ChanRobles™ Virtual Law Library | chanrobles.com™  
Main Index Law Library Philippine Laws, Statutes & Codes Latest Legal Updates Philippine Legal Resources Significant Philippine Legal Resources Worldwide Legal Resources Philippine Supreme Court Decisions United States Jurisprudence
Prof. Joselito Guianan Chan's The Labor Code of the Philippines, Annotated Labor Standards & Social Legislation Volume I of a 3-Volume Series 2019 Edition (3rd Revised Edition)
 

 
Chan Robles Virtual Law Library
 









 

 
UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT JURISPRUDENCE
 

 
PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT JURISPRUDENCE
 

   
December-2015 Jurisprudence                 

  • G.R. No. 212058, December 07, 2015 - STAR ELECTRIC CORPORATION, Petitioner, v. R & G CONSTRUCTION DEVELOPMENT AND TRADING, INC., Respondent.

  • G.R. No. 210445, December 07, 2015 - NILO B. ROSIT, Petitioner, v. DAVAO DOCTORS HOSPITAL AND DR. ROLANDO G. GESTUVO, Respondent.

  • G.R. No. 195547, December 02, 2015 - MA. CORAZON M. OLA, Petitioner, v. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Respondent.

  • G.R. No. 209418, December 07, 2015 - W.M. MANUFACTURING, INC., Petitioner, v. RICHARD R. DALAG AND GOLDEN ROCK MANPOWER SERVICES, Respondent.

  • G.R. No. 197763, December 07, 2015 - SMART COMMUNICATIONS, INC., MR. NAPOLEON L. NAZARENO, AND MR. RICKY P. ISLA, Petitioners, v. JOSE LENI Z. SOLIDUM, Respondent.; G.R. No. 197836 - JOSE LENI Z. SOLIDUM, Petitioner, v. SMART COMMUNICATIONS, INC., MR. NAPOLEON L. NAZARENO, AND MR. RICKY P. ISLA, Respondent.

  • G.R. No. 207633, December 09, 2015 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. JOHNLIE LAGANGGA Y DUMPA, Accused-Appellant.

  • G.R. No. 203115, December 07, 2015 - ISLAND OVERSEAS TRANSPORT CORPORATION/PINE CREST SHIPPING CORPORATION/CAPT. EMMANUEL L. REGIO, Petitioners, v. ARMANDO M. BEJA, Respondent.

  • G.R. Nos. 216007-09, December 08, 2015 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Petitioner, v. LUZVIMINDA S. VALDEZ AND THE SANDIGANBAYAN (FIFTH DIVISION), Respondent.

  • G.R. No. 204275, December 09, 2015 - LILIOSA C. LISONDRA, Petitioner, v. MEGACRAFT INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION AND SPOUSES MELECIO AND ROSEMARIE OAMIL, Respondent.

  • G.R. No. 201652, December 02, 2015 - HEIRS OF SIMEON LATAYAN, NAMELY: LEONIDES Q. LATAYAN, ARIEL Q. LATAYAN, AND ETHEL Q. LATAYAN-AMPIL, REPRESENTED BY THEIR ATTORNEY-IN-FACT, LEONIDES Q. LATAYAN, Petitioners, v. PEING TAN, JOHNNY TAN, HERMTNIGILDO CASALAN, WEBINO VILLAREAL, DIOSCOROMOLO, DAMACINO BAYAWA, EDGAR NARITA, YOLANDA NARITA, POLICRONIA CAPIONES, ANDRES LOZANO, GREGORIO YAGAO, EMILIANO GUMATAY, JESUS ALCONTIN, ADAM DULAUON, MARIO PEREZ, LARRY CEMAFRANCA, FELIXBERTO BULADACO, CIPRIANOAHIT, BUENAVENTURA B ACALSO AND SALDE ESPIA, Respondents.

  • G.R. No. 196415, December 02, 2015 - COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Petitioner, v. TOLEDO POWER COMPANY, Respondent.; G.R. No. 196451 - TOLEDO POWER COMPANY, Petitioner, v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent.

