Orlando Garcia. Jr. ( Community Diagnostics Center ) vs. Ranida and Ramon Salvador G. R. No. 168512 March 20. 2007
Respondent Ranida Salvador underwent a medical scrutiny at the Community Diagnostics Center ( CDC ) as a requirement for regular employment. Garcia. a medical engineer. conducted the HBs Ag ( Hepatitis B Surface Antigen ) trial. On October 22. 1993. CDC issued the trial consequence bespeaking that Ranida was “HBs Ag: Reactive. ” The consequence bore the name and signature of Garcia as tester and the gum elastic stamp signature of Dr. Castro as diagnostician. When Ranida submitted the trial consequence to Dr. Sto. Domingo. the Company doctor. the latter apprised her that the findings indicated that she is enduring from Hepatitis B. a liver disease.
Therefore. based on the medical study submitted by Sto. Domingo. the Company terminated Ranida’s employment for neglecting the physical scrutiny. It was subsequently determined that there was an mistake in the old scrutiny and that the respondent was non enduring from Hepatitis B. Respondent was rehired by the company. Issue:
Whether Garcia ( CDC ) is apt for amendss to the respondents for publishing an wrong HBsAG trial consequence. HELD:
The Court held that CDC was negligent because there was no accredited doctor in CDC as required by jurisprudence. CDC is non administered. directed and supervised by a accredited doctor as required by jurisprudence. but by Ma. Ruby C. Calderon. a accredited Medical Technologist. In the License to Open and Operate a Clinical Lab for the old ages 1993 and 1996 issued by Dr. Juan R. Nanagas. M. D. . Undersecretary for Health Facilities. Standards and Regulation. defendant-appellee Castro was named as the caput of CDC. However. defendant diagnostician is non the proprietor of the Community Diagnostic Center nor an employee of the same nor the employer of its employees.
Defendant diagnostician comes to the Community Diagnostic Center when and where a job is referred to him. Castro’s infrequent visit to the clinical research lab hardly qualifies as an effectual administrative supervising and control over the activities in the research lab. “Supervision and control” means the authorization to move straight whenever a specific map is entrusted by jurisprudence or ordinance to a subsidiary ; direct the public presentation of responsibility ; keep the committee of Acts of the Apostless ; reappraisal. O.K. . revision or modify Acts of the Apostless and determinations of subsidiary functionaries or units. Furthermore. Garcia conducted the HBsAG trial of respondent Ranida without the supervising of defendant-appellee Castro. Last. the disputed HBsAG trial consequence was released to respondent Ranida without the mandate of defendant-appellee Castro.