Title
Cutanda vs. Marlow Navigation Phils., Inc.
Case
G.R. No. 219123
Decision Date
Sep 11, 2017
Seafarer injured on duty, deemed permanently disabled after 240 days; awarded $60K, moral damages, and attorney’s fees due to employer’s bad faith.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 164301)

Facts of the Case

Cutanda was hired by Marlow Navigation Phils. for a ten-month contract with a monthly salary of US$680. Before joining the vessel MV "Malte Rambow," he was declared fit to work by company-designated physicians. On October 8, 2012, he suffered severe injuries to his left hand while executing his duties aboard the vessel in Malaysia. After immediate medical care in Malaysia, he was repatriated to the Philippines for further treatment, where he underwent therapy for approximately six months but remained unfit for work.

Legal Actions Taken

Following the inadequate response from his employers regarding his medical condition and their refusal to pay disability benefits, Cutanda filed a complaint against the respondents pursuing total disability benefits, medical reimbursements, moral damages, and attorney’s fees. He asserted that his injuries had rendered him permanently and totally disabled, warranting compensation as per the regulations under the Philippine Overseas Employment Administration (POEA) Standard Employment Contract (SEC).

Findings in Lower Courts

The Labor Arbiter initially ruled in favor of Cutanda, granting him the full amount of US$60,000 in disability benefits, US$6,000 in attorney’s fees, and P50,000 for moral damages. The ruling underscored the notion that disability assessments are determined not solely by the company physician but also by the medical findings demonstrating the extent of the injuries.

The National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) affirmed this ruling, pointing out the conflicting medical assessments which delegitimized the determination made by the company-designated physician regarding the petitioner's disability grading.

Court of Appeals Decision

The respondents appealed to the Court of Appeals (CA), which reversed the NLRC's decision, claiming Cutanda's disability was graded at "Grade 10" and thus did not meet the criteria for total and permanent disability established under the POEA-SEC. The CA further deleted the awards for moral damages and attorney's fees, arguing insufficient grounds for these claims.

Supreme Court Determination

Upon review, the Supreme Court reconciled the conflicting findings between the CA and the NLRC, ultimately siding with Cutanda. The ruling stated that the findings by the company physicians did not conclusively prove that Cutanda was fit to work or had regained the full use of his hand, thereby qualifying him for permanent total disability benefits given the duration he had been unable to work, exceeding the legal limits.

The Court

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster—building context before diving into full texts.