Cariño v. Maine Marine Phils., Inc.
REITERATIONFacts
The Antecedents: Christian Albert A. Cariño (Cariño) filed a complaint for permanent and total disability benefits, sickness allowance, reimbursement of expenses, damages, and attorney's fees against Maine Marine Philippines, Inc. (Maine Marine) and its officers. Cariño alleged that while working as a deck boy, he slipped into a manhole, sustaining severe pain and fractures in his right ankle. He received initial treatment on board and was later treated in India, where he underwent surgery. Upon repatriation, he was referred to company-designated physicians but claimed that Maine Marine withheld approval for further treatment and payment of sickness allowance. He consulted an independent orthopedic surgeon who declared him unfit to be a seaman. Procedural History: The Labor Arbiter (LA) ruled in favor of Cariño, awarding permanent and total disability benefits, sickness allowance, damages, and attorney's fees. The National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) reversed the LA's decision, finding that Cariño abandoned his medical treatment by failing to appear for a scheduled appointment and prematurely filing his complaint. The Court of Appeals (CA) affirmed the NLRC's ruling. The Petition: Cariño filed a petition for review on certiorari before the Supreme Court, assailing the CA's decision.
Issue(s)
Whether the Court of Appeals erred in ruling that Cariño had abandoned his treatment with the company-designated physician so as to deny him permanent and total disability benefits. Whether Cariño is entitled to permanent and total disability benefits, sickness allowance, damages, and attorney's fees under the Philippine Overseas Employment Administration Standard Employment Contract (POEA-SEC) and the Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA).
Ruling
The Supreme Court granted the petition, reversed and set aside the decisions of the Court of Appeals and the National Labor Relations Commission. Respondents were held jointly and severally liable to pay Christian Albert A. Cariño permanent and total disability benefit, sickness allowance, moral damages, and exemplary damages, plus attorney's fees and legal interest.
Ratio Decidendi
On the issue of abandonment of treatment: The Court ruled that Cariño did not abandon his medical treatment. While he failed to appear for his scheduled appointment on September 17, 2013, this was not due to his own volition but because his employer, Maine Marine, failed to approve his medical examination and reimburse his expenses. The Court emphasized that the employer has a duty to provide medical treatment and pay sickness allowance, as stipulated in Section 20(A) of the POEA-SEC. Cariño's consistent follow-ups and written requests demonstrated his earnest efforts to continue his treatment, contrary to the findings of the NLRC and CA. The Court found that Maine Marine's failure to fulfill its obligations was the direct cause of Cariño's non-appearance, and to fault him for this would be oppressive and unjust. The Court reiterated that the POEA-SEC must be construed liberally in favor of the seafarer. On entitlement to benefits and damages: The Court held that Cariño is entitled to permanent and total disability benefits and sickness allowance. Since the company-designated physician failed to issue a final assessment within the 120-day period without justifiable reason, Cariño's disability is deemed permanent and total, as per the ruling in Elburg Shipmanagement Phils., Inc. v. Quiogue, Jr.. Furthermore, the Court found that Cariño is entitled to benefits under the Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA) between IBF JSU/AMOSUP-IMMAJ, as his employment contract clearly stated coverage by this CBA, and the belated submission of the CBA on appeal should have been given evidentiary weight, following Andaya v. National Labor Relations Commission. The Court also affirmed the LA's award of moral and exemplary damages, increasing the amounts to P100,000.00 each due to Maine Marine's callous treatment and bad faith in reneging on its obligations and feigning ignorance of the CBA. Attorney's fees were also awarded based on Article 2208 of the New Civil Code. Legal interest was imposed from the finality of the decision.
Main Doctrine
A seafarer's failure to appear for a scheduled medical examination with the company-designated physician, if caused by the employer's failure to provide sickness allowance and approve medical treatment, does not constitute abandonment of treatment, and thus does not forfeit the seafarer's right to disability benefits. The employer's breach of its obligations under the POEA-SEC is the primary reason for the seafarer's non-appearance.