G.R. No. 217362, November 19, 2018
HENRY DIONIO, PETITIONER, VS. TRANS-GLOBAL MARITIME AGENCY, INC., GOODWOOD SHIPMANAGEMENT PTE LTD., AND MICHAEL ESTANIEL, RESPONDENTS.

FACTS

Petitioner Henry Dionio was employed as a Bosun by respondents. On February 25, 2011, he experienced severe symptoms including dizziness and chest pain. He was eventually diagnosed with “Bilateral Cerebellar Infarct.” The company-designated physician assessed him with a Grade 10 disability. Dissatisfied, Dionio consulted his own doctors, who found him medically unfit for sea duty. He filed a complaint for permanent total disability benefits.
The Labor Arbiter awarded benefits based on the Grade 10 assessment. The NLRC reversed, awarding permanent total disability benefits, finding that Dionio’s incapacity to perform his strenuous work as a Bosun, with a high risk of another cerebrovascular event, rendered him permanently and totally disabled. The Court of Appeals reinstated the Labor Arbiter’s decision, ruling that Dionio’s failure to refer the conflicting medical assessments to a third physician, as mandated by the POEA-SEC, meant the company doctor’s Grade 10 assessment prevailed.

ISSUE

Whether the Court of Appeals erred in ruling that the company-designated physician’s Grade 10 disability assessment is conclusive, thereby denying Dionio’s claim for permanent total disability benefits.

RULING

The Supreme Court granted the petition and reinstated the NLRC decision. The legal logic proceeds from the principle that disability is evaluated based on the seafarer’s loss of earning capacity, not merely the medical grading. While the procedural rule on referring conflicting assessments to a third doctor is generally binding, the Court found an exception here. The company-designated physician’s own medical reports explicitly stated that Dionio’s prognosis to return to sea duties was “guarded due to risk of another cerebrovascular event.” This assessment inherently contradicted the assigned Grade 10 rating, which implied only a minor impediment.
The Court reasoned that when the company physician’s findings themselves indicate the seafarer is unfit to resume his specific work due to the high risk of a life-threatening recurrence, a legal assessment of permanent total disability is warranted. The nature of Dionio’s work as a Bosun was strenuous, and the medical prohibition from returning to such work meant he lost his capacity to earn wages in his accustomed employment. Therefore, despite the procedural lapse, the substantive evidence demonstrated Dionio suffered from permanent total disability, entitling him to the corresponding benefits.