GR 219370; (December, 2017) (Digest)
G.R. No. 219370. December 06, 2017
VERONICO O. TAGUD, PETITIONER, V. BSM CREW SERVICE CENTRE PHILS., INC./ NARCISSUS DURAN AND/OR BERNHARD SCHULTE SHIPMANAGEMENT (CYPRUS), RESPONDENTS.
FACTS
Petitioner Veronico O. Tagud was hired by respondents as an Able Bodied Seaman. On October 18, 2008, while performing a sanding job onboard the vessel, he lost his balance due to the ship’s sudden tilting, causing his right elbow to crash against a hard object. He lost sensation and strength in his upper right extremity. An x-ray taken three days later in Wynnum, Queensland, showed no fracture or abnormality except for a small olecranon spur. Tagud was eventually repatriated to Manila on November 8, 2008, upon the completion of his contract.
Tagud alleged that upon repatriation, he received no assistance or referral to a company-designated physician from his manning agency. He first sought private medical consultation four months later, in March 2009, for pain in his upper right extremities. In February 2010, a physician from the Veterans Memorial Medical Center assessed him with a permanent neurologic disability caused by repetitive vibratory and physical trauma during work. Tagud subsequently filed a complaint for permanent total disability benefits.
ISSUE
Whether Tagud is entitled to permanent total disability benefits.
RULING
No. The Supreme Court denied the petition and affirmed the rulings of the NLRC and the Court of Appeals, which dismissed Tagud’s claim. The legal logic hinges on the petitioner’s failure to comply with mandatory procedural and substantive requirements for claiming disability benefits under the Philippine Overseas Employment Administration (POEA) Standard Employment Contract (SEC) and relevant jurisprudence.
Procedurally, Tagud failed to report to the company-designated physician within three working days from his repatriation for a post-employment medical examination, as required by the POEA-SEC. This failure is fatal to his claim, as it deprived the employer of the opportunity to assess his condition through its chosen physician, a right integral to the contractual scheme governing seafarers’ employment. The Court emphasized that the duty to report is a mandatory precondition for claiming disability benefits.
Substantively, Tagud failed to prove that his alleged disability was work-related and occurred during the term of his employment. The lone x-ray report taken shortly after the incident indicated no significant injury. The long delay of four months before seeking any medical consultation severed the causal link between his employment and his subsequent condition. The Court reasoned that other incidents could have occurred during that period, making it impossible to conclude that his ailment was work-connected. Consequently, without complying with the reporting requirement and without establishing a work-related illness, Tagud’s claim for disability benefits must fail.