Barko International v. Alcayno
REITERATIONFacts
The Antecedents: Eberly S. Alcayno was employed as an Able-bodied Seaman by Fuyo Kaiun Co. Ltd., through its local manning agent Barko International, Inc., for a nine-month contract. After one month at sea, Alcayno developed a stiff neck and swelling in his jaw, which worsened. He was diagnosed with a severe diffuse infection in the neck, uncontrolled diabetes mellitus, fever, and toxemia, with potential gangrene and necrosis. Upon repatriation to the Philippines, he was diagnosed by a company-designated physician with uncontrolled diabetes mellitus and tuberculous adenitis, and subsequently underwent six months of anti-tuberculosis treatment. Alcayno filed a complaint for disability benefits, asserting his illness was contracted on board and resulted in permanent total disability. Procedural History: The Labor Arbiter (LA) ruled in favor of Alcayno, awarding permanent and total disability benefits, medical expenses, and attorney's fees, finding his illness compensable and a permanent total disability due to his inability to work for over 120 days. The National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) reversed the LA's decision, finding no evidence that the tuberculous adenitis and diabetes mellitus were contracted during his short tour of duty or that working conditions exacerbated his condition. The Court of Appeals (CA) granted Alcayno's petition for certiorari, reversing the NLRC and reinstating the LA's decision, holding that incapacity to earn wages is the basis for compensation and that an illness occurring during employment is presumed work-related unless refuted. The CA denied the petitioners' motion for reconsideration, distinguishing the applicable jurisprudence. The Petition: Petitioners Barko International, Inc. and Fuyo Kaiun Co. Ltd. filed a petition for review on certiorari under Rule 45 of the Rules of Court, seeking to overturn the CA's decision. They argued that the CA erred in granting total and permanent disability benefits solely based on Alcayno's inability to work for more than 120 days, and also erred in awarding attorney's fees. The core of their argument was that Alcayno was declared fit to work by the company-designated physician within the 240-day period, negating a permanent total disability claim, and that the CA improperly applied jurisprudence.
Issue(s)
Whether the respondent is entitled to permanent and total disability benefits. Whether the Court of Appeals erred in ordering the payment of attorney's fees.
Ruling
The petition is devoid of merit. The Supreme Court affirmed the Decision of the Court of Appeals, upholding the award of permanent and total disability benefits and attorney's fees to the respondent.
Ratio Decidendi
On the entitlement to permanent and total disability benefits: The Court reiterated the rule that the burden of proof rests upon the party asserting the affirmative of an issue, requiring substantial evidence in labor cases. The respondent, Eberly S. Alcayno, was employed as an Able-bodied Seaman and passed his PEME, though with a notation of "pulmonary fibrosis right lower lung with calcified benign nodules." He was repatriated due to Tuberculous Adenitis and Diabetes Mellitus. The Court found merit in the respondent's contention regarding the "fit to work" certification issued by the company-designated physician despite the ongoing medical treatment, considering it a potential ploy to circumvent the law. Both the company-designated physician and the respondent's private physician had similar findings of Tuberculous Adenitis. The Court emphasized that under Section 32-A (18) of the POEA Memorandum Circular No. 09, Series of 2000, Pulmonary Tuberculosis is considered an occupational disease in occupations involving constant exposure to harmful substances, such as chipping rust and painting on deck, which were part of the respondent's duties. The Court clarified that permanent total disability means the disablement of an employee to earn wages in the same or similar kind of work, or any work they can do. The respondent's inability to perform his customary work for more than 120 days after repatriation was considered permanent total disability. The Court also affirmed the applicability of the doctrine in Crystal Shipping, Inc. v. Natividad, stating that a seafarer's continuous inability to work due to a work-related illness for more than 120 days constitutes permanent total disability without qualification by a company-designated physician's declaration of fitness. The Court held that the ruling in Vergara v. Hammonia Maritime Services, Inc., promulgated after the respondent's claim accrued, should not be applied retroactively to deny the respondent's accrued cause of action. On the award of attorney's fees: While not explicitly detailed in the provided text for this specific ruling, the Labor Arbiter initially awarded attorney's fees at ten percent (10%) of the total award. The Supreme Court's affirmation of the CA's decision, which in turn reinstated the LA's decision, implicitly upholds the award of attorney's fees. Generally, attorney's fees are awarded in labor cases when the employee is compelled to litigate to protect their rights, which was the situation of the respondent in pursuing his disability claims against the petitioners.
Main Doctrine
A seafarer's continuous inability to work due to a work-related illness for a period of more than 120 days after repatriation is considered permanent and total disability, entitling them to compensation, irrespective of a company-designated physician's declaration of fitness to work within that period, especially when the claim accrued prior to the ruling in Vergara v. Hammonia Maritime Services, Inc.