Scribd
Upload
141 views2 pages

Case Digest No. 2 PDF

1) A seafarer filed a claim for permanent total disability benefits after being diagnosed with septic arthritis and avascular necrosis of the left hip while employed. 2) The Labor Arbiter and NLRC awarded the seafarer disability benefits, but the Supreme Court reversed, finding that the seafarer's illness pre-existed his employment based on medical records. 3) While the pre-employment medical exam found the seafarer fit to work, the Supreme Court ruled that the exam could not have divulged the seafarer's true illness, and that disability from a pre-existing condition is not compensable. Therefore, the seafarer was not

Uploaded by

Angel Khaille Saguban
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
141 views2 pages

Case Digest No. 2 PDF

1) A seafarer filed a claim for permanent total disability benefits after being diagnosed with septic arthritis and avascular necrosis of the left hip while employed. 2) The Labor Arbiter and NLRC awarded the seafarer disability benefits, but the Supreme Court reversed, finding that the seafarer's illness pre-existed his employment based on medical records. 3) While the pre-employment medical exam found the seafarer fit to work, the Supreme Court ruled that the exam could not have divulged the seafarer's true illness, and that disability from a pre-existing condition is not compensable. Therefore, the seafarer was not

Uploaded by

Angel Khaille Saguban
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 2

[G.R. NO.

161104 : September 27, 2006]

NYK-FIL SHIP MANAGEMENT INC. and/or NYK SHIP MANAGEMENT HK., LTD., Petitioners, v. THE
NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION AND LAURO A. HERNANDEZ

Fallacy on non sequitor

FACTS: Seafarer was employed as a boatswain under the old POEA Standard Employment Contract. On
February 22, 1999, he requested for medical attention due to high fever and pains at his left hip bone
socket. The company doctor diagnosed him to have septic arthritis and avascular necrosis of the left hip
and gave him a disability grading of half of Grade 9. Seafarer filed a claim for permanent total disability
benefits of US$60,000.

The Labor Arbiter directed him for medical evaluation to any government hospital, in order to determine
the extent of his disability. Seafarer complied and was advised by the government doctor not to engage
in manual work that would entail prolonged standing, running and carrying heavy objects.

The Labor Arbiter awarded disability benefits of US$6,530.00, equivalent to impediment grade of half of
Grade 9 and attorney’s fees.

The NLRC modified the decision and awarded total disability benefits of US$60,000.00 and ruled that
petitioners’ negligence, coupled with the fact that the nature of the illness of respondent seafarer
renders him incapable of pursuing his profession as a seafarer, sufficed to categorize respondent’s
disability as permanent total disability. The Court of Appeals affirmed the NLRC ruling. Petitioner vessel
brought the case to the Supreme Court and argued that the appeals court failed to consider that the
condition of respondent pre-existed his employment, thereby limiting, if not negating their liability.

The Supreme Court, through Justice Morales, reversed the decision and dismissed the claim:

The Court said that: “in order to hold petitioners (vessel) liable to respondent (seafarer) for disability
benefits, respondent (seafarer) must present concrete proof that he acquired or contracted the injury or
illness, which resulted to his disability, during the term of his contract.” As gleaned from the records,
seafarer disclosed that as early as January 19, 1999, or nine (9) days prior to his deployment, he had
been experiencing fever, moderate to high grade, intermittent, associated with chills, body malaise and
pain on the lumbosacral area radiating to left lower extremity. This clearly shows that his ailment
antedated his employment and that he did not contract it while working on board the vessel for more
than three (3) weeks. “Disability arising from a pre-existing illness is not compensable.”

Seafarer argues that prior to his employment, he underwent a thorough PEME conducted by the
company-designated physician and was pronounced “fit to work.” This means that his illness was
acquired during employment.
On this issue, the court ruled:

“While a PEME may reveal enough for the petitioner (vessel) to decide whether a seafarer is fit for
overseas employment, it may not be relied upon to inform petitioners of a seafarer’s true state of
health. The PEME could not have divulged respondent’s illness considering that the examinations were
not exploratory. It was only after respondent seafarer was subjected to extensive medical procedures
including MRI of the thoracic and lumbosacral spine that respondent’s illness was finally diagnosed as a
case of avascular necrosis of the hip with septic arthritis.”

The court further held:

“It having been satisfactorily shown that respondent was really not fit to work as a boatswain due to his
pre-existing illness and, therefore, he is not entitled to disability compensation, necessarily, he is not
entitled to attorney’s fees."

You might also like