Philippine Supreme Court Resolutions

G.R. No. 151993 (Maritime Factors, Inc. v. Bienvenido Hindang). - This is a resolution of the Motion for Reconsideration filed by respondent of our Decision dated October 19, 2011 in the above-entitled case. In said Decision, we reversed the Court of Appeals' affirmance of the findings made by the Labor Arbiter (LA) and the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) that Danilo Hindang died of asphyxia by strangulation. We found that the three tribunals erred in not giving credence to the medical report of Dr. Ossman Abdel Hameed, an Arabian doctor who conducted the autopsy on Danilo's remains immediately after the latter's death, who concluded that Danilo committed suicide by hanging himself. We did not agree on the findings of the three tribunals that the photocopy of a fax transmission of Dr. Hameed's medical report is unverifiable and unreliable; thus, not credible. We found that respondent is estopped from raising its objection to such photocopy of medical report, since respondent even lifted portions of the report which would try to prove his claim that Danilo died by strangulation. We found the medical report comprehensive and more detailed. We also gave credence to the written report of Danilo's fellow crew members to prove that Danilo's cabin door was locked when he was found hanging in the wardrobe; and that there was no showing of any sign of struggle on Danilo's part to defend himself from an intruder.

Respondent files his motion for reconsideration arguing that we erred in giving credence to (a) an unsigned photocopy of the fax transmission of the alleged English translation from the Arabic language of the alleged medical report of a certain Dr. Hameed, without the attached certification as to the authenticity of the translation and the authentication from the Philippine Consulate Office as to the existence and genuineness of the purported medical report; (b) an unauthenticated written report of Danilo's fellow crew members which was not even subscribed and sworn to under oath, on account of the principle of estoppel. He claims that estoppel does not apply in this case, since it was not him who presented the alleged medical report but the petitioner.

Respondent also claims that the issue of estoppel was never raised by Petitioner; hence, such issue is deemed waived if ever such defense is available; and that respondent is not estopped from raising his objection to the photocopy of the medical report as it did not anchor its case on such report but presented the NBI medico-legal report stating that Danilo was strangled by somebody.

We found no merit in the motion for reconsideration.

As we had stated in genuineness and due execution also used some of the findings our Decision, while respondent questions the of Dr. Hameed's medical report, however, he in the medical report to bolster his claim that Danilo died of asphyxia through strangulation. We quote respondent's allegations in his position paper filed before the LA, to wit: 

SECOND: The Medical Jurisprudence Report in quoting the Primary Medical Report conducted by the Medical Care Centre on Ras Tanura, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia indicated that there are some abrasions and contusions suffered by Danilo as follows: 

1. A "blue colour in his down part of the body";
2. A "pit injury with flow of blood in the big toe of the right leg.�

The foregoing indications found in Danilo's body are not consistent with the allegations that Danilo died through suicide by hanging.^[1]

Notably, the LA quoted verbatim this argument advanced by respondent as one of its reasons in finding that Danilo died of strangulation.^[2] 

Moreover, respondent, in his Comment filed before the CA and under the heading PRIVATE RESPONDENTS�S EVIDENCE, argued in this wise: 

x x x x 

On the other hand, the alleged medical report even indicated that Danilo have ligature marks all around his neck, such as: 

1. "an incision of hanging around the neck"
2. "this incision expands breadthwise from the front to the back of the neck"
3. "there is little hemorrhage beside the mentioned incision around the neck"
4. "we conclude that there is a wounded vital and recent incision around the neck."

The above findings destroyed the suppositions made by petitioner that Danilo hanged himself as ligature marks around his neck are consistent with strangulation and not hanging.^[3]

x x x x 

FOURTH The alleged medical report indicated that there were abrasions and contusions suffered by Danilo, to wit: 

1. A "blue colour in his down part of the body";
2. A "pit injury with flow of blood in the big toe of the right leg":
3. "There is dark precipitant blood at the bottom of his four extremities."

The foregoing injuries found on Danilo's body are not consistent with the allegation that Danilo died through suicide by hanging. These are external injuries indicative of foul play.^[4]

The respondent referred to Dr. Hameed's medical report to prove that Danilo died of strangulation and not by committing suicide, he cannot deny now the genuineness and due execution of the same.

We also find no merit to respondent's claim that the issue of estoppel is not raised at all by petitioner. A reading of petitioner's Rejoinder to comment filed in the CA would show that respondent had raised the issue of estoppel.^[5]  cralaw

WHEREFORE, the motion for reconsideration is DENIED.

SO ORDERED.  

Very truly yours,

(Sgd.) LUCITA ABJELINA-SORIANO
Division Clerk of Court

Endnotes:

---

^[1] Rollo, p. 71.

^[2] Id. at 81-82.

^[3] Id. at 146-147.

^[4] Id. at 149.

^[5] Id. at 172.