G.R. No. 239190 - Bitco vs. Crossworld Marine Services, Inc.

Case Digest (G.R. No. 239190)
Expanded Legal Reasoning Model

Facts:

Background of Employment and Injury

Raul D. Bitco was hired as an Ordinary Seaman by Crossworld Marine Services, Inc. for its foreign principal, Kapal (Cyprus) Ltd.
He underwent a Pre-Employment Medical Examination and was certified fit to work.
His employment contract provided for an eight‑month duration (extendable by mutual consent for one month) with a basic monthly salary of US$406.39 plus other benefits.
Bitco departed from the Philippines on November 6, 2014 to join the vessel “M/V Eurocargo Bari.”

The Onset and Evolution of the Injury

In February 2015, while on board and during provisions in Italy, Bitco experienced a sudden snap in his lower back while lifting supplies, causing acute moderate pain; despite this, he continued his work.
On June 25, 2015, after engaging in heavy work, his lower back pain recurred.

He was taken to a medical facility in Valencia, Spain.
He was diagnosed with Post Effort Acute Lumbociatalgia, was given medication, and advised to rest for three days.

Due to persistent pain, Bitco was declared unfit for sea duties and ordered for repatriation for further evaluation and management in the Philippines.

Medical Treatment and Assessments

Arrival and Initial Treatment

Bitco arrived in the Philippines on July 22, 2015 and immediately reported to Crossworld Marine Services.
He underwent a post‑employment medical examination and was referred to Ship-to-Shore Medical Assist in Makati City, and subsequently to St. Luke’s Medical Center, Global City, Taguig City.

Treatment and Diagnostic Procedures

Bitco received eight sessions of physical therapy with minimal improvement.
On September 12, 2015, he underwent an epidural steroid injection and a subsequent set of physiotherapy sessions.
An MRI on October 16, 2015 revealed:

Straightened lumbar curvature (possibly due to muscle spasm).

ii. Dessicated disks and spondylosis at L4‑L5 and L5‑S1 with severe bilateral neural canal narrowing, among other degenerative findings. iii. Ancillary findings such as a small annular tear, mild levoscoliosis, and an incidental small cyst in the right kidney.

Medical Assessment and Disability Rating

Bitco was treated by the company‑designated physician until December 15, 2015.
On December 17, 2015 (150 days post-repatriation), the company‑designated physician assessed him with a partial disability (Grade 8) pursuant to the POEA‑SEC, without a definitive declaration of fitness to resume his sea duties.
On January 26, 2016, Bitco consulted his personal doctor, Dr. Renato P. Runas, who issued a medical report stating that Bitco was unfit for sea duty in any capacity because of a total and permanent disability.
Dr. Runas noted Bitco’s significant limitations including inability to lift heavy objects and perform tasks involving bending, picking up, or carrying, with discomfort worsening upon prolonged sitting or standing.

Procedural History and Dispute Over Disability Benefits

Claim for Benefits

Bitco filed a case seeking total and permanent disability benefits based on his continued incapacitation.
He additionally claimed attorney’s fees on the ground that he was forced to secure counsel to pursue his claims.

Defense of the Respondents

Respondents contended that Bitco was only partially disabled (Grade 8) and alleged that he failed to secure a second or third doctor’s opinion as mandated by the POEA‑SEC.
They emphasized that under the employment contract and the POEA‑SEC schedule of benefits, he was only entitled to partial disability compensation and not the total and permanent benefits he claimed.

Development in Quasi‑Judicial Proceedings

The Labor Arbiter (LA), on January 23, 2017, rendered a decision finding merit in Bitco’s claim for total and permanent disability benefits, noting his failure to resume work within the critical 120‑ or 240‑day periods.
The National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) affirmed the LA’s decision on May 9, 2017 and denied a subsequent motion for reconsideration on May 31, 2017.
Respondents elevated the matter to the Court of Appeals (CA) via a Petition for Certiorari under Rule 65, arguing that the referral to a third doctor was mandatory and that the company‑designated physician’s Grade 8 rating should be controlling.
The CA on November 29, 2017 annulled and set aside the NLRC and LA decisions, finding that the referral procedure was mandatory.
On May 3, 2018, the CA denied Bitco’s Motion for Reconsideration, leading to the present Petition for Review on Certiorari under Rule 45.

Issues:

Is Bitco entitled to permanent and total disability benefits despite the company‑designated physician’s partial disability (Grade 8) assessment?

Does the failure to secure a conclusive opinion within the prescribed 120‑ or 240‑day period render the disability status automatically permanent?
Is the mandatory referral to a third doctor a condition precedent to the claim for total and permanent disability benefits?

Whether the CA erred in annulling and setting aside the decisions of the NLRC and the Labor Arbiter which had recognized Bitco’s entitlement.

Whether Bitco is entitled to attorney’s fees given that he was compelled to secure legal representation to pursue his claims.

Ruling:

(Subscriber-Only)

Ratio:

(Subscriber-Only)

Doctrine:

(Subscriber-Only)

Unlock Full Case Digest

Case Digest (G.R. No. 239190) Core Legal Reasoning Model Expanded

Facts:

Case Digest (G.R. No. 239190) Expanded Legal Reasoning Model

Facts:

Issues:

Ruling:

Ratio:

Doctrine:

Case Digest (G.R. No. 239190)
Core Legal Reasoning Model

Expanded

Case Digest (G.R. No. 239190)
Expanded Legal Reasoning Model