Philippine Shipping Update – Manning Industry[Download]
By: Ruben Del Rosario, President, Del Rosario Pandiphil Inc., May 27, 2014 (Issue 2014/09)
Supreme Court disallows knee injury claim of seafarer as he was declared fit and was re-employed; allows permanent and total disability benefits for hand injury claim suffered in subsequent employment as degree of disability was issued after 240 days
Seafarer was hired as waste handler on-board a cruise ship. Sometime 5 August 2005, seafarer fell from a ladder while working and injured his knee. He was repatriated and had anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction surgery under the medical supervision of the company-designated-doctors. On 19 January 2006, he was declared fit to return to work from an orthopaedic point of view. Seafarer sought reemployment with the company, passed the pre-employment medical examination, and was re-hired in the same capacity for another cruise vessel.
On board, seafarer met another accident while driving a forklift and injured his right hand and wrist. He was repatriated and arrived in the Philippines on 15 January 2007 and had surgery for his injury. On 7 September 2007, the company-designated doctor issued a medical report that the seafarer has a permanent but incomplete disability. The company-designated doctor likewise issued a medical opinion on 25 September 2007 that seafarer’s disability may be classified as a grade 10 disability.
The seafarer filed two complaints for disability benefits, illness al1owance, damages and attorney's fees against the company which was anchored on his knee injury and hand injury arising from his two employments with the company. The seafarer argues that since both treating periods for his injuries lasted for more than 120 days, then he should be entitled to US$60,000 each for his knee and hand injury.
The Labor Arbiter dismissed the claim due to the knee injury on the ground that the seafarer was already declared fit to work after his ACL reconstruction surgery. He also passed the pre-employment medical examination when he sought reemployment, was reemployed and was able to work again. As regards the hand injury, the Labor Arbiter awarded to the seafarer US$10,075 which is the equivalent award for the grade 10 assessment issued by the company-designated doctor.
The NLRC reversed the Labor Arbiter's Decision. It ruled that seafarer is entitled to permanent and total disability benefit of US$60,000 for his knee injury and another US$60,000 for his hand injury.
On reconsideration, the NLRC issued a Decision which set aside its earlier Decision and reinstated the Labor Arbiter's Decision
On further petition to the Court of Appeals, it was held that since the seafarer was unable to perform his customary work for more than 120 days on account of his knee injury and hand injury, he is entitled to permanent and total disability benefit for both injuries, and the total amount of US$120,000
The Supreme Court modified the ruling of the Court of Appeals.
On the knee injury, seafarer is not entitled to disability benefits
Seafarer is not entitled to permanent and total disability benefit for his knee injury since he became already fit to work again as a seaman. He even admitted in his position paper that he was declared fit to work. He was also declared fit for sea service after his pre-employment medical examination when he sought reemployment with petitioners. The medical certificate declaring seafarer fit for sea service even bears his signature. And he was able to work again in the same capacity as waste handler in another vessel. This position is amply supported by substantial evidence.
On the hand injury, seafarer is considered permanently and totally disabled
The Supreme Court noted that the company-designated doctor failed to issue a degree of disability to the seafarer’s injury within 240 days which by law makes the disability permanent and total. Thus, while the company-designated doctor issued an opinion within 240 days that seafarer’s disability is permanent but incomplete, the degree of disability was issued on the 256th day and after the lapse of the 240 days period stated under law. According to the Supreme Court, the degree of disability must be the one established prior to the 240 days period.
United Philippine Lines, Inc. et.al., vs. Generoso Sibug; G.R. No. 201072, April 2, 2014; First Division; Associate Justice Martin Villarama, Jr., Ponente (Attys. Lovereal Ocampo-Carullo and Florencio Aquino handled for vessel interests).
--------------------
“Del Rosario & Del Rosario is more or less unrivalled when it comes to maritime work in the Philippines” from Asia-Pacific, The Legal 500, 2014, p. 497
“Del Rosario & Del Rosario is often first port of call for employment law within the maritime industry, where it represents shipowners, agents, insurers and port owners.” Asia-Pacific, the Legal 500, 2014, p. 494
“This unparalleled shipping firm remains at the forefront of the market.” “They are in a league of their own.” “They are the runaway leaders in shipping.” Chambers Asia Pacific, 2012 p. 832
---------------------------
Social Networking Sites
Twitter ID: delrosariopandi Facebook Page: DelRosarioLaw
This publication aims to provide commentary on issues affecting the manning industry, analysis of recent cases and updates on legislation. It is meant to be brief and is not intended to be legal advice. For further information, please email This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. .
This publication is sent from time to time to clients and friends. To unsubscribe, reply to this email and put “unsubscribe” in the subject.
________________________________________
Del Rosario & Del Rosario / Del Rosario Pandiphil, Inc.
Office Address: 15th Floor, Pacific Star Building, Makati Avenue, 1200 Makati City, Philippines
Telephone: 63 2 810 1791 * Fax: 63 2 817 1740/ 63 2 810 3632
24/7 mobile: (63) (917) 830-8384; This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.; www.delrosariolaw.com