  • G.R. No. 221318, December 16, 2015 - KABATAAN PARTY-LIST, REPRESENTED BY REPRESENTATIVE JAMES MARK TERRY L. RIDON AND MARJOHARA S. TUCAY; SARAH JANE I. ELAGO, PRESIDENT OF THE NATIONAL UNION OF STUDENTS OF THE PHILIPPINES; VENCER MARI E. CRISOSTOMO, CHAIRPERSON OF THE ANAKBAYAN; MARC LINO J. ABILA, NATIONAL PRESIDENT OF THE COLLEGE EDITORS GUILD OF THE PHILIPPINES; EINSTEIN Z. RECEDES, DEPUTY SECRETARY- GENERAL OF ANAKBAYAN; CHARISSE BERNADINE I. BAŅEZ, CHAIRPERSON OF THE LEAGUE OF FILIPINO STUDENTS; ARLENE CLARISSE Y. JULVE, MEMBER OF ALYANSA NG MGA GRUPONG HALIGI NG AGHAM AT TEKNOLOHIYA PARA SA MAMAMAYAN (AGHAM); AND SINING MARIA ROSA L. MARFORI, Petitioners, v. COMMISSION ELECTIONS, ON, Respondent.

  • G.R. Nos. 197096-97, December 07, 2015 - ANTONIO Z. KING, HEREIN REPRESENTED BY HIS ATTORNEY-IN-FACT, EDGARDO SANTOS, Petitioner, v. FRANCISCO A. ROBLES, ANTONIO T. DATU, RENE A. MASILUNGAN, RESTITUTO S. SOLOMON, RODRIGO MENDOZA, ROMEO MENDOZA REYNALDO DATU, JOSEPH TIU, TERESITA TIU, ROGELIO GEBILAGUIN AND PRESCILLA GEBILAGUIN, Respondent.

  • G.R. No. 207112, December 08, 2015 - PILIPINAS TOTAL GAS, INC., Petitioner, v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent.

  • G.R. No. 210855, December 09, 2015 - ROLANDO S. ABADILLA, JR., Petitioner, v. SPOUSES BONIFACIO P. OBRERO AND BERNABELA N. OBRERO, AND JUDITH OBRERO-TIMBRESA, Respondent.

  • G.R. No. 199314 [Formerly UDK No. 14553], December 07, 2015 - TAMBLOT SECURITY & GENERAL SERVICES, INC., Petitioner, v. FLORENCIO ITEM, LEONARDO PALM A, RTCARDO UCANG, FLORENCRO AMORA, REYNALDO DANO, APOLLO JOTOJOT, TEODORO BARONG, JUAN T. CUSI, TEODORO DE LOS REYES, EFREN ESCOL, JOVANNE COSE, DARIO S. GEALON, JULIO ESPADA AND DARIO PAJE, Respondent.

  • G.R. No. 192659, December 02, 2015 - PHILIPPINE RACE HORSE TRAINER'S ASSOCIATION, INC., Petitioner, v. PIEDRAS NEGRAS CONSTRUCTION AND DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, Respondent.

  • G.R. No. 218787, December 08, 2015 - LEO Y. QUERUBIN, MARIA CORAZON M. AKOL, AND AUGUSTO C. LAGMAN, Petitioners, v. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS EN BANC, REPRESENTED BY CHAIRPERSON J. ANDRES D. BAUTISTA, AND JOINT VENTURE OF SMARTMATIC-TIM CORPORATION, TOTAL INFORMATION MANAGEMENT CORPORATION, SMARTMATIC INTERNATIONAL HOLDING B.V. AND JARLTECH INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION, REPRESENTED BY PARTNER WITH BIGGEST EQUITY SHARE, SMARTMATIC-TIM CORPORATION, ITS GENERAL MANAGER ALASTAIR JOSEPH JAMES WELLS, SMARTMATIC CHAIRMAN LORD MALLOCH-BROWN, SMARTMATIC-ASIA PACIFIC PRESIDENT CESAR FLORES, AND ANY OR ALL PERSONS ACTING FOR AND ON BEHALF OF THE JOINT VENTURE, Respondent.

  • G.R. No. 179814, December 07, 2015 - WILFRED N.CHIOK, Petitioner, v. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES AND RUFINA CHUA, Respondents.; G.R. No. 180021 - RUFINA CHUA, Petitioner, v. WILFRED N. CHIOK, AND THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES (AS AN UNWILLING CO-PARTY PETITIONER), Respondent.

