THIRD DIVISION
G.R. No. 231748, July 08, 2020
RICHARD LAWRENCE DAZ TOLIONGCO, PETITIONER, V. COURT OF APPEALS, NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION, ANGLO-EASTERN CREW MANAGEMENT PHILIPPINES, INC., ANGLO-EASTERN (ANTWERP) NV, GREGORIO B. SIALSA, ALL CORPORATE OFFICERS AND DIRECTORS AND M/V MINERAL WATER, RESPONDENTS,
D E C I S I O N
LEONEN, J.:
This case involves a seafarer who was sexually harassed during the course of his employment on board the M/V Mineral Water. After the incident, petitioner Richard Lawrence Daz Toliongco (Toliongco) opted for voluntaiy repatriation. He failed to comply with the three-day reportorial requirement. However, a week after his repatriation, he filed a complaint before the Overseas Workers Welfare Administration.1 Several months later, he filed a complaint "for constructive dismissal, sexual harassment and maltreatment with prayer for the payment of disability benefits, damages and attorney's fees"2 claiming that he is rendered permanently and totally disabled due to his post-traumatic stress disorder caused by his unfortunate experience onboard the vessel.
For this Court's resolution is a Petition for Review on Certiorari with Motion to Allow Petitioner to Litigate as an Indigent or a Pauper Litigant assailing the Decision3 and Resolution4 of the Court of Appeals, Manila in CA-G.R. SP. No. 143146.
On October 30, 2013, respondent Anglo-Eastern Crew Management Philippines (Anglo-Eastern Crew), Inc. employed Toliongco as a Messman on behalf of its foreign principal, Anglo Eastern (ANTWERP), NV.5 Toliongco's employment contract provided:
That the seafarer shall be employed on board under the following terms
and conditions:
1.1 | Duration of Contract | 7 MONTHS |
1.2 | Position | Position: Messman |
1.3 | Basic Monthly Salary: | U$$604.00 |
1.4 | Hours of Work: | 44 hrs/wk |
1.5 | Overtime: | US$ 450.00 OT after 103 hrs/mo. US$ 4.36/hr |
1.6 | Vacation Leave with Pay: | US$91.00 |
Comp leave holidays- | US$34.91 | |
1.7 | Point of Hire: | MANILA, PHILIPPINES |
1.8 | Collective Bargaining Agreement, if any: | Belgium |
• The patient directly experienced the threat of sexual violence and death;Dr. Dellosa's diagnosis was verified by Dr. Li-Ann Lara-Orencia who also concluded that Toliongco cannot return to his job as a seafarer.31
• recurrent, intrusive, and distressing memories of the traumatic incident;
• persistent avoidance of the distressing memories;
• persistent anger;
• problem with concentration; and
• sleep disturbance ever since the said incident happened.30cralawlawlibrary
6. Severe mental disorder or Severe Complex Cerebral function disturbance or post-traumatic psychoneurosis which require regular aid and attendance as to render worker permanently unable to perform any work.36He asserted that he suffered an occupational disease while employed aboard the vessel and is now "totally and permanently disabled" due to his "mental instability."37 Thus, he was hindered from returning to his previous job as a seafarer.38
(1) he was not repatriated on a medical ground; (2) he did not comply with the mandatory requirement for post-employment medical examination within three days from his arrival; and (3) there is no declaration from the company-designated physician as to his fitness for sea duty.40While the Labor Arbiter found that Toliongco was constructively dismissed and forced to repatriate himself due to "the hostile environment brought about by. . . [the] filing of the complaint,"41 it concluded that Toliongco cannot claim disability benefits because he failed to report within three (3) days from his arrival and the medical evidence he submitted was not enough to guarantee his claim.42
Regardless, complainant was certainly wronged. His resistance to the repeated demands of his CO to masturbate him and suck his penis led to his complaint. In turn, his complaint was met with violent reaction by his superior. It will not escape the attention of this Office that his allegation that he was threatened with death was never really contested by the respondents. In short, his work environment became a hostile, offensive and intimidating environment because he resisted his superior's demand for sexual favor. What was done to him was clear sexual harassment.46The dispositive portion of the Labor Arbiter's decision reads:
WHEREFORE, evidence and law considered, judgment is hereby rendered holding the respondents liable for the constructive dismissal of the complainant. Accordingly, they are hereby ORDERED to solidarily pay the latter as follows:On appeal, the National Labor Relations Commission affirmed the Labor Arbiter's ruling with modification.48
Salaries for the unexpired portion of the contract Php 54, 384.16Moral Damages .... Php 20,000.00Exemplary Damages .... Php 10,000.00Attorney's Fees .... Php 5, 438.41
SO ORDERED 47
