Title
De Andres vs. Diamond H Marine Services and Shipping Agency, Inc.
Case
G.R. No. 217345
Decision Date
Jul 12, 2017
Seafarer injured on duty, forced to sign waiver for repatriation; SC invalidates MOA, awards $60K disability benefits due to employer's failure to refer to company physician.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 217345)

Relevant Dates

De Andres entered into an Employment Contract on February 1, 2008, and sustained his injury on February 27, 2009. He was repatriated on February 5, 2010. The LA ruled in favor of De Andres on May 20, 2011, the NLRC reversed this decision on January 18, 2012, and the CA affirmed the NLRC ruling on July 31, 2014.

Applicable Laws

The key legal framework includes the 1987 Philippine Constitution, the Labor Code, and the 2000 Amended POEA Standard Terms and Conditions Governing the Employment of Filipino Seafarers On-Board Ocean-Going Vessels, specifically Section 20 (B)(3), which outlines the employers’ obligations regarding reporting requirements for seafarers claiming disability benefits.

Case Background

Wilmer O. De Andres was employed on a fishing vessel in Taiwan under an Employment Contract that stipulated his role and salary. However, he encountered exploitation, working excessively long hours and being subjected to a contract alteration that adversely affected his pay and conditions. On February 27, 2009, he suffered a severe leg injury due to an accident on the vessel, which resulted in multiple surgeries. Despite his dire medical condition, which rendered him unable to work, he faced challenges in obtaining repatriation and adequate medical care.

Findings of the Labor Arbiter

The Labor Arbiter ruled in favor of De Andres, awarding him total and permanent disability benefits, sickness allowance, and other compensations. The LA deduced that De Andres was forced to sign a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) that waived his claims in exchange for a termination payment, which he contended was inadequate and coercively signed to ensure his return to the Philippines.

NLRC and CA Rulings

The NLRC reversed the LA's decision, asserting that De Andres failed to comply with the mandatory reporting requirements stipulated under the POEA-SEC. It emphasized that he did not submit himself for a medical examination by the company-designated physician upon returning to the Philippines. The CA upheld the NLRC's ruling, concluding that the waiver found in the MOA was legally binding.

Petitioner's Arguments

In his petition to the Supreme Court, De Andres contended that the mandatory reporting requirement should not be strictly enforced as he faced employer obstruction when he attempted to comply. He argued that the MOA was an invalid quitclaim due to the unconscionable consideration it offered compared to his legitimate claims under the employment contract.

Respondents' Defense

The respondents maintained that De Andres’s injuries resulted from his negligence and that he voluntarily signed a valid MOA. They cited that before his repatriation, he was assessed by a physician in Taiwan who declared him fit for work, arguing that he forfeited the right to claim disability benefits by failing to follow the reporting protocol as mandated.

Supreme Court's Analysis

The Supreme Court found merit in De Andres's petition, stating that the denial of his disability claims could not solely rely on the reportorial requirement as he was effectively prevented from complying due to the employer's denial of his claims. The Court emphasized that the employer had an obligation to refer De Andres to a company-designated physicia

...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.