  • G.R. No. 209324, December 09, 2015 - REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES, REPRESENTED BY THE BUREAU OF CUSTOMS, Petitioner, v. PILIPINAS SHELL PETROLEUM CORPORATION, Respondent.

  • G.R. No. 213832, December 07, 2015 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. GILBERT MERCADO A.K.A. "BONG", Accused-Appellant.

  • G.R. No. 198270, December 09, 2015 - ARMILYN MORILLO, Petitioner, v. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES AND RICHARD NATIVIDAD, Respondent.

  • G.R. No. 215201, December 09, 2015 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. MARK ANTHONY ROAQUIN Y NAVARRO, Accused-Appellant.

  • G.R. No. 203918, December 02, 2015 - SPOUSES AMADOR C. CAYAGO, JR. AND ERMALINDA B. CAYAGO, Petitioners, v. SPOUSES EVELITO CANTARA AND SOLEDAD CANTARA, Respondents.

  • G.R. No. 203397, December 09, 2015 - AUGUSTO ONG TRINIDAD II, AUGUSTO ONG TRINIDAD III FOR HIMSELF AND REPRESENTING LEVY ONG TRINIDAD AND ROHMEL ONG TRINIDAD, MARY ANN NEPOMUCENO TRINIDAD FOR HERSELF AND ASSISTING HER MINOR CHILDREN JOAQUIN GERARD N. TRINIDAD IV, JACOB GABRIEL N. TRINIDAD, AND JERED GYAN N. TRINIDAD, Petitioners, v. SPOUSES BONIFACIO PALAD AND FELICIDAD KAUSAPIN, Respondent.

  • G.R. No. 202215, December 09, 2015 - VICMAR DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION AND/OR ROBERT KUA, OWNER, AND ENGR. JUANITO C. PAGCALIWAGAN, MANAGER, Petitioners, v. CAMILO ELARCOSA, MARLON BANDA, DANTE L. BALAMAD, RODRIGO COLANSE, CHIQUITO PACALDO, ROBINSON PANAGA, JUNIE ABUGHO, SBLVERIO NARISMA, ARMANDO GONZALES, TEOFILO ELBINA, FRANCISCO BAGUIO, GELVEN RHYAN RAMOS, JULITO SIMAN, RECARIDO PANES, JESUS TINSAY, AGAPITO CANAS, JR., OLIVER LOBAYNON, SIMEON BAGUIO, JOSEPH SALCEDO, DONIL INDINO, WILFREDO GULBEN, JESRILE TANIO, RENANTE PAMON, RICHIE GULBEN, DANIEL ELLO, REXY DOFELIZ, RONALD NOVAL, NORBERTO BELARGA, ALLAN BAGUIO, ROBERTO PAGUICAN, ROMEO PATOY, ROLANDO TACBOBO, WILFREDO LADRA, RUBEN PANES, RUEL CABANDAY, AND JUNARD ABUGHO, Respondent.

  • G.R. No. 188638, December 09, 2015 - PHILIPPINE TRANSMARINE CARRIERS, INC. AND NORTHERN MARINE MANAGEMENT, Petitioners, v. JOSELITO A. CRISTINO, DECEASED AND REPRESENTED BY HIS WIFE SUSAN B. BERDOS, Respondent.

  • G.R. No. 211543, December 09, 2015 - DOMINGO G. PANGANIBAN, Petitioner, v. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES., Respondent.

  • G.R. No. 209039, December 09, 2015 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. MIRAFLOR UGANIEL LERIO, Accused-Appellant.

  • G.R. No. 209559, December 09, 2015 - ENCHANTED KINGDOM, INC., Petitioner, v. MIGUEL J. VERZO, Respondent.

  • G.R. No. 160399, December 09, 2015 - THE CITY OF ILOILO, REPRESENTED BY HON. MAYOR JERRY P. TREŅAS, Petitioner, v. HON. JUDGE RENE B. HONRADO, PRESIDING JUDGE, REGIONAL TRIAL COURT, BRANCH 29, ILOILO CITY, AND JPV MOTOR VEHICLE EMISSION TESTING & CAR CARE CENTER, CO., REPRESENTED BY JIM P. VELEZ, Respondent.

