Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

PHILASIA SHIPPING AGENCY CORPORATION v. ANDRES G. TOMACRUZ

This case has been cited 8 times or more.

	GR No. 211882 2015-07-29	ELBURG SHIPMANAGEMENT PHILS. v. ERNESTO S. QUIOGUE MENDOZA, J.
Following Vergara, the Court ruled in subsequent cases that if the medical treatment exceeded 240 days, then the seafarer should receive permanent and total disability benefits. In Philasia Shipping Agency v. Tomacruz,[21] the seafarer was granted permanent and total disability benefits. "[F]rom the time Tomacruz (seafarer) was repatriated on November 18, 2002, he submitted himself to the care and treatment of the company-designated physician. When the company-designated physician made a declaration on July 25, 2003 that Tomacruz was already fit to work, 249 days had already lapsed from the time he was repatriated."[22]
	GR No. 191899 2015-06-22	JULIUS R. TAGALOG v. CROSSWORLD MARINE SERVICES INC. PEREZ, J.
Entitlement of seafarers to disability benefits is governed not only by medical findings but also by contract and by law. By contract, Department Order No. 4, series of 2000, of the Department of Labor and Employment Philippine Overseas Employment Agency-Standard Employment Contract (POEA-SEC) and the parties’ Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA) bind the seafarer and the employer. By law, the Labor Code provisions on disability apply with equal force to seafarers.[8]
	GR No. 199568 2015-06-17	DOHLE-PHILMAN MANNING AGENCY v. HEIRS OF ANDRES G. GAZZINGAN DEL CASTILLO, J.
Anent the nature of disability caused by his work-related illness, the Court notes that Gazzingan was no longer provided work after being diagnosed with aortic dissection/dissecting aneurysm. He was constrained to seek further medical attention at his own expense and was continuously unable to work until his death. Thus, the Court is inclined to rule that Gazzingan suffered from a permanent total disability as he was unable to return to his regular job for more than one hundred twenty days.[51] Accordingly, his permanent total disability benefits should be US$60,000.00 or 120% of US$50,000.00, pursuant to the Schedule of Disability Allowances under the POEA-SEC. The Labor Arbiter thus erred in fixing his disability benefits at US$50,000.00. As regards sickness allowance, the award of US$1,300.00 for his incapacity to work for 120 days was proper. The grant of attorney’s fees is likewise affirmed for being justified in accordance with Article 2208(2)[52] of the Civil Code since respondents were compelled to litigate to satisfy their claims for Gazzingan’s disability benefits.[53]
	GR No. 209201 2014-11-19	NEW FILIPINO MARITIME AGENCIES INC. v. MICHAEL D. DESPABELADERAS MENDOZA, J.
Petitioners contend that the 120-day rule applied by the CA as basis for granting Michael's permanent total disability benefits was already abandoned and no longer controlling. In support of their position, petitioners cited the cases of PHILASIA Shipping Agency Corporation, Inc. v. Tomacruz,[15] citing Vergara v. Hammonia Maritime Services, Inc.(Vergara),[16] and Santiago v. Pacbasin Shipmanagement, Inc.(Pacbasin),[17] where it was clarified that the temporary total disability period of 120 days may be extended up to a maximum of 240 days. Thus, petitioners claim that the seafarer's cause of action arises only after the lapse of a maximum 240-day period.
	GR No. 185449 2014-11-12	GOODYEAR PHILIPPINES v. MARINA L. ANGUS DEL CASTILLO, J.
The Court likewise finds no cogent reason to overturn the CA's award of moral damages in the amount of P5,000.00 and attorney's fees. Moral damages is awarded when fraud and bad faith have been established,[46] as in this case. Petitioners' false contention over what has been paid to Angus suggests an attempt to feign compliance with their legal obligation to grant their employee all the benefits provided for by agreement and law. Their bad faith is evident in the intent to circumvent this legal mandate. And as Angus was then forced to litigate her just claims when petitioners refused to heed her demands for the payment of separation pay, the award of attorney's fees equivalent to 10% of the amount of separation pay is also in order.[47]
	GR No. 192034 2014-01-13	ALPHA SHIP MANAGEMENT CORPORATION v. ELEOSIS V. CALO DEL CASTILLO, J.
disability becomes permanent when so declared by the company-designated physician within the period allowed, or upon expiration of the maximum 240-day medical treatment period in case of absence of a declaration of fitness or permanent disability. It is settled that the above provisions of the Labor Code and the Amended Rules on Employees Compensation on disabilities apply to seafarers;[42] the POEA Standard Employment Contract, which respondent holds, is not the sole basis for determining their
	GR No. 182072 2013-06-28	UNIVAC DEVELOPMENT v. WILLIAM M. SORIANO PERALTA, J.
The power of the Court of Appeals to review NLRC decisions via Rule 65 or Petition for Certiorari has been settled as early as in our decision in St. Martin Funeral Home v. National Labor Relations Commission. This Court held that the proper vehicle for such review was a Special Civil Action for Certiorari under Rule 65 of the Rules of Court, and that this action should be filed in the Court of Appeals in strict observance of the doctrine of the hierarchy of courts. Moreover, it is already settled that under Section 9 of Batas Pambansa Blg. 129, as amended by Republic Act No. 7902[10] (An Act Expanding the Jurisdiction of the Court of Appeals, amending for the purpose of Section Nine of Batas Pambansa Blg. 129 as amended, known as the Judiciary Reorganization Act of 1980), the Court of Appeals pursuant to the exercise of its original jurisdiction over Petitions for Certiorari is specifically given the power to pass upon the evidence, if and when necessary, to resolve factual issues.[24]
	GR No. 162809 2012-09-05	PACIFIC OCEAN MANNING v. BENJAMIN D. PENALES LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J.
Elucidating on this concept, this Court, in PHILASIA Shipping Agency Corporation v. Tomacruz[36] quoting Vergara, held: As these provisions operate, the seafarer, upon sign-off from his vessel, must report to the company-designated physician within three (3) days from arrival for diagnosis and treatment. For the duration of the treatment but in no case to exceed 120 days, the seaman is on temporary total disability as he is totally unable to work. He receives his basic wage during this period until he is declared fit to work or his temporary disability is acknowledged by the company to be permanent, either partially or totally, as his condition is defined under the POEA Standard Employment Contract and by applicable Philippine laws. If the 120 days initial period is exceeded and no such declaration is made because the seafarer requires further medical attention, then the temporary total disability period may be extended up to a maximum of 240 days, subject to the right of the employer to declare within this period that a permanent partial or total disability already exists. The seaman may of course also be declared fit to work at any time such declaration is justified by his medical condition.