Title
Madridejos vs. NYK-Fil Ship Management, Inc.
Case
G.R. No. 204262
Decision Date
Jun 7, 2017
Seafarer claimed disability benefits for a sebaceous cyst, alleging work-relatedness. Courts ruled it non-compensable, citing lack of evidence and termination due to probationary contract expiration.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 204262)

Employment Background

Madridejos, a Filipino seafarer, signed an employment contract with NYK-Fil on March 25, 2010, for a position as a Demi Chef aboard the vessel "Crystal Symphony/Serenity." His contract was set for a duration of ten months, with provisions for salary and working conditions. He commenced his duties on April 10, 2010, but two weeks later, he suffered an accident resulting from slipping on a metal stairway, which led to the discovery of a sebaceous cyst.

Medical Treatment and Repayment

After his unfortunate fall on April 28, 2010, Madridejos was examined by onboard medical personnel and subsequently underwent a minor surgical procedure to excise the cyst at Spire Southampton Hospital on April 29, 2010. Following the procedure, Madridejos remained on the vessel until he was terminated on July 5, 2010, ostensibly due to the expiration of his contract as a probationary employee. He was repatriated to the Philippines on July 6, 2010.

Disability Claim Initiation

Upon returning to the Philippines, Madridejos sought recognition of his illness as work-related and demanded disability benefits from NYK-Fil. He claimed that his medical issues were aggravated by his work conditions and that he was advised to return home for further evaluation and treatment. Despite his assertions, NYK-Fil contested these claims, arguing that the cyst was not work-related and that Madridejos could resume his duties post-surgery.

Labor Arbiter's Decision

The Labor Arbiter, Gaudencio P. Demaisip, Jr., ruled in favor of Madridejos, concluding that his illness arose during his period of employment. The Labor Arbiter, however, awarded Madridejos a disability rating of Grade 7, rather than Grade 1, which he sought, based on the findings that while the illness was incurred during the employment term, there was insufficient evidence to indicate the severity warranted a higher classification.

National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) Review

Both parties appealed the Labor Arbiter's ruling. The NLRC sided with NYK-Fil, highlighting significant doubts regarding the validity of Madridejos’s claims. They found that the cyst was not work-related and noted that there was no substantial proof supporting Madridejos's assertions of being medically unfit for work or the need for further treatment in the Philippines.

Court of Appeals Rulings

Madridejos subsequently filed for certiorari with the Court of Appeals, yet his petition was dismissed. The Court of Appeals upheld the NLRC's findings, stating that the evidence indicated Madridejos's termination resulted from the expiration of his contract rather than any medical issues. The court concluded that his medical condition did not arise through the course of his employment, thereby denying his claim for disability benefits.

Petition for Review on Certiorari

Madridejos proceeded to file a Petition for Review on Certiorari, asserting continued entitlement to disability benefits arguing the court decisions disregarded the substantial evidence he presented. He emphasized the need for recognition of his medical issues as arising from his occupational duties.

Court's Final Findings

The Supreme Court affirmed the lower courts' decisions, concluding that Madridejos's cyst was not work-relat

...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.