Abosta Shipmanagement v. Segui
REITERATIONFacts
The Antecedents: Respondent Dante C. Segui, an able seaman, was hired by petitioners Abosta Shipmanagement Corp., Cido Shipping Company Ltd., and Alex S. Estabillo. During his employment, Segui experienced extreme fatigue and exhaustion due to long working hours. On October 26, 2010, he suffered severe back pain while on duty, which progressively worsened, leading to his inability to stand and requiring medical attention at various ports. Upon repatriation to Manila, he was diagnosed with a lumbar disc problem, specifically a "Circumferential Disc Bulge at L4-L5 with Posteromedial Herniation of the Nucleus Pulposus as well as associated Spinal Canal and Neuroforaminal Narrowings," necessitating surgery. Despite the operation and subsequent therapy, Segui's pain and discomfort persisted, leading him to seek an independent medical opinion which concluded he was permanently and totally unable to work as a seafarer. Petitioners disputed this, averring that Segui was attended by company-designated physicians, underwent treatment, and was assessed with a Grade 8 disability. Procedural History: Segui filed a complaint for permanent and total disability benefits and attorney's fees. The Labor Arbiter (LA) ruled in favor of Segui, finding him entitled to maximum disability benefits, emphasizing that the seafarer's own physician's assessment, detailing the nature and extent of his incapacity, should prevail over the company-designated physician's findings, especially when the latter failed to declare fitness to work within the prescribed periods. The National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) affirmed the LA's decision, holding that the International Transport Workers' Federation (ITF) Standard Agreement provided higher compensation and that while the company-designated physician's assessment is crucial, a seafarer's right to a second opinion is recognized. The NLRC found that Segui's disability was permanent and total, entitling him to 100% compensation under the ITF Standard Collective Agreement/CBA. Petitioners' motion for reconsideration was denied. Subsequently, the case was elevated to the Court of Appeals (CA) via a petition for certiorari. The CA dismissed the petition, affirming the NLRC's decision and finding no grave abuse of discretion. The Petition: Petitioners Abosta, et al. filed a petition for review on certiorari under Rule 45 of the Rules of Court, raising several issues, including whether the CA erred in affirming disability compensation based on an unproven Collective Bargaining Agreement, in disregarding the tenet that disability compensation is determined by the company-designated physician's grading, in disregarding the weight given to company-designated physicians' findings absent bias, in disregarding the need for a third physician in case of conflicting findings, and in awarding attorney's fees without evidence of bad faith. They argued that disability compensation should be determined by the company-designated physician's assessment within the legal period and that Segui's failure to refer the case to a third physician was fatal to his claim. Respondent Segui countered that his injury was work-related, he had been incapacitated for more than 120 days, and in case of conflicting medical findings, the doubt should be resolved in his favor based on social justice.
Issue(s)
Whether the Court of Appeals committed serious and reversible error in affirming disability compensation on the basis of an unproven and unsubstantiated Collective Bargaining Agreement. Whether the Court of Appeals committed serious and reversible error in disregarding the uniformed decisional tenet in our jurisdiction that disability compensation is determined not by the number of days of treatment but rather, by the disability grading issued by the company-designated physicians. Whether the Court of Appeals committed serious and reversible error in disregarding the uniformed decisional tenet in our jurisdiction that in the absence of evidence of bias, the findings of the company-designated physicians are entitled to great weight and respect. Whether the Court of Appeals committed serious and reversible error in disregarding the uniformed decisional tenet in our jurisdiction that failure of a seafarer to refer the case to a third physician in the event of conflicting findings will result in the dismissal of the complaint. Whether the Court of Appeals committed serious and reversible error in disregarding the uniformed decisional tenet in our jurisdiction that attorney's fees may not be awarded where there is no evidence of bad faith on the part of the party being held liable for the same.
Ruling
The petition is denied. The Court of Appeals Decision dated July 31, 2014 and the Resolution dated October 14, 2014 are affirmed with modification. Legal interest at the rate of 6% per annum is imposed on the monetary award for permanent and total disability benefits due Dante C. Segui, to be reckoned from the finality of the Decision until full satisfaction thereof.
Ratio Decidendi
On the issue of the Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA): The Court found the petitioners' argument that the CBA was unproven to be untenable. Records showed that the vessel M/V Grand Quest was covered by an ITF Agreement during Segui's employment. The petitioners never specifically denied or refuted the evidence presented by Segui regarding the ITF Agreement, thus, they are deemed to have admitted its coverage. The Court reiterated that unanimous findings of fact of lower courts and quasi-judicial agencies are binding on the Supreme Court. On the determination of disability compensation: The Court clarified the rules governing claims for total and permanent disability benefits for seafarers. It held that the company-designated physician must issue a final medical assessment within 120 days. If this period is extended to 240 days, there must be a sufficient justification, such as the seafarer requiring further medical treatment or being uncooperative. If no assessment is given within 120 days without justification, or within 240 days even with justification, the seafarer's disability is deemed permanent and total. In this case, the company-designated physician issued a Grade 8 disability rating only on the 219th day without prior justification for the extension, thus, Segui's disability was deemed permanent and total. On the weight of company-designated physician's findings: While the company-designated physician's assessment is generally given weight, it must be issued within the prescribed periods. The Court noted that even the company-designated physician's reports in June 2011 were consistent with Segui's physician's assessment that he was unfit for sea duty. The Court also stated that it can determine which medical finding has merit even without a third independent physician, based on the records. On the failure to refer to a third physician: The Court found that the records were replete with support for Segui's permanent and total disability, as declared by the LA, NLRC, and CA. While the referral to a third physician is standard procedure in cases of conflicting medical findings, the Court, in this instance, found sufficient basis in the existing medical reports to determine the merits of the conflicting assessments. On the award of attorney's fees: The Court affirmed the award of attorney's fees, citing Article 2208, paragraph 8 of the Civil Code, which allows recovery of attorney's fees in actions for indemnity under workmen's compensation and employer's liability laws. The Court also imposed legal interest at the rate of 6% per annum on the monetary award from the finality of the decision until full satisfaction.
Main Doctrine
The company-designated physician must issue a final medical assessment on the seafarer's disability grading within 120 days from the time the seafarer reported to him. Failure to do so without justifiable reason, or failure to issue an assessment within the extended 240-day period, results in the seafarer's disability being deemed permanent and total, entitling them to permanent and total disability benefits.