Fourth. Whether or not the public respondent seriously erred and gravely abused its discretion when it affirmed the decision of the Labor Arbiter finding that the deposit of RM14,400 was not a valid payment. We find the petition meritorious. First. We hold that there is no ambiguity in the aforequoted Computation/Certification from the Malacca Labor Office. The computation is in complete accord with Section 8 of the Workmen's Compensation Act of Malaysia which states: xxx "8. Subject to this Act, the amount of compensation shall be as follows, namely a. Where death has resulted from the injury, a lump sum equal to forty-five months' earnings or fourteen thousand four hundred ringgit, whichever is less." Clearly what is due to the private respondent as death benefit is 14,400 Malaysian Ringgit since that amount is less than US $27,902.02. Second. To clinch its contention that private respondent is only entitled to the payment of RM14,400, petitioner also submitted the following Certification issued by Sh. Yahya Bin Sh. Mohamed, Director General of Labour Peninsular, Malaysia:iv[4] "IBU PEJABAT JABATAN BURUH, SEMENANJUNG MALAYSIA (KEMENTERIAN SUMBER MANUSIA), PARAS 5, BLOK B (UTARA), Telefon: 03-2557200 PUSAT BANDAR DAMANSARA, 03-2559111 50532 KUALA LUMPUR Telefax : 03-2536040 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Ruj Tuan : Ruj Kami : (8)BSM.9/12/46/96 Tarikh: /( Mac 1997 To Whom It May Concern. Fatal Accident to Eduardo O. Felipe On 7.6.1993 in Malacca___________ "We regret to inform you that the abovenamed workman passed away on 7.6.1993 as a result of an accident arising out of and in the course of his