BSM Crew Service Centre Phils., Inc. v. Llanita
REITERATIONFacts
The Antecedents: Respondent Jay C. Llanita (Llanita) was employed as a seafarer by petitioner BSM Crew Service Centre Phils., Inc. (BSM) for Bernhard Schulte Shipmanagement. On May 10, 2010, while on board the vessel MV "LISSY SCHULTE," a boiler explosion occurred, causing injuries to Llanita, including cerebral concussion, fracture, and burns. He was medically repatriated on May 21, 2010, and underwent treatment by the company-designated physician for several months. Procedural History: The company-designated physician issued medical reports assessing Llanita with a Grade 10 and 50% Grade 14 Disability. Llanita filed a complaint for permanent and total disability benefits, arguing that more than 120 days had lapsed since his repatriation and he remained unfit for duty. The Labor Arbiter and the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) ruled in favor of BSM, finding Llanita only entitled to partial disability benefits based on the company-designated physician's timely assessment. The Court of Appeals (CA) modified the NLRC ruling, awarding full permanent and total disability benefits, holding that the company-designated physician's assessment was issued beyond the 120-day period. The Petition: Petitioners BSM, Bernhard Schulte Shipmanagement, and Elpidio Henry Fetiza filed a Petition for Review on Certiorari before the Supreme Court, assailing the CA's decision and resolution.
Issue(s)
Whether the Court of Appeals committed grave abuse of discretion in reversing the findings of fact of the NLRC. Whether respondent Llanita is entitled to permanent and total disability benefits. Whether the medical assessment of the company-designated physician was issued within the prescribed period.
Ruling
The Supreme Court granted the petition, reversed and set aside the decision and resolution of the Court of Appeals, and reinstated the decision of the National Labor Relations Commission. The Court ruled that Llanita is not entitled to permanent and total disability benefits.
Ratio Decidendi
On whether the Court of Appeals committed grave abuse of discretion: The Court held that while the CA can review the NLRC's findings under Rule 65, there must be a clear showing of grave abuse of discretion. In this case, the NLRC judiciously reviewed the records and its ruling was based on substantial evidence, thus, the CA erred in finding grave abuse of discretion. On whether respondent Llanita is entitled to permanent and total disability benefits: The Court reiterated that the company-designated physician must issue a final medical assessment within 120 days from the time the seafarer reported to him. If this period is extended to 240 days with justification, and no assessment is made, then the disability is permanent and total. However, if a final assessment of partial disability is made within these periods, the claim for total and permanent disability cannot be sustained. The mere lapse of the 120-day/240-day period does not automatically entitle a seafarer to permanent and total disability benefits. On whether the medical assessment of the company-designated physician was issued within the prescribed period: The Court found that the company-designated physician made an initial assessment on August 13, 2010 (95 days from injury, 84 days from repatriation) and a final assessment on September 25, 2010 (138 days from injury, 127 days from repatriation). Both dates fall within the 120-day/240-day period. The CA erred in considering a February 11, 2011 medical certificate, which merely restated prior findings and was issued at the request of counsel, as the basis for the 120-day calculation. Furthermore, Llanita's consultation with his own doctor did not result in a definitive finding of permanent and total disability, and the dispute was not referred to a third doctor as required.
Main Doctrine
The presumption of permanent and total disability after the lapse of the 120-day/240-day period only arises when the company-designated physician fails to issue a medical assessment within such period. If a final medical evaluation is issued within the prescribed period, the seafarer's claim for permanent and total disability cannot be sustained unless the seafarer properly questions the assessment and refers the dispute to a third doctor.