G.R. No. 228684 . March 06, 2019
EDMUND C. MAWANAY, PETITIONER, VS. PHILIPPINE TRANSMARINE CARRIERS, INC., RIZZO-BOTTIGLIERI – DE CARLINI ARMATORISPA AND/OR CAPT. DANILO SALASAN, RESPONDENTS.

FACTS

Petitioner Edmund C. Mawanay was hired as an ordinary seaman by respondents. On August 30, 2013, while working on board, he experienced severe headaches and dizziness, later collapsing and losing consciousness. He was medically repatriated on October 6, 2013. The company-designated physician conducted a series of examinations, initially assessing an interim Grade 10 disability. Subsequent reports noted normal test results and suggested the possibility of feigned illness, ultimately declaring him fit for work and cleared of his condition in a final report dated March 5, 2014. Dissatisfied, Mawanay consulted an independent physician, Dr. May Donato-Tan, who declared him permanently and totally disabled on August 18, 2014. He filed a complaint for disability benefits.
The Labor Arbiter dismissed the complaint, crediting the company doctor’s fit-to-work assessment. The NLRC reversed, awarding permanent total disability benefits, noting inconsistencies in the company physician’s findings and ruling that the illness persisted beyond 120 days. The Court of Appeals granted the respondents’ certiorari petition, reinstating the Labor Arbiter’s decision, holding that the company-designated physician issued a final assessment within the 240-day extended period, and that Mawanay failed to validly contest this assessment by referring to a joint-agreed or independent third doctor.

ISSUE

Whether the Court of Appeals erred in ruling that the petitioner is not entitled to permanent and total disability benefits.

RULING

The Supreme Court denied the petition and affirmed the Court of Appeals. The ruling hinged on the proper procedure for contesting a company-designated physician’s assessment under the Philippine Overseas Employment Administration-Standard Employment Contract (POEA-SEC) and relevant jurisprudence. The law provides a mechanism: if a seafarer disagrees with the company doctor’s assessment, he must, within certain periods, request a referral to a third doctor jointly agreed upon by the parties. The seafarer’s unilateral consultation with a private doctor does not comply with this mandatory procedure and does not constitute a valid contestation.
In this case, the company-designated physician issued a final fit-to-work assessment on March 5, 2014, which was within the 240-day extended period for treatment. The petitioner did not seek a referral to a third doctor agreed upon by both parties. Instead, he unilaterally obtained an opposing opinion from his own chosen physician months later. This failure to observe the prescribed conflict-resolution procedure rendered the independent doctor’s certification without probative value against the company physician’s evaluation. Consequently, the company doctor’s assessment, which was arrived at after extensive examination and which declared the petitioner fit for duty, stands. The award of disability benefits was therefore correctly set aside.