Unicol Management Services, Inc. vs. Malipot

Death of a seafarer resulting from his own deliberate act of suicide is not compensable under the POEA Standard Employment Contract, provided the employer can substantially prove that the death is directly attributable to the seafarer's willful act, as required under Section 20(D) of the POEA Standard Terms and Conditions Governing the Overseas Employment of Filipino Seafarers On-Board Ocean-Going Ships.

Respondent Delia Malipot is the surviving spouse of the late seaman Glicerio Malipot, with whom she has two minor children. Seaman Glicerio was hired by petitioner Unicol Management Services, acting for and on behalf of its principal petitioner Link Marine Pte. Ltd., to serve as Chief Engineer Officer aboard the vessel Heredia Sea under a POEA-approved employment contract. Prior to deployment, he underwent a rigorous pre-employment medical examination conducted by petitioners' designated physicians and was found physically and mentally fit to work. The dispute centers on whether his death aboard the vessel is compensable under the POEA Standard Employment Contract, which governs the overseas employment of Filipino seafarers and provides for death benefits to beneficiaries, subject to an exemption for deaths resulting from the seafarer's willful or criminal act.

On July 16, 2008, seaman Glicerio Malipot was processed for hiring by petitioner Unicol Management Services, acting for and on behalf of its principal, petitioner Link Marine Pte. Ltd., for deployment aboard the vessel Heredia Sea as Chief Engineer Officer with a monthly salary of US$2,500.00. The contract duration was stated as four months on his Sea-based Overseas Filipino Worker sheet, though petitioners contended it was for four to six months under the POEA-approved Contract of Employment, ending February 18, 2009. Prior to deployment, seaman Glicerio underwent a rigorous pre-employment medical examination conducted by petitioners' designated physicians and was found physically and mentally fit to work. He left the Philippines on August 18, 2008 to join the vessel.

According to respondent Delia Malipot, the seafarer's surviving spouse, seaman Glicerio began to suffer emotional strain when petitioners refused to allow him to go home. As early as November 16, 2008, he manifested his desire to end his contract and gave petitioners enough time to secure a replacement. His request was relayed by the Master of Heredia Sea to petitioners' Port Captain, who did not allow him to leave the vessel. The Port Captain allegedly threatened that once he set foot on Philippine soil, he would be arrested, never employed again, and made to pay for all deployment expenses. Seaman Glicerio became depressed, especially when December came and he was still not allowed to go home. He called and texted respondent, begging her to talk to the Port Captain. He soon experienced chest pains and palpitations and was seen by a physician at the Fujairah Port Medical Center in Fujairah, United Arab Emirates, where he was diagnosed with musculoskeletal pain and emotional trauma/illness. Despite this, he was not repatriated, and even when his four-month contract expired on December 18, 2008, he was not allowed to join his family for Christmas.

Petitioners, for their part, alleged that before the end of the employment contract, or on January 13, 2009, they received information that seaman Glicerio had committed suicide by hanging in the storeroom of the Heredia Sea. This report was confirmed by the Certification of the Philippine Consulate General at Dubai, along with a Medico-Legal Report issued by the Ministry of Justice of the United Arab Emirates and a Death Certificate issued by the Ministry of Health of the United Arab Emirates, both indicating the cause of death as suicidal asphyxia due to hanging. An Investigation Report submitted by Inchcape Shipping Services detailed the events prior to the death, noting that seaman Glicerio was cheerful during the first two months but thereafter kept to himself after telling people that his family was facing problems in the Philippines and that he had informed petitioners to look for his replacement. The Medical Report by Dr. Sajeed Aboobaker, who examined the seafarer on December 10, 2008, diagnosed him with musculoskeletal pain and emotional trauma due to family problems.

Respondent filed a complaint before the Labor Arbiter claiming death compensation under the POEA contract. The Labor Arbiter awarded US$71,500.00 in total benefits, finding that petitioners failed to substantially prove suicide. The NLRC reversed, finding the foreign medico-legal and death certificate documents conclusive on the cause of death. The Court of Appeals in turn reversed the NLRC, holding that the documents were inconclusive as to the circumstances of death and that the Investigation Report, log book extracts, and Master's Report were belatedly submitted on appeal. The Supreme Court took up the case on petition for review, given the conflicting factual findings of the CA and the NLRC.

• Sufficiency of Evidence of Suicide: Petitioners insisted that seaman Glicerio committed suicide and that the CA erred in not considering the Medico-Legal Report and Death Certificate on the ground that they were only evidence of the cause of death but not the circumstances surrounding the suicide.
• Admissibility of Additional Evidence on Appeal: Petitioners contended that the CA erred in disregarding the Investigation Report, log book extracts, and Master's Report, which detailed the events transpiring before the suicide and convincingly ruled out suspicions of foul play, even though these were submitted for the first time on appeal to the NLRC.
• Non-Compensability of Suicide: Petitioners argued that death by suicide is not compensable under the POEA Standard Employment Contract, as it falls under the exemption for death resulting from the seafarer's willful or criminal act.

