3/25/2021 E-Library - Information At Your Fingertips: Printer Friendly another medical examination by his attending physicians at the Manila Doctors Hospital on December 4, 1996, to verify possible mistake in his post treatment examination on March 25, 1996, firmly "was classified under partial permanent disability and is not fit to go back to his previous work due to mental state." (Annex "C", complainant's reply to respondent's position paper). We have gone into a judicious study and analysis of the arguments and exhibits particularly the ones relied upon by the parties and find that of the complainant worthy of consideration. Looking closely at Annexes "D" and "E" of respondents' position paper, there is hardly any clear affirmation that complainant was fully fit to resume his work as radio operator. Although the document alluded to, declares that complainant may be allowed to go back to work, the tenor of the same seems uncertain that complainant is fit to resume his work, and that assuming that such was the message, the words "may be" can not be taken as overriding that coming from the Manila Doctor Hospital which in the beginning handled the medical case of complainant and to which respondents unconditionally referred him and by reason of which six or seven medical especialists [sic] of the hospital took turn[s] studying and reviewing his uncertain ailment after release by respondents. Otherwise stated, unlike the message of annexes D to E of respondents, annex "C" of complainant is clear and unmistakable and confirm complainant's partial permanent disability and his definite unfitness to go back to his previous work due to his mental health. Some pronouncements in this exhibit mentions also that when complainant was admitted an emerging basis for drowsiness, behavioral change and off and on fever" and different procedures were resorted along his case, like emergency CT scan on the brain and his admission in June 24, 1995 was catastropic, whereas, more could be said in three document[s] issued by Dra. Victoria Florendo Cayabyab. Finally, respondents contend that the annexes issued by Dr. Domingo-Reyes of the Manila Doctors Hospital should not be given weight because it is not issued by the hospital or doctor duly accredited by the POEA. Neither would a close look on the applicable provision for seamen show - that a duly accredited hospital or doctor is needed for purposes of the grant of compensation benefits to a such [sic] or ailing seamen. We are more persuaded based on the arguments of the complainant among others, that it is absurd to require an ailing seaman in high seas or in a foreign land to still wait until the ship where he is working land in the country to secure treatment in a duly accredited hospital or doctor. On the basis of the above therefore, and convinced that complainant's "partial permanent disability" which was contracted in the course or on account of his employment as radio operator in foreign principal's vessel, he is entitled to disability benefit in accordance with the schedule of benefits enumerated in Appendix 1 of the Contract, the maximum of which is US $50,000. But since the amount prayed for is US$25,000.00 which we presume has a more realistic basis, the same is hereby granted. https://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocsfriendly/1/50003 3/16