Case Digest (G.R. No. 209582)
Facts:
Teekay Shipping Philippines, Inc., and/or Teekay Shipping Ltd., and/or Alex Verchez v. Roberto M. Ramoga, Jr., G.R. No. 209582, January 19, 2018, Supreme Court First Division, Tijam, J., writing for the Court. Petitioners (the manning agency, the foreign principal and an individual) seek review of the Court of Appeals decision that affirmed the National Labor Relations Commission's award of permanent total disability benefits to respondent seafarer Roberto M. Ramoga, Jr.
On February 18, 2010 respondent executed an overseas employment contract with Teekay Shipping Ltd., through its local manning agency Teekay Shipping Philippines, Inc., for an eight-month engagement as Deck Trainee under POEA-approved terms. After a fit-for-sea PEME, he joined the M/T "SEBAROK SPIRIT" on April 9, 2010. He slipped and injured his left ankle aboard the vessel, was examined in Thailand and diagnosed with metatarsal fractures; surgery was recommended.
Respondent was repatriated on October 4, 2010 and was referred to Metropolitan Medical Center. On October 9, 2010 he underwent open reduction and internal fixation performed by the company-designated physician, Dr. William Chuasuan, Jr., and received rehabilitation. The company-designated physician issued a report dated January 11, 2011 advising continued rehabilitation and follow-up, and subsequently issued a certification declaring respondent fit to return to work on April 8, 2011.
Dissatisfied, respondent consulted a private orthopedist, Dr. Rogelio P. Catapang, who declared him permanently unfit for sea duty. On March 4, 2011 respondent filed a complaint before the Labor Arbiter seeking permanent total disability benefits, sickness allowance, medical expenses, damages and attorney's fees under the Revised Standard Terms and Conditions Governing the Employment of Filipino Seafarers.
The Labor Arbiter rendered judgment on September 14, 2011 finding petitioners jointly and solidarily liable to pay US$60,000 (or its peso equivalent), sickness allowance and attorney's fees. On appeal the NLRC, in its March 30, 2012 Decision, deleted only the sickness allowance and otherwise affirmed the Labor Arbiter. Petitioners sought certiorari with the Court of Appeals (CA), which on May 30, 2013 affirmed the NLRC. The CA denied petitioners' motion for reconsideration on October 18, 2013.
Petitioners filed a Petition for Review on Certiorari under Rule 45 before the Supreme Court, challenging the CA's affirmation and arguing...(Pro-only)
Issues:
- Under Rule 45, may the Supreme Court review the Court of Appeals' factual findings in this case?
- Was respondent entitled to permanent total disability benefits despite the company-designated physician's declaration of fitness on April 8, 2011 (186 days after repatriation)?
- Does the company-designated physician's assessment prevail over the seafarer’s private physician in determining e...(Pro-only)
Ruling:
- (Pro-only)
Ratio:
- (Pro-only)
Doctrine:
- (Pro-only)