Title
Supreme Court
Jebsens Maritime, Inc. vs. Mirasol
Case
G.R. No. 213874
Decision Date
Jun 19, 2019
Seafarer awarded permanent disability benefits after company failed to issue final medical assessment within 120 days, affirming entitlement under POEA rules.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 246126)

Applicable Law

The governing body for the claims is the Philippine Overseas Employment Administration (POEA) Standard Employment Contract, along with applicable labor laws concerning disability benefits for seafarers as stipulated in the 1987 Philippine Constitution.

Procedural History

This dispute escalated through several judicial and quasi-judicial mechanisms. A complaint was first filed by Mirasol on November 8, 2012, against the petitioners for various claims, including total permanent disability benefits and damages. The Labor Arbiter ruled in favor of Mirasol on January 31, 2013, awarding him his claims. This decision was partially modified by the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) on June 28, 2013, reducing his disability benefits but affirming his entitlement to sickness allowance and attorney’s fees.

Labor Arbiter's Finding

In its initial ruling, the Labor Arbiter determined that the petitioners were liable for permanent and total disability benefits and sickness allowance due to Mirasol's medical condition, which was acquired during his deployment onboard the vessel. The Arbiter noted that Mirasol had passed a pre-employment medical examination that deemed him fit for work, and that his condition manifested after he had commenced duties onboard.

NLRC Ruling

The NLRC subsequently modified the Labor Arbiter's ruling, concluding that Mirasol's testicular cancer was not work-related, as he reported symptoms only ten days after boarding. The NLRC awarded him a reduced compensation amount, asserting that he had not met the burden of proving the work-relatedness of his illness, despite acknowledging the loss of a testicle as a disability comparable to the Grade II Schedule of Disability.

Court of Appeals Decision

Mirasol then sought recourse before the Court of Appeals (CA), which reinstated the Labor Arbiter's original decision. The CA's ruling was predominantly based on the failure of the company-designated physicians to provide a timely and definitive assessment of Mirasol's fitness to work or the extent of his disability. The court established that since the physicians could not determine his eligibility for work within the required period, Mirasol was automatically entitled to claim permanent disability benefits.

Petitioner's Arguments

In appealing the CA decision, the petitioners argued primarily that Mirasol's condition was not work-related and reiterated that he had not presented sufficient evidence to establish the connection between his illness and his work. They emphasized that symptoms arose only after a short period of duty aboard the vessel.

Court Ruling Analysis

The Supreme Court affirmed the CA's decision, dismissing the petitioners' arguments. The ruling reiterated that a seafarer's eligibility for total and permanent disability benefits is primarily predicated on the company-designated physician's failure to issue a conclusive assessment of fitness to work within the statutory 120-day period. Citing precedent, the Court reinforc

...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.