G.R. No. 250085, June 14, 2021
Julie Fuentes Resurreccion, Petitioner, vs. Southfield Agencies, Inc., Brightnight Shipping & Investment Ltd. and/or Arlene Bautista, Respondents.

FACTS

Petitioner Julie Fuentes Resurreccion was hired by respondent Southfield Agencies, Inc., for its principal Brightnight Shipping & Investment Ltd., as a Third Engineer on board M/V Eco Spitfire on November 27, 2015. He commenced work on November 30, 2015. On January 12, 2016, he complained of yellow discoloration of his eyes and skin. After medical referral in Egypt, he was medically repatriated to the Philippines on February 5, 2016. The company-designated physician diagnosed him with Liver Cirrhosis with Jaundice and Massive Ascites and assessed on February 16, 2016, that his illness was not work-related. On July 28, 2016, an independent physician, Dr. Radentor R. Viernes, issued a medical certificate finding the illness work-related and/or work-aggravated and declaring petitioner permanently and totally unfit to work as a seaman. Petitioner filed a complaint for total and permanent disability benefits, sickness allowance, damages, and attorney’s fees. The Labor Arbiter dismissed the complaint but awarded financial assistance. The National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) affirmed the dismissal, ruling petitioner failed to prove the illness was compensable. The Court of Appeals affirmed the NLRC’s ruling.

ISSUE

Whether petitioner is entitled to total and permanent disability benefits and other monetary claims for his illness, Liver Cirrhosis with Jaundice and Massive Ascites.

RULING

No. The Supreme Court denied the petition and affirmed the rulings of the Court of Appeals and the NLRC. The Court held that Liver Cirrhosis is not listed as an occupational disease under Section 32-A of the Philippine Overseas Employment Administration Standard Employment Contract (POEA-SEC). While Section 20(B)(4) of the POEA-SEC provides a disputable presumption that an illness not listed is work-related, the seafarer must still prove by substantial evidence the conditions for compensability under Section 32-A, namely: (a) the work must involve the risks described; (b) the disease was contracted as a result of exposure to the described risks; (c) the disease was contracted within a period of exposure; and (d) there was no notorious negligence on the part of the seafarer. Petitioner failed to establish a reasonable causal connection between his work as a Third Engineer and his Liver Cirrhosis. His and his independent physician’s assertions that his work conditions (exposure to chemicals, fumes, heat) contributed to his illness were speculative and not supported by concrete evidence. The company-designated physician’s assessment that the illness was not work-related, with its detailed medical explanation, remained uncontroverted. The Court also found no merit in petitioner’s claim that his current illness was a continuation of a prior work-related ailment, as his previous illness (Obstructive Jaundice) had been resolved and he was declared fit to work before redeployment. The award of financial assistance by the Labor Arbiter was deleted as it had no legal basis. The solidary liability of respondent Arlene Bautista, as a corporate officer, for the money claims was sustained under the Migrant Workers Act.