G.R. No. 177578 ; January 25, 2012
Magsaysay Maritime Corporation and/or Wastfel-Larsen Management A/S, Petitioners, vs. Oberto S. Lobusta, Respondent.

FACTS

Petitioner Magsaysay Maritime Corporation is a domestic corporation and the local manning agent of the vessel MV “Fossanger” and of petitioner Wastfel-Larsen Management A/S. Respondent Oberto S. Lobusta, a seaman employed by Magsaysay since 1994, was hired again as an Able Seaman in March 1998. His employment contract incorporated the 1996 POEA Standard Employment Contract. He boarded the vessel on March 16, 1998. After two months, he complained of breathing difficulty and back pain. On May 12, 1998, in Singapore, he was admitted to a medical center and diagnosed with severe acute bronchial asthma with secondary infection and lumbosacral muscle strain. He was declared fit for discharge for repatriation for further treatment on May 21, 1998.
Upon repatriation, he was referred to Metropolitan Hospital. Medical reports indicated he needed spine surgery (decompression laminectomy), which was performed on August 30, 1998. A subsequent report on October 12, 1998, stated that while the prognosis for recovery from the spine surgery was good, his obstructive airway disease needed indefinite monitoring and bronchodilators, suggesting a disability grading of 10-20%. Treatment continued. By February 19, 1999, a report stated his moderate obstructive pulmonary disease was a chronic problem requiring indefinite medication and he had probably reached maximum medical care.
The parties agreed on a common doctor, Dr. Camilo Roa, whose December 1999 clinical summary stated Lobusta was not physically fit to resume work as a seaman due to persistent symptoms, his asthma would remain chronically active, and he needed multiple controller medications. As settlement failed, Lobusta filed a complaint for disability/medical benefits on October 2, 2000.
In October 2000, the parties agreed on an independent medical examination by Dr. Annette M. David, whose findings would be final. Dr. David’s November 17, 2000, report classified his respiratory impairment as “Class 2 or Mild Impairment of the Whole Person (10-25%)” and considered it permanent. While noting he could conceivably perform duties during asymptomatic periods, Dr. David opined he ought not to be considered fit to return to work as an Able Seaman due to the risks of working with a self-contained breathing apparatus in oxygen-poor atmospheres, inadequate onboard medical facilities for acute asthmatic attacks, and exposure to chemical asthma triggers. She concluded it would be in the interest of all parties if he were no longer considered capable of gainful employment as a seafarer, though he might perform in a land-based capacity.
The Labor Arbiter ruled Lobusta suffered an illness during his contract, awarding US$2,060 as medical allowance, US$20,154 as disability benefits (not the maximum for total disability), and 5% attorney’s fees. The NLRC affirmed, ruling his condition was only permanent partial disability, noting Dr. David stated the degree of impairment was “mild.” The Court of Appeals (CA) granted Lobusta’s petition, modifying the NLRC resolution. The CA declared Lobusta to be suffering from permanent total disability, increased the disability benefits to US$60,000, and affirmed the award of US$2,060 as medical allowance and 5% of the total monetary award as attorney’s fees. The CA faulted the NLRC for plucking only particular phrases from Dr. David’s report and disregarding its full import, ruling that his disability brought about an incapacity to perform his customary work for more than 120 days, constituting permanent total disability.

ISSUE

Whether the Court of Appeals erred in declaring respondent Oberto S. Lobusta to be suffering from permanent total disability and in awarding him the corresponding maximum disability benefits under the POEA Standard Employment Contract.

RULING

The Supreme Court DENIED the petition and AFFIRMED the Decision and Resolution of the Court of Appeals. The Court held that the CA correctly declared Lobusta to be permanently and totally disabled and entitled to the maximum disability benefit of US$60,000.
The Court ruled that a disability is considered total and permanent if the seafarer is unable to perform his customary work for more than 120 days. The Court emphasized that the test for permanent total disability is the capacity of the employee to perform his work, not the severity of the illness or the degree of physical impairment. Citing jurisprudence, the Court stated that permanent total disability means the disablement of an employee to earn wages in the same kind of work or work of a similar nature that he was trained for or accustomed to perform, or any other kind of work which a person of his mentality and attainments could do.
The Court found that the medical findings, particularly the final and binding report of the independent physician Dr. Annette David, unequivocally stated that Lobusta ought not to be considered fit to return to work as an Able Seaman. Dr. David concluded that while his impairment was mild, the nature of his work at sea, involving risks from asthma triggers and inadequate medical facilities, rendered him incapable of gainful employment as a seafarer. This incapacity lasted from his repatriation in May 1998 beyond the 120-day period. Therefore, his inability to work as a seaman for over 120 days constituted permanent total disability.
The Court rejected the petitioners’ argument that the “mild” impairment classification precluded total disability, stating that the law does not require the illness to be incurable or the disability to be absolute. The inability to perform his specific job as a seaman for the required period is sufficient. Consequently, the award of US$60,000 as disability benefits under the POEA contract was proper. The awards for medical allowance and attorney’s fees were also sustained.