• Inconclusiveness of Cause of Death: Respondent alleged that the Medico-Legal Report and Death Certificate were inconclusive as to the cause of seaman Glicerio's death and that the NLRC committed grave abuse of discretion in giving them weight.
• Work-Related Emotional Trauma: Respondent contended that seaman Glicerio's emotional trauma was caused by the conditions of his job and aggravated by the acts of the Port Captain, who refused to allow him to go home and threatened him, making his death compensable.
• Insufficient Investigation by Employer: Respondent argued that apart from the Medico-Legal Report and Death Certificate, there was no showing that petitioners exerted effort to ascertain the circumstances surrounding the death, which was their duty as employer.
• Invalidity of Quitclaim: Respondent asserted that the quitclaim she executed for US$12,254.00 was inequitable and could not bar her legitimate claims, given that the amount was inordinately low compared to the US$71,500.00 awarded by the Labor Arbiter.

• Cause of Death: Whether seaman Glicerio committed suicide during the term of his employment contract, as established by the evidence on record.
• Admissibility of Evidence on Appeal: Whether the NLRC may receive and consider evidence submitted for the first time on appeal.
• Compensability of Suicide: Whether death by suicide is compensable under the POEA Standard Employment Contract.

• Cause of Death: Yes. Petitioners substantially proved through the Medico-Legal Report, Death Certificate, Investigation Report, log book extracts, and Master's Report that seaman Glicerio died of suicidal asphyxia due to hanging, with no evidence of foul play.
• Admissibility of Evidence on Appeal: Yes. The NLRC may receive evidence submitted for the first time on appeal, as it is directed to ascertain facts speedily and objectively without regard to technicalities of law and procedure in the interest of substantial justice.
• Compensability of Suicide: No. Death resulting from the seafarer's willful or deliberate act of suicide is not compensable under Section 20(D) of the POEA Standard Employment Contract, provided the employer proves the death is directly attributable to the seafarer.

• Cause of Death: The Court examined the records due to the conflicting findings of the CA and the NLRC, an exception to the general rule that the Supreme Court is not a trier of facts under Rule 45. The Medico-Legal Report issued by Prof. Dr. Osman Abdul Hameed Awad, medico-legal senior consultant in Fujairah, stated that the external examination of the body revealed a deep lacerated groove around the neck, vital and recent, occurring as a result of pressure and hanging with an elastic body such as a rope, and concluded that the death was due to suicidal asphyxia due to hanging. The external examination showed no violence, resistance, or external injuries, ruling out foul play. The Death Certificate issued by the UAE Ministry of Health corroborated this finding. The Investigation Report by Inchcape Shipping Services detailed the events prior to the death, including the last person who corresponded with the seafarer, the circumstances leading to the day he was discovered dead, and the person who found him. It noted that he was cheerful during the first two months but thereafter kept to himself after telling people his family was facing problems. The Medical Report by Dr. Sajeed Aboobaker, who examined the seafarer on December 10, 2008, diagnosed him with musculoskeletal pain and emotional trauma due to family problems. Taken together, these documents substantially proved that the death was attributable to the seafarer's deliberate act of killing himself.

• Admissibility of Evidence on Appeal: The Court held that the NLRC may receive evidence submitted for the first time on appeal, pursuant to its mandate to ascertain facts objectively and speedily without regard to technicalities of law in the interest of substantial justice. Citing Sasan, Sr. vs. National Labor Relations Commission 4th Division, the Court noted that the submission of additional evidence before the NLRC is not prohibited by its New Rules of Procedure, as rules of evidence prevailing in courts of law or equity are not controlling in labor cases. Section 218 of the Labor Code further empowers the Commission to conduct investigations, issue subpoenas, and receive evidence. The CA therefore erred in excluding the Investigation Report, log book extracts, and Master's Report on the ground that they were belatedly submitted.

• Compensability of Suicide: Section 20(D) of the POEA Standard Terms and Conditions Governing the Overseas Employment of Filipino Seafarers On-Board Ocean-Going Ships provides that no compensation and benefits shall be payable in respect of any injury, incapacity, disability, or death of the seafarer resulting from his willful or criminal act or intentional breach of his duties, provided that the employer can prove that such injury, incapacity, disability, or death is directly attributable to the seafarer. Since petitioners substantially proved that the death was directly attributable to the seafarer's deliberate act of hanging himself, the death was not compensable and his heirs were not entitled to any compensation or benefits. The Court acknowledged that while labor contracts are impressed with public interest and the POEA contract must be construed liberally in favor of Filipino seamen, justice must be dispensed in light of established facts, applicable law, and existing jurisprudence.

• Employer's Exemption from Death Benefits for Willful Act of Seafarer — Under Section 20(D) of the POEA Standard Employment Contract, the employer is exempt from paying death benefits where the seafarer's death results from his willful or criminal act or intentional breach of his duties, provided the employer proves that the death is directly attributable to the seafarer. The burden of proof rests on the employer to substantially establish the causal link between the seafarer's deliberate act and his death. In this case, the employer discharged that burden through the Medico-Legal Report, Death Certificate, Investigation Report, log book extracts, and Master's Report, all pointing to suicide by hanging with no evidence of foul play.

