1/4/2021 E-Library - Information At Your Fingertips: Printer Friendly WHEREFORE, the instant petition is DISMISSED for lack of merit. SO ORDERED.[26] Petitioner filed a motion for reconsideration but this was denied by the CA. Hence, this Petition. Issue The issue for the Court's resolution is whether the CA acted correctly in dismissing the petition for certiorari. The Court's Ruling The Petition is denied. In his Petition, petitioner essentially seeks a review of the factual findings of the LA and the NLRC that he was fit to work and that he was not entitled to disability benefits. He argues that the failure to refer to a third doctor should be taken against respondents. [27] The Court finds that the CA acted correctly in dismissing the petition for certiorari. The NLRC and the LA were both correct in ruling that petitioner was fit to work based on the findings of the company-designated physician and that petitioner failed to prove that he was entitled to disability benefits. Section 20(A) of the 2010 Philippine Overseas Employment Administration Standard Employment Contract[28] (POEA-SEC) states: SECTION 20. COMPENSATION AND BENEFITS A. COMPENSATION AND BENEFITS FOR INJURY OR ILLNESS The liabilities of the employer when the seafarer suffers work-related injury or illness during the term of his contract are as follows: xxxx 2. x x x However, if after repatriation, the seafarer still requires medical attention arising from said injury or illness, he shall be so provided at cost to the employer until such time he is declared fit or the degree of his disability has been established by the company-designated physician. https://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocsfriendly/1/65636 4/10