While complainant submitted the medical reports of his self-appointed doctors, the same failed to show the causal connection between the nature of his employment as the vessel's messman and his PTSD, or that the risk of contracting his illness was increased by his working conditions. Not even his own doctors made a finding or declaration that his illness is work-related/aggravated or that he is permanently incapacitated to perform his job as messman as a result of his having been molested and threatened by his own superior officer. There is likewise no disability grading issued by his own physicians.50However, it deleted the awards for moral and exemplary damages and instead granted financial assistance "as a measure of social and compassionate justice."51 The dispositive portion of its decision provided:
1) Unexpired portion (in USD)They are likewise ordered to give financial assistance in the amount Php 30,000.00 plus 10% attorney's fees of the total amount awarded.7/13/14-9/22/14
$604.00x2.30 = $1,389.20
WHEREFORE, premises considered, the petition filed by petitioner/complainant is DENIED. The Decision dated 28 August 2015 and 30 September 2015 that were issued by the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) are AFFIRMED.On March 17, 2017, the Court of Appeals denied Toliongco's Motion for Reconsideration.61
SO ORDERED.60
When in danger, it's natural to feel afraid. This fear triggers many split-second changes in the body to prepare to defend against the danger or to avoid it. This 'fight-or-flight' response is a healthy reaction meant to protect a person from harm. But in post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), this reaction is changed or damaged. People who have PTSD may feel stressed or frightened even when they're no longer in danger. PTSD develops after a terrifying ordeal that involved physical harm or the threat of physical harm. The person who develops PTSD may have been the one who was harmed, the harm may have happened to a loved one, or the person may have witnessed a harmful event that happened to loved ones or strangers.71He also cites Mayo Clinic: ChanRoblesVirtualawlibrary
Post-traumatic stress disorder symptoms may start within three months of a traumatic event, but sometimes symptoms may not appear until years after the event. These symptoms cause significant problems in social or work situations and in relationships.72Petitioner reiterates that because of the state of his mental health, he "can no longer return to his former work as seafarer."73 Therefore, he is entitled to permanent and total disability benefits.74]
Definition of Terms:The discharge and return home of a seafarer—for reasons such as end of contract, early termination of contract, or illness—is called repatriation. Upon repatriation, "the seafarer shall report to the manning agency within 72 hours upon arrival at point of hire."87 The 3-day reportorial requirement is reiterated under Section 20 (A) (3) of the 2010 POEA Standard Employment Contract:
16. Work-Related Illness — any sickness as a result of an occupational disease listed under Section 32-A of this Contract with the conditions set therein satisfied.
17. Work-Related Injury - injury arising out of and in the course of employment.
A. Compensation and Benefits for Injury or Illness
The liabilities of the employer when the seafarer suffers work-related injury or illness during the term of his contract are as follows:
3. In addition to the above obligation of the employer to provide medical attention, the seafarer shall also receive sickness allowance from his employer in an amount equivalent to his basic wage computed from the time he signed off until he is declared fit to work or the degree of disability has been assessed by the company-designated physician. The period within which the seafarer shall be entitled to his sickness allowance shall not exceed 120 days. Payment of the sickness allowance shall be made on a regular basis, but not less than once a month.
The seafarer shall be entitled to reimbursement of the cost of medicines prescribed by the company-designated physician. In case treatment of the seafarer is on an out-patient basis as determined by the company-designated physician, the company shall approve the appropriate mode of transportation and accommodation. The reasonable cost of actual traveling expenses and/or accommodation shall be paid subject to liquidation and submission of official receipts and/or proof of expenses.De Andres v. Diamond H Marine Services & Shipping Agency, Inc., et al.88 summarized the 3-day reportorial requirement and its exceptions under the POEA Standard Employment Contract: ChanRoblesVirtualawlibrary
For this purpose, the seafarer shall submit himself to a post-employment medical examination by a company-designated physician within three working days upon his return except when he is physically incapacitated to do so, in which case, a written notice to the agency within the same period is deemed as compliance. In the course of the treatment, the seafarer shall also report regularly to the company-designated physician specifically on the dates as prescribed by the company-designated physician and agreed to by the seafarer. Failure of the seafarer to comply with the mandatory reporting requirement shall result in his forfeiture of the right to claim the above benefits.
