinion, hence, the Contract recognizes the
prerogativeoftheseafarertorequestasecondopinionand,forthispurpose,toconsultaphysicianof
hischoice.(emphasisandunderscoringsupplied)

Inthe present case, itis undisputed that petitioner immediately consulted with a physician of his choice after
initiallyhavingbeenseenandoperatedonbyacompanydesignatedphysician.Itwasafterhegotasecondopinion
andafindingthatheisunfitforfurtherworkasaseamanthathefiledtheclaimfordisabilitybenefits.

RespectingtheappellatecourtsrulingthatitisPOEAMemoCircularNo.55,seriesof1996whichisapplicable
and not Memo Circular No. 9, series of 2000,aproposis the ruling inSeagull Maritime Corporation v.
Dee10involvingemploymentcontractenteredintoin1999,beforethepromulgationofPOEAMemoCircularNo.9,
seriesof2000ortheuseofthenewPOEAStandardEmploymentContract,likethatinvolvedinthepresentcase.In
saidcase,theCourtappliedthe2000Circularinholdingthatwhileitisthecompanydesignatedphysicianwho
mustdeclarethattheseamansufferedpermanentdisabilityduringemployment,itdoesnotdeprivetheseafarerof
hisrighttoseekasecondopinionwhichcanthenbeusedbythelabortribunalsinawardingdisabilityclaims.

Courtsarecalledupontobevigilantintheirtimehonoreddutytoprotectlabor,especiallyincasesofdisability
orailment.WhenappliedtoFilipinoseamen,theperilousnatureoftheirworkisconsideredindeterminingthe
properbenefitstobeawarded.Thesebenefits,attheveryleast,shouldapproximatetheriskstheybraveonboard
thevesseleverysingleday.

Accordingly,ifseriousdoubtexistsonthecompanydesignatedphysiciansdeclarationofthenature
ofaseamansinjuryanditscorrespondingimpedimentgrade,resorttoprognosisofothercompetent
medicalprofessionalsshouldbemade.Indoingso,aseamanshouldbegiventheopportunitytoassert
hisclaimafterprovingthenatureofhisinjury.Theseevidenceswillinturnbeusedtodeterminethe
benefitsrightfullyaccruingtohim.(emphasisandunderscoringsupplied)

ItbearsnotingthatDr.LimsmedicalfindingsdidnotsignificantlydifferfromthoseofDr.Cajas.Inessence,
evenifDr.Limdeclaredpetitionertobefittoresumeseaduties,still,thefinaldiagnosisofforaminalstenosisand
central disc protrusion remained six months postsurgery. 11It is understandable that a companydesignated
physicianismorepositivethanthatofaphysicianoftheseafarerschoice.Itisonthisaccountthataseafareris
given the option by the POEA Standard Employment Contract to seek a second opinion from his preferred
physician.

Petitionersare,atthispoint,remindedthatthePOEAstandardemploymentcontractforseamenwas
designedprimarilyfortheprotectionandbenefitofFilipinoseameninthepursuitoftheiremployment
on board oceangoing vessels. Its provisions must be construed and applied fairly, reasonably and
liberally in their favor.Only then can its beneficent provisions be fully carried into effect. (emphasis and
underscoringsupplied)12

InHFSPhilippinesv.Pilar,13wherethefindingsoftheindependentphysiciansweregivenmorecredencethan
thoseofthecompanydesignatedphysicians,theCourtheld:

The bottomline is this:the certification of the companydesignated physician would defeat


respondentsclaimwhiletheopinionoftheindependentphysicianswouldupholdsuchclaim.Insucha
situation,weadoptthefindingsfavorabletorespondent.

Thelawlookstenderlyonthelaborer.Wheretheevidencemaybereasonablyinterpretedintwodivergentways,
oneprejudicialandtheotherfavorabletohim,thebalancemustbetiltedinhisfavorconsistentwiththeprincipleof
socialjustice.(emphasisandunderscoringsupplied)

Astowhetherpetitionercanclaimdisabilitybenefits,theCourtrulesintheaffirmative.Permanentdisability
referstotheinabilityofaworkertoperformhisjobformorethan120days,regardlessofwhetherhelosestheuse
ofanypartofhisbody.Whatdeterminespetitionersentitlementtopermanentdisabilitybenefitsishisinabilityto

Page 3 of 4
Abante vs KJGS Fleet Management Manila
workformorethan120days.14Inthecaseatbar,itwasonlyonFebruary20,2001thattheCertificateofFitness
forWorkwasissuedbyDr.Lim,morethan6monthsfromthetimehewasinitiallyevaluatedbythedoctoronJuly
24,2000andafterheunderwentoperationonAugust18,2000.

