Case Digest (G.R. No. 196357)
Facts:
The Heirs of the Late Delfin Dela Cruz, Represented by His Spouse, Carmelita Dela Cruz v. Philippine Transmarine Carriers, Inc., G.R. No. 196357, April 20, 2015, Supreme Court Second Division, Del Castillo, J., writing for the Court.
Petitioners are the heirs of Delfin Dela Cruz, represented by his spouse Carmelita Dela Cruz; respondents are Philippine Transmarine Carriers, Inc. (local manning agent) and/or Tecto Belgium N.V. (principal). Delfin was contracted as an oiler under a POEA standard contract (basic salary, hours, benefits) and passed a Pre‑Employment Medical Examination (PEME) as “fit for sea service.” He embarked the vessel Lady Hilde in August 2000 and served until his contract expired and he was signed off and repatriated on August 16, 2001.
While on board, Delfin experienced chest and upper abdominal pains and, on June 26, 2001, was struck on the back by a falling metal board; he received medications and light‑duty recommendation. After repatriation he allegedly reported to respondents for mandatory post‑employment reporting and sought medical assistance but, petitioners allege, was not attended to. Delfin later sought care at De Los Santos Medical Center on November 13, 2003 (chest X‑ray and thoracic spine MRI) and was eventually diagnosed at St. Luke’s Medical Center with Malignant Peripheral Nerve Sheath Tumor (MPNST); he bore his own medical expenses. Delfin filed a complaint on December 4, 2003 before the NLRC claiming sickness allowance, medical reimbursement, permanent disability compensation, damages and attorney’s fees; he died on May 6, 2005.
The Labor Arbiter (LA) rendered a May 30, 2005 decision granting Delfin’s claims and awarding US$60,000.00 for permanent disability, US$2,140.00 sickness allowance and 10% attorney’s fees. The National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC), however, reversed in a January 23, 2007 decision, finding the claims barred by prescription and that petitioners failed to prove causal connection to employment; its March 30, 2007 resolution denied reconsideration. Petitioners filed a petition for certiorari with the Court of Appeals (CA) which, in a June 18, 2010 decision, dismissed the petition and affirmed the NLRC: the CA held the claim was timely under the three‑year POEA SEC rule but that petitioners failed to prove the illness was work‑related and denied sickness allowance and other dam...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Under Rule 45, may this Court review and re‑examine the factual findings of the labor tribunals and the Court of Appeals when those findings are in conflict?
- Are petitioners entitled to permanent disability benefits and sickness allowance under the applicable POEA Standard Employment Contract?
- Are petitioners entitled to a...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)