Almirante: Seafarer’s disability benefits

RESPONDENT Gomer L. Dotimas was employed in Oct. 27, 1999 by Acomarit Acomarit Limited, Phils. (Acomarit) for its principal and Acomarit Hongkong, Ltd. as able seaman on board the vessel M/V Saudi Riyadh for 10 months. He was issued a clean bill of health prior to being deployed after he underwent a medical examination.

In April 26, 2000, while on board and discharging his duties, respondent met an accident which injured his left leg. He was brought to the Rashid Hospital in Dubai were he was given first aid treatment. Sometime in May 2000, he was repatriated for medical reasons. Petitioners referred him to a designated-physician who recommended that his knee should be operated on. Respondent underwent surgery known as open reduction and fixation with intramedullary nails. After a series of evaluations, Dr. Elenita Torres Supan, the attending physician, issued a final evaluation certificate in Sept. 21, 2000 wherein she categorically cleared respondent from his injury and allowed him to resume his work even with implants, which could be removed after a year and a half.

After his claim for total permanent disability was not heeded by petitioners, respondent filed in July 6, 2001 a complaint for disability benefits and for moral and exemplary damages plus attorney’s fees. He claimed that an independent physician had suggested a disability grade of 13 for his injury. Is his claim meritorious?

Ruling: Partially, yes.

It was held that a claimant, in submitting himself to examination by the company-designated physician, does not automatically bind himself to the medical report issued by the company-designated physician; neither are the labor tribunals and the courts bound by said medical report. Its inherent merit will be weighed and duly considered. The claimant may dispute the medical report issued by the company-designated physician by seasonably consulting another physician. The medical report issued by said physician will also be evaluated by the labor tribunal and the court based on its inherent merits. In this case, respondent failed to dispute the declaration of fit to work by the company-designated physician by not timely consulting another physician.

Both the LA and the NLRC denied respondent’s claim on the ground that he failed to controvert the certification issued by Dr. Torres-Supan that he is fit to work. Respondent took roughly eight months or until May 2, 2001 before disputing the finding of Dr. Torres-Supan by writing the petitioners, through his counsel, for claim for disability benefits. Then, after his demand went unheeded, he challenged the doctor’s competency and the correctness of her findings when he filed the complaint against the petitioners before the LA in July 6, 2001. It is likewise noted from records that his basis of disability was an evaluation made 10 months after he was certified fit to work by the company-designated physician. He presented the certification of Dr. Jocelyn Myra R. Caja in July 20, 2001 suggesting disability grade 13.

As this Court has settled, it makes no sense to compare the certification of a company-designated physician with that of an employee­appointed physician if the former is dated seven to eight months earlier than the latter- there would be no basis for comparison at all. In this case, the certification of the company-designated physician was ten months earlier than that of the appointed physician of the respondent. Thus, there would be no basis for comparison.

Nevertheless, this Court finds that respondent is entitled to temporary total disability benefit. Both the company-designated physician and respondent’s own physician concluded that his left tibia was fractured and that it was healed after the surgery. Under the Schedule of Disability or Impediment for Injuries Suffered and Diseases or Illness Contracted in Section 30 of 1996 POEA SEC, the “slight atrophy of calf of leg muscles without apparent shortening or joint lesion or disturbance of weight-bearing line” suffered by respondent has a corresponding Impediment Grade of 13 (Peralta, J., SC Third Division, Acomarit Acomarit Limited, Phils., and/or Hongkong v. Gomer L. Dotimas, G.R. No. 190984, August 19, 2015).

Trending

No stories found.

Just in

No stories found.

Branded Content

No stories found.
SunStar Publishing Inc.
www.sunstar.com.ph