Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 107 views

    Case #7 Heirs of The Late Marcelino O. Nepomuceno, Represented by His Wife, MA. FE L. NEPOMUCENO VS. NAESS SHIPPING Phils. Inc. / Royal Dragon Ocean Transport, Inc., GR NO. 243459, June 08, 2020

    Uploaded by

    Harlene Hemor
    Nepomuceno was hired as a second engineer on a ship owned by NAESS Shipping Philippines Inc. through its agent Royal Dragon Ocean Transport, Inc. He was found dead in December 2013 from a myocardial infarction. His heirs sought death benefits under his employment contract, but their claim was denied. The Voluntary Arbitrator and Court of Appeals both ruled against the heirs, finding that the contract did not provide for death benefits in cases not due to willful acts of the employee. The Supreme Court affirmed, noting gaps in the contract regarding death benefits and unable to compel the addition of missing terms. It did not determine whether the death was work-related to allow other claims.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Case #7 Heirs of The Late Marcelino O. Nepomuceno, Represented by His Wife, MA. FE L. NEPOMUCENO VS. NAESS SHIPPING Phils. Inc. / Royal Dragon Ocean Transport, Inc., GR NO. 243459, June 08, 2020

    Uploaded by

    Harlene Hemor
    107 views2 pages
    Nepomuceno was hired as a second engineer on a ship owned by NAESS Shipping Philippines Inc. through its agent Royal Dragon Ocean Transport, Inc. He was found dead in December 2013 from a myocardial infarction. His heirs sought death benefits under his employment contract, but their claim was denied. The Voluntary Arbitrator and Court of Appeals both ruled against the heirs, finding that the contract did not provide for death benefits in cases not due to willful acts of the employee. The Supreme Court affirmed, noting gaps in the contract regarding death benefits and unable to compel the addition of missing terms. It did not determine whether the death was work-related to allow other claims.

    Original Title

    7. 77 2020

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Nepomuceno was hired as a second engineer on a ship owned by NAESS Shipping Philippines Inc. through its agent Royal Dragon Ocean Transport, Inc. He was found dead in December 2013 from a myocardial infarction. His heirs sought death benefits under his employment contract, but their claim was denied. The Voluntary Arbitrator and Court of Appeals both ruled against the heirs, finding that the contract did not provide for death benefits in cases not due to willful acts of the employee. The Supreme Court affirmed, noting gaps in the contract regarding death benefits and unable to compel the addition of missing terms. It did not determine whether the death was work-related to allow other claims.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    107 views2 pages

    Case #7 Heirs of The Late Marcelino O. Nepomuceno, Represented by His Wife, MA. FE L. NEPOMUCENO VS. NAESS SHIPPING Phils. Inc. / Royal Dragon Ocean Transport, Inc., GR NO. 243459, June 08, 2020

    Uploaded by

    Harlene Hemor
    Nepomuceno was hired as a second engineer on a ship owned by NAESS Shipping Philippines Inc. through its agent Royal Dragon Ocean Transport, Inc. He was found dead in December 2013 from a myocardial infarction. His heirs sought death benefits under his employment contract, but their claim was denied. The Voluntary Arbitrator and Court of Appeals both ruled against the heirs, finding that the contract did not provide for death benefits in cases not due to willful acts of the employee. The Supreme Court affirmed, noting gaps in the contract regarding death benefits and unable to compel the addition of missing terms. It did not determine whether the death was work-related to allow other claims.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 2

    CASE #7

    HEIRS OF THE LATE MARCELINO O. NEPOMUCENO,


    represented by his wife, MA. FE L. NEPOMUCENO VS. NAESS SHIPPING
    PHILS. INC. / ROYAL DRAGON OCEAN TRANSPORT, INC.,
    GR NO. 243459, June 08, 2020

    FACTS:

    Marcelino O. Nepomuceno was engaged by NAESS Shipping Philippines Inc ,


    through its local manning agent Royal Dragon Ocean Transport, Inc. to work as 2 nd
    engineer on the vessel M/V Meilling 11 for six months ,effective November 26,2013. His
    duties involved keeping the mooring logs, scheduling the shifting of engine personnel,
    maintenance of equipment, and discipline of engine crew. In the morning of December
    17,2013, Nepomuceno was found and declared dead by the shipyard medical officer.
    According to the autopsy report, the cause of his death was myocardial infraction.

    The petitioners sought to claim death benefits under Nepomuceno’s Contract.


    When the claim was denied by the respondents, petitioners filed a complaint before the
    National Conciliation and Mediation Board. On June 8, 2015, the Voluntary Arbitrator
    dismissed the claim for death benefits, holding that under the Addendum, the employer
    was obliged to take out the necessary insurance to cover disability compensation for
    work-related injuries only, and not death. Based on records, Nepomuceno did not suffer
    from any work-related injury or disability, and was not performing any work-related
    functions at the time of his death. The petitioners were unable to prove by substantial
    evidence that there was a causal connection between Nepomuceno’s death and the
    nature of his work.

    Aggrieved, petitioners filed a petition for review before the Court of Appeals but
    was denied holding that respondents were not liable for death benefits since the
    Addendum did not provide for payment of said benefits in case of death not due to the
    willful or deliberate act of the seafarer.

    ISSUE:

    Whether the petitioner is entitled to death benefits based on Nepomuceno’s


    employment contract from the respondents.

    HELD:

    NO. The court finds that the Addendum has gaps regarding the payment of death
    benefits, as it did not provide what constitutes death benefits, the amount to be paid, as
    well as other details. Such being the case, the Court cannot rule in favor of the
    petitioners in the absences of these provisions governing the specific details. While it is
    true that Article 1700 of Civil Code provides that the relations between capital and labor
    are not merely contractual, such that labor contracts are subject to the special laws
    governing working conditions and other similar subjects, this does not authorize the
    Court to provide for the missing details in the contract under the guise of interpreting the
    same nor compel the parties to negotiate such terms and conditions.

    The Court likewise, finds it no longer necessary to pass upon the issue of
    whether Nepomuceno’s death is work-related and whether the disease he contracted
    and which ultimately caused his death compensable. This is in order not to preempt any
    determination of the same in another recourse that petitioners may want to resort to,
    with respect to claims for other benefits to which they may be entitled to.

    You might also like