Disability Benefits NOT Dependent on Pre-existence of Medical Condition

Prior to employment, the seafarer underwent a pre-employment medical examination (PEME) where he declared to having allergies or anaphylaxis attributed to environmental factors, chemicals, foods, or medications., particularly exposure to latex and nickel.  After the seafarer was declared fit in the PEME, he was engaged as AZ Commis where his duties included food preparation and kitchen sanitation which exposed him to cleaning materials, sanitizers, bleaches, acids, degreasers and detergents.

After a few months on-board, seafarer experienced skin itching and as his skin condition persisted, he was medically repatriated.  Upon consultation with the company-designated physician (CDP), seafarer was eventually diagnosed with Nummular Eczema.  After treatment, the CDP declared the condition to have resolved.

Unconvinced with the findings of the CDP, the seafarer filed a claim for disability benefits before the Labor Arbiter of the NLRC armed with the findings of his own doctor.  The company defended the claim on the ground that, among others, the illness of the seafarer was not work-related as it was already pre-existing at the time of employment as admitted in the PEME. The claim of the seafarer was denied by the Labor Arbiter, the NLRC and the Court of Appeals for lack of factual or legal basis.   Upon appeal to the Supreme Court, benefits were awarded.

Pre-existence of illness not ground for denial of benefits

The Court found that the company does not dispute that seafarer’s work constantly exposed him to cleaning agents and chemicals. They only argue that seafarer has previously declared in his PEME that he has/had prior allergies.  However, while the seafarer answered "Yes" to allergies/anaphylaxis to environment, chemicals, food or drugs, it was also clearly indicated therein that it specifically pertained to latex and nickel. This disclosure does not indicate that seafarer was making a general admission of allergy to environment, chemicals, food, or drugs, but rather acknowledging those specific allergens only.

Notably, the records do not show that seafarer had exposure to latex and nickel while performing his work as AZ Commis. Consequently, there is no basis to support the company’s claim that seafarer's illness was already pre-existing as declared in his PEME.

In any case, compensability of an illness does not depend on whether the injury or disease was pre-existing at the time of employment but rather on whether the injury or illness is work-related or had been aggravated by the seafarer's working condition.  Seafarer's work as AZ Commis entailed exposure to cleaning materials such as sanitizers, bleaches, acids, degreasers, and detergents. His direct exposure to these chemicals, stress,
and climate changes, coupled with the findings of his own doctor confirm the existence of a reasonable connection between the nature of his work and his eczema.

The CDP assessment not final and definite; 120/240 days rule not followed

For the CDP assessment to be allowed, the same must: 1) include a definitive declaration as to the capacity of the seafarer to return to work, or at least a categorical and final degree of the seafarer's disability; and 2) be furnished to the seafarer.
 
A reading of the final report of the CDP, the same merely mentioned that the conditions have been resolved.  It did not mention whether the seafarer is fit to work or with a degree of disability.  As such, the same cannot be considered final and definite.

Also, the CDP assessment was not timely provided to the seafarer.  The final report of the CDP was addressed to the company and not to the seafarer himself.  As the assessment was not timely provided to the seafarer within the required period, the same cannot be sustained and the seafarer is considered permanently and totally disabled by operation of law.

C. L. vs. RCCL Crew Management, Inc., Royal Caribbean Cruises Ltd., and G. A. B., G.R. No. 270817, 27 January 2025; First Division, Associate Justice Ramon Paull Hernando, ponente

Areas of Specialization:  Labour & personal injury, litigation and dispute resolution, corporate and commercial, shipping and admiralty, intellectual property, cargo claims and charter party, transport, insurance and reinsurance, arbitration and ADR, immigration.