Lemoncito vs. BSM Crew Service Centre Philippines, Inc.

A final medical assessment by a company-designated physician must be complete and categorical in declaring a seafarer fit or unfit to work; an equivocal report that merely notes a condition is "controlled" or that a patient is "cleared cardiac wise" without explicit fitness determination does not constitute a valid assessment within the 120/240-day period, and the seafarer's disability is deemed total and permanent by operation of law.

Petitioner Michael Angelo T. Lemoncito was hired by respondent BSM Crew Service Centre Philippines, Inc. (BSM), for its principal Bernard Schulte Shipmanagement (BSS), as a motor man aboard the vessel MV British Ruby. After passing a pre-employment medical examination, he boarded the vessel on July 22, 2015. During the seventh month of his employment, he complained of fever, cough productive of whitish phlegm, throat discomfort, and elevated blood pressure (173/111). He was medically repatriated on February 22, 2016, and referred to company-designated physicians who diagnosed him with lower respiratory tract infection and hypertension.

• Employment and Medical Repatriation: BSM hired Lemoncito as a motor man on July 16, 2015, for a nine-month contract. Following a pre-employment medical examination declaring him fit, he boarded MV British Ruby on July 22, 2015. While performing duties involving 8 to 16 hours of daily mechanical work, he developed fever, cough, and hypertension (blood pressure reaching 173/111). On February 22, 2016, he was medically repatriated due to these conditions.
• Treatment by Company-Designated Physicians: On February 26, 2016, petitioner was referred to Marine Medical Services under Dr. Percival Pangilinan and Dr. Dennis Jose Sulit. After diagnostic tests, they diagnosed lower respiratory tract infection and hypertension, assigning an interim disability rating of Grade 12 ("slight, residual or disorder"). They opined the hypertension was not work-related, citing multifactorial causes (genetics, lifestyle, diet). Petitioner underwent continuous medication and re-evaluation.
• Final Medical Report: On July 1, 2016, the company-designated physicians issued their 16th and final report stating petitioner was "cleared cardiac wise" and his blood pressure was "adequately controlled with medications," but did not explicitly declare him fit or unfit to resume sea duties. The report noted he was previously cleared of respiratory infection.
• Independent Medical Assessment: Disagreeing with the company assessment, petitioner consulted Dr. Antonio Pascual on September 12, 2016. Dr. Pascual diagnosed Hypertensive Heart Disease, Stage 2, and Degenerative Osteoarthritis of the Thoracic Spine, certifying petitioner as "unfit to work as a seaman."
• Arbitration Proceedings: Petitioner filed a complaint for permanent total disability benefits, sickness allowance, and damages before the Panel of Voluntary Arbitrators, invoking the grievance procedure under the Collective Bargaining Agreement.

• Incomplete Assessment: The company-designated physicians' report dated July 1, 2016, was equivocal and incomplete; it failed to categorically state whether petitioner was fit or unfit to work as a seaman.
• Deemed Permanent Total Disability: By operation of law, the failure to issue a valid final and definite assessment within the 120-day period (or the 240-day extended period) results in automatic total and permanent disability.
• Work-Relatedness: The hypertension was work-related, acquired during his employment as a motor man performing strenuous duties for 24 uninterrupted years.
• Substantial Compliance: Petitioner substantially complied with the third-doctor-referral rule; he was compelled to consult his own physician due to the termination of treatment by the company-designated doctors.

• Timely and Credible Assessment: The company-designated physicians issued a final assessment well within the 240-day extended period; the 120-day period was extended because petitioner's medication was shifted and required further observation.
• Failure to Prove Compensability: Petitioner failed to prove by substantial evidence that his hypertension was work-related or compensable under the POEA-SEC, which requires uncontrolled hypertension with end organ damage to the kidneys, brain, heart, or eyes.
• Mandatory Third-Doctor Referral: Petitioner's failure to observe the mandatory third-doctor-referral rule under the POEA-SEC was fatal to his claim; he was bound by the company-designated physicians' assessment.
• Credibility of Findings: The company-designated physicians' findings were more credible than Dr. Pascual's, as they examined petitioner for four months while Dr. Pascual saw him only once.

