E-Library - Information At Your Fingertips: Printer Friendly 12 of 18 http://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocsfriendly/1/57858 eventual death due to “hypertensive cardio-vascular disease” could only be work related. The death due to “hypertensive cardio-vascular disease” could in fact be traced to Lutero Remo’s being the “Cook-Steward.” As Cook-Steward of an ocean going vessel, Remo had no choice but to prepare and eat hypertension inducing food, a kind of food that eventually caused his “hypertensive cardio-vascular disease,” a disease which in turn admittedly caused his death. Private respondents cannot deny liability for the subject death by claiming that the seafarer’s death occurred beyond the term of his employment and worsely, that there has been misrepresentation on the part of the seafarer. For, as employer, the private respondents had all the opportunity to pre-qualify, thoroughly screen and choose their applicants to determine if they are medically, psychologically and mentally fit for employment. That the seafarer here was subjected to the required pre-qualification standards before he was admitted as CookSteward, it thus has to be safely presumed that the late Remo was in a good state of health when he boarded the vessel.[69] (Emphases and underscoring supplied; citation omitted) More recently, in the 2013 case of Inter-Orient Maritime, Incorporated v. Candava,[70] also decided under the framework of the 1996 POEA-SEC, the Court pronounced that the seafarer’s death therein, despite occurring after his repatriation, remains “compensable for having been caused by an illness duly established to have been contracted in the course of his employment.”[71] Thus, considering the constitutional mandate on labor as well as relative jurisprudential context, the rule, restated for a final time, should be as follows: if the seafarer’s work-related injury or illness (that eventually causes his medical repatriation and, thereafter, his death, as in this case) occurs during the term of his employment, then the employer becomes liable for death compensation benefits under Section 20 (A) of the 2000 POEA-SEC. The provision cannot be construed otherwise for to do so would not only transgress prevailing constitutional policy and deride the bearings of relevant case law but also result in a travesty of fairness and an indifference to social justice. For all these reasons, the Court hereby grants the petition. WHEREFORE, the petition is GRANTED. The Decision dated May 19, 2009 and the Resolution dated October 30, 2009 of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. SP No. 104479 are hereby REVERSED and SET ASIDE and the Decision dated April 30, 2008 of the National Labor Relations Commission is REINSTATED. SO ORDERED. Sereno, C.J., (Chairperson), Leonardo-De Castro, Bersamin, and Perez, JJ., concur. 3/27/2020, 12:51 PM