5/28/2020 E-Library - Information At Your Fingertips: Printer Friendly >TRAUMATIC ARTHRITIS, RIGHT ANKLE DISABILITY RATING: Based on the physical examination and supported by laboratory examinations, he sustained injury while working. A fellow seaman fell on him while he was drilling some attachment for MOB. He broke his right ankle as a result of the incident. In Houston, Texas, USA, he had x-ray which showed he sustained a broken lateral malleolous, right [foot] which was reduced and fix[ed] with a cast. He was repatriated to Manila for further recuperation. He was in cast for almost 3 months and had therapy for the following months of sick leave. He sustained a broken bone on the ankle which is important in walking and standing. The ankle joint is form[ed] by three bones which has (sic) to be in good alignment to have a good ambulation. In his case, one bone the lateral side of the ankle was broken which was not align[ed] to its former anatomical location. This will result in instability on walking and standing. It will also cause early arthritic changes to the joint that will be manifested by on and off ankle pain. The patient will not be able to sustain prolong standing and carrying heavy weight without feeling of pain on his right ankle. He is not anymore physically fit to do strenuous job of a seaman. He is given a PARTIAL PERMANENT DISABILITY. He is UNFIT FOR SEADUTY in whatever capacity as a SEAMAN. [23] See Magsaysay Maritime Corp. and/or Dela Cruz v. Velasquez (591 Phil. 839 [2008]), where the Court held that the findings of the company-designated physician, who regularly monitored and treated the seafarer, and outlined his progress over a period of several months in several reports, deserve more credence than the single medical report of the seafarer’s doctor, who treated or examined the seafarer only once. [24] 588 Phil. 895 (2006). [25] Id. at 912. [26] Magsaysay Maritime Corporation v. National Labor Relations Commission, G.R. No. 191903, 19 June 2013, 699 SCRA 197; Santiago v. Pacbasin ShipManagement, Inc., G.R. No. 194677, 18 April 2012, 670 SCRA 271. Source: Supreme Court E-Library This page was dynamically generated by the E-Library Content Management System (E-LibCMS) elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocsfriendly/1/57487 12/13