ALPHA SHIP MANAGEMENT CORPORATION/JUNEL M.

CHAN and/or
CHUO-KAIUN COMP ANY, LIMITED
vs.
ELEOSIS V. CALO
G.R. No. 192034
January 13, 2014
For: Claim of permanent disability benefits
Facts:
Respondent Eleosis V. Calo worked for petitioners Alpha Ship
Management Corporation and Chuo-Kaiun Company Limited (CKCL) since
1998 under seven employment contracts. He was rehired as Chief Cook on
February 2004 and commenced his duties on March 2004. On July 2004 while
in China, the doctor found Calo suffering from urinary tract infection and
renal colic, and was given antibiotics. His condition did not improve and
consulted another doctor in Chile in August 2004, and was found to have
kidney problems and urinary tract infection but was declared fit for work on a
light duty basis. On September 2004, in Japan, Calo was diagnosed with
suspected renal and/or ureter calculus. He was declared unfit for work and
advised to be sent home and undergo further detailed examination and
treatment. He was repatriated on October 12, 2004 and was referred by
petitioners to Dr. Nicomedes G. Cruz, the company designated physician.
Calo was seen and examined by Dr. Cruz from Oct 20, 2004 Oct 14, 2005,
respondent felt his condition did not improved, prompting him to seek an
internal medicine specialist, Dr. Vicaldo. He then underwent surgery and had
further medical evaluations thereafter.
Calo filed against the petitioners a Complaint for the recovery of total
permanent disability benefits, illness allowance, reimbursement of medical
expenses, damages and attorneys fees.
Upon his return check up to Dr. Calo in 2006, the latter found him fit to
work.
Issue: Whether respondent is entitled to disability benefits under the POEA
Standard Employment Contract for Seafarers despite the fact that he was
declared fit to work.
Ruling:
Yes. Article 192(c)(1) of the Labor Code provides that:
Art. 192. Permanent total disability. x x x
(c) The following disabilities shall be deemed total and permanent:
(1)Temporary total disability lasting continuously for more than one
hundred twenty days, except as otherwise provided for in the Rules;
The 120-day period may be extended up to 240 days, under Rule X,
Section 2 of the Amended Rules on Employees Compensation and pursuant
Alexylle Rose Garsula - Concepcion

to the pronouncement in Vergara v. Hammonia Maritime Services, Inc.

stating that a temporary total disability becomes permanent when so
declared by the company-designated physician within the period allowed, or
upon expiration of the maximum 240-day medical treatment period in case
of absence of a declaration of fitness or permanent disability.
Respondent was repatriated on October 12, 2004 and underwent
treatment by the company-designated physician, Dr. Cruz, until October 14,
2005, or for a continuous period of over one year or for more than the
statutory 120-day or even 240-day48 period. During said treatment period,
Dr. Cruz did not arrive at a definite assessment of respondents fitness or
disability; thus, respondents medical condition remained unresolved. It was
only on July 18, 2006 that respondent was declared fit to work by Dr. Cruz.
Such declaration, however, became irrelevant, for by then, respondent had
been under medical treatment and unable to engage in gainful employment
for more than 240 days.
In the same manner, the issue of which among the two diagnoses or
opinions should prevail that of Dr. Cruz or Dr. Vicaldo is rendered
irrelevant in view of the lapse of the said 240-day period. As far as the
parties are concerned, respondents medical treatment and disability
continued for more than 240 days without any finding or diagnosis by the
company-designated physician that he was fit to resume work. Thus,
consonant with law and jurisprudence, respondent is entitled to a declaration
of permanent total disability, as well as the corresponding benefit attached
thereto in the amount of US$60,000.00.

Alexylle Rose Garsula - Concepcion