8/27/2020 E-Library - Information At Your Fingertips: Printer Friendly 2. The disease was contracted as a result of the seafarer's exposure to the described risks; 3. The disease was contracted within a period of exposure and under such other factors necessary to contract it; and 4. There was no notorious negligence on the part of the seafarer. (Emphasis supplied) Unlike "work-relatedness," no legal presumption of compensability is accorded to the seafarer. As such, the seafarer bears the burden to prove substantial evidence that the conditions of compensability have been satisfied. This applies for both listed occupational disease and non-listed illness.[27] decrees: Atienza v. Orophil[28] lucidly Therefore, it is apparent that for both listed occupational disease and a nonlisted illness and their resulting injury to be compensable, the seafarer must sufficiently show by substantial evidence compliance with the conditions for compensability. If the employer fails to successfully dispute the work-relatedness of the seafarer's illness, and the latter, in turn, has established compliance with the conditions for compensability, the issue now shifts to a determination of the nature of the disability (i.e., permanent and total or temporary and total) and the amount of disability benefits due the seafarer.[29] Here, respondents mainly rely on the alleged pre-existence of petitioner's illness and have failed to refute the presumption of its work-relatedness or aggravation by reason of his work. The presumption, therefore, remains in place in petitioner's favor, i.e. his injury or illness was work-related or was aggravated by his work condition. Both the company-designated doctor and Dr. Chuasuan, Jr. agreed that petitioner suffered from Osteoarthritis and got repatriated after finishing his employment contract. Osteoarthritis is listed as an occupational disease which is presumed to be work-related. Under Section 32-A (21) of the 2010 POEA-SEC, for Osteoarthritis to be considered as an occupational disease, it must have been contracted in any occupation involving: a. Joint strain from carrying heavy load, or unduly heavy physical labor, as among laborers and mechanics; b. Minor or major injuries to the joint; c. Excessive use or constant strenuous usage of a particular joint, as among sportsmen, particularly those who have engaged in the more active sports https://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocsfriendly/1/65546 6/13