DISPOSITIVE:

SUBJECTS/DOCTRINES/DIGEST:

WHAT HAPPENED IN THIS CASE?

RESPONDENT WAS REPATRIATED DUE TO HIS AILMENT WHICH MADE HIM . PETITIONER SAID RESPONDENT WAS REPATRIATED BECAUSE HIS CONTRACT EXPIRED. SUPREME COURT SAID PETITIONER WAS WRONG BECAUSE WHY WOULD PETITIONER RECOMMEND THAT RESPONDENT UNDERGO MEDICAL EXAMINATION IF HIS CONTRACT ALREADY EXPIRED. FURTHER, COMPANY PHYSICIAN DECLARED HIM WITH DISABILITY. SINCE PHYSICIAN FAILED WITHIN THE REQUIRED PERIOD TO DECLARE WHETHER THE DISABILITY WAS PERMANENT AND TOTAL THE SAME IS PRESUMED TO BE PERMANENT AND TOTAL.

SUPREME COURT ADJUSTED THE BENEFITS DUE RESPONDENT OTHERWISE IT WOULD RESULT TO UNJUST ENRICHMENT.

TO READ THE DECISION, JUST CLICK/DOWNLOAD THE FILE BELOW. IF FILE DOES NOT APPEAR ON SCREEN GO TO DOWNLOAD. IT IS THE FIRST ITEM. OPEN IT.

NOTE: TO RESEARCH ON A TOPIC IN YAHOO OR GOOGLE SEARCH  JUST TYPE “attybulao and the topic”. EXAMPLE: TO RESEARCH ON FORUM SHOPPING JUST  TYPE “attybulao and forum shopping”.