Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence


Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence > Year 1979 > June 1979 Decisions > G.R. No. L-33496 June 19, 1979 - NATIONAL WATERWORKS & SEWERAGE AUTHORITY v. COURT OF INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS, ET AL.:




PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

SECOND DIVISION

[G.R. No. L-33496. June 19, 1979.]

NATIONAL WATERWORKS & SEWERAGE AUTHORITY, Petitioner, v. COURT OF INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS, KKMK-NWSA, PAFLU & KKMK-NWSA, Respondents.


R E S O L U T I O N


FERNANDO, Actg. C.J.:


Petitioner National Waterworks and Sewerage Authority (NAWASA), faced, in its own words, with "the legal quandary resulting from the two separate proposals of both respondent unions, the KKMK-NWSA and the KKMK-NWSA-PAFLU, to renegotiate the existing collective bargaining contract that expired on July 1, 1970 and in NWSA’s desire to avert any industrial crisis," filed on May 29, 1970 with respondent Court a petition for certification election to determine which of the two contending unions should be the appropriate bargaining representative of the rank and file employees. 1 Entertaining doubts as to whether respondent Court possessed jurisdiction over a public corporation exercising governmental functions, it included in its prayer "the reservation that in the remote event [it is decided that NWSA is] performing proprietary function, an Order be issued directing certification election to determine which of the two contending unions is the proper bargaining representative of the rank and file." 2 Then came on June 10, 1970, a motion to dismiss from respondent union KKMK-NWSA-PAFLU "alleging that the respondent court has no jurisdiction over the subject matter of the suit; the action is barred by prior judgment; and the petition states no valid cause of action; and praying for the dismissal of the petition for certification election. . . . On or about July 18, 1970, the respondent KKMK-NWSA filed its opposition to the motion to dismiss filed by KKMK-NWSA-PAFLU. [It joined] the NWSA in the petition for certification election" 3 On August 19, 1970, the then Judge Arsenio Martinez of respondent Court "dismissed the petition without prejudice on the ground that it was beyond the jurisdiction or competence of this Court to entertain the petition for certification election because of the alternative stand of petitioner that NWSA is performing governmental function." 4 Not satisfied, petitioner moved to reconsider, but on February 1, 1971, respondent Court en banc issued a resolution affirming the order of August 10, 1970. 5 Hence this petition for certiorari by way of review. It was given due course and respondents were required to answer. Respondents, however, failed to do so and petitioner, in a subsequent resolution of this Court, was required to file its brief, which it did. Neither respondent union filed any brief.chanrobles virtual lawlibrary

No decision on the merits need be given. The present Labor Code expressly abolished respondent Court of Industrial Relations. 6 Accordingly, in DBP Employees Union-NATU v. Development Bank of the Philippines, 7 it was held: "The legal situation has radically changed since this case was submitted for decision. There is a new Labor Code. The Court of Industrial Relations was therein abolished, a National Labor Relations Commission taking its place. What is more, there is no mention of any executive certification of labor disputes to such an agency, Under the circumstances, whatever decision that will be rendered by this Court would he characterized by its rather academic character. A ruling on the merits appears unnecessary and inadvisable. At most, it will be in the nature of an advisory opinion." 8 As to the principal question raised, mention may be made, however, of the fact that in Philippine Virginia Tobacco Administration v. CIR, 9 this Court ruled that notwithstanding the exercise of powers governmental in nature rather than proprietary in character by government-owned corporations, the now defunct Court of Industrial Relations still possessed jurisdiction over labor disputes.

WHEREFORE, the petition is dismissed for being moot and academic.

Antonio, (Actg. Chairman), Aquino, Santos and Abad Santos, JJ., concur.

Barredo and Concepcion Jr., JJ., are on leave.

Endnotes:



1. Petition, par. III, Statement of Facts and the Case and Annex A.

2. Ibid.

3. Ibid, par. V.

4. Ibid, par. VIII, Annex G.

5. Ibid, pars. IX and X and Annex J.

6. Presidential Decree No. 442, Article 299 (1974).

7. L-30961, January 29, 1975, 62 SCRA 160.

8. Ibid, 161-162. Cf. E. Lim & Sons Manufacturers, Inc. v. CIR, L-39117, September 25, 1975, 67 SCRA 124.

9. L-32052, July 25, 1975, 65 SCRA 416.




Back to Home | Back to Main




















chanrobles.com





ChanRobles On-Line Bar Review

ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : www.chanroblesbar.com

ChanRobles MCLE On-line

ChanRobles Lawnet Inc. - ChanRobles MCLE On-line : www.chanroblesmcleonline.com






June-1979 Jurisprudence                 

  • G.R. No. L-46938 June 14, 1979 - EVANGELISTO RACELA v. AGUSTIN C. BAGASAO

  • G.R. No. L-30271 June 15, 1979 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. LEONARDO DAHIL

