5/28/2020 E-Library - Information At Your Fingertips: Printer Friendly permanently disabled within the 120-day or 240-day period but he remains incapacitated to perform his usual sea duties after the lapse of said periods. Paragraph (b) applies to Sibug’s case. The company-designated doctor failed to issue a certification with a definite assessment of the degree of Sibug’s disability for his Ryndam injury within 240 days. In Fil-Pride Shipping Company, Inc., et al. v. Balasta,[23] we held that the “companydesignated physician must arrive at a definite assessment of the seafarer’s fitness to work or permanent disability within the period of 120 or 240 days, pursuant to Article 192 (c)(1) of the Labor Code and Rule X, Section 2 of the Amended Rules on Employees Compensation. If he fails to do so and the seafarer’s medical condition remains unresolved, the latter shall be deemed totally and permanently disabled.” This definite assessment of the seaman’s permanent disability must include the degree of his disability, as required by Section 20-B of the POEA-SEC, to wit: SEC. 20. COMPENSATION AND BENEFITS xxxx B. COMPENSATION AND BENEFITS FOR INJURY OR ILLNESS xxxx 2. 3. xxx However, if after repatriation, the seafarer still requires medical attention arising from said injury or illness, he shall be so provided at cost to the employer until such time he is declared fit or the degree of his disability has been established by the company-designated physician. Upon sign-off from the vessel for medical treatment, the seafarer is entitled to sickness allowance x x x until he is declared fit to work or the degree of permanent disability has been assessed by the company-designated physician x x x. (Emphasis and underscoring supplied.) As we said in Oriental Shipmanagement Co., Inc. v. Bastol,[24] the companydesignated doctor must declare the seaman fit to work or assess the degree of his permanent disability. In this case, Sibug was repatriated and arrived in the country on January 15, 2007 after his Ryndam injury. He had surgery on his injured hand. On September 7, 2007, the company-designated doctor issued a medical report that Sibug has a permanent but incomplete disability. But this medical report failed to state the degree of Sibug’s disability. Only in an email dated September 28, 2007, copy of which was attached as Annex 3 of petitioners’ position paper, was Sibug’s disability from his Ryndam injury elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocsfriendly/1/56804 5/7