In a situation where the seafarer’s illness was disputably presumed to be work-related, is the seafarer no longer required to prove that his illness was caused by (or at least aggravated by) his work?
The Supreme Court re-emphasized an aspect of its ruling in Brent School, Inc. v. Zamora (G.R. No. L-48494, February 5, 1990, 260 PHIL 747-765).
One of the three witnesses recanted his testimony against the accused. Should the accused be liable only for simple illegal recruitment?
With regard to the heirs’ recovery of death benefits, should the death of the seafarer be shown to have happened during the term of his employment?
Was the award of separation pay to the employee (who was dismissed for just cause) proper?
Note this example of the principal’s control over the work performance of contractor’s employees.
Entitlement to disability benefits by seamen on overseas work is a matter governed, not only by medical findings but, by law and by contract.
Is the landowner entitled to a payment of annual interest of 12% on the unpaid balance of just compensation, even if he was already granted the 6% annual incremental interest prescribed under prevailing rules?
Is a higher court’s separate order of restitution or reparation of damages a conditio sine qua non before the Office of the Labor Arbiter could proceed with execution of the same?
Check out the consequences of disrespectful and belligerent behavior in the workplace.