8/27/2020 E-Library - Information At Your Fingertips: Printer Friendly xxxx In the recent case of Veritas Maritime Corporation v. Gepanaga, Jr., involving an almost identical provision of the CBA, the Court reiterated the well-settled rule that the seafarer's non-compliance with the mandated conflict-resolution procedure under the POEA-SEC and the CBA militates against his claims, and results in the affirmance of the fit to work certification of the company-designated physician, thus: The [POEA-SEC] and the CBA clearly provide that when a seafarer sustains a work-related illness or injury while on board the vessel, his fitness or unfitness for work shall be determined by the company-designated physician. If the physician appointed by the seafarer disagrees with the company-designated physician's assessment, the opinion of a third doctor may be agreed jointly between the employer and the seafarer to be the decision final and binding on them. Thus, while petitioner had the right to seek a second and even a third opinion, the final determination of whose decision must prevail must be done in accordance with an agreed procedure. Unfortunately, the petitioner did not avail of this procedure; hence, we have no option but to declare that the companydesignated doctor's certification is the final determination that must prevail. x x x.[30] Further, with regard to the procedure for referral to a third doctor, jurisprudence has set that it is the duty of the seafarer to signify his intent to refer the conflict between the findings of the company-designated physician and that of his own doctor to a third doctor.[31] After notice from the seafarer, the company must then commence the process of choosing the third doctor.[32] Here, after receipt of his own doctor's medical report, petitioner did not show any proof that he sent the medical report to respondents and signify to respondents that he would like to refer the conflicting medical findings to a third doctor. The CA was therefore correct that absent compliance with the conflict-resolution procedure, the findings of the company-designated physician that petitioner has a Grade 8 disability rating should prevail over that of the seafarer's doctor. Petitioner's injury was not a result of an accident. Both the LA and the NLRC ruled that petitioner's lumbar spondylosis arose from an accident. The CA, on the other hand, ruled that petitioner was not involved in an https://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocsfriendly/1/65520 6/14