1/4/2021 E-Library - Information At Your Fingertips: Printer Friendly IN VIEW WHEREOF, [respondent's] appeal is GRANTED. The assailed Decision is hereby MODIFIED. The corporate [petitioners] are hereby ORDERED to pay the [respondent] permanent and total disability benefits in the amount of US$80,000.00 or its peso equivalent at the prevailing exchange rate on the date of actual payment. Said [petitioners] are, likewise, directed to pay the [respondent] sickness allowance for the period starting from the 5th to the 28th of February 2010 and attorney's fees equivalent to ten percent (10%) of the total monetary award. SO ORDERED.[21] Petitioners' motion for reconsideration was denied in the NLRC Resolution[22] dated January 28, 2014: WHEREFORE, the Motion for Reconsideration is hereby DENIED. No second Motion for Reconsideration of the same nature shall be entertained and the filing thereof shall subject the movant to be cited in contempt in accordance to the power of this Commission as provided under Article 218 of the Labor Code of the Philippines vis-a-vis Section 15 of Rule VII and Rule IX of the 2011 Revised Rules of Procedure of this Commission. SO ORDERED.[23] The Ruling of the Court of Appeals In its December 17, 2014 assailed Decision,[24] the CA affirmed the NLRC's conclusion that respondent is entitled to permanent and total disability benefits. The CA ruled that "the fact that [respondent] was unable to perform his customary work as an Able Seaman for more than 120 days establishes permanent total disability."[25] According to the CA, "[t]his holds true despite a declaration by the company-designated doctors that the seafarer is fit to work; the disability is still considered permanent and total if such declaration is made after the expiration of 120 days from repatriation.[26] The award of sickness allowance was also upheld but modified to include the periods from February 5 to 28, 2010; June 16 to 30, 2010, through July 1 to 9, 2010 for the entitlement thereto.[27] The attorney's fees awarded were also upheld.[28] The CA disposed, thus: WHEREFORE, premises considered, the Petition for Certiorari is hereby DENIED. ACCORDINGLY, the challenged Decision dated 11 December 2013 and Resolution dated 28 January 2014 rendered by the NLRC, Fourth Division in NLRC LAC NO.-OFW-M-08-000762-13, NLRC NCR(M)-08-l 191112 are AFFIRMED with MODIFICATION in that [petitioners] are ORDERED to pay, jointly and severally, [respondent] sickness allowance for https://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocsfriendly/1/65696 4/13