Case Digest (G.R. No. 160138) Core Legal Reasoning Model
Core Legal Reasoning Model
Facts:
In Julio B. Purcon, Jr. v. MRM Philippines, Inc. and Miguel L. Rivera/Maritime Resources Management (G.R. No. 182718, September 26, 2008), petitioner Julio B. Purcon, Jr. was hired on January 28, 2002 by respondent MRM Philippines, Inc. as a seaman aboard M/T SARABELLE 2 under a three‐month contract paying US$584.00 monthly, which was later extended. In June 2002 he was diagnosed with hernia in France and repatriated on June 26, 2002. Upon return, the company physician declared him fit to resume work on July 24, 2002, but no vacancy was available. In September 2003 and March 2004 further medical examinations by a private doctor showed epididymitis and respiratory infection of Grade XIV. Petitioner filed a complaint before the NLRC’s Arbitration Branch for reimbursement of medical expenses, sickness allowance, permanent disability benefits, damages, and attorney’s fees. Respondents countered that the hernia was non‐work‐related, easily remedied by surgery, and that petitioner had Case Digest (G.R. No. 160138) Expanded Legal Reasoning Model
Expanded Legal Reasoning Model
Facts:
- Background of Employment and Injury
- Julio B. Purcon, Jr. was hired by MRM Philippines, Inc. on January 28, 2002 as a seaman aboard M/T SARABELLE 2 under a three-month contract at a monthly salary of USD 584.00; contract was later extended by another three months.
- In June 2002, petitioner experienced severe left testicular pain; diagnosed with hernia in France and repatriated on June 26, 2002. Upon return, company physician Dr. Alegre prescribed medication and on July 24, 2002 declared him fit to resume work. Petitioner was not rehired due to lack of vacancy.
- On September 17, 2003, he consulted Dr. Vicaldo at Philippine Heart Center; on March 3, 2004 diagnosed with epididymitis (left) and upper respiratory tract infection.
- Initial Labor Proceedings
- Petitioner filed before the NLRC-Arbitration Branch a complaint for medical expense reimbursement, sickness allowance, permanent disability benefits, damages, and attorney’s fees.
- Respondents argued hernia was non-work-related, petitioner was fit to work, his condition correctable by surgery, and that he signed a notarized Quitclaim and Release.
- Decisions and Appeals
- Labor Arbiter (March 31, 2005) dismissed complaint for lack of merit, holding petitioner fit to work and non-rehiring not equivalent to disability.
- NLRC Third Division (September 30, 2005) affirmed the Arbiter’s decision; motion for reconsideration denied on December 20, 2005; resolution became final January 27, 2006.
- Court of Appeals (June 7, 2006) dismissed Rule 65 certiorari petition for formal infirmities; motion for reconsideration denied; resolution final September 29, 2006.
- Supreme Court (July 16, 2007) denied Rule 45 petition for review—citing late filing, unpaid fees, defective verification; Entry of Judgment issued October 9, 2007.
- Petitioner filed on May 6, 2008 a petition for relief from judgment under Rule 38, seeking to set aside the July 16, 2007 Resolution and October 9, 2007 Entry of Judgment, alleging counsel negligence and gross mistakes by Labor Arbiter and NLRC.
Issues:
- Whether a Rule 38 petition for relief from judgment is an available remedy in the Supreme Court.
- Whether petitioner’s claim of counsel’s negligence constitutes “excusable negligence” warranting relief under Rule 38.
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)