FIRST DIVISION
[G.R. No. 243969. June 6, 2019.]
LEOPOLDO C. AMPARO, JR., petitioner, vs.KGJS FLEET MANAGEMENT MANILA, INC., KRISTIAN GERHARD JEBSEN SKIPSREDERI AS, respondents.
NOTICE
Sirs/Mesdames :
Please take notice that the Court, First Division, issued a Resolution datedJune 6, 2019which reads as follows:
"G.R. No. 243969 (Leopoldo C. Amparo, Jr. v. KGJS Fleet Management Manila, Inc., Kristian Gerhard Jebsen Skipsrederi AS). — After review, the Court resolves to DENY the petition for failure to sufficiently show that the Court of Appeals (CA) committed any reversible error in its assailed Decision, which affirmed the National Conciliation and Mediation Board (NCMB's) Decision denying petitioner's claim for total disability benefits. The CA correctly held that petitioner failed to discharge the burden of proof incumbent upon him to prove that his hearing loss was work-related, and that, nevertheless, upon petitioner's failure to submit himself to a post-employment medical examination within three days from disembarkation, as required under Section 20 (A) of the 2010 Philippine Overseas Employment Administration Standard Employment Contract, he forfeited his right to claim the benefits granted therein. 1 HTcADC
Anent the other issues raised, elementary is the principle that this Court is not a trier of facts, and only errors of law are generally reviewed in petitions for review on certiorari of Decisions of the CA. In labor cases, this doctrine applies with even greater force, 2 where factual questions are for labor tribunals to resolve. 3 The findings of fact of quasi-judicial bodies like the National Labor Relations Commission are accorded with respect, even finality, if supported by substantial evidence. When further passed upon and upheld by the CA, they are binding and conclusive upon the Supreme Court and will not normally be disturbed save for exceptional circumstances which are not obtained in this case.
WHEREFORE, premises considered, the petition is DENIED. The assailed Decision dated June 22, 2018 and Resolution dated January 10, 2019 of the Court of Appeals Tenth Division in CA-G.R. SP No. 148888 denying the motion for reconsideration are hereby AFFIRMED. CAIHTE
SO ORDERED."Carandang, J., on official leave.
Very truly yours,
(SGD.) LIBRADA C. BUENADivision Clerk of Court
Footnotes
1. 2010 Philippine Overseas Employment Administration Standard Employment Contract, Sec. 20 (A): x x x
For this purpose, the seafarer shall submit himself to a post-employment medical examination by a company-designated physician within three working days upon his return except when he is physically incapacitated to do so, in which case, a written notice to the agency within the same period is deemed as compliance. x x x Failure of the seafarer to comply with the mandatory reporting requirement shall result in his forfeiture of the right to claim the above benefits; See Ceriola v. NAESS Shipping Philippines, Inc., G.R. No. 193101, April 20, 2015, 756 SCRA 72.
2.San Juan De Dios Educational Foundation Employees Union-Alliance of Filipino Workers v. San Juan De Dios Educational Foundation, Inc., G.R. No. 143341, May 28, 2004, 430 SCRA 193, 205-206.
3.Masangcay v. Trans-Global Maritime Agency, Inc., G.R. No. 172800, October 17, 2008, 569 SCRA 592, 606.