View full case

CHRISTOPHER C. CALERA v. HOEGH FLEET SERVICES PHILIPPINES

FACTS:

On December 5, 2016, petitioner Christopher C. Calera left the country for Cartagena, Colombia to work as an ordinary seaman for respondent Hoegh Fleet Services Philippines, Inc. He slipped in the shower at the hotel and fell on his buttocks, resulting in excruciating pain and recurring numbness in his lower back and extremity. Despite the injury, petitioner still boarded the vessel and reported the accident to the ship's officer. However, instead of receiving medical attention, he was ordered to immediately go to work and was made to carry heavy baggage and cans of grease. As a result, his back pain worsened and he had difficulty getting out of bed the next day. He was then sent to a hospital in Cartagena where he was diagnosed with mechanical lumbago and perianal abscess. His condition did not improve and he was medically repatriated on January 2, 2017. Upon his return to the Philippines, petitioner sought medical evaluation and underwent medication and physical therapy. Despite lack of improvement, respondent discontinued his physical therapy and verbally assessed him to be fit for work. Petitioner sought further medical evaluation and was diagnosed with total and permanent disability by an orthopedic specialist.

The case involves Christopher C. Calera, a seaman who was brought to a hospital in Cartagena, Colombia due to lower back pain. He was diagnosed with mechanical lumbago and given pain relievers. He was declared unfit to work for 5 days and given pain medications. Despite follow-up consultations, there was no improvement in his condition. He was found to have a muscle spasm and perianal abscess, leading to the prescription of antibiotics and oral medications. After one week of rest, he returned to work but was eventually repatriated for further evaluation and management. Upon his return, he underwent various medical examinations, including X-ray, MRI of the lumbosacral spine, and EMG-NCV. He received oral medications and physical therapy treatment but it was terminated by the company. At present, he continues to experience intense lower back pain and numbness in his lower extremities. Physical examination revealed tenderness in the lumbar area, muscle spasms, limited trunk flexion, and aggravation of pain during specific movements. He has been diagnosed with lumbar disc disease and a posterior disc bulge. Calera requested a conference with the respondent to discuss his entitlement to disability benefits under the CBA, but the respondent did not take action. He filed a Notice to Arbitrate, and during the grievance proceedings, he agreed to submit his case for disability assessment to a third doctor. However, the respondent disagreed with the proposal, and the referral to a third doctor did not proceed. The RCMB proceedings resumed, and Calera presented his difficulty in moving due to lower back pain and the use of a back brace during the proceedings.

Christopher C. Calera, a 33-year-old male from La Union, was engaged as an ordinary seaman on board the vessel Hoegh Grace. On December 6, 2016, Calera presented complaints of right-sided low back pain of VAS 6-7/10, accompanied by paresthesia on the right lower extremity after prolonged sitting. He was given pain medication and was subsequently referred to a shore side facility. Calera was later diagnosed with piriformis syndrome, right with sciatica. He underwent several medical procedures and physical therapy sessions as recommended by his medical reports. Shiphealth issued an interim grade 8 disability rating for Calera, based on his present functional capacity. In its final medical report, Shiphealth found that Calera was suffering from piriformis syndrome, right with sciatica, and recommended four sets of physical therapy consisting of six sessions each.

The petitioner, Mr. Calera, was a seafarer working for the respondent, Marlow Navigation Company Ltd., on board a vessel. On December 8, 13, and 19, 2016, Mr. Calera was referred to a shore-side facility in Colombia due to mechanical lumbago. He underwent treatment and was temporarily relieved of symptoms. During the course of treatment, he complained of minimal perianal pain after defecation, and a possible perianal abscess was considered. However, no perianal abscess, hemorrhoids, or anal fissures were identified upon examination. Mr. Calera also had a past medical history of previous surgeries for hemorrhoids and anal fissures. In addition to the perianal symptoms, Mr. Calera also complained of low back pain. He underwent evaluations by the Orthopedic Spine Surgery service, and initial consideration for his condition was lumbar muscle strain and possible spine fracture. X-rays of his cervical and thoracolumbar spine showed normal findings, and the assessment of possible radiculopathy, secondary to a herniated nucleus pulposus, was made. He underwent physical therapy, and subsequent re-evaluations confirmed a diagnosis of piriformis syndrome with sciatica. Continued physical therapy and pain medications were advised. On April 17, 2017, Mr. Calera reported resolution of low back pain but occasional numbness or paresthesia on the right lower leg. Physical examination showed improved lumbar range of motion and no swelling or tenderness. The final diagnosis was piriformis syndrome with sciatica, improving. The orthopedic spine service stated that no further active intervention was needed, except for continued self-directed home exercises. Despite being declared fit to return to work, Mr. Calera refused to sign his certificate of fitness to work. He subsequently filed a Notice to Arbitrate seeking compensation for total and permanent disability. The Panel of Arbitrators ruled in his favor and ordered the respondent to pay him disability compensation. The respondent filed a motion for reconsideration which was denied, and the case was elevated to the Court of Appeals. The Court of Appeals reversed the panel's decision, but the petitioner filed a motion for reconsideration which was also denied. The petitioner now seeks relief from the Supreme Court, arguing that his illness is work-related.

ISSUES:

  1. Whether the Holiday Inn incident is a compensable accident.

  2. Whether petitioner's injury was work-aggravated.

  3. Whether the petitioner's injury was work-related or work-aggravated.

  4. Whether the company-designated physicians timely issued a final and definitive assessment of the petitioner's condition.

