5/28/2020 E-Library - Information At Your Fingertips: Printer Friendly his salary of US$390.00 or the amount of US$1,560.00 with interest, P500,000.00 damages, and attorney’s fees of 10% of the recoverable amount. Petitioners, on the other hand, stated and argued in their Position Paper[16] and Reply[17] that respondent filed a labor complaint even before the company-designated physician, Dr. Cruz, could complete his examination and treatment of respondent’s condition, which thus prompted them to deny his claim for disability benefits; that the independent physician Dr. Vicaldo examined respondent only once on February 16, 2006, and thus could not have arrived at a competent diagnosis of respondent’s condition; that in the absence of a competent diagnosis and substantial evidence, respondent’s claim for benefits cannot stand; that respondent’s illness is not workrelated, and that his lifestyle caused, or was a contributing factor to, his illness; that contrary to respondent’s claim, the latter has been paid his illness allowance in full; that respondent’s medical expenses are being shouldered by them; and that respondent is not entitled to damages and attorney’s fees as a result of prematurely filing the labor case. Petitioners thus prayed that the labor case be dismissed. Ruling of the Labor Arbiter On April 30, 2007, a Decision[18] was rendered by the Labor Arbiter which decreed as follows: WHEREFORE, judgment is hereby rendered ordering respondents to pay, jointly and severally, the complainant the following amount[s]: (1) US$60,000.00 or its peso equivalent at the time of payment as disability benefit; and (2) US$6,000.00 or its peso equivalent at the time of payment as attorney’s fees. All other claims are Dismissed for lack of merit. SO ORDERED.[19] The Labor Arbiter held essentially that respondent contracted his illness while serving out his employment contract with petitioners; that his illness was workrelated/aggravated; that while respondent was under the care of Dr. Cruz from September 18, 2005 until April 19, 2006, the latter could have come up with a declaration of fitness or disability, yet he did not; that respondent’s illness rendered him unfit for duty and required bypass surgery to treat the same; and that respondent’s condition constituted permanent total disability as the same is equivalent to Impediment Grade 1 (120%) as assessed by Dr. Vicaldo, which thus entitles respondent to the maximum disability compensation of US$60,000.00. For lack of basis, however, respondent’s claim for damages and reimbursement of medical expenses was denied. Ruling of the National Labor Relations Commission elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocsfriendly/1/56669 5/14