5/28/2020 E-Library - Information At Your Fingertips: Printer Friendly in his PEME that he had Diabetes Mellitus, Beamko and Eagle Maritime assumed the risk of liability arising from his weakened medical condition.[21] In opposition, respondents contended[22] that: (a) Ayungo was already suffering from his illnesses when he entered into the contract of employment with Beamko and Eagle Maritime;[23] and (b) his illnesses were not work-related under the 2000 Philippine Overseas Employment Agency Standard Employment Contract (2000 POEA-SEC).[24] The LA Ruling In a Decision[25] dated May 14, 2009, the Labor Arbiter (LA) ordered Beamko, Eagle Maritime, and Salvatierra, Jr. to jointly and severally pay Ayungo the sum of: (a) US$60,000.00 as permanent total disability benefits, as well as US$6,300.00 sickness allowance, to be paid in Philippine currency at the time of payment; (b) P100,000.00 as moral damages; (c) P100,000.00 as exemplary damages; and (d) attorney’s fees equivalent to 10% of the total monetary award. The LA held that Beamko, Eagle Maritime, and Salvatierra, Jr. cannot evade liability by claiming that Ayungo’s illnesses were pre-existing considering that during his PEME, he divulged that he had Diabetes Mellitus, and despite such, was still declared “fit for sea duty.”[26] The LA did not give credence to Dr. Cruz-Balbon’s and Dr. Lim’s findings that Ayungo’s Diabetes Mellitus and Hypertension were not work-related as the same appeared to be mere general statements unsupported by medical and laboratory tests. [27] Lastly, the LA concluded that Ayungo’s Hypertension can be classified as primary or essential for the reason that it had caused the impairment of his heart and kidney organs.[28] Dissatisfied, respondents filed an appeal to the NLRC. The NLRC Ruling In a Resolution[29] dated July 20, 2010, the NLRC denied the appeal, and thereby affirmed the LA’s ruling in toto. It fully subscribed to the findings of the LA that Ayungo’s Diabetes Mellitus and Hypertension were work-related and, hence, compensable, effectively debunking respondents’ contention that Ayungo is not entitled to permanent total disability benefits on the ground that his illnesses were pre-existing. Respondents moved for reconsideration which the NLRC denied in a Resolution[30] dated September 28, 2010, prompting the filing of a petition for certiorari before the CA. Pending resolution thereof, both parties jointly filed a Conditional Satisfaction of Judgment Award[31] before the NLRC, wherein Ayungo manifested his receipt[32] of the sum of P3,391,506.31 from respondents, without prejudice to the outcome of the certiorari case filed before the CA. The CA Ruling elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocsfriendly/1/56522 3/10