Title
Philippine Transmarine Carriers, Inc. vs. Nazam
Case
G.R. No. 190804
Decision Date
Oct 11, 2010
Seafarer claimed depression due to hostile work conditions but failed to undergo mandatory post-employment medical exam; SC ruled illness non-compensable under POEA-SEC.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 190804)

Allegations and Complaints

On October 5, 2004, Nazam filed a complaint with the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) seeking payment for disability benefits, sickness allowance, damages, and attorney’s fees. He alleged that he faced hostile working conditions aboard the vessel, including verbal and mental abuse from the Chief Officer and Master, which led to him suffering from hypertension and depression. Nazam also claimed he was coerced into signing blank documents, removed from his position as Bosun, denied medical assistance in Yokohama, Japan, and subsequently denied a post-employment medical examination after his repatriation.

Medical Diagnoses

Subsequent to these events, Nazam consulted with Dr. Jesus Alberto Q. Poblete on October 27, 2004, where he was diagnosed with "Major Depression with Psychotic Features" and a possible traumatic disorder. Dr. Raymond Rosales later confirmed his diagnosis of Depressive Disorder on March 19, 2005, issuing a medical certification indicating Nazam was unfit for sea duty. Petitioners contended that Nazam's repatriation was simply a result of his request to be relieved and maintained that his alleged hypertension could not have developed during such a brief tenure aboard the vessel.

Labor Arbiter's Decision

On August 29, 2006, Labor Arbiter Ramon Valentin C. Reyes rendered a decision in favor of Nazam, awarding him US$60,000 in permanent total disability benefits, US$2,140 as sickness allowance, P50,000 each in moral and exemplary damages, and attorney’s fees amounting to 10% of the total award. The Arbiter found that Nazam's pre-employment records indicated he was fit for sea duty, thus concluding that his conditions arose during his employment.

NLRC's Reversal of Labor Arbiter's Decision

However, in a decision dated January 31, 2008, the NLRC overturned the Labor Arbiter’s ruling and dismissed Nazam's complaint. It cited Nazam’s request for relief as a significant factor, noted his failure to undergo a mandatory post-employment medical exam, and pointed out that he had not demonstrated that his repatriation was due to a work-related illness. The NLRC also observed that Nazam's delay in seeking medical assistance—over a month after his repatriation—questioned his claims' validity, particularly since the initial medical certification failed to provide a disability assessment.

Court of Appeals Decision and Petition for Review

Nazam subsequently appealed to the Court of Appeals, which issued a decision on September 30, 2009, reversing the NLRC's ruling and reinstating the Labor Arbiter’s decision. The appellate court emphasized that Nazam's depression was a direct result of his shipboard employment demands and the harsh treatment he received. The petitioners' motion for reconsideration was denied by resolution on December 17, 2009, leading to the present petition for review on certiorari.

Supreme Court's Ruling

The Supreme Court found the petition to be meritorious, stating that for an injury or illness to be compensated under the Philippine Overseas Employment Administration-Standard Employment Contract (POEA-SEC), it must occur within the empl

...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.