6/14/2021
E-Library - Information At Your Fingertips: Printer Friendly
The CA upheld the medical assessment of the company-designated physician finding
Alfredo's condition to be not work-related. Alfredo failed to rebut said assessment by
substantial evidence. The medical certificate of his own physician did not even provide
for findings how Alfredo's medical condition could have been work-related/aggravated.
[40] The CA further emphasizes that Alfredo secured the opinion of his personal
physician after filing his complaint for disability benefits. Without the medical
assessment of his personal physician, Alfredo was only armed with his own belief that
he is able to recover disability benefits. His claim for said benefits was premature as it
was not even supported by the medical findings of his own physician.[41] The CA also
omitted the award for attorney's fees holding that there was no basis.[42] MMMI
refused to pay permanent and total disability benefits as it relied on the companydesignated physician's assessment that Alfredo's illness is not work-related. Further, it
was Alfredo's own refusal to continue his treatment with the company-designated
physicians that caused the cessation of the medical attention given to him by MMMI.
[43]
In view of the foregoing Decision, Alfredo filed the instant petition for review under
Rule 45 of the Rules of Court. Alfredo mainly argues that he is entitled to payment of
permanent and total disability benefits. His condition falls squarely under the POEAlisted occupational illness cardiovascular disease.[44] Alfredo explains that his condition
was acquired or worsened while he was on board the vessel, especially since he has
been in the employ of MMMI for five years. His years of service took a toll on his body.
Alfredo also claims that judicial notice should be taken that as a seaman, he is
constantly subjected to the very stressful demands of his duties and responsibilities and
exposed to the hazardous condition of his station. In addition, the food provided on
board the vessel was mostly meat, or food items high in fat, high in cholesterol or low
in fiber. Alfredo had no choice but to cook and eat what is available in the ship's
provision. There is a reasonable connection between his job and his medical condition.
[45] Alfredo argues entitlement to permanent and total disability benefits because he
was unable to return to work after 120 days from his repatriation due to his workrelated illness.[46] Alfredo also claims for payment of attorney's fees because he merely
protected his interest in the suit.[47]
MMMI, in its Comment,[48] argues that Alfredo's working conditions do not involve risks
of acquiring myocardial infarction (heart attack) or coronary heart disease. Apart from
lack of substantial evidence to prove work-relatedness of his disease, MMMI reiterates
that Alfredo was already hypertensive prior to deployment. He also has a family history
of hypertension. Hence, his pre-existing illness could have been the cause of his heart
attack.[49] Further, Alfredo was given medications to control his preexisting illnesses,
but Alfredo neither alleged nor proved that he complied with taking the prescribed
maintenance medications and doctor-recommended lifestyle changes.[50] MMMI
emphasizes that the company-designated physicians assessed Alfredo's illness as not
work-related.[51] The findings of the company-designated physicians take precedence
than that of Alfredo's physician because the former has an extensive knowledge of
Alfredo's medical conditions.[52] Further, it is imperative that Alfredo's conditions be
assessed with a disability grade provided under the POEA-SEC. Failure to return to work
https://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocsfriendly/1/66856
4/12