17. LEGAL HEIRS OF DEAUNA V. FIL-STAR MARITIME CORP. 688 PHIL.

582, 601
(2012)
Facts: Edwin embarked on August 1, 2004, beginning a nine-month engagement as the Sanko's
Chief Engineer. He had stomach aches and was later diagnosed with kidney stones, for which he
was given medication. Then Edwin was returned home. While petitioners asserted that Edwin
was repatriated because of the latter's physical fragility and head heaviness, respondents alleged
that Edwin requested an early termination. Edwin was found to have WHO Grade 4
Glioblastoma (GBM). Then it was mentioned that Edwin might have developed the cancer after
being exposed to radiation or vinyl materials, or after working close to power lines.
Respondent asserted that they gave Edwin a US$6,033.36 allowance out of sympathy and a
desire to prevent legal disputes. Despite being under no duty to do so, they also offered to pay
US$60,000.00 in disability payments. This is because GBM may only be classified a work-
related illness if the individual who develops it has been exposed to radiation or vinyl chemicals
or has worked close to electricity lines. According to the respondents, Edwin did not have this
exposure while working for them. Following that, petitioners requested disability benefits, but
respondents rejected their request. They subsequently filed a lawsuit with the National Labor
Relations Commission seeking disability compensation, medical and transportation
reimbursements, moral and exemplary damages, and attorney's expenses (NLRC). Edwin died on
April 13, 2006 during the pendency of the proceedings. He was substituted therein by the
petitioners who sought the payment of death benefits under the International Bargaining
Forum/Associated Marine Officers and Seamens Union of the Philippines/International Mariners
Management Association of Japan Collective Bargaining Agreement (IBF/AMOSUP/IMMAJ
CBA).
Voluntary Arbitrator Rene Ofreneo (VA Ofreneo), invoking the provisions of the Philippine
Overseas Employment Administration Standard Employment Contract (POEA SEC) and the
IBF/AMOSUP/IMMAJ CBA, awarded death benefits to the petitioners. The Court of Appeals
reversed the decision of VA Ofreneo. Petitioners contend that they are entitled to death benefits.
Issue: Whether or not within the purview of the IBF/AMOSUP/IMMAJ CBA, Edwin's death on
April 13, 2006, or more than a year from his repatriation, can be considered as one occurring
while he was still in the employment of the respondents.
Ruling: YES. Edwin's death can be considered can be considered as one occuring while he was
still in the employment of respondents. Under the IBF/AMOSUP/IMMAJ CBA provisions,
Edwin's death a little more than a year from his repatriation can still be considered as one
occurring while he was still under the respondents' employ.
From the foregoing, the SC concluded that at the time of Edwin's death on April 13, 2006 due to
GBM, he was still in the employment of the respondents. While it is true that Article 22.1 of the
IBF/AMOSUP/IMMAJ CBA considers a seafarer as terminated when he signs off from the
vessel due to sickness, the foregoing is subject to the provisions of Article 29. Under Article 29,
a seafarer remains under the respondents' employ as long as the former is still entitled to medical
assistance and sick pay, and provided that the death which eventually occurs is directly
attributable to the sickness which caused the seafarer's employment to be terminated. As
discussed above, the company-designated physician, Dr. Cruz, in effect admitted that Edwin was
repatriated due to symptoms which a person suffering from GBM normally exhibits. The
petitioners are, however, not entitled to moral and exemplary damages and attorney's fees.