• Validity of Medical Assessment: Whether the company-designated physicians' final report constituted a complete and definite assessment of petitioner's fitness to work within the 120/240-day period.
• Permanent Total Disability by Operation of Law: Whether petitioner is deemed totally and permanently disabled where the company-designated physicians failed to issue a valid final assessment within the prescribed periods.

• Validity of Medical Assessment: The July 1, 2016 medical report was incomplete, equivocal, and non-conclusive. The phrases "cleared cardiac wise" and "blood pressure adequately controlled with medications" were too generic to constitute a definite assessment of fitness for sea duty; they left ambiguous whether petitioner could resume work or required further monitoring. Pursuant to Ampo-on v. Reinier Pacific International Shipping, Inc., an assessment must be complete and definite to be conclusive; otherwise, it is ignored.
• Permanent Total Disability by Operation of Law: Where the company-designated physician fails to arrive at a definite assessment within the 120/240-day period, the law steps in to consider the seafarer's disability as total and permanent. The incomplete report did not satisfy the requirement for a valid assessment, thus petitioner was deemed totally and permanently disabled by operation of law.

• Definite Assessment Requirement — The company-designated physician bears the responsibility to arrive at a definite assessment of the seafarer's fitness or degree of disability within 120 days from repatriation, extendable to 240 days if further medical treatment is required. This assessment must be complete, definite, and categorical; an equivocal or incomplete medical report is invalid and the disability grading contained therein is ignored.
• Deemed Total and Permanent Disability — Failure of the company-designated physician to issue a valid final and definite assessment within the prescribed periods results in the seafarer's disability being considered total and permanent by operation of law, regardless of any interim disability ratings or ongoing treatment.
• Pre-Employment Medical Examination (PEME) — A PEME declaring a seafarer "fit for sea duty" establishes the seafarer's initial capacity to perform tasks without danger to health, but does not preclude the development of compensable work-related conditions during employment.

• "The responsibility of the company-designated physician to arrive at a definite assessment within the prescribed periods necessitates that the perceived disability rating has been properly established and inscribed in a valid and timely medical report. To be conclusive and to give proper disability benefits to the seafarer, this assessment must be complete and definite; otherwise, the medical report shall be set aside and the disability grading contained therein shall be ignored."
• "Without a valid final and definitive assessment from the company-designated doctors within the 120/240-day period, as in this case, the law already steps in to consider a seafarer's disability as total and permanent."

• Ampo-on v. Reinier Pacific International Shipping, Inc., G.R. No. 240614, June 10, 2019 — Controlling precedent establishing that a company-designated physician's assessment must be complete and definite; failure results in deemed total and permanent disability.
• Manansala v. Marlow Navigation Phils. Inc., 817 Phil. 84 (2017) — Cited for the principle that a PEME must fulfill its purpose of ascertaining a prospective seafarer's capacity for safely performing tasks at sea.
• Gamboa v. Maunlad Trans, Inc., G.R. No. 232905, August 20, 2018 — Followed for the rule that failure to assess within the period results in total and permanent disability by operation of law.
• Balatero v. Senator Crewing (Manila) Inc., 811 Phil. 589 (2017) — Cited in support of granting permanent total disability compensation to seafarers with cardiovascular diseases treated beyond the assessment periods.

• POEA-Standard Employment Contract (POEA-SEC) — Provisions governing the 120-day and 240-day assessment periods for disability, the requirement for definite assessment by company-designated physicians, and the standard for compensability of hypertension (uncontrolled with end organ damage).
• Rule 45 of the Rules of Court — Governs the procedure for Petition for Review on Certiorari to the Supreme Court.

Peralta, C.J. (Chairperson), Caguioa, J. Reyes, Jr., and Lopez, JJ.