Itisgathered15fromthedocumentsemanatingfromtheOfficeofDr.Limthatpetitionerwasseenbyhimfrom
July24,2000uptoFebruary20,2001oratotalof13times;andexceptforthemedicalreportsdatedFebruary5,
2001 and February 20, 2001 (when the doctor finally pronounced petitioner fit to work), Dr. Lim consistently
recommendedthatpetitionercontinuehisphysicalrehabilitation/therapyandrevisitcliniconspecificdatesforre
evaluation,therebyimplyingthatpetitionerwasnotyetfittowork.

Givenaseafarersentitlementtopermanentdisabilitybenefitswhenheisunabletoworkformorethan120
days,thefailureofthecompanydesignatedphysiciantopronouncepetitionerfittoworkwithinthe120dayperiod
entitleshimtopermanenttotaldisabilitybenefitintheamountofUS$60,000.00. 16

Respectingtheclaimformoralandexemplarydamages,thesamecannotbegranted,therebeingnoconcrete
showingofbadfaithormaliceonthepartofKJGS.Therecordsshowthatitshoulderedalltheexpensesincurredin
petitioners surgery and subsequent rehabilitation. And it regularly inquired from Dr. Lim about petitioners
condition.

TheclaimforattorneysfeesisgrantedfollowingArticle2208oftheNewCivilCodewhichallowsitsrecoveryin
actionsforrecoveryofwagesoflaborersandactionsforindemnityundertheemployersliabilitylaws.Thesamefees
arealsorecoverablewhenthedefendantsactoromissionhascompelledtheplaintifftoincurexpensestoprotecthis
interest17asinthepresentcasefollowingtherefusalbyrespondent tosettlehisclaims.Pursuanttoprevailing
jurisprudence,petitionerisentitledtoattorneysfeesoftenpercent(10%)ofthemonetaryaward.

WHEREFORE,thedecisionandresolutionoftheCourtofAppealsdatedDecember10,2007,andApril1,2008,
respectively,areREVERSEDandSETASIDE.Respondentsareheldjointlyandseverallyliabletopaypetitioner
thefollowing:a)permanenttotaldisabilitybenefitsofUS$60,000.00atitspesoequivalentatthetimeofactual
payment;andb)attorneysfeesoftenpercent(10%)ofthetotalmonetaryawardatitspesoequivalentatthetimeof
actualpayment.

SOORDERED.

Puno(C.J.,Chairperson),LeonardoDeCastro,BersaminandVillarama,Jr.,JJ.,concur.

_______________

*FIRSTDIVISION. Associate Justices Jose L. Sabio, Jr. and Jose C.


1VideletterofDr.RobertoD.LimdatedFebruary Reyes,Jr.
20,2001,NLRCRecords,p.54. 9G.R.No.175894,November14,2008,571SCRA
2Videcertification of Dr. Jocelyn Myra R. Caja 183 citingSeagull Maritime Corp. v. Dee, G.R. No.
datedMarch10,2001,Id.,atp.58. 165156,April2,2007,520SCRA109,117119.
3Id.,atp.2. 10Id.
11VideFebruary 20, 2001 certification of Dr.
4Id.,atpp.123129.
RobertoLim,supra.
5CARollo, pp. 2125. Penned by Commissioner
Ernesto S. Dinopol and concurred in by Presiding 12Seagull Maritime Corp. v. Dee,supraat 121
Commissioner Roy V. Seeres and Commissioner 122.
RomeoL.Go. 13G.R.No.168716,April16,2009,585SCRA315.
6Id., at pp. 2628. Penned by Commissioner 14Palisoc v. Easways Marine Inc., G.R. No.
Perlita B. Velasco and concurred in by Presiding 152273,September11,2007,532SCRA585.
Commissioner Raul T. Aquino and Commissioner 15Videmedicalreports,NLRCRecords,pp.4254.
RomeoL.Go. 16Sec. 30A of POEA Standard Employment
7Id.,atpp.231239.PennedbyAssociateJustice Contract or Memo Circular No. 5, series of 2000
Myrna DimarananVidal and concurred in by (Standard Terms and Conditions Governing the
Associate Justices Jose L. Sabio, Jr. and Jose C. Employment of Filipino Seafarers on Board Ocean
Reyes,Jr. GoingVessels).
8Id., at p. 267. Penned by Associate Justice 17Remigio v. National Labor Relations
Myrna DimarananVidal and concurred in by Commission, G.R. No. 159887, April 12, 2006, 487
SCRA190.

Page 4 of 4

Anda mungkin juga menyukai