  5. Whether or not the medical report issued by the company-designated physicians is final and definite.

  6. Whether or not the seafarer is entitled to disability benefits under the Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA).

  7. Whether petitioner is entitled to total and permanent disability benefits and attorney's fees.

RULING:

  1. The Holiday Inn incident was not a compensable accident. The slip and fall in the bathroom does not meet the definition of an unforeseen injurious occurrence that could not be reasonably anticipated. There was no showing that the petitioner took any measures to avoid or lessen the injury caused by the slippery floor.

  2. Petitioner's injury was work-aggravated. Although the slip and fall incident itself is not compensable, the injury suffered was aggravated by the petitioner's work on board the vessel. The petitioner reported the incident and the resulting pain and numbness to his superiors, who then ordered him to immediately start working without providing pain relievers. These circumstances show that the injury suffered at Holiday Inn was worsened by the petitioner's work on board the vessel.

  3. The petitioner's injury was work-related or work-aggravated. The Court ruled that the petitioner's injury was caused or at least aggravated by his work during the term of his employment contract. It was established that his work involved carrying heavy loads and performing strenuous activities, which reasonably led to the conclusion that his work caused or aggravated his illness.

  4. The company-designated physicians failed to issue a final and definitive assessment of the petitioner's condition. The Court emphasized that a final and definite disability assessment is necessary to accurately reflect the extent of the seafarer's sickness or injuries and his or her capacity to resume work. The medical reports issued by the company-designated physicians were found to be incomplete and not final, therefore rendering the disability grading contained therein not seriously appreciable.

  5. The Court finds that the medical report issued by the company-designated physicians is not final and definite. The report did not contain any disability rating or declaration regarding the seafarer's fitness or unfitness for further sea duty. Furthermore, the seafarer still required further medical treatment, indicating that he was not yet healed. As a result, the seafarer is deemed totally and permanently disabled by operation of law.

  6. The seafarer is not entitled to USD90,000.00 disability benefits under the CBA since he is not an officer or cadet but an ordinary seafarer. Instead, he is entitled to USD60,000.00 under the POEA-SEC.

  7. Petitioner is entitled to total and permanent disability benefits of USD60,000.00 and attorney's fees of ten percent (10%) of the total monetary award. The total monetary award shall earn six percent (6%) legal interest per annum from finality of this Decision until fully paid.

PRINCIPLES:

  • The seafarers' employment is governed by the contracts they signed, as long as the stipulations are not contrary to law, morals, public order, or public policy.

  • The POEA Rules and Regulations require the integration of the POEA-Standard Employment Contract (POEA-SEC) in every seafarer's contract.

  • An accident, for the purpose of determining compensability, is an unintended and unforeseen injurious occurrence that does not occur in the usual course of events and could not be reasonably anticipated.

  • A work-related injury or illness arises out of and in the course of employment.

  • Pre-existing conditions may be compensable if aggravated by the seafarer's work.

  • The nature of employment need not be the sole and only reason for an illness or injury suffered by a seafarer. It is sufficient that the employment has contributed, even in a small measure, to the development of the disease. (Heirs of Licuanan v. Singa Ship Management, Inc.)

  • The company-designated physician must issue a final medical assessment on the seafarer's disability grading within 120 days from the seafarer's reporting. If the assessment is not given within this period without justifiable reason, the seafarer's disability becomes permanent and total. If a sufficient justification is provided, the period of diagnosis and treatment may be extended to 240 days. If no assessment is given even within the extended period, the seafarer's disability becomes permanent and total regardless of any justification. (Elburg Shipmanagement Phils., Inc. v. Quiogue, Jr.)

  • A final and complete medical report from the company-designated physicians is necessary to properly establish the disability and determine the corresponding disability benefits. The report must be complete, definitive, and accurately reflect the true extent of the seafarer's sickness or injuries and ability to resume work. (Hanseatic Shipping Philippines, Inc. v. Ballon)

  • A medical report issued by company-designated physicians must be final and definite, assessing the seafarer's fitness to work or degree of permanent disability within the prescribed period of 120 or 240 days. Without a valid final and definite assessment from the company-designated physicians within the prescribed period, the seafarer's disability is considered total and permanent by operation of law.

  • The failure of the company-designated physician to give a definitive impediment rating beyond the extended temporary disability period transforms the seafarer's total and temporary disability into a total and permanent disability by operation of law.

  • The entitlement to disability benefits under the CBA is contingent upon the seafarer's status as an officer or cadet. For ordinary seafarers, the benefits under the POEA-SEC apply.

  • To be entitled to moral and exemplary damages, the seafarer must show that the respondent acted in a wanton, fraudulent, reckless, oppressive, or malevolent manner in dealing with him for medical treatment.

  • A seafarer who is compelled to litigate to satisfy his claim for disability benefits is entitled to attorney's fees.

  • An employee who is declared totally and permanently disabled for sea duties is entitled to total and permanent disability benefits.

  • The amount of total and permanent disability benefits is fixed at USD60,000.00.

  • In case of an award for total and permanent disability benefits, the employee is also entitled to attorney's fees equivalent to ten percent (10%) of the total monetary award.

  • The total monetary award shall earn interest at the rate of six percent (6%) per annum from the finality of the decision until fully paid.