6/7/2020 E-Library - Information At Your Fingertips: Printer Friendly Further, Madridejos avers that neither he nor labor tribunals and courts are bound by the medical report of NYK-FIL's company-designated physician; the inherent merits of the case should be considered.[86] He maintains that NYK-FIL's refusal to heed his demands was induced by "bad faith and malice."[87] He then concludes that the National Labor Relations Commission committed grave abuse of discretion in disregarding his disability compensation, deleting moral damages, and not awarding attorney's fees in his favor.[88] On January 21, 2013, this Court issued a Resolution[89] requiring NYK-FIL to comment on the Petition. In its Comment,[90] NYK-FIL belies Madridejos' claim that he was involved in an accident while lifting kitchen equipment on board the vessel.[91] It claims that Madridejos' story was "bare, self-serving, and hearsay as there was no such incident that ever happened on board the vessel and no record of such alleged occurrence exists."[92] Furthermore, his sebaceous cyst was curable.[93] Thus, it was even completely excised, enabling him "to work for the next two (2) months . . . without any complaint[.]"[94] Additionally, the cyst was already removed under local anesthesia which allegedly connotes that: By local anesthesia, it simply means that the operation or excision was merely superficial or skin-deep. It is nothing more serious tha[n] excision or extraction of boil or "pigsa" in the vernacular. The only difference of the sebaceous cyst from boil, is that in the former, what is being extracted is sebum/keratin or "sebo" in the vernacular and in the latter is pus or "nana" in the vernacular. This explains why only local anesthesia is necessary.[95] NYK-FIL insists that it has terminated Madridejos' services pursuant to Item 7 of his Employment Agreement and not because of his illness.[96] "[H]e was repatriated . . . three (3) months after his cyst was removed."[97] His silence on the events that transpired between his operation and repatriation confirms NYK-FIL's claim that " [Madridejos] was not repatriated for medical reason[s] but rather due to a valid termination of... [his] probationary employment."[98] Moreover, his assertion that he reported to the local agency to seek medical referral is untrue.[99] Hence, his non-compliance with the compulsory post-employment medical examination leads to the forfeiture of the benefits provided for under Philippine Overseas Employment Agency Standard Employment Contract.[100] Finally, it claims that Madridejos is not entitled to moral damages, exemplary damages, or attorney's fees since NYK-FIL did not act in bad faith.[101] On June 3, 2013, this Court issued a Resolution[102] requiring petitioner to file his elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocsfriendly/1/63066 8/25