Title
Supreme Court
Cabatan vs. Southeast Asia Shipping Corp.
Case
G.R. No. 219495
Decision Date
Feb 28, 2022
Seafarer denied disability benefits due to failure to prove work-related injury and non-compliance with mandatory three-day reporting requirement post-repatriation.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 219495)

Facts of the Case

Cabatan reported feeling severe pain in the scrotal and inguinal areas after carrying heavy machinery aboard the M/V BP Pioneer due to waves causing the vessel to sway. Initially treated by the ship’s doctor, Cabatan was put on pain relievers and advised to rest, although no immediate serious conditions were diagnosed. After repatriation on May 25, 2010, he underwent a pre-employment medical examination (PEME) at a company-accredited clinic, which revealed multiple spinal issues, leading to consultations with various specialists and recommendations for surgery.

Procedural History

On March 1, 2011, Cabatan filed a complaint against SEASCORP and Maritime Management for total permanent disability benefits based on injury claims. The respondents contended that Cabatan failed to report to the manning agency for post-employment medical examination after contract termination and thus claimed he forfeited his right to benefits. The Labor Arbiter ruled in favor of Cabatan; however, the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) reversed this decision, primarily based on the contention that he did not substantiate that his condition was work-related or that he complied with post-employment reporting requirements.

NLRC Decision

The NLRC's April 26, 2012 decision emphasized the need for a seafarer to undergo a post-employment medical examination within three days upon repatriation, which Cabatan did not do. The Commission found the absence of evidence linking Cabatan’s alleged permanent disability directly to his employment and maintained that his claims were unsupported due to failure to comply with reporting protocols.

Court of Appeals Decision

Cabatan’s subsequent petition for certiorari before the Court of Appeals was denied, affirming the NLRC's findings that non-compliance with mandatory reporting requirements led to the forfeiture of his claims for disability benefits. The Court held that the controlling factor for entitlement to benefits was whether an examination could establish a link between the claimed disability and the employment.

Issues on Appeal

In the present petition for review on certiorari, Cabatan raised two main issues, arguing that the Court of Appeals erred in dismissing the “Report of Illness” from the ship’s doctor and that the mandatory reporting requirement should not be absolute as he did not believe his condition warranted medical attention based on initial medical advice.

Supreme Court Ruling

The Supreme Court ruled against Cabatan, holding that the petition lacked merit. Reaffirming the NLRC

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur is a legal research platform serving the Philippines with case digests and jurisprudence resources. AI digests are study aids only—use responsibly.