Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 68 views

    Carcedo vs. Maine Marine Philippines Inc. Case Digest

    Uploaded by

    PAMELA PARCE
    This case involves Dario Carcedo, who was hired as a Chief Officer on a ship. While working, he suffered injuries to his foot that became infected. He was treated by various doctors but ultimately had parts of his foot amputated. He filed a claim for total and permanent disability benefits. The Labor Arbiter only awarded partial disability based on the company doctor's assessment. However, the NLRC reversed and awarded full disability, citing a different doctor. The CA upheld the partial disability, but also found Carcedo totally permanently disabled since he couldn't work over 120 days. The Supreme Court ruled that Carcedo was entitled to total permanent disability benefits. It cited precedent that this applies

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Carcedo vs. Maine Marine Philippines Inc. Case Digest

    Uploaded by

    PAMELA PARCE
    68 views2 pages
    This case involves Dario Carcedo, who was hired as a Chief Officer on a ship. While working, he suffered injuries to his foot that became infected. He was treated by various doctors but ultimately had parts of his foot amputated. He filed a claim for total and permanent disability benefits. The Labor Arbiter only awarded partial disability based on the company doctor's assessment. However, the NLRC reversed and awarded full disability, citing a different doctor. The CA upheld the partial disability, but also found Carcedo totally permanently disabled since he couldn't work over 120 days. The Supreme Court ruled that Carcedo was entitled to total permanent disability benefits. It cited precedent that this applies

    Original Title

    Carcedo-vs.-Maine-Marine-Philippines-Inc.-case-digest

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    This case involves Dario Carcedo, who was hired as a Chief Officer on a ship. While working, he suffered injuries to his foot that became infected. He was treated by various doctors but ultimately had parts of his foot amputated. He filed a claim for total and permanent disability benefits. The Labor Arbiter only awarded partial disability based on the company doctor's assessment. However, the NLRC reversed and awarded full disability, citing a different doctor. The CA upheld the partial disability, but also found Carcedo totally permanently disabled since he couldn't work over 120 days. The Supreme Court ruled that Carcedo was entitled to total permanent disability benefits. It cited precedent that this applies

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    68 views2 pages

    Carcedo vs. Maine Marine Philippines Inc. Case Digest

    Uploaded by

    PAMELA PARCE
    This case involves Dario Carcedo, who was hired as a Chief Officer on a ship. While working, he suffered injuries to his foot that became infected. He was treated by various doctors but ultimately had parts of his foot amputated. He filed a claim for total and permanent disability benefits. The Labor Arbiter only awarded partial disability based on the company doctor's assessment. However, the NLRC reversed and awarded full disability, citing a different doctor. The CA upheld the partial disability, but also found Carcedo totally permanently disabled since he couldn't work over 120 days. The Supreme Court ruled that Carcedo was entitled to total permanent disability benefits. It cited precedent that this applies

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 2

    G.R. No.

    203804
    15 April 2015
    Dario A. Carcedo (substituted by his wife Prsicilla Dela Cruz-Carcedo) vs. Maine Marine
    Philippines, Inc. and/or Misuga Kajun Co., Ltd., and/or Ma. Corazon Guese-Songcuya
    Carpio, J.

    Facts:

    Carcedo was hired by Maine Marine for its foreign principal Misuga Kajun as a Chief Officer on
    board M/V Speedwell under contract for nine months. He underwent a Pre-Employment
    Medical Examination where he was declared fit to work.

    In November 2008, Carcedo’s foot was wounded because of his safety shoes. Upon
    examination, he was given antibiotics by the ship doctor, but his foot condition worsened when
    he slid down the deck and bumped his right foot.

    In January 2009, he felt pain in the back of his swollen leg and developed fever and headache.
    He was treated at the Yoshino Hospital in Japan where he was diagnosed with an open fracture
    of the right major toe bone with a suspicion of sepsis.

    He was repatriated and referred to the company-designated physician, Dr. Nicomedez Cruz of
    Manila Doctors Hospital, for medical treatment and was found to have an infected open wound
    in the medial aspect of the right big toe. The said doctor recommended “an impediment
    disability grading of 8% loss of first toe (big toe) and some of its metatarsal bone.” Due to
    infection of the amputated stump, he was again admitted to the hospital and where his right
    first metatarsal bone was eventually removed.

    Carcedo filed a complaint for total and permanent disability benefits, sickness allowance and
    other consequential damages. He consulted an orthopedic surgeon, Dr. Alan Leonardo R.
    Raymundo, who amputated Carcedo’s second toe after.

    The Labor Arbiter denied his claim for full disability and awarded him only partial disability in
    accordance with the contract between the parties. The NLRC reversed the LA’s decision and
    awarded Carcedo full disability benefits and attorney’s fees. It gave credence to the findings of
    Dr. Raymundo and held that Carcedo’s death was confirmation of his unfitness to do work as a
    seaman. It applied the definition of permanent disability as “the inability of a worker to perform
    his job for more than 120 days, regardless of whether or not he loses the use of any part of his
    body.” The CA, however, upheld the 8% disability grading made by the company-designated
    physician in accordance with the CBA. It, however, also declared Carcedo to be suffering from
    total permanent disability because (1) he was unable to perform his job for more than 120
    days; and (2) the declarations by the company-designated physician that Carcedo was fit for sea
    duty were made more than 400 days from repatriation.
    Issue: Whether Carcedo was entitled to total and permanent disability benefits in accordance
    with the CBA?

    Held:

    YES.

    Carcedo’s disability is deemed total and permanent due to the lack of a final disability
    assessment and of a certification of fitness for sea service from Dr. Cruz.

    In C.F. Sharp Crew Management, Inc. v. Taok, the Court held that “…a seafarer may pursue an
    action for total and permanent disability benefits if: (a) the company-designated physician
    failed to issue a declaration as to his fitness to engage in sea duty or disability even after the
    lapse of the 120-day period and there is no indication that further medical treatment would
    address his temporary total disability, hence justify an extension of the period to 240 days; (b)
    240 days had lapsed without any certification being issued by the company-designated
    physician; (c) the company-designated physician declared that he is fit for sea duty within the
    120-day or 240-day period, as the case may be, but his physician of choice and the doctor
    chosen under Section 20-B(3) of the POEA-SEC are of a contrary opinion; (d) the company-
    designated physician acknowledged that he is partially permanently disabled but other doctors
    who he consulted, on his own and jointly with his employer, believed that his disability is not
    only permanent but total as well; (e) the company-designated physician recognized that he is
    totally and permanently disabled but there is a dispute on the disability grading; (f) the
    company-designated physician determined that his medical condition is not compensable or
    work-related under the POEA-SEC but his doctor-of-choice and the third doctor selected under
    Section 20-B(3) of the POEA-SEC found otherwise and declared him unfit to work; (g) the
    company-designated physician declared him totally and permanently disabled but the employer
    refuses to pay him the corresponding benefits; and (h) the company-designated physician
    declared him partially and permanently disabled within the 120-day or 240-day period but he
    remains incapacitated to perform his usual sea duties after the lapse of the said periods.”

    Decision: Petition granted. CA decision reversed. NLRC decision reinstated with modification
    (without attorney’s fees).

    You might also like