Case Digest (G.R. No. 245857)
Facts:
Angelito S. Magno v. Career Philippines Shipmanagement, Inc., Columbia Shipmanagement, Ltd., and Verlou Carmelino, G.R. No. 245857, June 26, 2023, Supreme Court Second Division, Kho, Jr., J., writing for the Court.Petitioner Angelito S. Magno (Magno) was hired by Career Philippines Shipmanagement, Inc. for and on behalf of its principal Columbia Shipmanagement, Ltd. as an Able Seaman under a nine‑month contract. Magno underwent a pre‑employment medical exam and was declared fit for sea duty. While performing maintenance work in October 2014 he began to experience back and right knee pain; he was repatriated to the Philippines on November 10, 2015 for further treatment.
During his repatriation treatment Magno was seen by the company‑designated physician, Dr. Nicomedes Cruz, who diagnosed t/c lumbosacral strain and right knee arthritis and ordered imaging and therapy. Magno underwent right knee arthroscopy on January 14, 2015. On April 10, 2015 Dr. Cruz issued a medical report to Career Philippines’ finance manager stating, inter alia, that Magno had Herniated Nucleus Pulposus L4‑L5 (not work‑related), osteoarthritis of the right knee (work‑related under the POEA schedule), that the patient would incur residual disability with a guarded prognosis, and assigning disability gradings equivalent to Grade 11 (spine) and Grade 10 (knee) under the POEA Schedule of Disability Grading. Treatment was thereafter discontinued and Magno was not furnished a copy of Dr. Cruz’s report.
Magno sought an independent assessment from Dr. Manuel Magtira, whose July 7, 2015 report showed MRI findings and functional limitations and concluded Magno was permanently unfit to work as a seafarer. Magno’s counsel sent a letter dated July 13, 2015 requesting his medical records and referral to a third doctor for resolution of the conflicting assessments; respondents did not accede. On August 18, 2015 Magno filed a complaint before the NLRC seeking payment of permanent and total disability benefits, sick pay/allowance, medical expenses, moral/exemplary damages, and attorney’s fees.
The Labor Arbiter (LA) in a February 15, 2016 decision granted Magno permanent and total disability benefits in the amount of USD 60,000 (peso equivalent) plus 10% attorney’s fees, reasoning that over 120 days had passed since repatriation and Magno remained incapable of working; the LA treated the third‑doctor procedure as directory. The NLRC, in a Decision dated August 30, 2016 (with a Resolution of October 27, 2016 denying reconsideration), affirmed with modification (dropping Carmelino as respondent) and also granted permanent and total disability benefits, holding that the company‑designated physician’s assessment was not conclusive and that respondents failed to refer the conflicting medical opinions to a third doctor.
Respondents elevated the case to the Court of Appeals (via a petition for certiorari under Rule 65). The CA, in a Decision dated January 26, 2018, granted the petition, reversed the NLRC, and awarded Magno USD 17,540 as permanent and partial disability benefits...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Did the Court of Appeals commit reversible error (grave abuse of discretion) in reversing the NLRC’s grant of total and permanent disability benefits to Magno?
- Did respondents comply with the POEA‑SEC and due process in furnishing Magno a final and definite assessment by the company‑designated physician within the 120/240‑day period?
- Is Magno entitled to permanent and total disability benefits by operation of law given the alleged absence of a properly issued and furnished final assessment and respondents’ failure to initiate the third‑doctor procedure? ...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)