5/19/2021 E-Library - Information At Your Fingertips: Printer Friendly Other claims are dismissed for lack of merit. SO ORDERED.[28] In so ruling, the LA disregarded the medical assessment and grading given by the company-designated physician. According to the LA, Pastrana is entitled to total and permanent disability benefits given that his condition "has rendered him unfit to continue working as a seafarer, which is his primary source of gainful employment."[29] The LA further held that there is no evidence showing that Pastrana had already resumed his sea duties, or was declared fit to work.[30] Thus, he is considered to be suffering from a Grade 1 Disability and entitled to permanent and total disability benefits.[31] The LA also awarded Pastrana attorney's fees in an amount equivalent to 10% of the total judgment award for securing the services of a counsel to protect his rights and interests.[32] Aggrieved, respondents filed a Memorandum of Appeal with the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC).[33] Ruling of the NLRC The NLRC dismissed respondents' appeal and affirmed the LA's ruling in a Decision[34] dated April 8, 2014, viz.: IN VIEW WHEREOF, the respondents' appeal is DISMISSED for lack of merit. The Decision of the Labor Arbiter is hereby AFFIRMED. SO ORDERED.[35] The NLRC held that Pastrana is deemed permanently and totally disabled considering that he could no longer return to his work as a seafarer on account of his medical condition.[36] After all, in disability compensation, it is the incapacity to work resulting in the impairment of one's earning capacity that is being compensated and not the injury.[37] In addition, while the diagnosis of the company-designated physician bears vital significance in claims for disability benefits, his assessment is not irrefutable and conclusive.[38] No less than the Philippine Overseas Employment Administration Standard Employment Contract (POEA-SEC) recognizes the right of seafarers to seek a second opinion from a physician of their choice.[39] Finally, the NLRC also applied the "120 day rule" which states that a seafarer who is unable to perform his job for 120 days is deemed permanently disabled.[40] Respondents sought reconsideration of the NLRC Decision, but was denied in a Resolution[41] dated May 9, 2014. Thus, they filed a petition for certiorari[42] before the CA and prayed for the issuance of injunctive relief to enjoin the execution of the NLRC Decision. Before the CA could act on respondents' application for injunctive relief, the NLRC issued a Writ of Execution dated September 24, 2014.[43] Thus, respondents moved for https://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocsfriendly/1/66257 3/14