logo-ahplogo-ahplogo-ahplogo-ahp
  • Home
  • Firm
    • About Us
    • Careers
    • Linked Stream
  • Solutions
      • Anticorruption & Good Corporate Governance
      • Banking & Finance
      • Capital Markets
      • Competition Law
      • Debt & Corporate Restructuring
      • Dispute Resolution
      • Energy, Oil & Gas
      • Foreign Direct Investment
      • Fraud & Forensics Investigation
      • Intellectual Property
      • Islamic Finance
      • Labor Law
      • Mergers & Acquisitions
      • Projects & Natural Resources
      • Real Property
      • Shipping & Aviation
      • Tax & Customs Services
      • Telecommunications & Media
  • Members
  • Events
    • News & Insights
  • Rajah Tann Asia
✕
            No results See all results

            Philippine Shipping Law Developments: 2nd Quarter of 2020

            Introduction

            This is the Second Quarter 2020 issue of the Regional Shipping Update of Rajah & Tann Asia’s Shipping & International Trade Practice, a publication that provides a snapshot of the key legal developments in various jurisdictions where our member firms have regional presence. In each quarter, we cover one jurisdiction, and for this issue, we focus on the Philippines with the following updates:

            • Supreme Court Issues Rules of Procedure for Admiralty Cases
            • Department of Transportation Creates the Shippers’ Protection Office
            • Heirs of Licuanan v. Singa Ship Management, Inc.: A Seafarer’s Heirs are Entitled to Death Benefits for Work-related Illness Even if Death Occurs After the Term of Contract

            Supreme Court Issues Rules of Procedure for Admiralty Cases

            On 17 September 2019, the Philippine Supreme Court (“SC“) issued Administrative Matter No. 19-08-14-SC, which is also known as the Rules of Procedure for Admiralty Cases (“Rules“). The Rules took effect on 1 January 2020.

            The Rules are intended to:

            1. provide the Regional Trial Courts (“RTCs“) with a special and summary procedure for admiralty cases;
            2. provide parties in admiralty cases fast, reliable and efficient means of recourse to Philippine courts; and
            3. enhance the administration of justice in admiralty cases in the Philippines through the development of judicial expertise.

            The Rules govern the procedure in civil actions relating to admiralty laws in the country, including the issuance of a warrant of arrest of a vessel. The Rules also provide that some of the existing RTCs would be selected to act as admiralty courts.

            Department of Transportation Creates the Shippers’ Protection Office

            On 24 June 2020, the Department of Transportation issued Department Order No. 2020-008 creating the Shippers’ Protection Office (“SPO“) “for the protection and assistance to shippers, both international and domestic, against unreasonable fees and charges imposed by international and domestic shipping lines”.

            The following are the functions of the SPO:

            1. assist the public with matters concerning the operations of, including the fees and charges collected by, international and domestic shipping lines;
            2. collect and consolidate all relevant data and information regarding the operation and the fees and charges collected by international and domestic shipping lines;
            3. require international and domestic shipping lines to submit comments or position on complaints/issues against them, and to appear before the SPO, as may be necessary;
            4. coordinate with the appropriate government agencies having jurisdiction and authority to regulate and/or resolve matters communicated with the SPO;
            5. submit reports, information, documents and other relevant materials for the approval and consideration of the Chairperson of the SPO; and
            6. perform other related functions as may be directed or as the need arises.

            A Seafarer’s Heirs are Entitled to Death Benefits for Work-related Illness Even if Death Occurs After the Term of Contract

            The SC ruled in Heirs of Licuanan v. Singa Ship Management, Inc. (G.R. No. 238261, June 26, 2019) (“Heirs of Licuanan v Singa Ship“) that a seafarer’s heirs are entitled to receive death benefits even if the seafarer died after the term of the employment contract.

            Brief Facts

            Under a nine-month contract, Manolo Licuanan (“Licuanan“) was a seafarer assigned to work as a chef de partie on board Queen Mary 2, a ship owned by Singa Ship Management Pte. Ltd. During the term of the employment contract, Licuanan complained of difficulty in swallowing solid food, which subsequently developed into persistent dry cough. During Licuanan’s deployment at the vessel, a doctor diagnosed him with a mass in his nasopharynx. For this reason, Licuanan was medically repatriated to the Philippines and the employment contract was terminated.

            In the Philippines, the employer’s doctor diagnosed Licuanan with nasopharyngeal carcinoma. The employer’s doctor initially declared the illness as not work-related. Afterwards, the same doctor issued a Grade 7 disability assessment on Licuanan. Licuanan died after two years, or long after the employment contract was terminated.

            Are the heirs entitled to death benefits even if the seafarer died after the term of the contract?

