5/28/2020 E-Library - Information At Your Fingertips: Printer Friendly The disputable presumption that a particular injury or illness that results in disability, or in some cases death, is work-related stands in the absence of contrary evidence. In the case at bench, the said presumption was not overturned by the petitioners. Although, the employer is not the insurer of the health of his employees, he takes them as he finds them and assumes the risk of liability. Consequently, the Court concurs with the finding of the courts below that respondent’s disability is compensable. [59] Records show that respondents’ sole evidence to disprove that Rodolfo’s illness is workrelated was the medical opinion of Dr. Abaya, wherein it was explained that Rodolfo’s ailment is a congenital malformation of blood vessels in the brain that may be due to familial strains.[60] However, as correctly observed by the LA, the document presented cannot be given probative value as it was a mere print out of an e-mail that was not signed or certified to by the doctor.[61] Moreover, records reveal that Rodolfo was attended by Dr. Legaspi from the time he was admitted at the Medical City on February 20, 2008 up to his death on March 2, 2008[62] and not by Dr. Abaya whose qualifications to diagnose such kind of illness was not even established. Likewise, the medical opinion was not backed up by any medical findings to substantiate the claim that Rodolfo’s ailment was congenital in origin or that there were traces of the disease in Rodolfo’s family history. Under the foregoing premises, the unsubstantiated and unauthenticated medical findings of Dr. Abaya are therefore highly suspect and cannot be considered as substantial evidence to support respondents’ postulation. Thus, with no substantial evidence on the part of the employer and given that no other cogent reason exists to hold otherwise, the presumption under Section 20 (B) (4) should stand. Accordingly, the Court is constrained to pronounce that Rodolfo’s death, which appears to have been proximately caused by his Brainstem (pontine) Cavernous Malformation, was work-related, in satisfaction of the first requirement of compensability under Section 20 (A) (1) of the 2000 POEA-SEC. II. The Seafarer’s Death Occurred During the Term of Employment. Moving to the second requirement, respondents assert that Rodolfo’s death on March 2, 2008 had occurred beyond the term of his employment, considering his prior medical repatriation on February 20, 2008 which had the effect of contract termination. The argument is founded on Section 18 (B) (1) of the 2000 POEA-SEC, which reads: SECTION 18. TERMINATION OF EMPLOYMENT xxxx B. The employment of the seafarer is also terminated when the seafarer arrives at the point of hire for any of the following reasons: 1. when the seafarer signs-off and is disembarked for medical reasons pursuant to Section 20(B)[5][63] of this Contract. elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocsfriendly/1/58338 7/18