  • G.R. No. 159979, December 09, 2015 - CAPITAL INSURANCE AND SURETY CO., INC., Petitioner, v. DEL MONTE MOTOR WORKS, INC., Respondent.

  • G.R. No. 213696, December 09, 2015 - QUANTUM FOODS, INC., Petitioner, v. MARCELINO ESLOYO AND GLEN MAGSILA, Respondent.

  • G.R. No. 209040, December 09, 2015 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. RODOLFO PATEŅO DAYAPDAPAN, Accused-Appellant.

  • G.R. No. 166581, December 07, 2015 - SOLIDBANK CORPORATION, Petitioner, v. COURT OF APPEALS, NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION, AND DANILO H. LAZARO, Respondents.; G.R. No. 167187 - DANILO H. LAZARO, Petitioner, v. COURT OF APPEALS, NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION AND SOLIDBANK CORPORATION, Respondents.

  • G.R. No. 200901, December 07, 2015 - SM INVESTMENTS CORPORATION, Petitioner, v. ESTELA MARFORI POSADAS, MARIA ELENA POSADAS AND AIDA MACARAIG POSADAS. Respondents.

  • G.R. No. 208113, December 02, 2015 - DOLORES DIAZ, Petitioner, v. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES AND LETICIA S. ARCILLA, Respondents.

  • G.R. No. 182375, December 02, 2015 - HADJA RAWIYA SUIB, Petitioner, v. EMONG EBBAH AND THE HONORABLE COURT OF APPEALS, 22ND DIVISION, MINDANAO STATION, CAGAYAN DE ORO CITY, Respondents.

  • G.R. No. 211210, December 02, 2015 - RADAR SECURITY & WATCHMAN AGENCY, INC., Petitioner, v. JOSE D. CASTRO, Respondent.

  • G.R. No. 213814, December 02, 2015 - RAFAEL B. QUILLOPA, Petitioner, v. QUALITY GUARDS SERVICES AND INVESTIGATION AGENCY AND ISMAEL BASABICA, JR., Respondents.

  • G.R. No. 193964, December 02, 2015 - ENGINEER BEN Y. LIM, RBL FISHING CORPORATION, PALAWAN AQUACULTURE CORPORATION, AND PENINSULA SHIPYARD CORPORATION, Petitioners, v. HON. SULPICIO G. GAMOSA, OFFICER-IN-CHARGE, NCIP REGIONAL HEARING OFFICE, REGION IV AND TAGBANUA INDIGENOUS CULTURAL COMMUNITY OF BARANGAY BUENAVISTA, CORON, PALAWAN, AS REPRESENTED BY FERNANDO P. AGUIDO, ERNESTO CINCO, BOBENCIO MOSQUERA, JURRY CARPIANO, VICTOR BALBUTAN, NORDITO ALBERTO, EDENG PESRO, CLAUDINA BAQUID, NONITA SALVA, AND NANCHITA ALBERTO, Respondents.

  • G.R. No. 197792, December 09, 2015 - CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION, Petitioner, v. MADLAWI B. MAGOYAG, Respondent.

  • G.R. No. 192947, December 09, 2015 - MELANIE E. DE OCAMPO, Petitioner, v. RPN-9/RADIO PHILIPPINES NETWORK, INC., Respondent.

  • G.R. No. 204172, December 09, 2015 - HON. HERMOGENES E. EBDANE, JR., IN HIS OFFICIAL CAPACITY AS ACTING SECRETARY OF THE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS AND HIGHWAYS (DPWH), ATTY. JOEL L. JACOB, IN HIS OFFICIAL CAPACITY AS OFFICER-IN-CHARGE, LEGAL SERVICE (DPWH), ATTY. OLIVER T. RODULFO, IN HIS OFFICIAL CAPACITY AS HEAD, INTERNAL AFFAIRS OFFICE, (DPWH), AND HON. JAIME A. PACANAN, IN HIS OFFICIAL CAPACITY AS REGIONAL DIRECTOR, (DPWH), REGIONAL OFFICE NO. VIII, Petitioners, v. ALVARO Y. APURILLO, ERDA P. GABRIANA, JOCELYN S. JO, IRAIDA R. LASTIMADO, AND FRANCISCO B. VINEGAS, JR., Respondents.

  • G.R. No. 215424, December 09, 2015 - ADINA B. MANANSALA, Petitioner, v. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Respondent.

