6/5/2020 E-Library - Information At Your Fingertips: Printer Friendly On May 11, 2012, the CA denied[35] the Motion for Reconsideration. Hence, the PTC and the NCM filed this Petition contending that: THE HONORABLE COURT OF APPEALS COMMITTED SERIOUS, REVERSIBLE AND GROSS ERROR IN LAW BASED ON THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS: A. In ignoring the legal precept that findings of facts of the NLRC are accorded respect and finality when supported by substantial evidence[.] B. In ignoring the declaration of the company[-]designated physician finding the illness to be not work[-]related thereby violating the terms of the POEA contract giving authority to the company[-designated] doctor to assess the illness involved. C. In profoundly relying on inapplicable jurisprudence which finds no parallelism to the instant case. D. In upholding the applicability of the alleged CBA in awarding USD$ 110,000.00 even if its provisions limit the liability of the Employer to work[-]related accidents only. E. In awarding attorney's fees without legal and factual basis.[36] The PTC and the NCM insist that the medical opinion of the company-designated physician stood unchallenged since Demetrio did not consult his own physician for a contrary opinion; that the opinion of the company-designated doctor cannot be superseded or rescinded by mere speculation that the seafarer's illness was workconnected; and, that prior to the aforesaid declaration of the company-designated doctor, Demetrio underwent a series of examinations and treatments, which tended to show that the declaration of the company-designated physician was not arrived at capriciously. The PTC and the NCM moreover fault the CA for holding that Dr. Salvador was not the original doctor who examined Demetrio; that the medical opinion of the companydesignated doctor should not be taken singly but as the collective opinion of a team of doctors who worked together in arriving at a declaration regarding the seafarer's condition; and, that Dr. Salvador merely reported the conclusion reached collectively by the medical experts in the team. The PTC and the NCM insist that stomach cancer is often asymptomatic; that since Demetrio was only about four months aboard the vessel when the symptoms of his stomach cancer manifested, then it is an open question whether he acquired his illness on board the vessel; that the burden of proof to establish work-relation is upon the seafarer; and, that in this case, there is no showing that the nature of Demetrio's work as well as the working conditions in the vessel increased the risk of his acquiring stomach cancer. Finally, the PTC and the NCM take the position that the CBA does not apply here elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocsfriendly/1/61244 4/10