E-Library - Information At Your Fingertips: Printer Friendly
2 of 18
http://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocsfriendly/1/57858
On May 23, 2007, Nancing’s widow, Anita, for herself and on behalf of their children,
Charmaine, Charlene, and Charl Smith, all surnamed Canuel (petitioners) filed a
complaint[14] against Magsaysay and Kotani, as well as Magsaysay’s
Manager/President, Eduardo U. Manese (respondents), before the National Labor
Relations
Commission
(NLRC),
docketed
as
NLRC-OFW
Case
No.
(M)-07-05-01423-00, seeking to recover death benefits, death compensation of
minor children, burial allowance, damages, and attorney’s fees.
In their defense, respondents denied any liability and contended that while Nancing
died of acute respiratory failure, the real cause of his death, as shown in the autopsy
conducted by the National Bureau of Investigation, was “moderately differentiated
andenocarcinoma, pneumonia and pulmonary edema, lung tissue” or lung cancer.[15]
The said illness is not work-related per advise of their company doctor, Dr. Marie
Cherry Lyn Samson-Fernando, hence, not compensable.[16]
The LA Ruling
In a Decision[17] dated December 27, 2007, the Labor Arbiter (LA) ruled in favor of
petitioners and thereby ordered respondents to pay them: (a) the aggregate sum of
US$72,000.00 consisting of US$50,000.00 as death benefits, US$21,000.00 as
death compensation for the three minor children (US$7,000.00 each), and
US$1,000.00 for burial expenses; (b) illness allowance from March 5, 2007 to April
25, 2007; (c) P100,000.00 as moral damages; (d) P100,000.00 as exemplary
damages; and (e) 10% of the total award as attorney’s fees.[18]
The LA found that Nancing’s death on April 25, 2007 occurred during the term of his
twelve-month employment contract.[19] Moreover, the evidence on record supports
the conclusion that his demise was caused by the injury he sustained in an accident
while performing his job on board the vessel. Hence, his death was the result of a
work-related injury that occurred during the term of his employment.[20] Corollary
thereto, the LA disregarded respondents’ contention that lung cancer, a non-work
related illness, caused Nancing’s death as it was apparent that it was the injury he
sustained while working on board the vessel that triggered the deterioration of his
resistance against the said illness or any other affliction that he may have had.[21]
At odds with the LA Ruling, respondents appealed to the NLRC.
The NLRC Ruling
Respondents’ appeal[22] was denied by the NLRC in a Decision[23] dated April 30,
2008.
The NLRC ruled that while respondents correctly argued that Nancing’s death did not
occur during the term of his employment pursuant to Section 18 of the Philippine
Overseas Employment Administration Standard Employment Contract (POEA-SEC) as
3/27/2020, 12:51 PM