4/13/2021 E-Library - Information At Your Fingertips: Printer Friendly told that refusal to do so would render him ineligible for disability benefits on the ground that he had abandoned his medical treatment. Dr. Chua cited Antolino's failure to appear at the November 4, 2015 check-up.[17] Still in pain, Antolino refused to sign the document, and instead sought the opinion of another doctor. He consulted Dr. Manuel Fidel M. Magtira (Dr. Magtira) who then declared him unfit for sea duty.[18] Antolino informed Hanseatic of Dr. Magtira's findings, simultaneously requesting that his case be referred to a third medical expert for a conclusive opinion. Because his request went unheeded, he filed a complaint for disability benefi1s before the LA.[19] Hanseatic, in its defense, cited Antolino's alleged medical abandonment. Pointing to his failure to attend the scheduled November 4, 2015 medical examination, the manning company argued that the seafarer had forfeited his disability benefits claim. Hanseatic averred that it had adequately informed Antolino of the scheduled check-up, as well as the consequences of his failure to attend the same. To prove the assertion, the company presented a series of letters that were sent through private courier and received by Antolino himself.[20] The LA's Ruling On August 8, 2016, the LA rendered a Decision granting Antolino total and permanent disability benefits in the amount of US$60,000.00 plus ten percent (10%) of the award as attorney's fees. Brushing aside Hanseatic's assertion of abandonment, the LA ruled that Antolino's failure to appear at the scheduled medical examination was justified by his financial incapacity. Since be had no money for a plane ticket, it was held that he had not intentionally abandoned his treatment.[21] That being the case, the LA proceeded to determine whether Antolino was indeed entitled to total and permanent disability benefits. Ruling in the affirmative, the LA opined that failure to refer Antolino's case to a third doctor should be taken against Hanseatic. Since the company did not reply to the seafarer's request for referral, the latter was deemed totally and permanently disabled in the eyes of the law.[22] The LA therefore ordered the award of disability benefits, viz.: WHEREFORE, [p]remises [c]onsidered, this office finds the Complainant to be [t]otally and [p]ermanently disabled. Respondents, jointly and severally are held liable to [Antolino] in the amount of US$60,000.00 or its Philippine Peso [e]quivalent at the time of payment as total and permanent disability benefit as well as to pay Attorney[']s fees equivalent to ten percent (10%) of the total award. [Antolino's] other claims are denied for lack of merit. SO ORDERED.[23] (Emphasis in the original) The NLRC's Ruling https://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocsfriendly/1/66178 3/12