Fleet Management Services v. Lescabo
REITERATIONFacts
The Antecedents: Alejandro G. Lescabo, a fitter, was employed by Fleet Ship Management, Inc. (through its local agency Fleet Management Services Philippines, Inc.) on successive contracts since 2012. His duties involved strenuous physical activities and joint strain, requiring him to work 8 to 16 hours daily. In September 2019, while performing engine maintenance, Lescabo experienced severe symptoms including weakness, vomiting, dizziness, fever, and hiccups, leading to his diagnosis with bronchitis in Hong Kong. His condition worsened, resulting in his admission to a hospital in Bangkok, Thailand, where he was diagnosed with Sepsis; Severe Hyponatremia induced alteration of consciousness; Pneumonia and Syndrome of Inappropriate Antidiuretic Hormone Secretion (SIADH). He was declared unfit to work and repatriated to the Philippines. Procedural History: Upon repatriation, Lescabo was treated by the company-designated physician, Dr. Nicomedes G. Cruz, and his team. Despite initial diagnoses of pneumonia and hyponatremia, a final medical report issued by Dr. Amado G. Regino on February 7, 2020, declared Lescabo fit to resume sea duties, despite Lescabo's continued complaints and a scheduled follow-up appointment. Disagreeing with this assessment, Lescabo obtained a second opinion from Dr. Felix T. Terencio, who declared him unfit to work. Lescabo's claim for disability benefits was initially pursued through the National Conciliation Mediation Board (NCMB) and subsequently filed with the labor arbiter (LA). The LA ruled in favor of Lescabo, awarding disability compensation, sickness allowance, medical expenses, and attorney's fees. The National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) affirmed the LA's decision, later modifying it to delete the sickness allowance and adjust attorney's fees. Fleet Ship Management then filed a Petition for Certiorari with the Court of Appeals (CA), which denied the petition and subsequent motion for reconsideration, upholding the NLRC's ruling. The Petition: Petitioners Fleet Management Services Philippines, Inc., Fleet Ship Management, Inc., and Janette T. Tumbali filed a Petition for Review on Certiorari under Rule 45 of the Rules of Court, assailing the CA's Decision and Resolution. They argue that their company-designated physicians issued a final and definite assessment declaring Lescabo fit to work, that Lescabo failed to comply with the third-doctor-referral rule, and that the CA erred in awarding attorney's fees and legal interest. The Supreme Court is tasked with resolving whether the CA correctly found that the NLRC did not act with grave abuse of discretion in granting total and permanent disability benefits to Lescabo, considering that the core of the dispute involves factual findings regarding the validity and finality of the medical assessments.
Issue(s)
Whether the Court of Appeals correctly found that the NLRC did not act with grave abuse of discretion when it granted total and permanent disability benefits to Lescabo. Whether the medical assessment issued by the company-designated physicians was final and definite, complete, based on sufficient examination, and transmitted with proper notice to the seafarer. Whether Lescabo complied with the third-doctor-referral rule under the POEA-SEC. Whether the award of attorney's fees and legal interest was proper.
Ruling
The Petition for Review on Certiorari is DENIED. The April 20, 2023 Decision and July 26, 2023 Resolution of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. SP No. 11270-MIN are AFFIRMED. Petitioners Fleet Management Services Philippines, Inc., Janette T. Tumbali, and Fleet Ship Management, Inc. are ORDERED TO PAY, jointly and severally, respondent Alejandro G. Lescabo: (1) total and permanent disability benefits in the amount of USD 60,000.00, or its equivalent in Philippine currency at the time of payment; and (2) attorney's fees equivalent to 10% of the disability benefits in the amount of USD 6,000.00, or its equivalent in Philippine currency at the time of payment. The total monetary award shall earn 6% legal interest per annum from finality of this Decision until full payment.
Ratio Decidendi
On the validity of the NLRC's finding: The Court held that the assessment issued by Dr. Regino was not final and definite as contemplated under the Philippine Overseas Employment Agency Standard Employment Contract (POEA-SEC). A valid, final, and definite medical assessment must clearly state whether the seafarer is fit to work or the exact disability rating, and without any further condition or treatment. It should no longer require any further action on the part of the company-designated physician and must be issued after exhausting all possible treatment options within the periods allowed by law. Without such a valid assessment, the seafarer's temporary and total disability, by operation of law, becomes permanent and total. On the validity, completeness, basis, transmission, and notice of the Final Medical Report: The Court found the Final Medical Report incomplete because it listed three illnesses (pneumonia, hyponatremia, and acid peptic disease) but only indicated that pneumonia was "resolved" and acid peptic disease was "treated." The report left Lescabo to guess whether his "Hyponatremia secondary to Syndrome of Inappropriate ADH Secretion" was also resolved. The fact that Dr. Cruz later needed to clarify in an affidavit that all diagnosed conditions were resolved further proved the report's initial incompleteness. The Court determined that the Final Medical Report was issued without sufficient basis. Dr. Regino issued the report on February 7, 2020, three days before Lescabo's scheduled follow-up on February 10, 2020, and without conducting a personal medical examination on that date. Dr. San Andres, who had personally examined Lescabo eight times, had advised a follow-up. Dr. Regino's notes, which mentioned the absence of dizziness and headache and improved ambulation, presupposed a prior physical examination that did not occur. The clinic's own records confirmed the February 10, 2020 appointment, casting doubt on the report's basis. Even if the assessment were considered valid, it was belatedly transmitted. The 120-day period for issuing a final assessment expired on February 8, 2020. The Final Medical Report was electronically sent to Lescabo's wife on February 17, 2020, nine days after the lapse of the period. This failure to provide the assessment within the prescribed period leads to a finding that no valid assessment was issued. The company-designated physician failed to duly and properly inform Lescabo of the assessment. Fleet Ship admitted sending the report via his wife's Facebook Messenger account, without any personal copy given to Lescabo or any attempt to explain the contents. Medical reports should be personally received by the seafarer, or sent by other sanctioned means, with proper explanation, as notice is a cornerstone of due process. This failure also results in a finding that no valid assessment was given. On the third-doctor-referral rule: The Court reiterated that the third-doctor-referral rule does not apply when the company-designated physician failed to issue a valid, final, and definite assessment. Since Fleet Ship's physicians did not issue such an assessment, Lescabo's consultation with Dr. Terencio was justified. On attorney's fees and legal interest: The award of attorney's fees and legal interest was deemed proper. Article 2208 of the Civil Code allows recovery of attorney's fees in actions for recovery of wages and indemnity under employer's liability laws, or when a party's act or omission compels the other to incur expenses to protect their interest. The imposition of 6% legal interest per annum from finality of the decision until full payment is also in accordance with established jurisprudence.
Main Doctrine
A company-designated physician's medical assessment must be final, conclusive, and definite, clearly stating whether the seafarer is fit to work or the exact disability rating, and without any further condition or treatment. Failure to issue such a valid assessment within the prescribed period results in the seafarer being presumed to be suffering from permanent and total disability.