6/7/2020 E-Library - Information At Your Fingertips: Printer Friendly REVERSIBLE ERROR IN REVERSING BOTH THE FINDINGS OF THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION AND THE LABOR ARBITER AND IN AWARDING RESPONDENT ANIANO P. DEDACE, JR. TOTAL PERMANENT DISABILITY BENEFITS. II. WHETHER OR NOT THE COURT OF APPEALS COMMITTED PATENT AND REVERSIBLE ERROR IN RULING THAT ANIANO P. DEDACE, JR. IS ENTITLED TO ATTORNEY'S FEES.[18] The petitioners assail the CA's decision for being erroneous. They argue that since Dedace's illness, Sepsis, is neither listed as a disability under Section 32 of the 2000 POEA-SEC nor listed as an occupational disease under Section 32-A of the same rule, the burden is upon Dedace to present substantial evidence which would show that there is causal connection between his illness and the nature of his employment. The petitioners aver that Dedace failed to discharge this burden. They point out that the records show Dedace did not, by way of a contrary medical finding, contest the medical assessment made by the company-designated physician. The petitioners invoked the case of Magsaysay Maritime Corporation v. NLRC[19] to support their stand. The petitioners further argue that the CA erred when it awarded attorney's fees in favor of Dedace as the same lacks legal basis. They posit that attorney's fees cannot be recovered as part of damages because of the policy that no premium should be placed on the right to litigate. In his Comment,[20] dated 2 April 2012, Dedace maintained that the CA did not commit any error. He pointed out that the CA resolved the case in his favor because the company-designated physician failed to explain his assessment that his illness was not work-related. Dedace also contended that the CA properly awarded attorney's fees as he was forced to retain the services of a counsel in order to protect his rights which the petitioners refused to recognize. With the submissions by the parties, the Court is essentially tasked to resolve the following issues: (i) whether the CA erred when it ruled that Dedace's illness was workrelated and therefore compensable; and (ii) whether the CA erred when it awarded Dedace attorney's fees. OUR RULING The petition lacks merit. Dedace's illness is work-related; The company-designated physician failed to make an assessment within the 120-day period. Every employment contract between a Filipino seafarer and his employer is governed, not only by their mutual agreements, but also by the provisions of the POEA-SEC, as provided under Department Order No. 4, series of 2000 of the Department of Labor and elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocsfriendly/1/64366 5/13