GR 229228; (January, 2021) (Digest)
G.R. No. 229228 , January 26, 2021
TORM Shipping Philippines, Inc., TORM S/A, Petitioners, vs. Pamfilo A. Alacre, Respondent.
FACTS
Respondent Pamfilo A. Alacre was hired by petitioner TORM Shipping Philippines, Inc. as a Fitter on board the vessel Torm Kristina for six months. In July 2012, while working, he felt pain in his right shoulder and was diagnosed with “Right shoulder sprain, right hand joint sprain.” He was repatriated on July 8, 2012, and referred to the company-designated physician for treatment. On October 29, 2012, the company-designated physician issued an interim disability grading of “Grade 10.” As his condition persisted, respondent consulted an independent orthopedic specialist, Dr. Venancio P. Garduce, Jr., who recommended a Grade 3 disability grading and stated it would be impossible for respondent to work as a seaman. Respondent underwent shoulder surgery in February 2013. He filed a complaint before the Labor Arbiter (LA) for permanent total disability benefits. The LA awarded him US$60,000.00, finding his disability total and permanent due to the company-designated physician’s failure to issue a final assessment within the required period and his inability to work for over 120 days. The NLRC reversed the LA, dismissing the complaint without prejudice pending the resolution of respondent’s separate claim filed with the Danish National Board of Industrial Injuries (NBII) under the Danish Industrial Injuries Act, pursuant to the applicable Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA). The Court of Appeals (CA) reinstated the LA’s decision, ruling the CBA was effective but that the disability became total and permanent due to the lack of a final assessment, and that the amount awarded by the NBII could be offset against the LA’s award.
ISSUE
Whether the Court of Appeals erred in annulling the NLRC’s decision and awarding permanent total disability benefits to the respondent.
RULING
The Supreme Court GRANTED the petition, REVERSED and SET ASIDE the CA decision and resolution, and DISMISSED the complaint.
The Court held that the applicable CBA, which remained in force due to the absence of a notice of termination, governed the dispute. The CBA contained a “choice of law” clause designating the Danish Industrial Injuries Act as the primary source of compensation and a “setting off” provision requiring that any compensation received under Danish law be deducted from any potential award under the Philippine Overseas Employment Administration-Standard Employment Contract (POEA-SEC). The respondent had voluntarily filed and pursued a claim with the Danish authorities (NBII), which subsequently granted him a permanent disability award. By availing himself of the Danish system, the respondent was bound by its outcome. The NBII’s decision had become final and executory, and the compensation paid under it (approximately US$96,000.00) already exceeded the maximum US$60,000.00 disability benefit under the POEA-SEC. Applying the CBA’s offsetting provision, no further obligation remained on the part of the petitioners. The Court also deleted the award of attorney’s fees, finding no basis that the respondent was forced to litigate or that benefits were maliciously withheld.