Title
Philippine Transmarine Carriers, Inc. vs. Tena-e
Case
G.R. No. 234365
Decision Date
Jul 6, 2022
Seafarer injured on duty; treatment extended beyond 120 days. Company-designated doctor issued interim Grade 12 disability, but final assessment lapsed due to seafarer’s missed appointment. SC ruled no permanent total disability, awarding Grade 12 benefits.
A

Case Summary (G.R. No. 203576)

Factual Background

In July 2014, Allan N. Tena-e was employed as a seafarer by PTCI for its foreign principal, Seaspan Crew Management Ltd. He suffered an injury to his right shoulder on October 5, 2014, while on duty, which led to a diagnosis of a clavicular fracture. Following his injury, Allan received treatment aboard the vessel and upon repatriation was examined by company-designated doctors, who issued various medical reports outlining his injury and rehabilitation plan.

Medical Treatment and Assessment

After his repatriation, Allan continued to be under medical surveillance until March 2015, where he underwent physical therapy and received interim assessments. Despite showing signs of improvement, Allan continued to experience pain. A follow-up appointment was scheduled for April 13, 2015, but he failed to attend this appointment, leading to disputes regarding his treatment and disability assessment.

Proceedings Before the Labor Arbiter

In December 2015, the Labor Arbiter ruled in favor of Allan, concluding that he was entitled to total and permanent disability benefits due to the absence of a final medical assessment from the company-designated physician within the legally mandated period. Allan's claim for damages was, however, denied, although he was awarded attorney's fees for necessitating counsel due to the petitioners' failure to act in good faith.

Appeal to the NLRC

Following the Labor Arbiter's decision, PTCI appealed to the NLRC, which affirmed the lower court's ruling. The NLRC found no merit in PTCI's claims of Allan abandoning his treatment and upheld Allan's entitlement to benefits due to the lack of a conclusive evaluation by a company physician within the specified duration.

Ruling of the Court of Appeals

The Court of Appeals further denied PTCI's appeal, reiterating the earlier findings regarding Allan's compliance with treatment protocols and the company's failure to conduct a final assessment after the lapse of the periods mandated by law. PTCI's subsequent motion for reconsideration was also denied.

Petition for Review on Certiorari

PTCI filed a petition for review on certiorari, contesting the findings related to abandonment of treatment and the award of attorney's fees. The petitioner argued that Allan's failure to appear on the scheduled follow-up appointment constituted abandonment, impairing their ability to conduct a final assessment within the necessary time frame.

Court's Ruling

The Supreme Court ruled in favor of PTCI, establishing that while a seafarer has rights to disability benefits, they are contingent upon adhering to treatment schedules and appointments with company-designated physicians. Allan's failure to attend the scheduled follow-

...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.