6/7/2020 E-Library - Information At Your Fingertips: Printer Friendly SEC.[50] Nevertheless, the LA ordered Elburg to pay petitioner his sickness allowance which was computed at US$2,840.00, as well as 10% attorney's fees since the latter was clearly compelled to litigate to protect his rights and interests.[51] Aggrieved, petitioner filed an appeal[52] to the NLRC. The NLRC Ruling In a Decision[53] dated June 30, 2015, the NLRC partly ruled in favor of petitioner, directing Crewtech, Rizzo, and Ancheta, in solidum, to pay him his total and permanent disability benefits in the amount of US$60,000.00, and further sustained the award of sickness allowance and 10% attorney's fees.[54] Contrary to the findings of the LA, the NLRC ruled that there was no fraudulent concealment on the part of petitioner given that Crewtech was well aware of his past medical history as reflected in the Medical Report[55] dated May 2, 2014 and thus, cannot feign ignorance of his true condition. [56] The NLRC likewise ruled that petitioner's illness was work-related, holding that as Chief Cook, the latter cannot just excuse himself to obey the call of nature more so when preparing and cooking food of the officers and crew of the vessel, and that the limited water provisions for the entire voyage and their diet may have increased the development, if not aggravation of his illness.[57] As petitioner's illness rendered him incapable of resuming work, he was entitled to total and permanent disability or Grade 1 impediment pursuant to the 2010 POEA-SEC and not the FIT/CISL-SIRIUS SHIP management SRL - Genoa 2012-2014 IBF Model CBA that covered only those disabilities arising from an accident.[58] Finally, the NLRC ruled that since the complaint was not amended to implead Elburg, no jurisdiction was acquired over said corporation and as such, Crewtech, Rizzo, and Ancheta, were ordered, in solidum, to pay petitioner his disability benefits subject to reimbursement by Elburg on account of the assumption of responsibility agreement.[59] The latter's motion for reconsideration[60] was denied in a Resolution[61] dated August 27, 2015. Dissatisfied, Elburg elevated the matter to the CA via a petition for certiorari,[62] docketed as CA-G.R. SP No. 142802. The CA Ruling In a Decision[63] dated March 1, 2016, the CA partly granted the petition and set aside the NLRC Decision in so far as it ordered the payment to petitioner of total permanent disability benefits in the amount of US$60,000.00.[64] Contrary to the findings of the NLRC, the CA ruled that petitioner willfully concealed his previous treatment for prostatitis in 2011 during his 2013 PEME. Moreover, he ticked the box "no" in answer to the question of whether or not he was suffering from any medical condition likely to be aggravated by sea service.[65] The CA further held that petitioner failed to discharge the burden of proving that his illness was work-related. It observed that petitioner merely enumerated his duties and responsibilities as Chief Cook without establishing a reasonable connection between the nature of his work and his illness and how his working conditions contributed to and/or aggravated his condition.[66] It added that the company-designated physician's assessment of non-work relatedness was supported by elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocsfriendly/1/63721 4/13