• NLRC's Authority to Receive Evidence on Appeal — The NLRC may admit and consider evidence submitted for the first time on appeal, as it is mandated to ascertain facts speedily and objectively without regard to technicalities of law and procedure in the interest of substantial justice. Rules of evidence prevailing in courts of law or equity are not controlling in labor cases. This is supported by Section 218 of the Labor Code, which empowers the Commission to conduct investigations and receive evidence.

• Exceptions to the Rule That the Supreme Court Is Not a Trier of Facts under Rule 45 — While the Court's jurisdiction under Rule 45 is limited to questions of law, exceptions exist, including when the findings of fact of the CA and the NLRC are conflicting, which justifies the Court's review of the factual records to determine whether there was sufficient basis for the CA's reversal of the NLRC decision.

• "Clearly, the employer is liable to pay the heirs of the deceased seafarer for death benefits once it is established that he died during the effectivity of his employment contract. However, the employer may be exempt from liability if it can successfully prove that the seaman's death was caused by an injury directly attributable to his deliberate or willful act." — This passage articulates the controlling rule on the employer's exemption from death benefits liability under the POEA contract, framing the burden of proof on the employer.

• "While it is true that labor contracts are impressed with public interest and the provisions of the POEA Employment Contract must be construed logically and liberally in favor of Filipino seamen in the pursuit of their employment on board ocean-going vessels, still the rule is that justice is in every case for the deserving, to be dispensed with in the light of established facts, the applicable law, and existing jurisprudence." — This passage balances the liberal construction rule in favor of seafarers against the requirement that claims must be grounded on established facts and law, a principle frequently cited in subsequent seafarer benefits jurisprudence.

• "The NLRC and Labor Arbiters are directed to use every and all reasonable means to ascertain the facts in each case speedily and objectively, without regard to technicalities of law and procedure all in the interest of substantial justice." — This passage defines the doctrinal basis for the NLRC's authority to receive evidence on appeal, distinguishing labor proceedings from ordinary civil litigation.

• Sasan, Sr. vs. National Labor Relations Commission 4th Division, 590 Phil. 685 (2008) — Followed. The Court relied on this case to support the principle that the NLRC may admit evidence submitted for the first time on appeal, as rules of evidence in courts of law are not controlling in labor cases.

• Maritime Factors, Inc. vs. Hindang, G.R. No. 151993, October 19, 2011, 659 SCRA 526 — Followed. Cited for the rule that the employer may be exempt from liability for death benefits if it proves the seaman's death was directly attributable to his deliberate or willful act.

• Crewlink, Inc. vs. Teringtering, G.R. No. 166803, October 11, 2012, 684 SCRA 12 — Followed. Cited for the principle that justice must be dispensed in light of established facts, applicable law, and existing jurisprudence, even in labor cases where liberal construction in favor of seafarers is the norm.

• Becmen Service Exporter and Promotion, Inc. vs. Cuaresma — Distinguished. The NLRC cited this case for the proposition that Filipinos are resilient and do not easily succumb to hardship, but distinguished it on the ground that in Becmen, the postmortem examination and police report did not state with specificity that suicide was the cause of death, whereas here the reports categorically stated suicidal asphyxia due to hanging.

• Section 20(B)(1), POEA Standard Terms and Conditions Governing the Overseas Employment of Filipino Seafarers On-Board Ocean-Going Ships — Provides that in case of work-related death of the seafarer during the term of his contract, the employer shall pay his beneficiaries the Philippine currency equivalent of US$50,000, plus US$7,000 to each child under twenty-one but not exceeding four children. This provision was the basis for the death benefits claimed by respondent.

• Section 20(D), POEA Standard Terms and Conditions Governing the Overseas Employment of Filipino Seafarers On-Board Ocean-Going Ships — Provides that no compensation and benefits shall be payable in respect of any injury, incapacity, disability, or death of the seafarer resulting from his willful or criminal act or intentional breach of his duties, provided the employer can prove that such injury, incapacity, disability, or death is directly attributable to the seafarer. This provision was the controlling basis for exempting the employer from liability.

• Article 2208, paragraph (2), Civil Code — Provides that attorney's fees may be recovered when the defendant's act or omission has compelled the plaintiff to litigate or incur expenses to protect his interests. The Labor Arbiter relied on this provision in awarding attorney's fees, though the award was ultimately nullified by the finding of non-compensability.

• Section 218, Labor Code — Empowers the NLRC to issue subpoenas, conduct investigations, hear and determine disputes, and receive evidence. The Court relied on this provision to support the NLRC's authority to admit evidence submitted for the first time on appeal.

• Rule 45, 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure — Governs petitions for review on certiorari before the Supreme Court, limiting review to questions of law, subject to recognized exceptions including conflicting findings of fact by lower tribunals.

Presbitero J. Velasco, Jr. (Chairperson), Martin S. Villarama, Jr., Bienvenido L. Reyes, and Francis H. Jardeleza concurred. No separate concurring opinions were written.