G.R. No. 240614 - Ampo-on vs. Reinier Pacific International Shipping, Inc.

Petitioner Danille G. Ampo-on was employed on February 11, 2014, as an Able Seaman by respondent Reinier Pacific International Shipping, Inc. for the benefit of its principal, Neptune Shipmanagement Services Pte./NOL Liner (Pte.), Ltd.
He was assigned to work aboard the vessel M/V APL Barcelona under an eight-month contract with a basic monthly salary of US$671.00, exclusive of overtime pay and other benefits.
Prior to boarding, he underwent a pre-employment medical examination (PEME) and was declared fit for sea duty.

On October 18, 2014, while performing sanding works, petitioner experienced an abrupt snap and crunching sound in his back followed immediately by severe pain.
Upon arrival at the port in Taiwan on October 20, 2014, he was rushed to a hospital and diagnosed with L3-L4 Spondylolisthesis and L3 Pars Fracture.
Subsequently, petitioner was repatriated on October 23, 2014 and referred to the company-designated physician.
The company-designated physician conducted various tests, advised physical therapy, and even recommended surgery, eventually issuing a medical report on February 6, 2015 which stated:

The petitioner was unlikely to be fit for work within 120 days of treatment.
If entitled to disability benefits, his disability grading was provisionally assessed as Grade 8 (loss of 2/3 lifting power of the trunk) with a guarded prognosis.

On March 25, 2015, petitioner secured an opinion from his independent physician, Dr. Manuel Fidel M. Magtira, who declared him permanently disabled and unfit for sea duty.

Believing his condition rendered him incapacitated from work as a seafarer for more than 120 days, petitioner filed a complaint before the National Conciliation and Mediation Board (NCMB).
His claim was for total and permanent disability benefits amounting to US$120,000.00 in accordance with the Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA), in addition to moral, exemplary, and compensatory damages, as well as attorney’s fees.
Respondents contended that the injury was neither work-related nor accidental but was merely a manifestation of illness and further argued that petitioner’s refusal of the suggested surgery demonstrated notorious negligence.

The NCMB rendered a Decision on October 1, 2015, ruling in favor of petitioner by determining that:

His back injury was sustained while performing his duties, thereby qualifying as work-related and accidental.
He was entitled to maximum disability compensation under the terms of the CBA, plus 10% attorney’s fees.

After respondents’ motion for reconsideration was denied in a Resolution dated January 7, 2016, the matter was elevated to the Court of Appeals (CA).
On March 28, 2018, the CA set aside the NCMB ruling, holding that petitioner was only entitled to Grade 8 disability benefits under the POEA-SEC by giving more weight to the company-designated physician’s interim assessment.

Petitioner sought reconsideration from the CA in a Resolution dated July 10, 2018, which was also denied, leading him to file this petition for review before the Supreme Court.
The core factual dispute centered on the finality and adequacy of the medical assessments provided, and whether these assessments fairly determined the nature and extent of his disability.

Whether the Court of Appeals erred in limiting petitioner’s award to only Grade 8 (partial) disability benefits under the POEA-SEC instead of recognizing his injury as total and permanent under the CBA.

Whether the company-designated physician’s assessment, which was characterized as an interim evaluation with a guarded prognosis, constitutes a final and definite disability assessment within the established 120-day period.

Whether petitioner’s refusal to undergo recommended surgery amounts to notorious negligence that would bar him from receiving full disability compensation.

Whether the nature of the injury—as an unintended, unforeseen, and accidental occurrence during the performance of his duties—satisfies the criteria for work-related injury compensation under the applicable collective bargaining agreement.