5/28/2020 E-Library - Information At Your Fingertips: Printer Friendly hydrant caps, which injury resulted in his disability. The Court reasoned out that the injury cannot be said to be the result of an accident, i.e., an unlooked for mishap, occurrence, or fortuitous event, because the injury resulted from the performance of a duty. Although Illescas may not have expected the injury, yet, it is common knowledge that carrying heavy objects can cause back injury. Hence, the injury cannot be viewed as unusual under the circumstances, and is not synonymous with the term "accident." [27] While on its face, the facts seemed similar, they are in fact different, thus leading us to decide the present case differently. In Illescas, no unusual, fortuitous, unexpected or unforeseen event took place or was reported. Illescas merely went about his normal duties; he transported fire hydrant caps from the deck to the engine workshop, then back to the deck to refit the caps. The sudden snap Illescas felt on his back while carrying the fire hydrant caps thus could not, by itself, qualify as an accident.[28] In the present case, Sunga did not incur the injury while solely performing his regular duties; an intervening event transpired which brought upon the injury. To repeat, the two other oilers who were supposed to help carry the weight of the 200-kilogram globe valve lost their grasp of the globe valve. As a result, Sunga’s back snapped when the entire weight of the item fell upon him. The sheer weight of the item is designed not to be carried by just one person, but as was observed, meant to be undertaken by several men and expectedly greatly overwhelmed the physical limits of an average person. Notably, this incident cannot be considered as foreseeable, nor can it be reasonably anticipated. Sunga’s duty as a fitter involved changing the valve, not to routinely carry a 200-kilogram globe valve singlehandedly. The loss of his fellow workers’ group was also unforeseen in so far as Sunga was concerned. In Jarco Marketing Corporation, et al., v. Court of Appeals, we ruled that an accident pertains to an unforeseen event in which no fault or negligence attaches to the defendant. It is “a fortuitous circumstance, event or happening; an event happening without any human agency, or if happening wholly or partly through human agency, an event which under the circumstances is unusual or unexpected by the person to whom it happens.”[29] Since Sunga encountered an accident on board MT Sunway, the CA thus grossly misappreciated and misread the ruling of the NLRC, leading the appellate court to find a grave abuse of discretion sufficient for a reversal of the NLRC ruling. In other words, as the NLRC found, Sunga’s disability benefits should fall within the coverage of the parties’ CBA, which provides: Article 28: Disability 28.1 A seafarer who suffers permanent disability as a result of an accident whilst in the employment of the Company regardless of fault, including accidents occurring while traveling to or from the ship, and whose ability to work as a seafarer is reduced as a result thereof, but excluding permanent disability due to willful acts, shall in addition to sick pay, be elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocsfriendly/1/56877 6/9