6/5/2020 E-Library - Information At Your Fingertips: Printer Friendly constitutes grave error and grave abuse of discretion for reason that respondent was already declared "FIT TO WORK" by the company-designated physician. Petitioners alleged that the declaration of fitness by the company-designated physician bars respondent's claim for disability benefits from prospering.[27] Petitioners disagreed with the CA's ruling that respondent is suffering from total and permanent disability as he was purportedly unable to work for more than 120 days.[28] The CA concluded that as a result of his illness, respondent was clearly shown to be actually unfit to go back to his work as Able Seaman for at least five (5) months or for more than 120 days.[29] The CA held that respondent's inability to resume work for more than 120 days, by itself, already constituted permanent total disability. However, we have settled that a seafarer's inability to resume his work after the lapse of more than 120 days from the time he suffered an injury and/or illness is not a magic wand that automatically warrants the grant of total and permanent disability benefits in his favor.[30] While it may appear that under the POEA-SEC[31] and Labor Code[32] the 120-day period is non-extendible and the lapse thereof without the employer making any declaration would be enough to consider the employee permanently disabled, interpreting them in harmony with the Amended Rules on Employee Compensation (AREC)[33] indicates otherwise. That if the employer's failure to make a declaration on the fitness or disability of the seafarer is because of the latter's need for further medical attention, the period of temporary and total disability may be extended to a maximum of 240 days.[34] We held in Vergara v. Hammonia Maritime Services, Inc.[35] that a temporary total disability becomes permanent when so declared by the company-designated physician within the period allowed, or upon expiration of the maximum 240-day medical treatment period in case of absence of a declaration of fitness or permanent disability. [36] In the Vergara case, this Court discussed the significance of the 120- day period as one when the seafarer is considered to be totally yet temporarily disabled, thus, entitling him to sickness wages. This is also the period given to the employer to determine whether the seafarer is fit for sea duty or permanently disabled and the degree of such disability. Based on this Court's pronouncements, it is easily discernible that the 120-day or 240day periods, and the obligations the law imposed on the employer are determinative of when a seafarer's cause. of action for total and permanent disability may be considered to have arisen. Thus, a seafarer may pursue an action for total and permanent disability benefits if: (a) the company-designated physician failed to issue a declaration as to his fitness to engage in sea duty or disability even after the elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocsfriendly/1/61059 5/13