Macahilas v. BSM Crew Service Centre Philippines, Inc.
REITERATIONFacts
The Antecedents: Petitioner Adex R. Macahilas (Macahilas) was employed as Third Engineer on board APL Canada under an 8-month contract. During his employment, he experienced abdominal pain, vomiting, and chills, leading to a diagnosis of Phase IV Appendicitis and subsequent appendectomy. His wound became infected, necessitating medical repatriation to the Philippines. The company-designated physician opined that appendicitis was not work-related, but Macahilas continued treatment for the wound infection and later developed an incisional hernia, for which he underwent surgery. Over a year after repatriation, on March 12, 2015, he was declared fit to work. However, Macahilas consulted his personal physician who assessed him as unfit to resume work as a seafarer and deemed his illness work-aggravated/related, prompting Macahilas to claim permanent and total disability benefits. Procedural History: The Labor Arbiter (LA) awarded permanent and total disability benefits, finding that no final report on appendicitis was issued, the "not work-related" assessment was a private communication, and the final assessment was issued beyond the 240-day period. The LA also considered hernia a listed occupational illness and Macahilas's appendicitis work-aggravated/related. The National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) affirmed the LA's ruling. The Court of Appeals (CA) reversed the NLRC, holding that appendicitis is not an occupational disease, Macahilas failed to prove a connection between his work and appendicitis, and his incisional hernia was not work-related as it arose from the appendectomy. The Petition: Macahilas filed a petition with the Supreme Court, reiterating the work-relatedness of his appendicitis, fistula, and hernia, citing strenuous working conditions, diet, and the disputable presumption of work-relatedness for appendicitis. He argued that his hernia, a listed occupational illness, was also work-aggravated. He also contended that his inability to perform customary work for over 120 or 240 days entitled him to permanent and total disability benefits, and that attorney's fees should be awarded.
Issue(s)
Whether Macahilas's appendicitis is work-related. Whether Macahilas's fistula and hernia are work-related. Whether Macahilas is entitled to permanent and total disability benefits. Whether attorney's fees should be awarded.
Ruling
The Supreme Court granted the petition, reversed and set aside the Court of Appeals' decision, and ordered the respondents to pay Macahilas permanent and total disability benefits amounting to US$60,000.00 and attorney's fees amounting to US$6,000.00.
Ratio Decidendi
On the work-relatedness of appendicitis: The Court held that appendicitis, though not a listed occupational illness under the Philippine Overseas Employment Administration-Standard Employment Contract (POEA-SEC), is disputably presumed to be work-related. While the company-designated physician opined it was not work-related due to blockage by a fecalith, Macahilas provided a reasonable explanation connecting his work to the illness. He argued that limited food options on board, consisting of frozen, processed, and preserved foods, could lead to digestive issues and fecalith formation. Furthermore, his duties as third engineer exposed him to hazardous chemicals and combustion fumes in the engine room, which could weaken his immune system and increase susceptibility to infections that can cause appendicitis, as supported by medical literature. The Court reiterated that strict proof of causation is not required, only reasonable proof of work-connection, which Macahilas sufficiently established through his explanations and undisputed claims regarding his working conditions and diet. On the work-relatedness of fistula and hernia: The Court found the fistula and hernia to be work-related. These conditions were located at the surgical/incisional site, as shown by CT-scan results. The Court defined fistula as an abnormal connection between two body parts, usually resulting from injury or surgery, and incisional hernia as the protrusion of tissue through a surgical incision due to weakened abdominal muscles. Given that these conditions arose from the surgery for appendicitis, which the Court found to be work-related, the subsequent complications were also deemed work-related. On entitlement to permanent and total disability benefits: The Court ruled that Macahilas is entitled to permanent and total disability benefits due to the failure of the company-designated physician to issue a final and definitive assessment within the mandated 120/240-day period. The assessment stating the illness was "not work-related" was issued on the day of repatriation, but Macahilas still required further examination and treatment, including a second surgery for hernia. The fitness assessment was issued 419 days after repatriation, far exceeding the legal periods. The Court emphasized that a final, conclusive, and definitive assessment must clearly state fitness to work or a disability rating, without further conditions. The failure to provide such an assessment within the prescribed period, regardless of justification, leads to the presumption of permanent and total disability. On the award of attorney's fees: The Court ordered the payment of attorney's fees equivalent to 10% of the monetary award. This was based on Article 2208(2) of the Civil Code of the Philippines, which allows for attorney's fees when a party is compelled to litigate to enforce their claim. Macahilas was forced to file a labor complaint to pursue his claim for disability benefits, thus entitling him to recover attorney's fees.
Main Doctrine
The failure of the company-designated physician to issue a final and definitive assessment within the 120/240-day mandated period renders the seafarer's disability permanent and total, entitling them to the corresponding benefits. Appendicitis, while not a listed occupational illness under the POEA-SEC, is disputably presumed work-related, and a reasonable connection between the nature of work and the illness must be shown. Incisional hernia, resulting from surgery for an appendectomy, is also considered work-related.