If a doctor appointed by the seafarer disagrees with the assessment, a third doctor may be agreed jointly between the Employer and the seafarer. The third doctor's decision shall be final and binding on both parties. (Emphasis supplied).
To recapitulate, a seafarer claiming disability benefits is required to submit himself to a post-employment medical examination by a company-designated physician within three (3) working days from repatriation. Failure to comply with such requirement results in the forfeiture of the seafarer's claim for disability benefits. There are, however, exceptions to the rule: (1) when the seafarer is incapacitated to report to the employer upon his repatriation; and (2) when the employer inadvertently or deliberately refused to submit the seafarer to a post-employment medical examination by a company-designated physician.89Ebuenga v. Southfield Agencies90 explained the rationale for the 3-day reportorial requirement:
The 3-day mandatory reporting requirement must be strictly observed since within 3 days from repatriation, it would be fairly manageable for the physician to identify whether the disease. . . was contracted during the term of his employment or that his working conditions increased the risk of contracting the ailment.
...
Moreover, the post-employment medical examination within 3 days from . . . arrival is required in order to ascertain [the seafarer's] physical condition, since to ignore the rule would set a precedent with negative repercussions because it would open the floodgates to a limitless number of seafarers claiming disability benefits. It would certainly be unfair to the employer who would have difficulty determining the cause of a claimant's illness considering the passage of time. In such a case, the employers would have no protection against unrelated disability claims.91This Court also stated in Ebuenga that post-employment medical examination "is a reciprocal obligation where the seafarer is obliged to submit to an examination within three (3) working days from his or her arrival, and the employer is correspondingly obliged to conduct a meaningful and timely examination of the seafarer."92
E. MENTAL DISORDERSHowever, since DOH AO No. 2007-0025 refers to the pre-employment medical examination, it presupposes that the examination is done prior to embarkation.
There shall be no manifestation of any anxiety, depressive, psychotic, personality and psychological disorders identified and observed during the conduct of PEME and psychological testing. Appropriate psychologist's or psychiatrist's evaluation shall be sought to determine if condition renders a seafarer permanently unsuitable for seafaring duties.
- •Active alcohol or drug dependence as evidenced by diagnostic test result/s and confirmatory drug test result including physical finding or identified related behavioral disorder.
- Acute Psychoses, whether organic, schizophrenic or any other listed in the International Classification of Diseases
- Dementia/Senility
- Depression, active requiring medication
- History of documented mental disorder (psychosis)
- Identified "phobias" which will not fit into the job requirement
- Observation of Acute Manifestation of a Psychiatric Disorder that indicates a need for psychiatric evaluation
Personality Disorder- Psychoneurosis, Major Depression or Mania.96
Section 32-A provides:For an occupational disease and the resulting disability or death to be compensable, all of the following conditions must be satisfied:
Section 32 - A. OCCUPATIONAL DISEASES
[A] syndrome characterized by clinically significant disturbance in an individual's cognition, emotion regulation, or behavior that reflects a dysfunction in the psychological, biological, or developmental processes underlying mental functioning. Mental disorders are usually associated with significant distress or disability in social, occupational, or other important activities. An expectable or culturally approved response to a common stressor or loss, such as the death of a loved one, is not a mental disorder. Socially deviant behavior (e.g., political, religious, or sexual) and conflicts that are primarily between the individual and society are not mental disorders unless the deviance or conflict results from a dysfunction in the individual, as described above.97Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders and "[occurs] when the person has experienced an event that is outside the range of usual human experience, that would be-markedly distressing to almost anyone; e.g., serious threat to one's life or physical integrity, etc."98 The current diagnostic features of post-traumatic stress disorder are stated in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Disorders:
The essential feature of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is the development of characteristic symptoms following exposure to one or more traumatic events. Emotional reactions to the traumatic event (e.g., fear, helplessness, horror) are no longer a part of Criterion A. The clinical presentation of PTSD varies. In some individuals, fear-based re-experiencing, emotional, and behavioral symptoms may predominate. In others, anhedonic or dysphoric mood states and negative cognitions may be most distressing. In some other individuals, arousal and reactive-externalizing symptoms are prominent, while in others, dissociative symptoms predominate. Finally, some individuals exhibit combinations of these symptom patterns.A unique circumstance in this case is that the alleged illness is not caused by the duties and responsibilities of a Messman, but is due to the seafarer's work environment. Petitioner was harassed twice in one night. Though he managed to escape in both instances, there was no way for him to avoid CO Oleksiy. The only way he could protect himself from further sexual advances or unwanted sexual contact was to request for repatriation.
