Title
Seagull and Maritime Corporation vs. Dee
Case
G.R. No. 165156
Decision Date
Apr 2, 2007
Seafarer Jaycee Dee suffered a foot injury, deemed permanent and total by NLRC, despite company's Grade 11 rating. SC upheld US$60,000 award, affirming seafarers' right to second medical opinions.
A

Case Digest (G.R. No. 135846)

Facts:

  • Parties and employment arrangement
    • Private respondent Jaycee Dee was employed as an able-bodied seaman by petitioner Seagiant ShipManagement Co. Ltd.
    • Petitioner Seagull Maritime Corporation acted through the assistance of a local manning agent in connection with the employment.
    • Jaycee Dee was assigned to the vessel M/V Castor.
  • Work-related injury and medical course
    • On May 3, 2000, a passing ship collided with M/V Castor while it was berthed in Hamburg, Germany.
    • The collision jammed the vessel’s portable gangway between the other ship’s walls and the shore rail, after which it suddenly moved back to the berth.
    • Due to the rapid movement, Jaycee Dee’s left foot was pinned between the ship’s two metal beams and was crushed.
    • After initial treatment at a German hospital, Jaycee Dee was repatriated to the Philippines for medical treatment.
    • Jaycee Dee was examined and treated in several hospitals and clinics.
    • Jaycee Dee underwent two operations:
      • Operation on the foot in May 2000 (application of pin).
      • Operation in August 2000 (removal of pin).
    • Jaycee Dee underwent eight months of physical therapy.
    • Despite treatment, Jaycee Dee continued to suffer severe pain, and difficulty in moving and weight-bearing on the left foot while ambulating.
  • Complaint before the NLRC
    • Jaycee Dee filed a complaint in the NLRC against petitioners for permanent total disability benefits amounting to US$60,000.
    • Petitioners defended that Jaycee Dee’s condition could still be remedied by a “triple arthrodesis” operation.
    • Petitioners opposed the amount of the claim and relied on the company-designated physician’s opinion.
    • Petitioners argued that company-designated physician Dr. Albert M. Manalang characterized Jaycee Dee’s injury as closest to “complete immobility of an ankle joint in normal position.”
    • Petitioners invoked the POEA standard employment contract schedule:
      • The injury, as rated under impediment grade no. 11, was compensable by US$7,465.
    • On March 15, 2002, the labor arbiter ruled for petitioners, ordering payment of US$7,465.00 (or its peso equivalent), and denying other claims.
  • Labor arbiter’s basis for the lesser award
    • The labor arbiter applied the POEA-prescribed contract’s “Schedule of Disability or Impediment for Injuries Suffered on Lower Extremities.”
    • The labor arbiter found the closest ailment to be:
      • “Complete immobility of an ankle joint in normal position”Grade 11.
    • The labor arbiter emphasized that, despite other doctors’ medical opinions, only Dr. Manalang gave an impediment grade corresponding to the injury.
  • NLRC reversal and award of permanent total disability
    • On appeal, the NLRC set aside the labor arbiter’s decision.
    • The NLRC declared Jaycee Dee’s disability permanent and total and ordered payment of US$60,000.00 (or its peso equivalent).
    • The NLRC dismissed other claims for lack of merit.
  • Medical findings relied upon by the NLRC
    • The NLRC considered medical findings of Dr. Norberto Meriales of PGH/Medical Center Manila.
    • Dr. Meriales opined that, with or without additional medical treatment, a return to Jaycee Dee’s previous work as a seaman was no longer possible.
    • The NLRC ruled that Jaycee Dee’s refusal to undergo a “triple arthrodesis” operation should not defeat his claim.
    • The NLRC reasoned that even if Jaycee Dee underwent the surgery, there was no guarantee that it would:
      • Alleviate his pain.
      • Restore full mobility and use of his foot.
      • Restore his ability to work as a seaman.
    • The NLRC characterized the operation as intended merely to relieve pain.
  • Additional orthopedic assessment
    • The NLRC also noted the findings of Dr. Rafael Bundoc, orthopedic surgeon in PGH.
    • Dr. Bundoc expressed that:
      • Surgery results might not meet expectations, and fusion would further compromise immobility.
      • Even if surgeries lessened pain, results remained variable.
      • Jaycee Dee understood the consequences of corrective foot surgery or none at all.
      • Jaycee Dee would never attain the level of activity he could perform as a seaman.
      • Jaycee Dee would best seek occupation not involving heavy manual work and prolonged ambulation.
    • The NLRC used these observations to support a permanent total disability determination.
  • Petitioners’ motion for reconsideration and denial
    • Petitioners filed a motion for reconsideration.
    • The NLRC denied the motion for reconsideration in a resolution dated July 23, 2003.
  • Court of Appeals certiorari review
    • Petitioners filed a petition for certiorari under Rule 65.
    • The Court of Appeals...(Subscriber-Only)

Issues:

  • Whether the NLRC committed grave abuse of discretion in setting aside the labor arbiter’s decision and awarding US$60,000 permanent total disability benefits
    • Whether the NLRC disregarded the supposed precedent in German Marine Agencies v. NLRC requiring the company-designated physician’s disability assessment to control
    • Whether the NLRC misapplied the POEA standard employment contract provisions on compensation...(Subscriber-Only)

Ruling:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Ratio:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster, building context before diving into full texts. AI-powered analysis, always verify critical details.