G.R. No. 244721 , February 05, 2020
JOLLY D. TEODORO, PETITIONER, VS. TEEKAY SHIPPING PHILIPPINES, INC., RESPONDENT.

FACTS

Petitioner Jolly D. Teodoro was hired as Chief Cook by respondent Teekay Shipping Philippines, Inc. (TSPI) on February 17, 2015, for an eight-month contract, covered by a POEA-SEC and a Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA). After a pre-employment medical exam where he was declared fit despite having Dyslipidemia and diabetes mellitus, he signed an Affidavit of Undertaking regarding his health condition and boarded the vessel on March 14, 2015. On June 30, 2015, while assisting in hauling food provisions from the upper deck to the freezer, exposing him to sudden extreme temperature changes, he experienced fever-like symptoms, body pain, and blindness in his left eye. He was diagnosed with “Left Eye Endophthalmitis with Orbital Cellulitis” in India and repatriated on July 10, 2015. In the Philippines, company-designated physicians confirmed his condition, diagnosing him with “Idiopathic Orbital Inflammatory Disease, Left Eye; Retinal Detachment, Left Eye; Panuveitis, Left Eye; Dacryoadenitis, Left Eye.” In a Medical Report dated November 3, 2015, the company-designated physician stated his eye condition may have been triggered by his diabetes mellitus and lack of sleep, was not work-related, and declared him unfit for further sea duties with a suggested disability rating of Grade 7 (total loss of vision in one eye). Petitioner demanded disability benefits under the CBA, which TSPI refused, leading to a complaint before the Panel of Voluntary Arbitrators (PVA). The PVA ruled in favor of petitioner, awarding total and permanent disability benefits of US$89,100.00 and attorney’s fees, finding the illness work-related and that TSPI failed to provide a safe workplace. The Court of Appeals (CA) modified the PVA decision, granting only partial and permanent disability benefits (Grade 7) and deleting the attorney’s fees award, prompting this petition.

ISSUE

Whether the CA committed reversible error in awarding petitioner partial and permanent disability benefits only and in deleting the award of attorney’s fees.

RULING

The Supreme Court GRANTED the petition. The CA erred in modifying the PVA Decision. Petitioner is entitled to total and permanent disability benefits under the CBA, not merely a Grade 7 rating under the POEA-SEC. The illness is disputably presumed work-related under Section 20(A)(4) of the POEA-SEC, and TSPI failed to rebut this presumption. The company-designated physician’s report attributing the illness to diabetes was insufficient to overcome the presumption, as it did not provide a detailed and conclusive explanation. Furthermore, the applicable CBA (IBF-PSU TCC Agreement) specifically provides that the “loss of vision in one eye” constitutes a “total disability” entitling the seafarer to 100% compensation. Since petitioner suffered permanent loss of vision in one eye and was declared unfit for sea duties, he is entitled to total and permanent disability benefits as stipulated in the CBA. The award of attorney’s fees is also reinstated under Article 2208 of the Civil Code, as petitioner was compelled to litigate to protect his interests.