4/29/2020 E-Library - Information At Your Fingertips: Printer Friendly long-standing imbalance between energy intake and energy expenditure.[61] On the other hand, hyperlipidemia or dyslipidemia is the “elevation of plasma cholesterol, triglycerides (TGs), or both, or a low high-density lipoprotein level that contributes to the development of atherosclerosis.”[62] The causes may be primary (genetic) or secondary, the most important of which is a sedentary lifestyle with excessive dietary intake of saturated fat, cholesterol, and trans fats.[63] Alcoholism, also known as alcohol dependence, refers to frequent consumption of large amounts of alcohol.[64] These definitions of the imputed medical conditions plainly do not indicate workrelatedness; by their nature, they are more the result of poor lifestyle choices and health habits for which disability benefits are improper. Under Section 20-D of the POEA-SEC, no compensation and benefits are due in respect of any disability resulting from the seafarer’s willful act.[65] Armando is entitled to sickness allowance only until the company-designated physician declared him fit to work The petitioners question the CA’s computation of the balance of Armando’s sickness allowance at 120 days. We find that the CA seriously erred in arriving at this computation. To recall, the company-designated physician declared Armando fit to work on May 12, 2003. Armando disembarked or signed/off from the vessel on February 10, 2003. Thus, following our discussion above and pursuant to Section 20-B, paragraph 3 of the POEASEC, Armando’s sickness allowance should be counted only at 92 days, that is from February 10, 2003 when he disembarked form the vessel, until May 12, 2003 when Dr. Alegre declared him fit to work. In sum, we hold that the CA seriously erred in finding that the NLRC committed grave abuse of discretion in denying Armando’s claim for disability benefits. As a final note, while the Court adheres to the principle of liberality in favor of the seafarer in construing the POEA-SEC, it cannot allow claims for compensation based on surmises. [66] Liberal construction is not a license to disregard the evidence on record or to misapply our laws.[67] WHEREFORE, premises considered, we hereby GRANT the petition and accordingly REVERSE and SET ASIDE the decision dated December 10, 2008 and the resolution dated February 18, 2009 of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. SP No. 105079, and REINSTATE the decision dated February 29, 2008 of the NLRC affirming the December 29, 2004 decision of Labor Arbiter Fedriel S. Panganiban. SO ORDERED. Carpio, (Chairperson), Del Castillo, Perez, and Perlas-Bernabe, JJ., concur. elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocsfriendly/1/56107 12/17