4/29/2020
E-Library - Information At Your Fingertips: Printer Friendly
722 Phil. 828
THIRD DIVISION
[ G.R. No. 204076, December 04, 2013 ]
JEBSENS MARITIME, INC., ESTANISLAO SANTIAGO, AND/OR HAPAG-LLOYD
AKTIENGESELL SCHAFT, PETITIONERS, VS. ELENO A. BABOL, RESPONDENT.
DECISION
MENDOZA, J.:
This is a petition for review on certiorari under Rule 45 of the Rules of Court assailing the May 15, 2012
Decision[1] of the Court of Appeals (CA) in CA-G.R. SP No.114966 and its October 8, 2012 Resolution,[2] which
affirmed the October 27, 2009 Decision[3] of the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) and the May 7,
2008 Decision[4] of the Labor Arbiter (LA), granting permanent and total disability benefits to Eleno A. Babol
(respondent).
The Facts
On September 21, 2006, respondent was rehired by Hapag Lloyd Aktiengesell Schaft (Hapag Lloyd) through its
local manning agent, Jebsens Maritime, Incorporated (Jebsens) as a reefer fitter for a term of six months.
Before joining his vessel of assignment, respondent was subjected to the rigid mandatory Pre-Employment
Medical Examination (PEME) and was cleared as fit for sea duty. On October 23, 2006, he boarded MV Glasgow
Express (formerly named as Maersk Dayton), an ocean-going vessel flying the German flag.
Sometime in February 2007, respondent noticed the swelling of his neck. On March 8, 2007, he was sent to
Health Watch Clinics in Fremantle, West Australia, to undergo medical evaluation. With the discovery of a large
recurrent left neck mass, a recommendation was issued for his repatriation.
On March 14, 2007, respondent arrived in the Philippines. He was then placed at the Metropolitan Medical
Center for treatment and management under the care of Dr. Robert D. Lim, the company-designated
physician. There, a biopsy of two soft tissue fragments taken from his swelling neck indicated Metastatic
Undifferentiated Carcinoma. On April 11, 2007, respondent was diagnosed with Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma
(NPC).
The doctors then recommended that respondent undergo six (6) cycles of chemotherapy and thirty nine (39)
sessions of radiotherapy for palliative management with a total cost of ?828,500.00. This recommendation was
acted upon by the petitioners who, in good faith, shouldered all the expenses.
On May 18, 2007, the petitioners requested from the company-designated physicians the determination of
whether respondent's condition could be considered as work-related or not. Responding to the request, Dr.
Christopher Co Peña (Dr. Co Peña), the company-designated oncologist, made a report addressed to Dr.
Robert Lim, stating respondent’s cancer as “likely not work-related.” The report also indicated the risk factors
that could have contributed to respondent's condition, as follows:
(1) Diet – salt cured fish;
(2) Viral agents – Epstein Barr Virus (EBV); and
(3) Genetic susceptibility – H2 locus antigens, Singapore Antigen BW46 and B17 Antigen.
Despite having received an expensive company-sponsored treatment, respondent still demanded the payment
of disability benefits from the petitioners. His demands being unheeded, respondent filed a claim before the
LA, docketed as NLRC NCR OFW Case No. (M) 01-00452-08, for the payment of permanent disability benefits,
sickness allowance and medical reimbursement.
elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocsfriendly/1/56454
1/8