Title
Supreme Court
Career Philippines Shipmanagement, Inc. vs. Godinez
Case
G.R. No. 206826
Decision Date
Oct 2, 2017
Seafarer Eduardo Godinez, diagnosed with bipolar disorder due to onboard stress and harsh treatment, won permanent disability benefits after invalidating a dubious "Certificate of Fitness for Work." Court ruled employer acted in bad faith, awarding damages and attorney's fees.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 206826)

Applicable Law

The case is governed by the provisions of the 1987 Philippine Constitution, particularly regarding labor rights, as well as regulations set forth by the Philippine Overseas Employment Administration (POEA) Standard Employment Contract which outlines benefits and obligations related to seafarers' employment.

Factual Antecedents of Godinez’s Employment

Eduardo Godinez was employed on November 7, 2003, under a POEA Standard Employment Contract while he was only 20 years old. Following a pre-employment medical examination declaring him fit for service, he was assigned to work as a Deck Cadet aboard "M/V Norviken." His duties included navigation watch, gangway watch, and assisting officers with various tasks.

Incidents Aboard "M/V Norviken"

On December 17, 2003, Godinez experienced a problematic incident where he failed to wake for his shift. Consequently, he faced punitive treatment from his superior officer, Second Officer Antonio Dayo. This punishment involved cleaning toilet facilities instead of his regular duties, which escalated into a pattern of psychological harassment characterized by humiliation, insults, and neglect of his basic needs.

Medical Condition and Repatriation

Godinez’s mental health deteriorated significantly, leading to bizarre behavior and disobedience. Reports from the vessel's captain documented Godinez's increasingly erratic state. By December 25, 2003, medical attention was sought, leading to Godinez’s repatriation on January 10, 2004. Subsequent examinations revealed he was diagnosed with bipolar disorder, marked by episodes of insomnia and paranoia from a young age, complicating the question of whether his condition was work-related.

Legal Proceedings Initiated by Godinez

On March 7, 2006, Godinez filed a labor case against Career and Columbian, claiming entitlements for disability benefits, sickness allowances, and damages due to the alleged maltreatment and resultant psychological trauma. He argued that his bipolar disorder was exacerbated by working conditions on board and mistreatment from his superior officer.

Ruling of the Labor Arbiter

The Labor Arbiter ruled in favor of Godinez on May 16, 2007, finding his condition to be work-related and thereby compensable under Section 20 of the POEA standard contract. The Arbiter ordered Career and Columbian to pay Godinez various monetary claims, including disability compensation, sickness allowance, and damages, concluding that the harsh treatment inflicted upon him by Dayo constituted a significant contributory factor to Godinez's eventual breakdown.

Ruling of the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC)

Career and Columbian appealed the Labor Arbiter's decision to the NLRC, which upheld the judgment on April 30, 2008. The NLRC emphasized the Arbiter's correct jurisdiction and affirmed the findings of work-related conditions impacting Godinez's mental health, while allowing for some modifications regarding the individual liability of the Operations Manager.

Court of Appeals Decision

Career and Columbian subsequently sought certiorari from the Court of Appeals. The appellate court affirmed the NLRC’s decision on May 22, 2012, ruling against the claims of fraudulent concealment by Godinez regarding his past medical history, concluding that he lacked intent or knowledge to misrepresent his health status during his employment application. This decision included maintaining the awards for disability benefits, sickness allowance, and damages based on substantial evidence demonstrating

...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.