6/5/2020 E-Library - Information At Your Fingertips: Printer Friendly examination. The CA reversed the NLRC’s ruling and reinstated the Labor Arbiter’s award of disability benefits and attorney’s fees to respondent. The CA no longer considered the issue of sickness allowance since it was already decided by another CA Division in a separate case.[12] The fallo of the assailed CA Decision reads: WHEREFORE, premises considered, the instant Petition is GRANTED. The assailed Resolutions dated 15 December 2005 and 17 March 2006, respectively, of the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) First Division in NLRC CA No. 041980-04 and NLRC NCR-OFW Case No. (M) 0201-00030-00 insofar as it denied the grant of disability benefits and attorney’s fees, are hereby REVERSED and SET ASIDE. Accordingly, the Decision dated 21 September 2004 of Labor Arbiter Patricio P. Libo-on awarding [respondent] disability benefits in the amount of US$125,000 and attorney’s fees in the amount of 10% of the monetary award, is hereby REINSTATED. SO ORDERED.[13] The CA ruled that respondent is no longer fit to work and his disability is permanent and total, citing Dr. Abesamis’s finding that recurrence of the same psychotic disorder is possible if respondent is placed in the same situation. It considered as an admission of respondent’s disability on petitioners’ part when they issued to him SSS Forms/Medical Certificates duly signed by Dr. Abesamis for him to be able to claim his disability benefits from the SSS. The CA held that respondent is not guilty of concealment since Dr. Della merely stated that respondent’s history revealed psychotic features and did not confirm that he was suffering from psychotic or mood disturbance. On respondent’s admission of a similar psychotic breakdown in 1996, the CA noted respondent’s denial as stated in Dr. Abesamis’s affidavit. In awarding US$125,000 as disability benefits, the CA applied Section 21(a) of the CBA which reads: DISABILITY SECTION 21 (a) A Seafarer who suffers an injury as a result of an accident from any cause whatsoever whilst in the employment of the Managers/Owners, including accidents occurring whilst travelling to or from the ship or as a result of marine or other similar peril, and whose ability to work is reduced as a result thereof, shall receive from the Managers/Owners in addition to her/his sick pay (Art. 16 and 17 above), a compensation as stated below: elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocsfriendly/1/58968 3/9