Bandila v. Abalos (G.R. No. 177100; February 22, 2010)
FACTS: Respondent Marcos C. Abalos entered into a contract of employment with petitioner Bandila Shipping, Inc. (BSI), a Philippine manning agency acting on behalf of its co-petitioner Fuyoh Shipping, Inc., as fourth engineer for the ocean-going vessel M/V Estrella Eterna at US$765.00 per month for 10 months. Prior to embarkation, Abalos underwent pre-employment medical examination and was found to be "fit for sea service." He boarded his vessel in Singapore on August 28, 2002.
As the vessel headed towards Nagoya, Japan, on January 23, 2003, respondent Abalos felt excruciating pain in his stomach while he was on duty. He tried to tolerate it until he got off but he was unable to sleep because of severe pain. The following day, unable to bear the pain, he told the vessels master about it. After being examined at the International Clinic in Nagoya, Japan, he was diagnosed to be suffering from "gallstone, acute cholecystitis, and pancreatitis suspected." The attending physician found him unfit for duty and recommended his repatriation.
On January 25, 2003 respondent Abalos was repatriated to the Philippines. He was referred to Dr. Ruby Dizon who found that he had cholecystolithiasis, commonly known as gallstone, and needed to undergo cholecystectomy or gall bladder removal that would cost P80,000.00. Unable to get the companys approval for his surgery, Abalos sought the opinion of other physicians who made the same diagnosis and suggested surgery.
Abalos filed a complaint with the Labor Arbiter for disability benefits, unexpired portion of his contract, moral and exemplary damages, and attorneys fees against petitioner. Persuaded by the opinion of a company-designated physician that cholecystolithiasis was not work-related, BSI denied liability.
Meantime, respondent Abalos amended his complaint to include nonpayment of disability benefits, medical reimbursement, sickness allowance, compensatory damages, moral and exemplary damages, and attorneys fees.
The Labor Arbiter found that Abalos became ill while on board his assigned vessel and the demanding nature of his work aggravated it, thus, establishing a reasonable connection between the two. He denied the other claims for lack of merit.
But, on appeal by petitioner BSI, the NLRC set aside the Labor Arbiters decision. The NLRC pointed out that the applicable standard terms of employment did not regard respondent Abalos illness as an occupational disease. He also failed to show that his work on ship aggravated it. His motion for reconsideration having been denied. The CA rendered a decision, granting the petition, setting aside the NLRC decision, and reinstating that of the Labor Arbiter. The appellate court denied BSIs motion for reconsideration, hence, the present petition for review.
ISSUE:
Is Abalos' cholecystolithiasis or gallstone compensable and, thus, entitles him to disability benefits and sickness allowance?
HELD: According to the NLRC, medical reports show that gallstone relates to ones weight or diet and in some instances may be a genetic predisposition. It is not one of those enumerated as compensable diseases in the Revised Standard Terms and Conditions Governing the Employment of Filipino Seafarers on Board Ocean-Going Vessels that covered Abalos employment. The NLRC denied him disability benefits and sickness allowance for this reason.
The CA held, however, that Abalos diet or sustenance on board the vessel had presumably caused or contributed to his illness for he had no choice but eat ship food. Consequently, although his gallstone is not a compensable illness under his employment contract, it can be said that his illness was either work-related or reasonably connected with his work.
But, since cholecystolithiasis or gallstone has been excluded as a compensable illness under the applicable standard contract for Filipino seafarers that binds both respondent Abalos and the vessels foreign owner, it was an error for the CA to treat Abalos illness as "work-related" and, therefore, compensable. The standard contract precisely did not consider gallstone as compensable illness because the parties agreed, presumably based on medical science, that such affliction is not caused by working on board ocean-going vessels.
Nor has respondent Abalos proved by some evidence that the nature of his work on board a ship aggravated his illness. No one knew when he boarded the vessel that he was sick of gallstone. By the nature of this illness, it is highly probable that Abalos already had it when he boarded his assigned ship although it went undiagnosed because he had yet to experience its symptoms.
If respondent Abalos had instead been sick of asthma and the shipping company knew of it even as it assigned him to do work that exposed him to allergens, then it can be said that the company assigned him work that aggravated his illness. Here, however, he himself was unaware that he had gallstone until excruciating pains manifested its presence for the first time when his vessel was sailing the seas.
GRANTED
