8/27/2020 E-Library - Information At Your Fingertips: Printer Friendly [47] Id. at 22. [48] Id. at 18. [49] Id. [50] Id. at 20-21. [51] Id. at 26-28. [52] Id. at 68. [53] Id. at 70, citing Silagan v. Southfield Agencies Inc., 793 Phil. 751 (2016) [Per J. Perez, Third Division]. In Silagan, the findings of the company-designated physician, who had unfettered opportunity to track the physical condition of the seafarer in a prolonged period of time, were upheld over the Medical Report of the seafarer's personal doctor, who only examined the seafarer once and based his assessment solely on the medical records adduced by his patient. [54] Id. at 71. [55] Id. [56] Id. at 74. [57] Id. at 76-79. [58] Crispino v. Tansay, 801 Phil. 711, 725 (2016) [Per J. Leonen, Second Division]. [59] 658 Phil. 627 (2011) [Per J. Carpio, Second Division]. [60] Id. at 633. [61] Maralit v. Philippine National Bank, 613 Phil. 270, 288 (2009) [Per J. Carpio, First Division]. [62] Cutanda v. Marlow Navigation Philippines, Inc., G.R. No. 219123, September 11, 2017, < http://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocs/1/63416 > [Per J. Peralta, Second Division]. [63] Jebsen Maritime, Inc. v. Ravena, 743 Phil. 371, 385 (2014) [Per J. Brion, Second Division]. [64] Magsaysay Mol Marine, Inc. v. Atraje, G.R. No. 229192, July 23, 2018, < http://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocs/1/64478 > [Per J. Leonen, Third Division]. [65] Id. [66] 773 Phil. 428 (2015) [Per J. Leonen, Second Division]. https://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocsfriendly/1/65396 18/20