MAGSAYSAY MARITIME CORPORATION and WESTFAL-LARSEN AND CO.

,
A/S
V.
NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION, First Division, and WILSON
G. CAPOY
G.R. No. 191903, June 19, 2013

Brion, J.:

FACTS:

The petitioner manning agency, Magsaysay Maritime Corporation, in

behalf of its foreign principal, co-petitioner Westfal-Larsen and Co., A/S, hired
respondent Wilson G. Capoy as Fitter on board a vessel for nine months. While
he was at work, it was alleged that Capoy fell down a ladder sometime in July
2005. Despite such incident, private respondent continued to work, however,
he fell down the stairs in August of the same year.

After being examined thrice, on August 31, 2005, Capoy was medically
repatriated. The following day, he reported to the company-designated
physician, Dr. Sussanah Ong-Salvador, who required him to undergo physical
and neurological examinations, and later on recommended that Capoy undergo
a multilevel laminectomy. The cost of the surgical procedure was shouldered by
the petitioners. Thereafter, he was discharged, but remained under the care of
the specialists for therapy sessions which continued until March 17, 2006. He
was to return on April 6, 2006 for re-evaluation.

Meanwhile, on January 19, 2006 or while still undergoing treatment by

the company doctors, Capoy filed a complaint for disability benefits,
maintenance allowance, damages and attorney’s fees against the petitioners.
He argued that after the lapse of 120 days without being declared fit to work,
he was entitled to permanent total disability benefits in accordance with the
collective bargaining agreement (CBA).

Petitioners argued that Capoy was not entitled to permanent disability

since no disability assessment has yet been made by the company-designated
physician and that Capoy failed to follow the recommended medical treatment.

On April 28, 2006, before the complaint could be resolved, Capoy had
himself examined by a physician of his choice, Dr. Raul F. Sabado, who
declared him "unfit to any kind of work permanently."

ISSUE:

Whether or not private respondent is entitled to permanent total

disability benefits

RULING:

NO. The records show that Capoy suffered an injury while at work, which
injury resulted in his disability. However, Capoy is not entitled to permanent
total disability compensation based on the applicable contract, rules and laws.
 Article 192(3) of the Labor Code states that: “xxx Temporary total
disability lasting continuously for more than one hundred twenty days, except
as otherwise provided for in the Rules.” Relatively, Section 2, Rule X of the
Rules and Regulations implementing Book IV of the Labor Code states that
“xxx If caused by an injury or sickness it shall not be paid longer than 120
consecutive days except where such injury or sickness still requires medical
attendance beyond 120 days but not to exceed 240 days from onset of
disability in which case benefit for temporary total disability shall be paid.”

The above provisions must be read together with Section 20(B)(3) of the
POEA-SEC which states that “Upon sign-off from the vessel for medical
treatment, the seafarer is entitled to sickness allowance equivalent to his basic
wage until he is declared fit to work or the degree of permanent disability has
been assessed by the company-designated physician but in no case shall this
period exceed one hundred twenty (120) days.”

Capoy’s claim was premature since at that time, he was still undergoing
medical treatment and no disability assessment has yet been made by the
company-designated physician, Dr. Salvador. Even after the lapse of 120 days
but within the 240-day extended period allowed by the rules, he was under
temporary total disability and entitled to temporary total disability benefits
under the same rules.

It should also be noted that Capoy became non-compliant to therapy and

failed to return for re-evaluation by the orthopedic surgeon. Thus, Capoy
prevented the company-designated physician from determining his fitness or
unfitness for sea duty. Lastly, Dr. Sabado’s declaration that Capoy is "unfit to
any kind of work permanently" would not alter the fact that the latter’s claim
for permanent total disability benefits was premature.