5/19/2021 E-Library - Information At Your Fingertips: Printer Friendly SECOND DIVISION [ G.R. No. 239299, July 08, 2020 ] INTERCREW SHIPPING AGENCY, INC., STAR EMIRATES MARINE SERVICES AND/OR GREGORIO ORTEGA, PETITIONERS, VS. OFRECINO B. CALANTOC, RESPONDENT. DECISION INTING, J.: This is a Petition for Review on Certiorari[1] under Rule 45 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure that seeks to annul and set aside the Decision[2] dated November 27, 2017 and the Resolution[3] dated May 10, 2018 of the Court of Appeals (CA) in CA-G.R. SP No. 141153, and to reinstate the Decision[4] dated March 31, 2015 of the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) dismissing the complaint for disability compensation for lack of merit. The Antecedents On March 14, 2008, Intercrew Philippines Agency, Inc. (Intercrew Shipping) hired Ofrecino B. Calantoc (respondent) for its foreign principal, Star Emirates Marine Services (Star Emirates), as fourth engineer for a period of 12 months with a basic monthly salary of US$700.00. As such, respondent underwent a pre-employment medical examination and was declared "fit for sea duty," despite his high blood pressure.[5] On March 20, 2008, respondent was deployed to join the vessel MV Oryx. Four months into his contract, respondent already experienced a slurring of speech, weakness on his right side, and was diagnosed with a mild stroke. However, he still continued his work on board the vessel, but he later on requested to be repatriated when his condition worsened.[6] On July 14, 2008, respondent arrived in the Philippines. He immediately reported to Intercrew Shipping, Star Emirates and Gregorio Ortega, as the President/General Manager of Intercrew Shipping (collectively, petitioners) and requested for medical assistance, but to no avail. Respondent made several requests, but were repeatedly refused. He was then constrained to consult a doctor at his own expense.[7] On January 9, 2009, respondent then underwent a Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) examination which revealed a large convexity meningioma,[8] a tumor in the left frontoparietal region. On the same date, respondent was admitted to the University of https://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocsfriendly/1/66350 1/11

Select target paragraph3