This case has been cited 2 times or more.
|
2014-07-28 |
SERENO, C.J. |
||||
| Further, petitioner is correct in that a disputable presumption in favor of the compensability of an illness suffered by a seafarer during the term of his contract is provided under Section 20 B(4)[14] of the POEA Standard Employment Contract. This disputable presumption works in favor of the employee pursuant to the following mandate under Executive Order No. 247 dated 21 July 1987, under which the POEA-SEC was created: "to secure the best terms and conditions of employment of Filipino contract workers and ensure compliance therewith" and "to protect the well-being of Filipino workers overseas." Hence, unless contrary evidence is presented by the seafarer's employer/s, this disputable presumption stands.[15] | |||||
|
2013-12-04 |
MENDOZA, J. |
||||
| In this case, it is undisputed that NPC afflicted respondent while on board the petitioners' vessel. As a non-occupational disease, it has the disputable presumption of being work-related. This presumption obviously works in the seafarer's favor.[16] Hence, unless contrary evidence is presented by the employers, the work-relatedness of the disease must be sustained.[17] | |||||