GR 238652; (June, 2021) (Digest)
G.R. No. 238652, June 21, 2021
JUAN S. ESPLAGO, PETITIONER, VS. NAESS SHIPPING PHILIPPINES, INC., KUWAIT OIL TANKER COMPANY AND/OR LAMBERTO J. TORRES, RESPONDENTS.
FACTS
Petitioner Juan S. Esplago was hired by respondents as a motorman. On October 11, 2011, while on duty in the engine boiler room, excessive smoke discharge hurt his eyes, leading to blurred vision. He was diagnosed with “left eye cataract” and repatriated. In the Philippines, company-designated physician Dr. Robert D. Lim diagnosed “Cataract Senile Mature” in both eyes and recommended surgery. Petitioner claimed the surgery was delayed and respondents later refused medication for his right eye. On July 13, 2012, his private physician, Dr. Gina Abesamis Tan-Perez, declared him permanently and totally disabled from working as a seaman. Respondents asserted the condition was due to old age, not work-related, and that petitioner underwent surgery on January 6, 2012, and was declared “fit to resume sea duties” on May 7, 2012, within the 240-day period. They also contended petitioner’s claim should be dismissed for his failure to consult a third doctor as required by the POEA-SEC. The Labor Arbiter and the NLRC ruled in favor of petitioner, awarding disability benefits, sickness wages, and attorney’s fees. The Court of Appeals reversed the NLRC, dismissing the complaint for failure to comply with the third-doctor referral rule.
ISSUE
Whether the Court of Appeals erred in reversing the NLRC and in holding that petitioner is not entitled to total and permanent disability benefits for failure to comply with the POEA-SEC rule on referral to a third doctor.
RULING
The Supreme Court denied the petition and affirmed the Court of Appeals. The Court held that the procedure for referral to a third doctor in case of conflicting assessments between the company-designated physician and the seafarer’s chosen physician is mandatory under the POEA-SEC. Petitioner’s failure to comply with this procedure constituted a breach of the rules, warranting the dismissal of his claim. Consequently, the findings of the company-designated physician, who declared petitioner “fit to resume sea duties” within the 240-day period, must be upheld as final.