Estrella v. BSM Crew Service Centre Philippines
REITERATIONFacts
The Antecedents: Petitioner Jose Yoac Estrella was employed as Second Engineer. While on board, he tripped on a mooring line, injuring his right shoulder. He was initially treated and declared unfit for work for four days, then resumed duties. Later, experiencing worsened pain, he underwent further examination which revealed a possible scapular fracture and soft tissue mass. He was recommended for repatriation and signed off from the vessel. Upon arrival in the Philippines, he was referred to the company-designated clinic. After various examinations, he was diagnosed with tendinosis of the distal supraspinatus tendon, partial tear of the subscapularis tendon, and tear of the transverse ligament. He underwent rehabilitation and was issued an interim disability assessment of Grade 9.0 with a fair to good prognosis and an estimated 4-6 weeks of further rehabilitation. He was advised to continue treatment and return for re-evaluation. Procedural History: Petitioner filed a complaint for disability benefits, damages, and attorney's fees before the NLRC. The Labor Arbiter ruled in his favor, awarding permanent total disability benefits. The NLRC affirmed the decision. On appeal, the Court of Appeals modified the NLRC resolutions, deleting the award of permanent disability benefits and instead awarding temporary total disability benefits equivalent to US$8,000.00. The Petition: Petitioner filed a Petition for Review on Certiorari before the Supreme Court, assailing the CA decision and seeking reinstatement of the Labor Arbiter and NLRC rulings.
Issue(s)
Whether or not petitioner is permanently and totally incapacitated to resume sea duties as would entitle him to the full disability benefits adjudicated by the Labor Arbiter and the NLRC. Whether or not the assessment made by the company-designated physician could be given credence. Whether or not the CA erred in finding petitioner entitled only to temporary total disability benefits.
Ruling
The Supreme Court denied the petition for lack of merit. It affirmed the Court of Appeals' ruling that petitioner is entitled to temporary total disability benefits equivalent to US$8,000.00, modifying the NLRC's award of permanent total disability benefits.
Ratio Decidendi
On the issue of permanent total disability: The Court reiterated that it is not the injury itself but the incapacity to work resulting in the impairment of earning capacity that is compensated. Entitlement to disability benefits is governed by the Labor Code, its implementing rules, and the POEA-SEC. The POEA-SEC provides that a seafarer is entitled to sickness allowance until declared fit to work or the degree of permanent disability is assessed by the company-designated physician, within a period not exceeding 120 days. This period may be extended up to 240 days if further medical attention is required. The Court found that the petitioner filed his complaint before the lapse of the 240-day period and before a final declaration of permanent disability was made by the company-designated physician. Therefore, he was still considered to be in a state of temporary total disability. On the credence of the company-designated physician's assessment: The Court noted that the petitioner was given an interim disability assessment on January 31, 2008, which was within the 120-day period from his referral on October 27, 2007. He was advised to continue rehabilitation, justifying the extension of the period. The company-designated physician directed him to return for re-evaluation on April 4, 2008, which would have been the 160th day. However, petitioner filed his complaint on March 25, 2008, before this scheduled re-evaluation and before the company-designated physician could make a final assessment within the extended 240-day period. Thus, the company-designated physician's assessment, or lack thereof within the prescribed period, was not definitively established as contrary to the petitioner's claim of permanent total disability. On the CA's award of temporary total disability benefits: The Court found that the CA correctly determined that petitioner was entitled to income benefits corresponding to the period he was undergoing rehabilitation or in a state of temporary total disability. The CA calculated this based on his monthly salary and the period of incapacity. The Court emphasized that the mere lapse of the 120-day period does not automatically warrant permanent total disability benefits. Temporary total disability only becomes permanent when, within the 240-day period, the company-designated physician declares it as such or fails to make a declaration. Since petitioner filed his complaint prematurely, he could not yet claim permanent total disability benefits.
Main Doctrine
The mere lapse of the 120-day period does not automatically warrant the payment of permanent total disability benefits to a seafarer; the company-designated physician has a period of 120 days, extendable to 240 days, to assess the seafarer's fitness to work or degree of permanent disability. A temporary total disability only becomes permanent when, within the said 240-day period, the company-designated physician declares it to be so or fails to make such declaration.