Olaybal v. OSG Shipmanagement Manila, Inc.
REITERATIONFacts
The Antecedents: Petitioner Romil T. Olaybal (Olaybal) was hired as an Oiler by OSG Shipmanagement (UK) Ltd. through its local agent OSG Shipmanagement Manila, Inc. (OSG) from August 18, 2002, to October 1, 2010. During his last contract, while performing repairs on a fresh water generator in July 2010, Olaybal was exposed to SAF acid, which penetrated his eyes, causing irritation. Subsequently, he experienced blurring vision in his right eye. Upon disembarkation in Tianjin, China, he was diagnosed with Retinal Detachment of the Right eye and Cataract. He was referred to a shore doctor in Singapore, who diagnosed him with (R) Eye-2 Areas of Retinal Detachment and (L) Eye-Extensive Lattice Degeneration of Retina with Impending Detachment. He was repatriated on October 7, 2010, and reported to OSG the next day, who referred him to Marine Medical Services (MMS) for treatment. The company-designated physicians assessed him with an interim Grade 7 disability (total loss of vision of one eye). He underwent surgery on February 8, 2011. On March 17, 2011, a private physician opined that his right eye vision was compatible with a permanent loss of useful visual acuity. On March 24, 2011, Olaybal filed a claim for permanent disability benefits. Procedural History: The Labor Arbiter (LA) ruled in favor of Olaybal, awarding full disability benefits, reimbursement of transportation fare, moral and exemplary damages, and attorney's fees. The National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) affirmed the LA's decision but deleted the award for transportation fare. The Court of Appeals (CA) initially affirmed the NLRC but deleted the awards for moral and exemplary damages and attorney's fees. In its Amended Decision, the CA reversed its earlier ruling, finding OSG jointly and severally liable to pay Olaybal a reduced amount of US$37,244.00 as partial and permanent disability benefit with Grade 7 Impediment, and US$1,000.00 for attorney's fees, affirming the deletion of moral and exemplary damages. The Petition: Olaybal filed a petition for review on certiorari, arguing that the CA gravely erred in giving full weight to the company-designated physician's assessment of Grade 7 disability, contrary to the LA and NLRC findings of permanent total disability, and in deleting the awards for moral and exemplary damages and reducing attorney's fees.
Issue(s)
Whether the Court of Appeals gravely erred in finding that petitioner is only suffering from Impediment Grade 7 under the POEA-SEC Schedule of Disability Allowance, despite the findings of the Labor Arbiter and National Labor Relations Commission that he is suffering from permanent total disability. Whether the Court of Appeals gravely erred in deleting the award for moral and exemplary damages and reducing the award for attorney's fees.
Ruling
The petition is denied. The March 24, 2014 Amended Decision of the Court of Appeals is affirmed.
Ratio Decidendi
On the issue of disability assessment: The Court held that Olaybal's contention that his disability is permanent and total is misplaced. While Article 192(c)(1) of the Labor Code states that temporary total disability lasting continuously for more than 120 days is deemed permanent and total, this is subject to qualifications. Section 2(b), Rule VII of the Implementing Rules clarifies that a disability is total and permanent if the employee is unable to perform any gainful occupation for a continuous period exceeding 120 days, except as otherwise provided. The exception is found in Section 2, Rule X, which allows for the extension of temporary total disability benefits up to 240 days if medical attendance is still required. The Court reiterated the ruling in Vergara v. Hammonia Maritime Services, Inc., harmonizing the POEA-SEC, Labor Code, and Amended Rules on Employee Compensation (AREC). This means the 120 days is for the employer to determine fitness to work, extendable to 240 days for further medical treatment. A temporary total disability becomes permanent only when declared by the company-designated physician within the 120 or 240 days, or upon the expiration of these periods without such a declaration, and the seafarer is still unable to resume duties. In Olaybal's case, the company-designated physician stated that his treatment would exceed 120 days and recovery depended on his response to further treatments, indicating ongoing medical assessment. He failed to attend his scheduled doctor's appointment within the 240-day period and instead sought a second opinion and filed a case, bypassing the prescribed procedure of submitting to a third doctor's examination if there was a disagreement. Therefore, his claim for total permanent disability was premature, and he was only qualified for partial permanent disability benefits equivalent to a Grade 7 assessment. Furthermore, Section 30 of the POEA-SEC requires total and permanent loss of vision of both eyes for a Grade 1 disability, which is not applicable here. He also lacked certification from the company-designated doctor for permanent unfitness for sea service under the CBA. On the award of damages and attorney's fees: The Court agreed with the CA that moral and exemplary damages cannot be granted as there was no concrete showing of bad faith or malice on the part of the respondents, who shouldered all medical expenses. However, the Court affirmed the award of attorney's fees, citing Article 2208(8) of the Civil Code and the ruling in Leonis Navigation Co. Inc. v. Villamater, finding US$1,000.00 a reasonable amount, consistent with lloreta v. Philippine Transmarine Carriers, Inc.
Main Doctrine
A seafarer's temporary total disability does not automatically become permanent and total; the company-designated physician must declare it so within the 120-day or 240-day period, or the seafarer must have exhausted all avenues for medical treatment and evaluation within the prescribed periods before filing a claim for permanent total disability benefits.