THIRD DIVISION
[G.R. No. 224554. February 22, 2017]
GILDA T. SINGSON, IN BEHALF OF NAZARENO JESUS VICENTE B. SINGSON, petitioner,vs. MARYVILLE MANILA, INC. AND/OR MARYVILLE MARITIME, INC. AND/OR GLENDA P. BILIRAN, respondents.
NOTICE
Sirs/Mesdames :
Please take notice that the Court, Third Division, issued a Resolution datedFebruary 22, 2017,which reads as follows:
"G.R. No. 224554 (Gilda T. Singson, in behalf of Nazareno Jesus Vicente B. Singson vs. Maryville Manila, Inc. and/or Maryville Maritime, Inc. and/or Glenda P. Biliran). — This is a Petition for Review on Certiorari that assails the Decision 1 dated December 10, 2015 and Resolution dated May 13, 2016 of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. SP No. 134311.
The facts culled from the records are as follows:
Respondent Maryville Manila, Inc. (Maryville) hired Nazareno Jesus Vicente Singson (Nazareno) as a Second Engineer under five (5) successive employment contracts from June 15, 2006 until October 6, 2009. During his last contract, he was hired for seven (7) months in behalf of its principal Maryville Maritime, Inc., with basic salary of $1,663.00, owner's bonus of US$215.00, senior officer bonus of US$1,400.00, fixed overtime pay of US$1,235.00 and eight (8) day vacation leave with pay of US$443.00. His Pre-Employment Medical Examination (PEME) by the company-designated physician showed that he was fit for employment. When his contract terminated on June 9, 2009, Maryville extended his employment and promoted him to Chief Engineer.
On August 7, 2009, Nazareno submitted a written request for vacation, stating that he "need[s] to take rest and attend [to] some personal problem at home." The letter was approved by the ship's captain. The letter was purportedly followed by yet another letter requesting a vacation, where Nazareno claimed that he needed to take some rest and attend to personal problem at home. His health had worsened and sometimes he could not sleep at night. 2 He returned to the Philippines on October 6, 2009, after the termination of his extended contract. aDSIHc
Upon his arrival, Nazareno allegedly proceeded to Maryville to request medical assistance but he was not referred to any company-designated physician. 3 Thus, he went to De La Salle University Medical Center, Dasmariñas, Cavite. The medical examination conducted thereat on October 26, 2009 showed that he had "cardiomegaly with possible basal congestion and/or pneumonia suspicious nodular densities, right lung x x x." 4
Nazareno's health further deteriorated so that he was confined from October 26, 2009 and underwent an operation on December 1, 2009 for "tube thoracostomy" of his right lung. He supposedly asked for medical assistance from respondents but was refused.
Nazareno died on December 16, 2009. His Death Certificate indicated that he died of Acute Pulmonary Venous Thromboembolism as the immediate cause; Bronchogenic Carcinoma (lung cancer), Bronchioalveolar Type Stage IIIB as the antecedent cause; and Malignant Pleural Effusion Secondary to #2 as the underlying cause. 5
Nazareno's widow, herein petitioner Gilda Singson, asked for financial assistance from Maryville for the school expenses of her children. 6 Maryville refused to lend aid, so petitioner filed a complaint for payment of death benefits, burial expenses, damages and attorney's fees against respondents. 7 Petitioner claimed that the nature of her husband's work exposed him to hazardous conditions such as overseeing the refrigeration system, main engine and other equipment; supervision of the daily maintenance and operation of the engine pollution management; and exposure to pesticides used to preserve the cargo of the vessel. ATICcS
In their defense, respondents claimed that Nazareno was repatriated after he finished his contract without any medical incident or complaint being reported and/or recorded about him. Moreover, his sickness is not work-related. He did not have any medical complaints while he was onboard the vessel nor upon his return to the country after termination of his contract. It was only on January 25, 2010 8 that respondents learned of Nazareno's demise. Respondents averred that petitioner's claims were mere hearsay and had no basis. Moreover, Nazareno's handwritten follow-up letter, stating that his health had worsened and that he could not sleep at night, was unsigned, undated and did not bear any signature or marking that it was received by the ship captain.
