6/8/2020 E-Library - Information At Your Fingertips: Printer Friendly While a PEME may reveal enough for the petitioner (vessel) to decide whether a seafarer is fit for overseas employment, it may not be relied upon to inform petitioners of a seafarer’s true state of health. The PEME could not have divulged respondent’s illness considering that the examinations were not exploratory.[7] Besides, it was not expressly stated in his medical diagnosis that his illness was equivalent to a total and permanent disability. Absent any indication, the Court cannot accommodate him. WHEREFORE, the petition is DENIED. SO ORDERED. Velasco, Jr., (Chairperson), Brion,* Abad, and Perez,** JJ., concur. * Designated as additional member in lieu of Associate Justice Diosdado M. Peralta, per Special Order No. 1150 dated November 11, 2011. ** Designated as additional member in lieu of Associate Justice Estela M. Perlas- Bernabe, per Special Order No. 1152 dated November 11, 2011. [1] Rollo, pp. 54-73. Penned by Associate Justice Fernanda Lampas Peralta and concurred in by Associate Justice Josefina Guevara-Salonga and Associate Justice Edgardo F. Sundiam. [2] Id. at 40-52. [3] Id. at 179. [4] G.R. No. 168210, June 17, 2008, 554 SCRA 590. [5] Magsaysay Maritime Corporation and/or Cruise Ships Catering and Services International, N.V. v. National Labor Relations Commission, G.R. No. 186180, March 22, 2010, 616 SCRA 362. [6] Rollo, p. 217. [7] Magsaysay Maritime Corporation and/or Cruise Ships Catering and Services International, N.V. v. National Labor Relations Commission, supra note 5. elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocsfriendly/1/26253 10/11