MA. ANTHEA ROSE B.

NEPOMUCENO
2012-0567
Labor Relations Set B
Atty. Lorenzo
BRIGHT MARITIME CORPORATION (BMC)/DESIREE P.
TENORIO
vs.
RICARDO B. FANTONIAL
G.R. No. 165935
FACTS: On January 15, 2000, a Contract of Employment was executed by petitioner
Bright Maritime Corporation (BMC), a manning agent, and its president, petitioner
Desiree P. Tenorio, for and in behalf of their principal, Ranger Marine S.A., and
respondent Ricardo B. Fantonial, which contract was verified and approved by the
Philippine Overseas Employment Administration (POEA) on January 17, 2000. The
employment contract provided that respondent shall be employed as boatswain of
the foreign vessel M/V AUK for one year, with a basic monthly salary of US$450,
plus an allowance of US$220. The contract also provided for a 90 hours per month
of overtime with pay and a vacation leave with pay of US$45 per month.
Respondent was made to undergo a medical examination at the Christian
Medical Clinic, which was petitioners accredited medical clinic. Respondent was
issued a Medical Certificate, dated January 17, 2000, which certificate had the
phrase FIT TO WORK stamped on its lower and upper portion.
However, petitioners informed and delivered a ticket to said respondent
stating that he will be departing on that same day. But at around 4:00 pm,
petitioners' liaison officers went to the airport to tell respondent that there had been
defects in his medical certificate which led to the cancellation of his travel on said
date. As the respondent went back to Christian Medical Clinic, he found out, through
the examining physician, that nothing was wrong with his medical; and, so he
reported to petitioners' office yet the latter contend that they are having him lined up
again at the ship's next port.
Since the respondent did not receive any call from the petitioner, he filed an
illegal dismissal case, payment of salaries for the unexpired portion of the
employment contract and for the award of moral, exemplary, and actual damages as
well as attorneys fees before the Regional Arbitration Branch No. 7 of the NLRC in
Cebu City.

ISSUE: Whether or not the employment contract was valid and the contention
of herein respondent relative to his claim for damages can be affirmed?
HELD: YES. The employment contract is valid and already perfected from the time it
was signed by both parties. However, be it noted that the petitioners had no just and
valid cause for the immediate cancellation of the deployment of respondent; hence,
petitioners should be liable for breach of contract, specifically, the actual, moral and
exemplary damages.
It was proven that the medical certificate issued on 17 January 2000 had been
stamped with fit to work. The alleged medical reasons for the cancellation of
deployment, even though a medical certificate was issued on said date of departure
of respondent, were not justified by the petitioners. Thus, the alleged medical
reasons are deemed to have been tainted with bad faith to prevent the respondent
from leaving.
Moral damages were awarded because the employers act was tainted with
bad faith, considering that respondents Medical Certificate stated that he was fit to
work on the day of his scheduled departure, yet he was not allowed to leave
allegedly for medical reasons. Further, in the said case, exemplary damages was
also imposed on the employer by way of example or correction for the public good
in view of petitioners act of preventing respondent from being deployed on the
ground that he was not yet declared fit to work on the date of his departure, despite
evidence to the contrary. The Court added: x x x. Exemplary damages are imposed
not to enrich one party or impoverish another, but to serve as a deterrent against or
as a negative incentive to curb socially deleterious actions.