The directly experienced traumatic events in Criterion A include, but are not limited to, exposure to war as a combatant or civilian, threatened or actual physical assault (e.g., physical attack, robbery, mugging, childhood physical abuse), threatened or actual sexual violence (e.g., forced sexual penetration, alcohol/drug-facilitated sexual penetration, abusive sexual contact, noncontact sexual abuse, sexual trafficking), being kidnapped, being taken hostage, terrorist attack, torture, incarceration as a prisoner of war, natural or human-made disasters, and severe motor vehicle accidents." (Emphasis supplied).
Respondents' argument that the claim is precluded because the injury is due to the willful acts of another seafarer is also untenable. The POEA Standard Employment Contract disqualifies claims caused by the willful or criminal act or intentional breach of duties done by the claimant, not by the assailant. It is highly unjust to preclude a seafarer's disability claim because of the assailant's willful or criminal act or intentional breach of duty.Cabuyoc v. Inter-Orient Navigation Shipmanagement, Inc.102 involved Cabuyoc, a Messman who "was found to be suffering from nervous breakdown and was declared unfit for work at sea."103 He was repatriated after two months and 11 days at sea and "filed a complaint before the Philippine Overseas Employment Administration for non-payment of overtime pay, hospitalization benefit and sickness allowance."104 Cabuyoc alleged that he received hostile treatment from the officers on board the ship. In ruling for Cabuyoc, this Court reasoned: ChanRoblesVirtualawlibrary
Between the ship owner/manager and the worker, the former is in a better position to ensure the discipline of its workers. Consequently, the law imposes liabilities on employers so that they are burdened with the costs of harm should they fail to take precautions. In economics, this is called internalization, which attributes the consequences and costs of an activity to the party who causes them.101 (Emphasis supplied)
Here, petitioner's illness and disability were the direct results of the demands of his shipboard employment contract and the harsh and inhumane treatment of the officers on board the vessel "Olandia." For no justifiable reason, respondents refused to pay their contractual obligations in bad faith. Further, it cannot be gainsaid that petitioner's disability is not only physical but mental as well because of the severe depression, mental torture, anguish, embarrassment, anger, sleepless nights and anxiety that befell him. To protect his rights and interest, petitioner was constrained to institute his complaint below and hire the services of an attorney.105The present case is unique because the illness involved is a mental health disorder. We should consider the reality that even if petitioner was physically capable of complying with the three-day reportorial requirement, his mental faculties might have hindered him from doing so, because of the possible trauma inflicted on him caused by the two incidents of sexual harassment at the hands of the chief officer.
Complainant's belated explanation in his Memorandum in Appeal that his mental state could not even cognize the imperative nature of the requirement fails to persuade [u]s. If he is indeed suffering from a debilitating mental incapacity as to deprive him of reason and logic to consult the company designated physician or at least notify his manning agent by some other means, then how come he had the wisdom of filing a complaint with the OWWA a week after he signed off from the vessel? How come that in his own Position Paper, he stated in no. 51 thereof that "in 12 July 2014, the complainant was repatriated to the Philippines and the company physicians examined him after his arrival." This statement strongly indicates that he knew he had to be examined after his arrival yet he was not able to produce any medical report of the company physician and instead submitted, very belatedly at that, the medical reports of his self-appointed doctors which, with due respect to the doctors, were wanting in many aspects.106 (Emphasis supplied).Perhaps petitioner's mind might have been so confused that he could not fully grasp whatever was happening around him. He might have lost his sense of time because of the trauma, thus rendering him unable to comply with the three-day reportorial requirement. It is also possible that he found it too traumatic to report to his agency upon repatriation.
Respondent's claim of having reported to petitioner Transmarine's office within three days from his arrival in the Philippines remains just that. As duly observed by the NLRC, respondent merely consulted a private practitioner more than one month after his arrival - three weeks after he had already filed his complaint for disability benefits; and he already filed his complaint for disability benefits; and he secured a medical certification that he was unfit for sea duty from another private physician only on March, 2005 or six months after his arrival.Several months had passed before petitioner sought medical opinion, but we should not blame him for belatedly seeking medical help. Perhaps his dire financial condition is one factor. We note that he filed this Petition as a pauper-litigant"6 and he has not found any suitable employment after repatriation.117 It might also have taken him some time to accept that he needed medical help. He knew well enough that he was wronged and immediately filed a complaint before the Overseas Worker's Welfare Administration, but perhaps, at that point, he had no manifest symptoms of any mental health issues yet.
