In Mars C. Palisoc v. Easways Marine, Inc., the Supreme Court clarified the rights of seafarers regarding permanent disability benefits, ruling that a seafarer’s inability to work for more than 120 days constitutes permanent disability, regardless of a company-designated physician’s assessment. This decision ensures that seafarers are compensated for their inability to work due to illness or injury sustained during their employment. This ruling emphasizes the protection of seafarers’ labor rights, ensuring they receive fair compensation when their ability to earn a living is impaired due to work-related health issues, preventing employers from sidestepping their responsibilities by delaying or avoiding disability assessments.

Gallstones at Sea: When Can a Seafarer Claim Disability Benefits?

Mars C. Palisoc, a seafarer, was hired as a 4th Engineer by East West Marine PTE, Ltd., through its agent Easways Marine, Inc. While working on a vessel, he fell ill in Saigon, Vietnam, and was diagnosed with left renal colic or gallstone impairment. After initial treatment, he was repatriated to Manila for further medical attention. The company referred him to a designated clinic, where he underwent laparoscopic cholecystectomy for gallbladder removal. Although the company covered the medical expenses and paid sickness allowance for 120 days, disputes arose when the company physician refused to assess his disability grade, and another doctor provided a conflicting assessment. This situation led Palisoc to file a case to claim disability benefits.

The core of the legal issue revolved around whether the Labor Code’s definition of permanent total disability applies to seafarers and the weight to be given to a medical certificate issued by a doctor not designated by the company. The petitioner argued that his inability to work should entitle him to disability benefits, while the respondents insisted on the assessment by a company-designated physician as the basis for such benefits. The Court of Appeals initially sided with the respondents, stating that the POEA-SEC governs the rights and obligations of the parties and that the petitioner’s condition was not a compensable injury under the POEA-SEC.

The Supreme Court reversed the Court of Appeals’ decision, emphasizing that the Labor Code’s provisions on permanent total disability, specifically Article 192(c)(1), are applicable to seafarers. Article 192(c)(1) of the Labor Code explicitly states:

ART. 192. Permanent Total Disability. x x x

(c) The following disabilities shall be deemed total and permanent:

(1) Temporary total disability lasting continuously for more than one hundred twenty days, except as otherwise provided for in the Rules;

Building on this principle, the Supreme Court referenced the case of Remigio v. National Labor Relations Commission, where it affirmed the application of the Labor Code concept of permanent disability to seafarers. The Court highlighted that labor contracts are imbued with public interest and are subject to labor laws, ensuring the protection and well-being of Filipino workers overseas. The Court has consistently applied the Labor Code’s concept of permanent total disability to seafarers’ cases, as cited in Philippine Transmarine Carriers v. NLRC, emphasizing that disability is assessed based on the loss of earning capacity, not solely on medical significance.

The Supreme Court acknowledged the importance of the assessment of disability by a company-designated physician. However, the court found inconsistencies in the medical certificate presented by the petitioner from a non-company physician, particularly concerning the dates of examination. Citing Sarocam v. Interorient Maritime Ent., Inc. and German Marine Agencies v. NLRC, the Court reiterated that the company-designated physician primarily determines a seaman’s degree of disability or fitness to work. Despite this, the Court also clarified that even without an official finding of unfitness by the company physician, the inability to work for more than 120 days warrants permanent disability benefits.

The Supreme Court pointed out that the Court of Appeals erred in ruling that the petitioner’s gallbladder removal was not a compensable injury under Appendix 1 of the POEA-SEC. The critical factor is the seafarer’s inability to perform their job for more than 120 days, irrespective of the specific injury or illness. Because the exact disability grade could not be determined based on the existing records, the Supreme Court remanded the case to the Labor Arbiter. This step ensures a proper assessment of the petitioner’s disability to compute the correct disability benefits.

FAQs

What was the key issue in this case?	The key issue was whether a seafarer is entitled to permanent disability benefits when unable to work for more than 120 days, regardless of assessment by a company-designated physician.
Does the Labor Code’s definition of permanent disability apply to seafarers?	Yes, the Supreme Court affirmed that the Labor Code’s provisions on permanent total disability, specifically Article 192(c)(1), apply to seafarers. This ensures they are covered by the same protections as other workers.
What is the role of the company-designated physician?	The assessment by a company-designated physician is essential in determining the seafarer’s disability. However, it’s not the only factor; inability to work for over 120 days is also critical.
What if the company doctor doesn’t provide an assessment?	Even without an official assessment, if the seafarer is unable to work for more than 120 days, they are deemed to have suffered permanent disability and are entitled to benefits.
What if a non-company doctor provides a different assessment?	The assessment of a company-designated physician generally takes precedence. However, the court may consider other medical opinions in conjunction with the inability to work for an extended period.
What determines entitlement to permanent disability benefits?	The primary factor is the inability of the seafarer to perform their job for more than 120 days, regardless of the specific nature of the injury or illness.
Why was the case remanded to the Labor Arbiter?	The case was remanded to determine the petitioner’s disability grade under the POEA Impediment Grading Scale, which is necessary for computing the disability benefits accurately.
What does this ruling mean for seafarers?	This ruling strengthens the rights of seafarers, ensuring they receive fair compensation when their ability to work is impaired due to health issues sustained during their employment, even without a formal disability assessment from the company.

The Supreme Court’s decision in Palisoc v. Easways Marine underscores the importance of protecting the rights of seafarers and ensuring they receive fair compensation for work-related disabilities. By clarifying the applicability of the Labor Code and emphasizing the significance of the inability to work for more than 120 days, the Court has provided a clearer framework for assessing disability benefits for seafarers.

For inquiries regarding the application of this ruling to specific circumstances, please contact ASG Law through contact or via email at frontdesk@asglawpartners.com.

Disclaimer: This analysis is provided for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For specific legal guidance tailored to your situation, please consult with a qualified attorney.
Source: MARS C. PALISOC, VS. EASWAYS MARINE, INC., G.R. NO. 152273, September 11, 2007