SECOND DIVISION
[G.R. No. 225609. September 14, 2016.]
REGALADO A. FLORES, petitioner, vs. MAERSK-FILIPINAS CREWING, INC., A.P. MOLLER A/S, MARYCIEL CALLEJO-TAGAL, respondents.
NOTICE
Sirs/Mesdames :
Please take notice that the Court, Second Division, issued a Resolution dated 14 September 2016 which reads as follows:
"G.R. No. 225609 — Regalado A. Flores vs. Maersk-Filipinas Crewing, Inc., A.P. Moller A/S, Maryciel Callejo-Tagal
After a judicious review of the records, the Court resolved to DENY the instant Petition for Review on Certiorari for failure of petitioner to show that the Court of Appeals (CA) in CA-G.R. SP No. 130717 committed any reversible error in affirming the February 28, 2013 Decision and April 29, 2013 Resolution of the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) in NLRC LAC No. OFW(M) 11-001018-12.
In cases of complaints for disability benefits, the Philippine Overseas Employment Administration-Standard Employment Contract (POEA-SEC) is the law between the parties and its provisions bind both the employer and the seafarer. Section 20 (A) (3) of the POEA-SEC provides that "[i]f a doctor appointed by the seafarer disagrees with the assessment [of the company-designated doctor], a third doctor may be agreed jointly between the Employer and the seafarer," and "[t]he third doctor's decision shall be final and binding on both parties." In this case, there was no referral to a third doctor whose decision would have been final and binding. Since petitioner Regalado A. Flores (Flores) did not follow the prescribed procedure under the POEA-SEC, the Court is convinced that between the findings of the company-designated physicians and that of Flores' personal doctors, the company-designated doctor's certification finding Flores fit to work should prevail.
Moreover, the Court finds no cogent reason to doubt or reverse the common findings of the Labor Arbiter, the NLRC, and the CA that petitioner is not entitled to any disability benefits. Substantial evidence on record exists to support their factual findings. We accord not only respect, but even finality, to the factual findings of the LA and NLRC, especially when affirmed by the CA, as in this case.
ACCORDINGLY, the Court resolved to AFFIRM the assailed April 29, 2016 Decision and June 27, 2016 Resolution of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. SP No. 130717.
SO ORDERED."
Very truly yours,
MA. LOURDES C. PERFECTODivision Clerk of Court
By:
(SGD.) TERESITA AQUINO TUAZONDeputy Division Clerk of Court