1/5/2021
E-Library - Information At Your Fingertips: Printer Friendly
Contract (POEA-SEC).[12] Subsequently,
designated
Grading[14]
physician gave
a Final
on
December
Medical
1,
2014,
Report [13]
and
the
company-
a Disability
of Grade 10 disability in accordance with the POEA-SEC.
Unhappy with this assessment, Buico consulted his own physician who diagnosed
Buico unfit to perform sea duty in whatever capacity with a permanent disability status.
[15]
On March 13, 2015, Buico then filed a Complaint [16] with the Labor Arbiter (LA)
against petitioners for permanent and total disability benefits.
In their defense, petitioners essentially made the following arguments: Buico was not
entitled to permanent and total disability benefits because the company-designated
physician had already assessed his disability at Grade 10 pursuant to the POEA-SEC;
Buico failed to follow the third doctor rule; the company-designated physician had
knowledge of Buico's actual medical condition, hence, he was more qualified to assess
his disability and his assessment should be upheld.[17]
The Ruling of the LA
In a Decision [18] dated June 30,-2015, the LA found that Buico suffered from Grade
10 disability, and ruled that
Buico's
physician's assessment was not done as
thoroughly as that of the company-designated
physician who had continuously
attended to him for a period of more than four (4) months.[19] The dispositive portion
of the LA Decision reads:
WHEREFORE,
follows:
premises considered,
judgment
is hereby rendered as
1) Declaring [Buico] as suffering from Grade 10 disability[; and]
2) Ordering [petitioners Magsaysay], Princess Cruise Lines Ltd. and
Gary M.
Castillo to jointly and severally pay [Buico] disability
benefit
in the
amount
of
US$10,075
or in its Philippine Peso
equivalent at the time of payment.
All other claims are dismissed
or lack of merit.
So Ordered.[20]
Aggrieved,
(NLRC).
Buico
appealed with
the
National
Labor
Relations Commission
The Ruling of the NLRC
In a Resolution[21] dated November 27, 2015, the NLRC reversed the LA's findings,
ruling that the referral to a third doctor was not mandatory and that the findings of the
https://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocsfriendly/1/65874
2/10