6/7/2020 E-Library - Information At Your Fingertips: Printer Friendly failed to present sufficient controverting evidence to overthrow the disputable presumption that Dedace's illness is work-related. To rule otherwise would render the statutory presumption under Section 20 of the POEA-SEC nugatory. Moreover, Dedace was under no obligation to consult with a physician of his choice under the given circumstances. It must be stressed that the duty of a seafarer to consult with his own physician arises only if the company-designated physician was able to issue an assessment within 120-days from the date of his repatriation. In this case, since the petitioners' company-designated physician, Dr. Cruz, failed to make an assessment within the aforesaid. period, Dedace's failure to adduce a medical certificate from a physician of his choice is not fatal to his cause. It is not the issuance of a medical certificate showing that the seafarer's illness is work-related or that he is totally and permanently unfit for sea duties which makes the employer liable. A seafarer's cause of action for total and permanent disability benefits accrues when, among others, the company-designated physician fails to issue a declaration as to his fitness to engage in sea duty or disability rating even after the lapse of the 120-day period and there is no indication that further medical treatment would address his temporary total disability.[29] In fine, the Court finds no error on the part of the CA when it reversed the ruling of the NLRC. The CA correctly ruled that the NLRC committed grave abuse of discretion when it grossly misapprehended the facts of the case. The awards of permanent total disability benefits and sickness allowance are proper. The CA properly awarded attorney's fees. Attorney's fees may be classified into two kinds: ordinary and extraordinary. Attorney's fees in its ordinary sense is the reasonable compensation paid to a lawyer by his client for the legal services he has rendered to the latter. Its basis is the fact of the lawyer's employment by and his agreement with his client. On the other hand, attorney's fees in its extraordinary concept refers to the indemnity for damages ordered by the court to be paid by the losing party in a litigation. The instances where these may be awarded are those enumerated in Article 2208 of the Civil Code, specifically paragraph 7 thereof which pertains to actions for recovery of wages, and is payable not to the lawyer but to the client, unless they have agreed that the award shall pertain to the lawyer as additional compensation or as part thereof. It is the extraordinary concept of attorney's fees which is contemplated by Article 111 of the Labor Code.[30] The award of attorney's fees in labor cases, however, are not limited to those expressly covered by Article Ill of the Labor Code which states that attorney's fees may be awarded in cases of unlawful withholding of wages. The Court has repeatedly held that the award of attorney's fees is legally and morally Justifiable, not only in actions for recovery of wages, but also where an employee was forced to litigate and thus incur expenses to protect his rights and interest.[31] The propriety of the award of attorney's fees in this case is clear. It could not be denied Dedace was forced to litigate and retain the services of his counsel thereby incurring expenses as a result of petitioners' refusal to pay the disability benefits rightfully due elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocsfriendly/1/64366 10/13