... Aside from a "To whom it may concern" handwritten letter of respondent attached to his Position Paper filed before the arbiter detailing the alleged instances of verbal abuse, which letter bears the alleged signatures of some of respondent's colleagues, respondent failed to proffer concrete proof that, if indeed he was subjected to abuse, it directly resulted in his depression."115cralawlawlibrary
A week after sign-off, complainant filed a complaint with the Overseas Worker's Welfare Administration (OWWA) claiming that he was sexually abused on board. Respondents denied his accusation and the case was dismissed.Lest this Court be misunderstood, We recognize that it takes time for victims of sexual harassment to come forward. Perhaps more so if the victim is a male, due to factors such as "fear that he will be considered to have provoked the assault in some way, stigma, a sense of loss of masculinity, either through being penetrated or not having fought hard enough to prevent the attack (or both), . . . and fear of being perceived as homosexual."119
Sometime around mid-December 2014, complainant filed another complaint against respondents with the National Conciliation & Mediation Board (NCMB) claiming disability as he said he consulted a doctor and he was suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder. No formal case was filed before the NCMB.118cralawlawlibrary
Social and cultural expectations on masculinity and male dominance urge men to keep quiet about being a victim, adding to the unique experience of male victims of domestic abuse. This leads to latent depression among boys and men. In a sense, patriarchy while privileging men, also victimizes them.To restate, sexual harassment can happen to anyone and everyone. Our society has often depicted women as being the weaker sex, and the only victims of sexual harassment. It is high-time that this notion is corrected. To consider women as the weaker sex is discriminatory. To think that only women can be victims of sexual harassment is discriminatory against men who have suffered the same plight; men who have been victimized by sexual predators.
There is now more space to believe that portraying only women as victims will not always promote gender equality before the law. It sometimes aggravates the gap by conceding that women have always been dominated by men. In doing so, it renders empowered women invisible; or, in some cases, that men as human beings can also become victims.
In this light, it may be said that violence in the context of intimate relationships should not be seen and encrusted as a gender issue, rather it is a power issue. Thus, when laws are not gender-neutral, male victims of domestic violence may also suffer from double victimization first by their abusers and second by the judicial system. Incidentally, focusing on women was the victims entrenches some level of heteronormativity. It is blind to the possibility that, whatever moral positions are taken by those who are dominant, in reality intimate relationships can also happen between men.121cralawlawlibrary
January 5, 2020N O T I C E O F J U D G M E N TSirs / Mesdames:
Please take notice that on July 8, 2020 a Decision, copy attached hereto, was rendered by the Supreme Court in the above-entitled case, the original of which was received by this Office on January 5, 2020 at 1:40 p.m.Very truly yours,
MISAEL DOMINGO C. BATTUNG III
Division Clerk of Court
By:
(Sgd.) RUMAR D. PASION
Deputy Division Clerk of CourtEndnotes:
* On wellness leave.
1 Rollo,p. 100-101.
2 Id. at 41, CA Decision.
3 Id. at 38-49. The January 13, 2017 Decision in CA-G.R. SP No. 143146 was penned by Associate Justice Jhosep Y. Lopez, and concurred in by Associate Justices Ramon R. Garcia and Leoncia R. Dimagiba of the Fifteenth Division, Court of Appeals, Manila.
4 Id. at 51-52. The March 17, 2017 Resolution in CA-G.R. SP No. 143146 was penned by Associate Justice Jhosep Y. Lopez and concurred in by Associate Justices Ramon R. Garcia and Leoncia R. Dimagiba of the Former Fifteenth Division, Court of Appeals, Manila.
5 Id. at 39.
6 Id. at 136.
7 Id. at 40
8 Id. at 75.
9 Id.
10 Id.
11 Id.
12 Id.
13 Id.
14 Id.
15 Id.
16 Id. at 76.
17 Id.
18 Id.
19 Id.
20 Id.
21 Id.
22 Id.
23 Id.
35 Id. at 41.
36 Id.
37 Id.
38 Id.
39 Id.
40 Id.
41 Id. at 41-42.
42 Id. at 42.
43 Id. at 87.
44 Id. at 42.
45 15 CA Decision, p. 41 Id. at 42.