Labor Arbiter Decision
The Labor Arbiter (LA) ruled in favor of petitioner, holding as follows: 9
WHEREFORE, premises considered, judgment is hereby rendered ordering respondents Maryville Manila, Inc. and/or the foreign principal employer Maryville Maritime, Inc., to pay, jointly and severally, complainant Gilda T. Singson widow of deceased seafarer Nazareno Jesus Vicente B. Singson for and in behalf of their minor children, the Philippine Peso equivalent at the time of actual payment of SEVENTY NINE THOUSAND US DOLLARS ($79,000.00) representing death benefits and allowance, and burial allowance, plus ten percent (10%) thereof as and for attorney's fees.
All other claims are dismissed for lack of merit.
SO ORDERED.
NLRC Resolution
In its November 13, 2013 Resolution, the NLRC affirmed the Labor Arbiter's Decision, viz.:
WHEREFORE, premises considered, the respondents' appeal is hereby DISMISSED for lack of merit and the Decision of the Labor Arbiter dated May 28, 2013 is AFFIRMED in its entirety.
CA Decision
The appellate court reversed the LA and NLRC rulings. The dispositive portion of the CA's December 10, 2015 Decision states:
WHEREFORE, the instant petition is hereby GRANTED. The assailed Decision dated 13 November 2013 and Resolution dated 27 December 2013 affirming the Labor Arbiter's Decision dated 28 May 2013 are REVERSED and SET ASIDE. The complaint dated 20 March 2012 docketed as NLRC OCW CASE NO. 03-04522-12 is hereby DISMISSED for lack of merit.
SO ORDERED.
The CA ratiocinated that without any record of illness during the terms of employment contract, it cannot be concluded that Nazareno acquired or developed his lung cancer during employment with Maryville.
Hence, the present petition.
The sole issue presented is whether or not Singson's heirs are entitled to their claimed benefits on account of the seafarer's death.
Our Ruling
The petition is unmeritorious.
The heirs of a deceased seafarer are entitled to death benefits provided he suffered a work-related death during the term of his contract. 10 In other words, there must be a causal connection between the nature of the work and the injury or illness that a seafarer suffered as a result thereof. The proof of such causal connection must be "such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion." 11
As per records, Nazareno died of Acute Pulmonary Venous Thromboembolism related to Bronchogenic Carcinoma, commonly known as "lung cancer," about two (2) months after the termination of his extended contract with the respondents. Yet, neither the LA nor the NLRC made a factual determination of Nazareno's nature of work as Second Engineer and later as Chief Engineer at the company and whether such work involved risks that exposed him to lung cancer. ETHIDa
There was no sufficient proof that Nazareno actually sought medical treatment on the ship or in any port during the effectivity of his contract. The first letter submitted by Nazareno requesting a vacation, and acknowledged by the ship captain, 12 only mentioned that he needed some rest and had to attend to some personal problems at home. His follow-up handwritten letter that mentioned his worsening condition was not dated or signed as received by the ship captain. 13
Without cavil, the petitioner failed to prove causal relation between the nature of her husband's work and the cause of his death as required under the POEA-Standard Employment Contract.
WHEREFORE, finding no reversible error in the assailed April 19, 2012 Decision of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. CV No. 90243, the Court resolves to DENY the petition and, thus, AFFIRM said Decision. (Reyes, J., on leave;Caguioa, J.,designated as Fifth Member of the Third Division per Special Order No. 2417 dated January 4, 2017)
SO ORDERED."
Very truly yours,
(SGD.) WILFREDO V. LAPITANDivision Clerk of Court
Footnotes
1. Penned by Associate Justice Ramon Bato, Jr. with the concurrence of Associate Justices Manuel M. Barrios and Victoria Isabel A. Paredes.
2.Rollo, p. 114.
3.Id. at 193.
4.Id. at 115. Annex "J" of Complainant's Position Paper.
5.Id. at 150.
6.Id. at 185.
7.Id. at 82-83.
8.Id. at 248.
9. Decision dated May 28, 2013.
10.Sea Power Shipping Enterprises, Inc., and/or Bulk Carriers Limited and Special Maritime Enterprises, and M/V Magellan v. Nenita P. Salazar, G.R. No. 188595, August 28, 2013.
11.Jessie David v. OSG Shipmanagement Manila, Inc., and/or Michaelmar Shipping Services, G.R. No. 197205, September 26, 2012.
12.Rollo, p. 113.
13.Id. at 114.