6/7/2020
E-Library - Information At Your Fingertips: Printer Friendly
According to him, however, his condition deteriorated while he was undergoing
treatment. On February 18, 2010, he filed a complaint against Scanmar, Crown Ship
and Edgardo Canoza (collectively, petitioners) seeking full and permanent disability
benefits, among others. He also consulted another doctor, Dr. Manuel C. Jacinto, Jr. (Dr.
Jacinto), at Sta. Teresita General Hospital in Quezon City, who on March 20, 2010
issued a certificate stating that his "condition did not improve despite medicine and that
his symptoms aggravated due to his work which entails carrying of heavy loads."[11]
Dr. Jacinto then assessed Conag as unfit to go back to work as a seafarer.[12]
Ruling of the LA
In its Decision[13] dated July 8, 2010, the LA held that the disability assessment of Dr.
Jacinto was reflective of Conag's actual medical and physical condition.[14] Citing
Maunlad Transport Inc., and/or Nippon Merchant Marine Company, Ltd., Inc. v. Manigo,
Jr.,[15] the LA ruled that the medical reports presented by the parties are not binding
upon the arbitration tribunal, but must be evaluated on their inherent merit, and that
the declaration of fitness by the company-designated physicians may be overcome by
superior evidence.[16] In particular, the LA noted that during the arbitration
proceedings, Conag appeared to be clearly physically unfit to resume sea duties on
account of his spinal injuries.[17] As for the certificate of fitness to work Conag signed,
the LA ruled it out for being an invalid waiver.[18] The fallo of the LA decision reads:
WHEREFORE, premises considered, judgment is hereby rendered ordering
[Scanmar] and/or [Crown Ship] to pay [Conag] the Philippine peso
equivalent at the time of actual payment of ONE HUNDRED EIGHTEEN
THOUSAND
EIGHT
HUNDRED
US
DOLLARS
(US$118,800),
representing permanent disability benefits in accordance with the Collective
Bargaining Agreement, plus ten [percent] (10%) thereof as and for
attorney's fees.
All other claims are hereby ordered dismissed for lack of merit.
SO ORDERED.[19]
Ruling of the NLRC
On appeal by the petitioners, the NLRC in its Decision[20] dated November 30, 2010,
dismissed Conag's complaint for lack of merit. It took note that Conag failed to comply
with the Philippine Overseas Employment Administration - Standard Employment
Contract (POEA-SEC) requirement on the appointment of a neutral physician in case of
disagreement as to his disability assessment.[21] The NLRC nevertheless ruled that
even without the opinion of a third doctor jointly chosen by the parties, any ruling will
have to be based on the evidence on record,[22] pursuant to Nisda v. Sea Serve
Maritime Agency, et al.[23] It concluded that Conag's evidence was inadequate to
overcome the assessment of fitness by the company-designated physicians. The NLRC
pointed out that Conag was under the care of the company-designated physicians from
elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocsfriendly/1/61899
2/12