G.R. No. 238545 - Unitra Maritime Manila, Inc., VT Maritime Inc., and/or Capt. Victor M. Villanueva vs. Giovannie B. Campanero

On April 22, 2014, Unitra Maritime Manila, Inc. hired Giovannie B. Campanero as Second (2nd) Officer for its foreign principal, VT Maritime Inc.
His employment was governed by the POEA-Standard Employment Contract (POEA-SEC) and the All Japan Seamen’s Union Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA).
On May 29, 2014, Campanero departed the Philippines, boarding the vessel M/V Mount Akaboshi.

Approximately one month into his voyage, while performing physically demanding tasks (e.g., lifting heavy provisions during lashing operations), Campanero experienced sudden weakness in his lower extremities.
The following day, he suffered sharp lower back pain accompanied by numbness in his right leg.
Despite his deteriorating condition, Campanero continued with his routine duties until his health forced him to seek an on-shore medical assessment in Japan, where he was diagnosed with a disc hernia, prompting his immediate repatriation.

Upon arrival in the Philippines, Campanero was promptly referred to company-designated physicians at Manila Doctors Hospital (MDH) for further evaluation and treatment.
His condition worsened during inpatient treatment: he could no longer stand independently, and further diagnostic imaging (MRI) revealed an arteriovenous malformation with ruptured intramedullary bleeding and associated complications in bowel movement.
Campanero underwent surgery and entered a rehabilitation phase for his lumbar spine injury; however, by April 2015, Unitra had withheld further medical aid.
No conclusive disability grading was issued by the company-designated physician within the prescribed 240-day period.

Dissatisfied with the company’s medical evaluation, Campanero consulted an independent specialist, Dr. Francis Pimentel (a specialist in Physical Medicine).

Dr. Pimentel’s assessment identified positive paraplegia (lower extremity muscle strength of 1-2/5), 90% sensory deficits, and bowel and bladder incontinence.
His report explicitly linked Campanero’s condition with his work environment and activities on board the vessel.

Additionally, orthopedic surgeon Dr. Rogelio Catapang, Jr. corroborated Dr. Pimentel’s findings and highlighted that the seafarer’s strenuous work conditions could have contributed to the rupture of the previously asymptomatic arteriovenous malformation.

Campanero initially filed a complaint before the Labor Arbiter (LA), who, on March 21, 2016, ordered Unitra Maritime Manila, Inc. and VT Maritime Inc. to pay him:

Permanent and total disability compensation amounting to USD127,932.00 (or its Philippine peso equivalent).
Sick pay amounting to USD4,181.67.
Attorney’s fees calculated at 10% of the total award.

The National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) reversed the LA’s decision on May 31, 2016, holding that:

Campanero failed to secure a second medical opinion before filing his claim.
His claim was premature due to non-compliance with the mandatory referral procedure to a third doctor.
The company-designated physician’s determination—that his illness was not work-related—was controlling.

On petition for certiorari before the Court of Appeals (CA), the CA rendered a decision on September 18, 2017:

It nullified the NLRC’s decision and reinstated the LA’s original award by recognizing the seafarer’s freedom to choose his own medical specialist.
The CA found a reasonable connection between his work-related activities (lifting heavy objects) and his spinal injury, thus ordering the payment of disability benefits.
The CA also denied the Motion for Reconsideration filed by Unitra Maritime and VT Maritime.

Petitioners (Unitra Maritime, VT Maritime, and/or Capt. Victor M. Villanueva) sought review from this Court to reverse the CA’s decision and reinstate the NLRC ruling on the basis of alleged errors.

Whether Campanero is entitled to total and permanent disability benefits under the terms of the POEA-SEC and the CBA.

Does the nature of Campanero’s employment and work duties contribute sufficiently to a presumptive work-related injury?

Whether the seafarer’s claim falls within the ambit of the CBA, notwithstanding arguments that his employment contract may not be covered by the said agreement.
Whether the failure of Campanero to secure a second and third medical opinion, as mandated by the POEA-SEC conflict-resolution procedure, should bar his claim for compensation.
Whether the factual findings of the NLRC, which relied on the company-designated physician’s interim assessments, should prevail over conflicting independent medical opinions.