Case Summary (G.R. No. 211882)
Facts of the Case
Quiogue was hired by the petitioners under an employment contract that required adherence to the Philippine Overseas Employment Administration Standard Employment Contract (POEA-SEC) and the International Transport Workers Federation Total Crew Cost Collective Bargaining Agreement (ITF TCC CBA), which provided better benefits in case of disability or death. After sustaining a foot injury on November 11, 2010, Quiogue was repatriated and diagnosed with a fracture in his left foot. He underwent treatment until April 13, 2011, when he was declared "fit to work" by the company-designated physician. Despite receiving treatment, Quiogue continued to experience pain and sought a second opinion, which led to a diagnosis of permanent total disability.
NLRC and CA Decisions
Quiogue filed a complaint with the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC), which ruled in his favor, stating that his injury rendered him unfit for seafaring duties. This decision was upheld by the NLRC and later confirmed by the Court of Appeals (CA) after the petitioners' appeal. The CA noted the significance of the 120-day rule, indicating that Quiogue's disability was considered permanent and total due to the company-designated physician's assessment being issued after the lapse of more than 120 days from his repatriation.
Petitioners' Arguments
In their petition for certiorari, the petitioners contended that Quiogue was not entitled to total permanent disability benefits due to the earlier assessment of fitness to work by the company-designated physician. They argued that greater weight should be afforded to the company-designated physician's diagnosis, rather than that of Quiogue's chosen physician, and questioned the basis for awarding attorney's fees to Quiogue.
Legal Principles and Findings
The court reiterated that seafarers are entitled to seek medical opinions beyond the assessments given by company-designated physicians. The decisions drew from legal precedents, including rulings asserting that if a seafarer is unable to perform his usual duties for more than 120 days due to work-related injuries, he is entitled to claims for permanent total disability. The court emphasized that the company-designated physician must provide a final assessment within the mandated periods, and failure to do so can lead to conclusions of automatic permanent total disability.
Decision and Outcome
The Supreme Court upheld the CA’s decision to award Quiogue permanent total disability benefits, reinforcing the
...continue readingCase Syllabus (G.R. No. 211882)
Procedural Posture and Nature of the Case
- Petitioners filed a petition for review on certiorari under Rule 45 of the Rules of Court.
- The petition assails the July 5, 2013 Decision and March 25, 2014 Resolution of the Court of Appeals (CA) in CA-G.R. SP No. 125064.
- The CA affirmed the resolutions of the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) in LAC No. 01-000014-12.
- The central issue involves the certification by the company-designated physician regarding the seafarer’s claimed disability issued beyond the 120-day period.
- The case revolves around the entitlement of respondent Ernesto S. Quiogue Jr. to permanent and total disability benefits due to a work-related injury.
Factual Background
- Ernesto S. Quiogue Jr. was employed by Elburg Shipmanagement Philippines, Inc. (on behalf of Enterprise Shipping Agency SRL) as an Able Bodied Seaman.
- His contract was governed by the Philippine Overseas Employment Administration Standard Employment Contract (POEA-SEC) and the International Transport Workers Federation Total Crew Cost Collective Bargaining Agreement (ITF TCC CBA), which provided higher benefits in case of disability or death.
- On November 11, 2010, Quiogue suffered an injury when a co-worker accidentally dropped a fire wire on his left foot aboard the vessel MT Filicudi M.
- He received immediate first aid and was hospitalized in Tarragona, Spain, where x-rays revealed a metatarsal bone fracture.
- Repatriated to the Philippines on November 19, 2010, Quiogue was diagnosed with a non-displaced fracture of the cuneiform bone of the left foot.
- Underwent treatment and therapy with the company-designated physician from November 2010 to April 2011.
- On April 13, 2011, he was certified “fit to work” by the company-designated physician despite his continuing pain.
- Quiogue subsequently sought a second medical opinion from orthopedic surgeon Dr. Nicanor Escutin, who declared him permanently and totally disabled and unfit for any seafaring duties.
- Petitioners refused to pay permanent and total disability benefits, claiming the company-designated physician’s “fit to work” certification prevailed.
- This dispute led to litigation before the Labor Arbiter (LA), NLRC, and CA.
Rulings of Lower Courts
- The Labor Arbiter ruled in favor of Quiogue, finding that his injury impaired his dexterity and ability to perform seafaring work and that he suffered permanent and total disability.
- The Arbiter ordered petitioners to pay US$89,000 as permanent and total disability benefits plus 10% attorney’s fees, denying other claims for lack of evidence.
- The NLRC affirmed the Labor Arbiter’s decision and denied the petitioners’ motion for reconsideration.
- The NLRC held that while a seafarer must be examined by the company-designated physician, the seafarer could also obtain a second opinion, and the medical evidence favorable to the seafarer should be adopted when divergent from the company doctor’s assessment.
- The NLRC considered the fact that more than five months from repatriation had transpired before the company physician declared Quiogue fit to work, invoking the ruling in Oriental Shipmanagement Co., Inc. v. Bastol on the presumption of permanent and total disability after 120 days.
- The CA affirmed the NLRC decision but deleted the award of attorney’s fees due to lack of factual and legal basis.
- The CA ruled that the timing of the “fit to work” certification—issued beyond the 120-day threshold—rendered Quiogue’s disability permanent and total.
- The CA also rejected petitioners’ argument that prior disability benefits received from a former employer barred the present claim, holding that claims arise from separate contracts and injuries.
Arguments of Petitioners
- Petitioners argued that the company-designated physician’s assessment (declaring Quiogue fit to work) was more accurate and controlled the determination of disability.
- Alleged that the NLRC gravely abused its discretion by giving greater weight to Dr. Escutin’s private examination over the company-designated physician’s findings.
- Contended that the 120-day period should preclude claims of permanent and total disability when the seafarer is declared fit to work by the company doctor within that timeframe.
- Claimed that Quiogue’s prior receipt of permanent disability benefits from a former employer barred his claim for further benefits.
- Argued that permanent and total disability benefits should not be based solely on the inability to return to work within 120 days.
- Suggested that awarding benefits in this case would set a dangerous precedent encouraging abuse.
- Maintained that a pre-employment medical examination (PEME) showing fitness to work shoul