5/19/2021 E-Library - Information At Your Fingertips: Printer Friendly Hence, OSG and Pacific Ocean Manning appealed the above Decision to the NLRC. NLRC Ruling In its 14 December 2015 Decision, the NLRC affirmed the LA's Decision. OSG and Pacific Ocean Manning filed a motion for reconsideration but the same was denied in the NLRC 29 February 2016 Resolution. Thereafter, they went to the CA on a Petition for Certiorari under Rule 65 of the Rules of Court.[7] On 4 August 2016, by virtue of a conditional satisfaction of judgment agreed by the parties, OSG paid the total amount of P5,181,389.00 to Martinez. Court of Appeals Ruling On 17 August 2017, the CA rendered the now assailed Decision which sustained the ruling of the NLRC that Martinez' illness is work-related and that he is entitled to permanent and total disability benefits. The CA ruled that the NLRC did not commit grave abuse of discretion since its factual finding that Martinez' illness is work-related is supported by substantial evidence. The CA, however, modified the Decision of the NLRC by deleting the award of sick wage allowance, medical and travel expenses, and attorney's fees. The CA decreed as follows: FOR THESE REASONS, the petition is PARTLY GRANTED. The December 14, 2015 Decision and February 29, 2016 Resolution of the National Labor Relations Commission is MODIFIED in that the award of sick wage allowance, medical and travel expenses, and attorney's fees are deleted. SO ORDERED.[8] Dissatisfied with the CA Decision, OSG and Pacific Ocean Manning filed a motion for reconsideration. Martinez also filed a motion for partial reconsideration in so far as the CA deleted the award of attorney's fees. He also maintained that the certiorari petition was mooted by virtue of a conditional settlement which would prevent OSG and Pacific Ocean Manning from taking back the judgment award previously granted by the labor tribunals, which was already paid and received by Martinez in full amount. The two motions for reconsideration were denied by the CA in a Resolution dated 6 February 2018.[9] Thereafter, Martinez filed before the Court a Motion for an Extension of Time to File Petition Under Rule 45[10] which was docketed as G.R. No. 237373. On the other hand, OSG and Pacific Ocean Manning filed a Petition for Review on Certiorari[11] which was docketed as G.R. No. 237378. Both cases were accordingly consolidated. In the Court's 18 June 2018 Resolution,[12] G.R. No. 237373 was declared closed and terminated after Martinez failed to file the intended petition. Hence, what remains now for resolution of the Court is the petition of OSG and Pacific Ocean Manning. In their petition, OSG and Pacific Ocean Manning posed the sole issue, to wit: https://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocsfriendly/1/66703 3/9

Select target paragraph3