Toquero v. Crossworld Marine Services
REITERATIONFacts
The Antecedents: Petitioner George M. Toquero was employed as a fitter by Crossworld Marine Services, Inc. on behalf of Kapal Cyprus, Ltd. On April 24, 2012, while on board the vessel MV AS VICTORIA, Toquero was assaulted by a fellow seafarer, Jamesy Fong, who struck him on the head with a metal spanner, causing him to lose consciousness and sustain a head injury requiring craniectomy. Toquero was hospitalized in Africa and later repatriated to the Philippines, where he was treated by the company-designated physician, Dr. Fe A. Bacungan. Dr. Bacungan's initial impression was Status-Post Head Trauma Secondary to Mauling with Depressed Skull, Left Parietal Area, and recommended an electroencephalography (EEG). An EEG conducted by Dr. Benilda C. Sanchez-Gan showed normal results. Toquero consulted his own physicians, Dr. Leonardo R. Pascual and Dr. Renato P. Runas. Dr. Runas declared Toquero permanently unfit to work as a seaman and diagnosed him with total and permanent disability due to the head injury and skull defect. Procedural History: Toquero was declared fit to work by the company-designated physician on June 18, 2012. He filed a complaint for sickness allowance, money claims, damages, and attorney's fees, later amended to include a claim for total permanent disability benefits. The Labor Arbiter dismissed the complaint for lack of merit but awarded US$5,000.00 in the interest of justice. The National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) modified the decision, vacating the US$5,000.00 award and ordering payment of sickness allowance and attorney's fees. The NLRC found the injury work-related but not compensable as it resulted from a criminal assault, not an accident. The Court of Appeals affirmed the NLRC's decision, reinstating the US$5,000.00 award for further medical treatment, but still ruled the injury not compensable as it was a result of a foreseen criminal assault. The Petition: Toquero filed a Petition for Review on Certiorari, arguing that the Court of Appeals erred in upholding the company-designated physician's findings, which he claimed were unreliable and biased. He contended that his injury was an accident and that he was entitled to total and permanent disability benefits under the Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA).
Issue(s)
Whether petitioner George M. Toquero may raise questions of fact in a Rule 45 petition. Whether petitioner's injury is compensable. Whether the company-designated physician's findings must be upheld, including the issue of mandatory referral to a third doctor and the admissibility of respondents' evidence. Whether petitioner is entitled to sickness allowance and attorney's fees.
Ruling
The Petition is GRANTED. The Decision and Resolution of the Court of Appeals are REVERSED and SET ASIDE. Respondents are solidarity liable to pay petitioner George M. Toquero total and permanent disability allowance of US$250,000.00, sickness allowance equivalent to 55 days of his basic wage, and attorney's fees equivalent to 10% of the total monetary award. All monetary awards shall be subject to interest at the rate of six percent (6%) per annum from the finality of the Decision until full satisfaction.
Ratio Decidendi
On the issue of raising questions of fact in a Rule 45 petition: The Supreme Court reiterated that Rule 45 petitions are generally limited to questions of law. However, it admitted exceptions, including grave abuse of discretion, misapprehension of facts, and conclusions without citation of specific evidence. The Court found that the exceptions applied in this case, warranting a review of the factual findings of the Court of Appeals. On the compensability of the injury: The Court held that the petitioner's injury was compensable because it met the two elements of a work-related injury: it was work-related and sustained during the term of employment. The Court clarified that the POEA Standard Employment Contract requires a work-related injury or illness, not necessarily an "accident" in the strict sense. It further stated that the employer has a contractual obligation to take reasonable precautions to prevent injury to the crew, and the assault by a co-seafarer, even if criminal, does not preclude compensability for the injured seafarer. The argument that the claim is precluded due to the willful acts of another seafarer was deemed untenable as the POEA-SEC disqualifies claims caused by the willful or criminal act of the claimant, not the assailant. On the company-designated physician's findings and referral to a third doctor: The Court found the company-designated physician's assessment to be neither definite nor conclusive. It noted that Dr. Bacungan failed to conduct a complete neurologic examination, including memory and cognitive assessments, as recommended in her own notes. The Court gave more weight to the findings of the petitioner's chosen physicians, who declared him permanently and totally disabled. The Court also clarified that while referral to a third doctor is a procedure, it is not a hard and fast rule, and in cases where the company-designated physician's assessment is deficient or not supported by medical records, the findings of the seafarer's personal physician may be given greater weight. On sickness allowance and attorney's fees: The Court ruled that petitioner was entitled to sickness allowance equivalent to his basic wage for 55 days, from his sign-off date until he was declared fit to work. Attorney's fees were also awarded at 10% of the total monetary award, consistent with Article 2208 of the Civil Code, which allows such awards in workers' compensation and employer's liability cases. The Court also upheld the CBA submitted by the petitioner, which provided for a total disability allowance of US$250,000.00. It reiterated the principle of resolving doubts in favor of labor, as enshrined in the Constitution and labor laws. Therefore, petitioner was entitled to the higher disability benefit amount.
Main Doctrine
A seafarer's injury is compensable if it is work-related and sustained during the term of employment, even if caused by a co-seafarer's criminal assault, as the employer has the duty to ensure the safety and discipline of its crew. The company-designated physician's assessment is not conclusive if it is not supported by complete and definite medical findings.