Respondent does not deny that Arbit ticked NO in his application but proffers an explanation: It is worth repeating that on December 12, 1997, Arbit went to the office of the respondent OSM and filed an Application for Shipboard Employment. Under the subheading MEDICAL HISTORY and after the item ANY PREVIOUS ILLNESS, Arbit checked the box pertaining to NO. This was done under the belief that he did not have any serious illnesses before, except for his eye injury which he declared, and that he would undergo rigid pre-employment medical examination and any serious illness/es would be discovered by the respondents company-designated physicians. Fortunately, he was declared FIT TO WORK by the respondents company-designated physician after a rigid pre-employment medical examination. In fact, he was able to serve [respondents] for eight (8) months and twenty (20) days after he joined his vessel of assignment. [32] Respondent does not likewise deny the existence and genuineness of the medical certificate and the Release and Quitclaim but contends that: The certification issued by Dr. Robert Lim of the Metropolitan Hospital x x x should be interpreted with the Release and Quitclaim signed by Arbit on September 26, 1997 x x x and Section 30-A of the POEA Standard Employment Contract. [33] A reading of the front page of the Release and Quitclaim would reveal that Arbit was paid the Philippine Currency equivalent of US$12,500 or PhP406,250. Without the said Release and Quitclaim, a layman would interpret Dr. Lims certification as determining Arbits degree of disability as TOTAL AND PERMANENT. But such erroneous conclusion could be avoided if the said certification is interpreted with the said Release and Quitclaim, together with Section 30-A of the POEA Standard Employment Contract. [34] Respondent contends that the amount of settlement (US$12,500) Arbit received is short of the disability allowance recoverable under Section 30-A of the Contract. Under this Section, a seafarer with permanent disability is entitled to a benefit of US$13,060.[35] If the disability is total and permanent, the benefit is US$60,000. Since Arbit received less, his disability could not have been total and permanent when he signed the Release and Quitclaim. This addresses the argument of petitioner that a person who has already received his disability benefits cannot be granted his disability claims anew.[36] Respondents arguments fail to impress. The evidence proves that Arbit was previously ill and he knew it. He committed misrepresentation. Not once but twice. Even if we take petitioners contention that Arbits previous disability was not total and permanent, making him qualified to seek permanent total disability compensation in