5/19/2021 E-Library - Information At Your Fingertips: Printer Friendly The structure of the POEA Standard Employment Contract theorizes that a seafarer will file for claims based on contractual obligations.[125] However, this should not be the case. To afford full protection to labor, our seafarers should not be limited to what is provided by contract. The separate opinion in InterOrient Maritime Enterprises, Inc. v. Creer III[126] recognized that: [Sjubstantive law still allows recovery of damages for injuries suffered by the seafarer as a result of a tortious violation on the part of the employer. This may be on the basis of the provisions of the Civil Code as well as special laws. These special laws may relate, among others, to environmental regulations and requirements to ensure the reduction of risks to occupational hazards both for the seafarer and the public in general. In such cases, the process for recovery should not be constrained by contract. [127] This Court made a similar pronouncement in Monana v. MEC Global Shipmanagement and Manning Corp.[128] that "seafarers who suffer from occupational hazards are not necessarily constrained to contractual breach as cause of action in claiming compensation. Our laws allow seafarers, in a proper case, to seek damages based on tortious violations by their employers by invoking Civil Code provisions, and even special laws such as environmental regulations requiring employers to ensure the reduction of risks to occupational hazards."[129] The existence and due execution of the POEA Standard Employment Contract does not mean that seafarers waive their rights to file claims on the basis of substantive law. In this case, Toliongco argues that he is entitled to moral damages because of "respondents' withholding of full disability benefits with no justifiable reason and their whimsical and blatant refusal to honor their contractual obligation of disability compensation to the petitioner."[130] On this matter, this Court reinstates the Labor Arbiter's award of moral damages but increases the amount to PI 00,000.00. The award of moral damages is based not on the grounds stated by petitioner but because this court cannot turn a blind eye to the sexual harassment that he had to endure while onboard the M/V Mineral Water. Certainly, a wrongful act was committed against him. We also reinstate and increase the award of exemplary damages to P50,000.00 in view of the award of moral damages. In addition, the award of exemplary damages should serve as a warning to shipping companies and manning agencies that it is their obligation to ensure safe working conditions for our seafarers. As petitioner was forced to litigate in order to receive compensation for the unexpired portion of his contract and compensation for what he suffered at the hands of CO Oleksiy, attorney's fees are also awarded. We must change the notion that injuries refer to only the physical kind. Injuries can https://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocsfriendly/1/66544 18/25