            Under the Philippine Overseas Employment Administration Standard Employment Contract (“POEA SEC“), an issuance which is incorporated in the employment contracts of Filipino seafarers, a seafarer’s heirs may claim death benefits if the death (a) was caused by a work-related illness or injury, and (b) occurred during the term of the seafarer’s contract. In this case, even if Licuanan died after the term of the employment contract, the SC ruled that Licuanan’s heirs were entitled to death benefits. Some key points of the judgement include:

            • Licuanan’s illness, nasopharyngeal carcinoma, was work-related. Although nasopharyngeal carcinoma is not among the occupational illnesses stated in the POEA SEC, the SC ruled that the POEA SEC nonetheless provides that illnesses not listed therein are “disputably presumed work-related”. This statement is a deviation from the SC’s previous rulings that the seafarer has the burden to prove that an illness or injury is work-related despite that presumption provided for in the POEA SEC.
            • The SC’s deviation from its rulings was likely justified by the employer’s doctor’s issuance of a grade 7 disability assessment on Licuanan. The SC ruled that the “issuance of a disability rating by the [employer’s doctor] negates any claim that the non-list illness is not work related”.
            • Although Licuanan died after the term of his employment contract, his heirs are still entitled to death benefits. The SC stated that “the seafarer’s death occurring after the termination of his employment due to his medical repatriation on account of a work-related injury or illness constitutes an exception thereto”.

            Conclusion

            The issuance of the Rules of Procedure for Admiralty Cases is a welcome development as it enhances the administration of justice in admiralty cases in the Philippines. The creation of the SPO provides assurance that domestic and international shippers are protected against unreasonable fees and charges that shipping lines impose.

            The ruling of the SC in Heirs of Licuanan v. Singa will benefit the heirs of seafarers who are similarly situated.

             

            Contacts

             

            Vladi Miguel S. Lazaro
            Partner
            Gatmaytan Yap Patacsil
            Gutierres & Protacio (C&G Law)
            Philippines
            T +632 8894 0377 to 79
            F +632 8552-1977
            vmslazaro@cagatlaw.com

             

            ***

            AHP Client Alert is a publication of Assegaf Hamzah & Partners. It brings an overview of selected Indonesian laws and regulations to the attention of clients but is not intended to be viewed or relied upon as legal advice. Clients should seek advice of qualified Indonesian legal practitioners with respect to the precise effect of the laws and regulations referred to in AHP Client Alert. Whilst care has been taken in the preparation of  AHP  Client Alert, no warranty is given as to the accuracy of the information it contains and no liability is accepted for any statement, opinion, error or omission.

             

             

            More Articles

            • Regional Trade Highlights 2022
              January 30, 2023
            • Indonesia Expands Its Anti-Tax-Avoidance Measures: A Development to be Aware of in Tax Planning and Compliance
              January 27, 2023
            • Dissecting the Amendment to the Omnibus Law: Which Sectors are Affected and How?
              January 20, 2023
            • A New Rule Requires Importers of Software or Other Digital Products via Electronic Transmission to Fulfil Customs Obligations
              January 16, 2023
            • Rajah & Tann Asia Member Firms, Members of Lifesciences Asia-Pacific Network (LAN), Contribute to the Singapore and Indonesia Chapters of Comparative Study: Patent Linkage Systems in APAC
              January 13, 2023
            • Indonesia’s New Criminal Code Introduces Corporate Crime
              January 4, 2023
            • A Practical Guide to Getting Your Organisation PDP Law-Ready
              December 1, 2022
            • Shipping Law Updates
              November 16, 2022
            • Arb-Med-Arb: An Effort to Enhance Amicable Dispute Resolution
              September 30, 2022
            • Five Burning Questions about the Indonesian Personal Data Protection Bill
              September 27, 2022
            By Practice Area
            • Projects & Energy
            • Technology Media & Telecommunications
            • Intellectual Property
            • Real Property
            • Banking & Finance
            • Capital Markets
            • Competition
            • Mergers & Acquisitions
            • Dispute Resolution
            • Tax and Customs

            Jakarta Office

            Capital Place, Level 36 & 37
            Jalan Jenderal Gatot Subroto Kav. 18
            Jakarta 12710,
            Indonesia

            Phone: +62 21 2555 7800
            Fax: +62 21 2555 7899
            Email: info@ahp.id


            Subcribe

            Surabaya Office

            Pakuwon Center, Superblok Tunjungan City
            Lantai 11, Unit 08
            Jalan Embong Malang No. 1, 3, 5,
            Surabaya 60261
            Indonesia

            Phone: +62 31 5116 4550
            Fax: +62 31 5116 4560

            Assegaf Hamzah & Partners


            © 2001 - 2022 Assegaf Hamzah & Partners. All rights reserved.

            Rajah & Tann Asia is a network of legal practices based in Asia.

            Member firms are independently constituted and regulated in accordance with relevant local legal requirements. Services provided by a member firm are governed by the terms of engagement between the member firm and the client.

            This website is solely intended to provide general information and does not provide any advice or create any relationship, whether legally binding or otherwise. Rajah & Tann Asia and its member firms do not accept, and fully disclaim, responsibility for any loss or damage which may result from accessing or relying on this website.