G.R. No. 202177 . November 17, 2021
BW SHIPPING PHILIPPINES, INC., BW GAS ASA/NORWAY AND/OR ROLANDO C. ADORABLE, PETITIONERS, VS. MARIO H. ONG, RESPONDENT.

FACTS

Respondent Mario H. Ong was hired by petitioner BW Shipping Philippines, Inc. as Chief Steward and Chief Cook on March 19, 2008. He was declared “fit for sea duty” prior to embarkation. On June 8, 2008, while on board, he complained of dizziness, nausea, headache, and shortness of breath. He was diagnosed with “uncontrolled diabetes and uncontrolled hypertension” by a doctor in Tampa, Florida on June 17, 2008, and was repatriated on June 20, 2008. He was treated by company-designated physicians, who declared him “fit to resume sea duties” on October 2, 2008. Respondent, feeling his condition did not improve, consulted his own cardiologist, Dr. Antonio C. Pascual, who diagnosed him with “Essential Hypertension, Stage 2 and Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2” on January 12, 2009. After petitioners refused to assist with his medication costs, respondent filed a complaint for permanent disability benefits. The Labor Arbiter granted the complaint, awarding USD90,000.00 in disability benefits. The NLRC affirmed the decision. The Court of Appeals denied the petitioners’ petition for certiorari, affirming the NLRC Resolutions.

ISSUE

Whether the Court of Appeals correctly affirmed the labor tribunals’ finding that respondent is entitled to permanent total disability benefits for his diabetes mellitus and hypertension.

RULING

No. The petition is meritorious. The Supreme Court reversed the assailed CA Decision and Resolutions. The entitlement to disability benefits is governed by law, contract, and medical findings. Under the POEA-SEC, for an illness to be compensable, it must be work-related and must have existed during the term of the employment contract. Diabetes mellitus is not an occupational disease under the POEA-SEC and is ordinarily a metabolic and familial disease, more the result of poor lifestyle choices, and does not indicate work-relatedness. Essential hypertension, while a listed occupational disease, requires proof that it is of such gravity as to impair the function of body organs, resulting in permanent disability. Respondent failed to demonstrate how his work caused or aggravated his illnesses. He also failed to substantiate that his hypertension resulted in permanent total disability. The company-designated physician declared him fit to work 104 days after repatriation, a finding not immediately contested. The Court found no substantial evidence to support the grant of permanent total disability benefits. The labor tribunals and the CA committed grave abuse of discretion.