6/8/2020 E-Library - Information At Your Fingertips: Printer Friendly WHEREFORE, the petition is GRANTED. The Resolutions dated October 17, 2007 and January 15, 2008 of the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC), Quezon City, in NLRC-LAC (OFW-M) No. 07-000018-07(3) NLRCOFW Case No. 06-08-02629-00 are ANNULLED and SET ASIDE. The Labor Arbiter’s Decision dated May 21, 2007 is REINSTATED in full. SO ORDERED.[17] The CA held that there was no doubt that respondent was unable to work for more than one hundred twenty days (120) the requisite period for a grant of total disability benefits. Although the petitioners claimed that their CBA provision should be controlling, the CA clarified that “the relevant provisions of the POEA-SEC pertaining to permanent total disability remain essential parts of the parties’ valid and binding contract.”[18] The CA further stated that although respondent’s Central Retinal Vein Occlusion was not listed as an occupational disease, he successfully established a causal connection from his work as a seaman to his illness. It stressed that compensability of a non-occupational disease, reasonable proof and not direct proof of a causal connection between the work and the ailment is required.[19] Petitioners’ Motion for Reconsideration[20] was likewise denied by the CA in its June 8, 2010 Resolution. Hence, this petition.[21] Petitioners submit the following issues for resolution: I WHETHER OR NOT THE COURT OF APPEALS COMMITTED PATENT AND REVERSIBLE ERROR IN RULING THAT PRIVATE RESPONDENT HANZIEL O. ROSETE IS ENTITLED TO TOTAL PERMANENT DISABILITY BENEFITS II WHETHER OR NOT THE COURT OF APPEALS COMMITTED PATENT AND REVERSIBLE ERROR RULING THAT PRIVATE RESPONDENT HANZIEL O. ROSETE IS ENTITLED TO DISABILITY BENEFITS UNDER THE COLLECTIVE BARGAINING AGREEMENT III WHETHER OR NOT THE COURT OF APPEALS COMMITTED PATENT AND REVERSIBLE ERROR IN RULING THAT PRIVATE RESPONDENT HANZIEL O. ROSETE IS ENTITLED TO ATTORNEY’S FEES.[22] elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocsfriendly/1/28554 4/11