McKenzie v Cui, G.R.

41831

FACTS

Aguedo, a licensed seaman, filed with the Regional Trial Court a complaint for recovery of certain sums of money,
with damages against Kenneth and Kraamer as Administrative Manager and master of M.V. Carbay, and its
operator Wallem Philippines, pursuant to Article 2180 of the Civil Code. He alleged that while M.V. Carbay was dry-
docked in Japan, he was attacked by his co-worker, an alleged protege of Kraamer; that without investigation,
Kraamer summarily dismissed him without paying his salary and thereafter compelled him to return to Manila,
incurring expenses in the amount of $320.

Defendants moved to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction and alleged that the National Seamen’s Board (POEA now) has
the exclusive jurisdiction over cases in connection with the employment of Filipino seamen on board vessels
engaged in overseas trade.

The trial judge denied the motion.

ISSUE: WON the POEA has jurisdiction over the case.

HELD

No. The Supreme Court affirmed the order of the trial court, that is, the court (not POEA) has jurisdiction over the
case. Aguedo’s complaint reveals his intention to seek and claim protection under the Civil Code and not under the
Labor Code. The items demanded are not labor benefits such as wages, overtime, or separation pay, but are items
claimed as natural consequences of such dismissal. His complaint is denominated as “damages” as a consequence
of his alleged summary dismissal by Kraamer. Moreover, in his opposition to the motion to dismiss, he cites
Articles 2197, 2200, 2219 and adds the relevant articles on Human Relations: Articles 19, 21, 24 and 32 of the Civil
Code to support his claim for damages.