Title
Canuel vs. Magsaysay Maritime Corp.
Case
G.R. No. 190161
Decision Date
Oct 13, 2014
Worker's death compensable as work-related injury during employment triggered events leading to death, despite post-contract termination, per liberal POEA-SEC interpretation.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 190161)

The Facts

Nancing was employed by Magsaysay on July 14, 2006, and was declared fit for duty after a medical examination. He suffered an accident on February 20, 2007, while working aboard the vessel M/V North Sea, resulting in injuries leading to a diagnosis of bilateral closed traumatic hemothorax. Following a period of medical treatment, he was repatriated to Manila where he ultimately died on April 25, 2007. The death certificate indicated acute respiratory failure as the immediate cause of death, with lung metastasis and bone cancer as underlying causes.

Initial Complaint

On May 23, 2007, Anita filed a complaint against the respondents for death benefits, claiming the accident had caused the complications leading to Nancing's death. The respondents denied liability, attributing Nancing's death to lung cancer, contending that it was not a work-related illness.

Labor Arbiter's Ruling

On December 27, 2007, the Labor Arbiter ruled in favor of the petitioners, awarding death benefits amounting to $72,000, which included death compensation for the minor children, burial expenses, and damages. The Labor Arbiter determined that the injury sustained during Nancing's employment was a contributing factor to his eventual demise.

NLRC Ruling

The National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) affirmed the Labor Arbiter's ruling on April 30, 2008, concluding that Nancing's death was linked to the work-related injury. However, the NLRC found that Nancing's contract technically ended upon his medical repatriation, which influenced the determination of benefits.

Court of Appeals Ruling

The Court of Appeals, in a decision dated May 19, 2009, found the NLRC's ruling to contain grave abuse of discretion, asserting that sorcerers’ death after contract termination was non-compensable, irrespective of work-related factors that led to his illness. The petitioners' motion for reconsideration was denied on October 30, 2009.

The Core Legal Issue

The primary issue for resolution was whether the Court of Appeals committed reversible error by dismissing the compensation claim after Nancing's employment was deemed terminated due to his medical repatriation. The petitioners argued that the work-related accident triggered a series of health complications, including his death.

The Court's Ruling

The Supreme Court clarified the governing provisions of the POEA regarding compensability of death benefits, emphasizing two requirements: the death must be work-related and must occur during the employment term. The Court determined that Nancing’s injury satisfied the work-related requirement, as it significantly contributed to his health deterioration and subsequent death.

Exception to Employment Termi

...continue reading

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.