G.R. No. 116354 Case Digest

G.R. No. 116354, December 4, 1997

Heirs of the late Reynaldo Aniban, petitioners

vs NLRC, repondents.

Ponente: Bellosillo

Facts:

Heirs assails the decision of the NLRC reversing the POEA which ruled that myocardial infraction was an occupational decrease in the case of radio operator Aniban and awarded death benefits and denying the motion for reconsideration.

Aniban was employed by the Transmarine acting in behalf of its Norwegian principal as radio operator on the vessel Kassel for a contract period of his employment died due to myocardial infraction. He was survived by his wife and three minor children.

The claim was granted only to the extent of POEA standard employment contract. The claim under CBA was rejected on the ground that the death was due to an occupational disease. Consequently, the heris filed a formal complaint for non-payment of the death compensation benefits under the CBA.

POEA ruled that myocardial infraction was an occupational disease n the case of Aniban and granted the prayer of his heirs. ON appeal, NLRC reversed the POEA on the grounds that it was the Employees Compensation Commission has the jurisdiction to hear and determine the claim for death benefits. A motion for reconsideration of the NLRC was denied. Hence, this petition.

Issues: (a) whether the POEA has jurisdiction to determine the claim of petitioners for death benefits, and (b) whether myocardial infarction is an occupational disease as to entitle petitioners to the death benefits provided under the CBA.

Ruling: 

On the issue of jurisdiction, it is not disputed that R/O Reynaldo Aniban was a Filipino seaman and that he died on board the vessel of his foreign employer during the existence of his employment contract, hence, this claim for death benefits by his widow and children.

The law applicable at the time the complaint was filed on 13 November 1992 was Art. 20 of the Labor Code as amended by E.O. Nos. 797  and 247 which clearly provided that "original and exclusive jurisdiction over all matters or cases including money claims, involving employer-employee relations, arising out of or by virtue of any law or contract involving Filipino seamen for overseas employment is vested with the POEA. 

On the other hand, the jurisdiction of the ECC comes into play only when the liability of the State Insurance Fund is in issue.

As regards the second issue, i.e., whether the death Reynaldo Aniban due to myocardial infarction is compensable, the POEA ruled in the affirmative when it likened the infirmity to a "heart attack" commonly aggravated by pressure and strain. It was observed that R/O Aniban, in addition to undergoing physical exertion while performing his duties as radio operator, was also exposed to undue pressure and strain as he was required to be on call twenty-four (24) hours a day to receive/transmit messages and to keep track of weather conditions. Such pressure and strain were aggravated by being away from his family, a plight commonly suffered by all seamen. In the case of R/O Aniban, the separation was particularly distressful as his pregnant wife was due to deliver their fourth child. Hence, the POEA ruled that myocardial infarction was an occupational disease.

We cannot rule otherwise. Reynaldo Aniban was healthy at the time he boarded the vessel of his foreign employer. 

Hence, he was certified "fit to work as radio operator" by the examining physician. However, R/O Aniban died three (3) months after he boarded "Kassel" due to myocardial infarction. As aforesaid, the POEA ruled that the cause of death could be considered occupational. Being a factual finding by the administrative agency tasked with its determination, such conclusion deserves respect and must be accorded finality. 

It must be stressed that the strict rules of evidence are not applicable in claims for compensation considering thatprobability and not the ultimate degree of certainty is the test of proof in compensation proceedings. 

In this case, there is substantial proof that myocardial infarction is an occupational disease for which Aniban's employer obligated itself to pay death benefits and additional compensation under the CBA in the event of the demise of its employee by reason thereof.

NLRC set aside.