Micronesia Resources v. Cantomayor
REITERATIONFacts
The Antecedents: Fabiolo Cantomayor, a seafarer, entered into an overseas employment contract with Dynacom Shield Shipping Ltd. and Singa Ship Management A.S., represented by Micronesia Resources, to serve as Third Officer on the vessel M/T "CLOUD." During his employment, Cantomayor began experiencing weakness and difficulty breathing, which worsened to the point of collapse. Upon reaching Italy, he was diagnosed with coronary artery disease and advised to undergo bypass surgery. He was subsequently repatriated to the Philippines, where a company-designated physician confirmed the diagnosis and recommended the same surgery. Cantomayor underwent coronary artery bypass surgery and, due to his condition, was unable to return to his previous employment. Procedural History: Cantomayor sought permanent and total disability compensation and reimbursement of medical expenses. The employer denied the claim for total disability, offering compensation for a Grade 7 permanent and partial disability. Cantomayor filed a complaint with the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC). The Labor Arbiter dismissed the complaint for lack of merit but ordered the respondents to pay US$20,900 for Grade 7 disability benefits. Only Cantomayor appealed to the NLRC, insisting on total disability compensation. The NLRC dismissed his appeal, and a subsequent motion for reconsideration was denied. Cantomayor then filed a Petition for Certiorari with the Court of Appeals (CA), which granted the petition, reversing the NLRC's decision and declaring Cantomayor to be suffering from a permanent and total disability. The Petition: Micronesia Resources, Dynacom Shield Shipping Ltd., and Singa Ship Management A.S. filed a Petition for Review on Certiorari under Rule 45 of the Rules of Court, assailing the CA's decision. They argued that the CA erred in giving due course to Cantomayor's petition, that the finding of total and permanent disability was baseless, and that Cantomayor was entitled only to the Grade 7 disability benefits awarded by the NLRC. They contended that the mere inability to work as a seaman does not automatically justify total disability compensation, that entitlement is schedular, and that the company physician's assessment should be controlling. The petitioners also argued that Cantomayor's illness was either not compensable or a pre-existing condition that he concealed.
Issue(s)
Whether the Court of Appeals erred in giving due course to the Petition for Certiorari filed by respondent. Whether the Court of Appeals erred in finding that respondent suffers from total and permanent disability. Whether respondent is entitled to permanent and total disability compensation.
Ruling
The Petition is denied for lack of merit. The Court affirmed the Court of Appeals' decision declaring respondent Fabiolo Cantomayor to be suffering from permanent and total disability and entitled to full benefits.
Ratio Decidendi
On the timeliness of the Petition for Certiorari: The Court found the procedural issue raised by petitioners to be without merit. It clarified that the Court of Appeals has the discretion to grant a motion for extension of time to file a petition, provided it is filed within the original period. In this case, respondent filed a motion for extension and subsequently filed the petition within the extended period. Crucially, petitioners did not question the timeliness of the petition before the CA, even in their motion for reconsideration, thereby waiving their right to raise the issue on appeal. Therefore, the CA properly gave due course to the petition. On the finding of total and permanent disability: The Court agreed with the CA that respondent suffered from permanent and total disability. It noted that the company-designated physician assessed a Grade 7 partial permanent disability, but this assessment was not conclusive. The Court emphasized that a total disability does not require absolute helplessness but rather the inability to pursue one's usual work and earn therefrom. Permanent disability is considered total if it lasts continuously for more than 120 days. The medical records showed that respondent continued to suffer chest pains and fatigability on long distance ambulation even after his surgery and assessment, rendering him unfit to resume his duties as a Third Officer for more than 120 days. This inability to perform his usual work for an extended period constitutes permanent total disability. On entitlement to permanent and total disability compensation: The Court held that respondent is entitled to permanent and total disability compensation. It clarified that under Section 20-B(5) of the 1996 POEA Standard Employment Contract, disability benefits are granted for injury or illness suffered during the term of employment. The illness need not be work-related, and the contract provides a more liberal provision than the Labor Code's provisions on disability benefits. The Court found that respondent's coronary artery disease was contracted during his employment. Furthermore, the results of his Pre-employment Medical Examination (PEME), which included an ECG showing "Poor R-waves progression NSSTTWC," coupled with the certification that he was fit to work, indicated that petitioners had the opportunity to discover his condition but still hired him. This precluded the claim of concealment. Given his inability to perform his usual work for more than 120 days due to the severity of his illness, he is entitled to full disability benefits.
Main Doctrine
A seafarer suffering from coronary artery disease during the term of employment is entitled to disability benefits under the 1996 POEA Standard Employment Contract, and the assessment of the company-designated physician is not conclusive if it contradicts the medical findings and the seafarer's inability to perform his usual work for more than 120 days.