G.R. No. 162809 - PACIFIC OCEAN MANNING, INC. AND CELTIC PACIFIC SHIP MANAGEMENT CO., LTD., VS. BENJAMIN D. PENALES.D E C I S I O N - Supreme Court E-Library

Ruling

WHEREFORE , premises considered, judgment is hereby rendered ordering respondents Pacific Ocean Manning, Inc. and Celtic Pacific Ship Management Ltd. (Hongkong), to pay, jointly and solidarily, complainant Benjamin D. Penales disability benefits in the sum of US$16,795.00 representing 33.59% of the maximum amount of US$50,000.00 payable in Philippine Currency at the rate of exchange prevailing at the time of payment as well as ten (10%) percent thereon as attorneys fees; and DISMISSING all other claims for lack of merit. [9] In her decision, the Labor Arbiter held that there is no dispute that Penaless injury was work-related and his treatment went beyond 120 days, which, under the Philippine Overseas Employment Administration (POEA) Standard Employment Contract (SEC), entitled him to disability benefits. The Labor Arbiter added that the petitioners were unable to refute Penaless claim by failing to prove that he was fit to work, or with at least a certificate on his disability grade. The Labor Arbiter then declared that Penales was entitled to a disability of around Grade 8 which is equivalent to 33.59% of the maximum amount of US$50,000 in the sum of US$16,795.00, after examining the schedule of disability benefits under the POEA SEC vis-à-vis the medical findings of the company-designated physician. [10] Not satisfied, Penales appealed [11] the Labor Arbiters Decision to the NLRC, arguing that the Labor Arbiter abused her discretion when she vaguely declared that he was entitled to a disability grade of only 8. The NLRC agreed that while there is no question that Penales was disabled, the issue of his grade of disability was not threshed out properly. The NLRC said that considering that the determination of the grade means determination of the actual physical condition of [Penales] and his injuries, a physician is more in a position to ascertain the degree of disability. [12] On September 5, 2002, the NLRC set aside [13] the Labor Arbiters decision and remanded the case for further proceedings only in so far as the determination of Penaless grade of disability. Penales moved to reconsider the above resolution but this was denied by the NLRC on November 18, 2002, for lack of merit. [14] Penales elevated his case then to the Court of Appeals via a Petition for Certiorari [15] under Rule 65, on the ground that the NLRC committed grave abuse of discretion when it remanded the case notwithstanding the fact that the evidence of both parties clearly support his entitlement to the maximum amount of US$60,000.00 as disability benefits. This petition was docketed as CA-G.R. SP No. 75126. The Court of Appeals found that Penales was able to establish his entitlement to the maximum benefits under Section C(4)[b] and [c] of the POEA SEC. The Court of Appeals held: We find Penales clearly entitled to the maximum amount given to totally and permanently disabled seafarers. It is undisputed that even now, Penales has fragile extremities that [affect]