  • A.M. No. 242-MJ June 19, 1979 - MAXIMO UBAS v. BENITO P. CINCO

  • A.M. No. 1696-MJ June 19, 1979 - SANCHO LAWAN v. ANTONIO MOLETA

  • G.R. No. L-24045 June 19, 1975

    PERCIVAL RICARDO v. SECRETARY OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS

  • G.R. No. L-24810 June 19, 1979 - JOSE M. VILLARAMA, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-25847 June 19, 1979 - POTENCIANO SUNGA, ET. AL. v. BENITO DE GUZMAN, ET. AL.

  • G.R. No. L-33496 June 19, 1979 - NATIONAL WATERWORKS & SEWERAGE AUTHORITY v. COURT OF INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-48948 June 19, 1979 - FLORENTINO ENRIQUEZ, ET AL. v. NESTOR C. RIVERA, ET. AL.

  • G.R. No. L-48962-63 June 19, 1979 - UNITED LUMBER & GENERAL WORKERS OF THE PHIL. v. CARMELO C. NORIEL, ET AL.

  • A.M. No. 690-CFI June 29, 1979 - BENITO B. NATE v. ENRIQUE A. AGANA, SR.

  • A.M. No. P-1622 June 29, 1979 - LEONARDA VDA. DE MALASARTE v. LIBRADO Z. YEBES

  • A.M. No. 1810-CTJ June 29, 1979 - ANGELINA S. SALCEDO v. ENRIQUE B. INTING

  • A.M. No. 10469-MC June 29, 1979 - J. CESAR SANGCO v. BIENVENIDO G. PALILEO

  • G.R. No. L-25954 June 29, 1979 - CATALINA DE LEON v. PETRONILO CASTAÑEDA

  • G.R. No. L-26704 June 29, 1979 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. DALMACIO SABENORIO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-31384 June 29, 1979 - COMMODITY FINANCING CO., INC. v. JOSE B. JIMENEZ

  • G.R. No. L-32562 June 29, 1979 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. AURELIO S. CRISTOBAL, JR.

  • G.R. No. L-32574 June 29, 1979 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ARMANDO B. ESTERO

  • G.R. No. L-32599 June 29, 1979 - EDGARDO E. MENDOZA v. ABUNDIO Z. ARRIETA

  • G.R. No. L-32832 June 29, 1979 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. LUIS BERALDE

  • G.R. No. L-33115 June 29, 1979 - MISAEL P. VERA v. VICENTE N. CUSI, JR.

  • G.R. No. L-33213 June 29, 1979 - ARTEMIO C. REYES v. ANDRES STA. MARIA

  • G.R. No. L-35236 June 29, 1979 - SECRETARY OF EDUCATION v. MAGNO S. GATMAITAN

  • G.R. No. L-35666 June 29, 1979 - MARINA B. VARGAS v. COURT OF APPEALS

  • G.R. No. L-36101 June 29, 1979 - RICARDO ROCERO v. CAPTAIN JAVIER OF THE PHILIPPINE CONSTABULARY

  • G.R. No. L-38145 June 29, 1979 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. PABLEO A. CABELTES

  • G.R. No. L-39016 June 29, 1979 - TAMDA SERVICE COOPERATIVE, INC. v. CITY MAYOR OF TACLOBAN CITY

  • G.R. No. L-40597 June 29, 1979 - AUGUSTO B. ONG YIU v. COURT OF APPEALS

  • G.R. No. L-42458 June 29, 1979 - JOSE SALVADOR, JR. v. WORKMEN’S COMPENSATION COMMISSION

  • G.R. No. L-42508 June 29, 1979 - MARIA D. OBOR v. WORKMEN’S COMPENSATION COMMISSION

  • G.R. No. L-44762 June 29, 1979 - PEDRO ELEGADO v. WORKMEN’S COMPENSATION COMMISSION

  • G.R. No. L-48706 June 29, 1979 - LOURDES E. BENGZON v. AMADO G. INCIONG

  • G.R. No. L-49462 June 29, 1979 - COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS v. COURT OF TAX APPEALS

  • G.R. No. L-49678 June 29, 1979 - ALLIED INVESTIGATION BUREAU, INC. v. BLAS F. OPLE

  • G.R. No. L-50471 June 29, 1979 - JULIO SALACUP v. TOMAS P. MADDELA, JR.