5/28/2020
E-Library - Information At Your Fingertips: Printer Friendly
Pagdanganan, Atty. Suarez, and Villanueva before the NLRC for the collection of: (a) his
unpaid salaries in the sum of US$24,821.74; (b) disability benefits; (c) sickness
allowance; and (d) reimbursement of his medical expenses.[13] However, only the
petitioners and the group of Peñalosa, Fernandez, D. Cruz, Javier, and A. Cruz
(Peñalosa Group) filed position papers to controvert Sarmiento’s claims. [14]
In their defense, petitioners denied any liability to Sarmiento, contending that they
were no longer connected with Sea Gem when the latter filed his complaint. Villanueva
resigned on February 5, 2008, or more than three (3) months before Sarmiento was
hired on May 8, 2008, while on June 16, 2008, Attys. Pagdanganan and Suarez
tendered their resignations as Sea Gem’s President and Corporate Secretary,
respectively.[15]
For their part, the Peñalosa Group maintained that they have divested their respective
shares of stock before Sea Gem engaged the services of Sarmiento. With the exception
of Fernandez who resigned on January 9, 2007, the rest of the Peñalosa Group severed
their ties with Sea Gem on August 8, 2007. Consequently, they argued that only the
present directors and stockholders should be held liable for Sarmiento’s money claims.
[16]
The LA Ruling
In a Decision[17] dated January 19, 2010, the Labor Arbiter (LA) found petitioners, Sea
Gem, Corinthian, the Peñalosa Group, Torrefil, and Alican liable for Sarmiento’s money
claims and directed them to jointly and severally pay him the aggregate sum of
US$32,821.00, representing his unpaid wages and sickness allowance.[18]
In granting Sarmiento’s unpaid wages, the LA found that he had indisputably proven
that a portion of his salaries remained unpaid. Likewise, the LA found that he was
entitled to sickness allowance, as he was repatriated on medical grounds and
necessarily required medical treatment.[19] However, the LA debunked Sarmiento’s
claim for disability benefits and medical expenses reimbursement, explaining that in the
absence of a competent physician’s declaration as to the degree of a seafarer’s
disability, disability benefits may not be awarded,[20] and that mere allegations of
medical expenses will not suffice to warrant a claim for reimbursement.[21] Finally, the
LA held petitioners, Sea Gem, Corinthian, the Peñalosa Group, Torrefil, and Alican liable
under Section 10[22] of Republic Act No. (RA) 8042,[23] opining that corporate directors
and officers cannot be relieved of their liabilities as such for the sole reason that they
have resigned or ceased to become shareholders of Sea Gem.[24]
Aggrieved, petitioners appealed to the NLRC, disclaiming liability for Sarmiento’s claims
and pointing out that the Philippine Overseas Employment Agency (POEA) itself never
accredited or recognized them as directors of Sea Gem.[25] However, records are bereft
of any showing that the Peñalosa Group, Sea Gem, Corinthian, Torrefil, and Alican
appealed the LA Decision, rendering the same final as to them.[26]
elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocsfriendly/1/57652
2/9