Case Digest (G.R. No. 253756)
Facts:
Resty S. Caampued v. Next Wave Maritime Management, Inc., MTM Ship Management Pte. Ltd., and Arnold Marquez, G.R. No. 253756, May 12, 2021, Supreme Court Second Division, Lazaro-Javier, J., writing for the Court.
Petitioner Resty S. Caampued (petitioner) was hired on March 29, 2016 by respondent Next Wave Maritime Management, Inc., for and on behalf of principal MTM Ship Management Pte. Ltd., as an engine fitter aboard the MV Red Cedar for a ten‑month term. His pre‑employment medical examination (PEME) declared him fit for sea duties, with medication prescribed for hypertension. His shipboard duties involved repeated, strenuous physical labor (lifting, fabrication, long hours standing and assisting in engine overhauls).
In the second week of May 2016, while assisting to repair a generator, petitioner forcefully pulled the piston lining in a squatting position, heard a click, and felt a snap in his back. He reported mild then progressively severe low back pain; supervisors initially provided analgesics but asked him to continue working. On June 1, 2016 in Africa he was seen at Welwitschia Hospital and diagnosed with, among other findings, paravertebral mass and possible spondylolisthesis; repatriation was recommended and effected on June 6, 2016.
Company‑designated physician Dr. Natalio Alegre examined petitioner at St. Luke’s Medical Center, ordered x‑ray and MRI, and—after biopsy—recorded chronic granulomatous inflammation with necrosis consistent with spinal tuberculosis, opining it as likely non‑work‑related (reactivation of childhood primary complex). Respondents stopped medical assistance on that basis. Petitioner continued to seek treatment (including at Philippine General Hospital) at his expense and later consulted orthopedist Dr. Renato Runas (January 2017), who found persistent pain, L4 over L5 displacement, and declared petitioner unfit for sea duties.
Petitioner filed a complaint for total and permanent disability benefits. The Labor Arbiter (Thomas T. Que, Jr.) granted total and permanent disability benefits of US$60,000, sickness allowance, damages and attorney’s fees on September 5, 2017, finding a reasonable work connection and that respondents failed to assess petitioner’s spondylolisthesis and other injuries, rendering them by operation of law total and permanent. On appeal, the NLRC reversed and dismissed the permanent disability claim (December 18, 2017), concluding petitioner had a pre‑existing back condition and had not proven work causation, but awarded sickness wages from repatriation to August 4, 2016. The NLRC denied reconsideration.
The Court of Appeals, in CA‑G.R. SP No. 155268 (Decision dated February 10, 2020; penned by ...(Pro-only)
Issues:
- Did petitioner materially conceal a pre‑existing medical condition that disqualifies him from relief under the POEA‑SEC?
- Is petitioner entitled to total and permanent disability benefits under the 2010 POEA‑Standard Employment Con...(Pro-only)
Ruling:
- (Pro-only)
Ratio:
- (Pro-only)
Doctrine:
- (Pro-only)