46 Id. at 88.
47 Id. at 42.
48 Id. at 93-104.
49 Id. at 103-104.
50 Id. at 99.
51 Id.
52 Id. at 103-104.
53 Id. at 106-107.
51 Id. at 43.
55 Id. at 48.
56 Id. at 44.
57 Id.
58 Id. at 46.
59 Id. at 47.
60 Id. a 48.
61 Id. at 51-52.
62 Id. at 2-36.
63 Id. at 149-150.
64 Id. at 151-158.
65 Id. at 159-172.
66 Id. at 174.
67 Id. at 10.
68 Id. at 16.
69 Id. at 19.
70 Id.
71 Id. at 19-20.
72 Id. at 20.
73 Id. at 23.
74 Id. at 25.
75 Id. at 154.
76 Id.
77 Id. at 155.
78 Id.
79 Id at 159-172.
80 Id. at 160.
81 Id.
82 Id. at 161.
83 Id. at 163.
84 Id. at 169.
85 CONST., art. XIII, sec. 3.
80 POEA Memorandum Circular No. 010-10.
87 POEA Memorandum Circular No. 010-10, sec. 19 (H).
85 813 Phil 746 (2017) [Per J. Mendoza, Second Division]
86 Id. at 763.
87 828 Phil. 122 (2018) [Per J. Leonen, Third Division].
92 Id. citing Career Philippines Shipmanagement, Inc. v. Serna, 700 Phil. 1 (2012) [Per J. Brion, Second Division].
93 H. KENNETH WALKER, W. DALLAS HALL, AND J. WILLIS HURST, CLINICAL METHODS: THE HISTORY, PHYSICAL, AND LABORATORY EXAMINATIONS (3rd ed., 1990), available at (last accessed on July I, 2020).
94Rollo, p. 169.
95 Available at (last accessed on July 2, 2020).
91 Id. at 136 citing Manota v. Avantgarde Shipping Corporation, 715 Phil 54, 64-65 (2013) [Per J. Peralta, Third Division].
96 Id. at 11.
97 DIAGNOSTIC AND STATISTICAL MANUAL OF MENTAL DISORDERS 20 (5lh ed.).
98 R. Moscarello, Post traumatic Stress Disorder After Sexual Assault: Its Psychodynamics and Treatment. Journal of the American Academy of Psychoanalysis, 19(2) Tl-IB JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN ACADEMY OF PSYCHOANALYSIS 235 (1991).
99 DIAGNOSTIC AND STATISTICAL MANUAL OF DISORDERS 274 (5* ed.).
100 G.R. No. 213482, June 26, 2019 [Per J. Leonen, Third Division].
101 Id.
102 537 Phil 897 (2006) [Per J. Garcia, Second Division].
102 Id. at 901.
104 Id.
105 Id. at 916.
106Rollo, p. 100-101.
107 Id. at 141-142. The Psychiatric Report was issued by the Life Change Recovery Center, The
Randy Dellosa Wellness Center and signed by Dr. Randy Dellosa, a psychiatrist and clinical psychologist.
108 Id. at 143. The Medical Certificate was issued by Dr. Li-Ann Lara-Orencia, MD.
109 Id. at 141-143.
110 647 Phil 91 (2010) [Per J. Carpio Morales, Third Division]
111 Id. at 93.
112 Id. at 94.
113 Id. at 95 (2010) [Per J. Carpio Morales, Third Division].
114 Id.
115 Id. at 96-98.
116Rollo, p. 31-32.
117 Id. at 147.
118 Id. at 79.
119 Simon Veamals and Tomas Campbell, Male victims of male sexual assault: A review of psychological consequences and treatment, 16(3) SEXUAL AND RELATIONSHIP THERAPY 279, 285 (2001).
120 712 Phil 44 (2013) [Per J. Perlas-Bernabe, En Banc].
121 Id. at 171-172.
122 Rollo, p. 74-91.
123 Id. at 93-104.
124 Inlet-Orient Maritime Enterprises, Inc. v. Creer III, 743 Phil 164, 188 (2014) [PerJ. Del Castillo, Second Division], J. Leonen, concurring.
125 Id.
126 743 Phil 164 (2014) [Per J. Del Castillo, Second Division].
127 Id. at 188.
128 746 Phil 736 (2014) [Per J. Leonen, Second Division].
129 Monana v. MEC Global Shipmanagement and Manning Corporation, et at, 746 Phil. 736. 756-757
(2014) [Per.I. Leonen, Second Division].
130Rollo, p. 28-29.
131Nacar v. Gallery Frames, 716 Phil. 806 (206) [Per J. Peralta, En Banc].chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary