4/9/2020 E-Library - Information At Your Fingertips: Printer Friendly contrary to that of the assessment of the company-designated physician, the opinion of a third doctor may be agreed jointly between the employer and the seafarer as the decision final and binding on both of them.[20] In this case, Santiago did not avail of this procedure. There was no agreement on a third doctor who shall examine him anew and whose finding shall be final and binding. Thus, this Court is left without choice but to uphold the certification made by Dr. Lim with respect to Santiago’s disability. WHEREFORE, the petition is DENIED. Accordingly, the February 11, 2010 Decision of the Court of Appeals, in CA-G.R. SP. No. 108035, is AFFIRMED. SO ORDERED. Velasco, Jr., (Chairperson), Peralta, Abad, and Perlas-Bernabe, JJ., concur. [1] Rollo, pp. 233-244. Penned by Associate Justice Bienvenido L. Reyes (now member of this Court) with Associate Justice Celia C. Librea-Leagogo and Associate Justice Francisco P. Acosta, concurring. [2] Id. at 159-167. Penned by Commissioner Romeo L. Go with Presiding Commissioner Gerardo C. Nograles and Commissioner Perlita B. Velasco, concurring. [3] Id. at 100-110. Penned by Executive Labor Arbiter for Adjudication Fatima Jambaro- Franco. [4] Id. at 35. [5] Id. at 17. [6] Id. at 50. [7] Id. at 109-110. [8] Id. at 166. [9] 510 Phil. 332 (2005). [10] G.R. No. 172933, October 6, 2008, 567 SCRA 610. [11] Id. at 629. [12] Rollo, p. 243. [13] Id. at 19. elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocsfriendly/1/54764 9/10