ISSUE: Whether or not the CA erred in affirming the decision of the

CIVIL PROCEDURE NLRC which dismissed petitioner's claim for permanent disability
benefits.
TAGUD v. BSM CREW CENTER PHILS.
RULING: No. The SC affirms the findings of the NLRC and CA that
G.R. No. 219370 | 6 December 2017
Tagud should not be awarded total permanent disability benefits
Subtopic: S. Post-judgment remedies; 2.Appeals; d. Modes and attorney’s fees.
of Appeal from judgments or final orders of various courts
(rule 40, 41, 42, 43 and 45) As a rule, the SC will only entertain questions of facts when there
is conflict in the findings of fact of the LA, NLRC, or the trial courts.
DOCTRINE: The SC only entertains questions of law under Rule 45
of the ROC, subject to some exceptions such as when the factual The records show that Tagud is not entitled to his claims because
findings of the LA, NLRC or trial courts are in conflict with each he failed to undergo a post-employment medical examination by a
other. company physician within the 3-day mandatory reporting period as
required under Sec. 20 (B) (3) of the 2000 POEA-SEC, and he did not
FACTS: even fall under the exception such as when he is physically
 Cyprus Bernhard is a foreign shipping company doing incapacitated to do so by which he must send a written notice to
business in the Philippines through Respondent BSM the agency. Tagud also failed to establish that (a) his illness is work-
Crew Center Phils which hired Petitioner Tagud in 2005 related; and he also failed to show that (b) his illness or injury was
as an able-bodied seafarer. Duran is he President of contracted during the term of his employment.
Cyprus.
 On 18 October 2008, Tagud lost sensation and strength For Tagud’s disability to be compensable, the two elements must
of his upper right extremity after his right elbow crashed concur. Otherwise, Tagud forfeits his right to claim his sickness
against a hard object while on duty. After 3 days, the allowance and disability benefits. Tagud failed to discharge this
vessel docked and he was brought to Wynnum, burden. He only presented an x-ray report taken in Wynnum,
Queensland for medical attention. Queensland where the vessel docked 3 days after he lost his
 On 8 Nov 2008, Tagud disembarked at Singapore and balance, and which did not show any no fracture nor abnormality.
was repatriated to Manila. He alleged that he reported
to his agency, but was not given any assistance so he Tagud did not even expressed that he needed urgent medical
sought medical attention to other physicians not attention which leads to a conclusion that he was not suffering
referred by the company and found that he has an from any physical disability requiring medical assistance and that
elevated blood pressure on his upper extremities, and his employment was terminated due to a finished contract.
neuritis with loss of strength on his right hand.
 He filed a Complaint with the NLRC NCR for permanent
and total disability benefits, sickness, wages, and
reimbursement of medical expenses, damages and
attorney fees.
 He claimed that as a result of his work-related illness
which he contracted during his employment, he should
be entitled to permanent disability benefits.
 Respondents denied liability to Tagud and alleged that
Tagud was repatriated to the Philippines due to a
finished contract; and he failed to report to Respondent
agency within a 3-day mandatory reporting period from
the date of his repatriation.
 The LA ruled in favor of Tagud. The Respondents appeal
to the NLRC.
 The NLRC reversed the LA decision and held that Tagud
failed to prove that he reported to Respondent agency
within 3 days from his arrival in the Philippines. Tagud
filed a MR to NLRC 2nd Division which denied the same.
 Tagud filed a petition for certiorari to the CA. The CA
dismissed the petition. Tagud’s MR was also denied by
the CA.
 Tagud filed a petition for review on certiorari to the SC.