6/7/2020 E-Library - Information At Your Fingertips: Printer Friendly work-related. Proceedings before the National Labor Relations Commission Petitioners appealed to the NLRC ascribing serious error on the findings of the Labor Arbiter. Petitioners maintained that respondent's Varicocoele was not work-related; that respondent was declared fit for sea duties by Dr. Gatchalian whose declaration correctly reflected respondent's condition as compared to Dr. Pascual who was not even a specialist in urological disorders; that no third doctor was sought to challenge Dr. Gatchalian's assessment in violation of the procedure laid down in the POEA-SEC; that respondent's alleged hypertension could not be made as basis for the payment of disability benefits as there was no proof that he acquired or suffered such illness during the term of his employment; and that respondent was not entitled to attorney's fees. In a Decision[18] dated December 9, 2011, the NLRC dismissed the appeal and affirmed the Decision of the Labor Arbiter. The NLRC sustained the Labor Arbiter's finding that respondent was permanently and totally disabled; that there was causal connection between the work of respondent and his illnesses (Varicocoele and Stage 2 Hypertension); and that Dr. Pascual's certification deserves more weight than the certification of Dr. Gatchalian that was issued after 120 days which, by operation of law, transformed respondent's disability to total and permanent, as was pronounced in the case of Quitoriano v. Jebsens Maritime, Inc.[19] Petitioners filed a Motion for Reconsideration[20] of the NLRC Decision but was denied in the NLRC Resolution[21] of February 2, 2012. Proceedings before the Court of Appeals Petitioners filed a Petition for Certiorari with Urgent Application for the Issuance of a Temporary Restraining Order and/or Writ of Preliminary Mandatory Injunction to enjoin the enforcement and execution of the NLRC judgment. Petitioners attributed grave abuse of discretion on the NLRC in affirming the Labor Arbiter's award of US$60,000.00 as disability benefits and attorney's fees of US$6,000.00. The CA, in a Decision[22] dated June 27, 2013, dismissed petitioners' Petition for Certiorari and held that the NLRC did not commit any grave abuse of discretion in rendering its assailed rulings. The CA found that there was no error in the NLRC's appreciation of the causal connection between respondent's work as a seaman and his illnesses; that the NLRC correctly upheld the assessment of Dr. Pascual based on its inherent merit; and that the NLRC properly considered respondent's disability as total and permanent based on the Court's ruling in the Quitoriano case. The CA likewise found justification in the award of attorney's fees since respondent was forced to litigate to protect his interest. Petitioners sought reconsideration[23] of the CA Decision. In a Resolution[24] dated February 5, 2014, petitioners' motion was denied. elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocsfriendly/1/64152 3/11