  • G.R. No. 179741, December 09, 2015 - HEIRS OF SPOUSES HILARIO MARINAS AND BERNARDINA N. MARINAS, Petitioners, v. BERNARDO FRIANEZA, RODRIGO FRIANEZA, ALEJANDRA FRIANEZA, HILARIO VILLENA, SATURNINO VILLENA, FEDERICO FLORES, PEDRO FLORES AND MARCELINA RAMOS, Respondents.

  • G.R. No. 190482, December 09, 2015 - DEPARTMENT OF AGRARIAN REFORM, REPRESENTED BY MS. FRITZI C. PANTOJA IN HER CAPACITY AS PROVINCIAL AGRARIAN REFORM OFFICER OF LAGUNA, Petitioner, v. IGMIDIO D. ROBLES, RANDY V. ROBLES, MARY KRIST B. MALIMBAN, ANNE JAMAICA G. ROBLES, JOHN CARLO S. ROBLES AND CHRISTINE ANN V. ROBLES, Respondents.

  • G.R. No. 212825, December 07, 2015 - COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Petitioner, v. NEXT MOBILE, INC. (FORMERLY NEXTEL COMMUNICATIONS PHILS., INC.), Respondent.

  • G.R. No. 174387, December 09, 2015 - BF CORPORATION, Petitioner, v. WERDENBERG INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION, Respondent.

  • G.R. No. 209689, December 02, 2015 - MARISSA B. QUIRANTE, Petitioner, v. OROPORT CARGO HANDLING SERVICES, INC., ET AL. Respondents.

  • G.R. No. 202877, December 09, 2015 - NARRA NICKEL MINING AND DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, TESORO MINING AND DEVELOPMENT, INC., AND MCARTHUR MINING, INC., Petitioners, v. REDMONT CONSOLIDATED MINES CORPORATION, Respondent.

  • G.R. No. 202947, December 09, 2015 - ASB REALTY CORPORATION, Petitioner, v. ORTIGAS & COMPANY LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, Respondent.

  • G.R. No. 213229, December 09, 2015 - FILINVEST ALABANG, INC., Petitioner, v. CENTURY IRON WORKS, INC., Respondent.

  • G.R. No. 210215, December 09, 2015 - ROGELIO S. NOLASCO, NICANORA N. GUEVARA, LEONARDA N. ELPEDES, HEIRS OF ARNULFO S. NOLASCO, AND REMEDIOS M. NOLASCO, REPRESENTED BY ELENITA M. NOLASCO Petitioners, v. CELERINO S. CUERPO, JOSELITO ENCABO, JOSEPH ASCUTIA, AND DOMILO LUCENARIO, Respondents.

  • G.R. No. 206942, December 09, 2015 - VICENTE C. TATEL, Petitioner, v. JLFP INVESTIGATION AND SECURITY AGENCY, INC., JOSE LUIS F. PAMINTUAN, AND/OR PAOLO C. TURNO, Respondents.

  • G.R. No. 209271, December 08, 2015 - INTERNATIONAL SERVICE FOR THE ACQUISITION OF AGRI-BIOTECH APPLICATIONS, INC., Petitioner, v. GREENPEACE SOUTHEAST ASIA (PHILIPPINES), MAGSASAKA AT SIYENTIPIKO SA PAGPAPAUNLAD NG AGRIKULTURA (MASIPAG), REP. TEODORO CASIŅO, DR. BEN MALAYANG III, DR. ANGELINA GALANG, LEONARDO AVILA III, CATHERINE UNTALAN, ATTY. MARIA PAZ LUNA, JUANITO MODINA, DAGOHOY MAGAWAY, DR. ROMEO QUIJANO, DR. WENCESLAO KIAT, JR., ATTY. H. HARRY ROQUE, JR., FORMER SEN. ORLANDO MERCADO, NOEL CABANGON, MAYOR EDWARD S. HAGEDORN AND EDWIN MARTHINE LOPEZ, Respondents.; CROP LIFE PHILIPPINES, INC., Petitioner-in-Intervention.; G.R. No. 209276 - ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT BUREAU OF THE DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES, BUREAU OF PLANT INDUSTRY AND FERTILIZER AND PESTICIDE AUTHORITY OF THE DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, Petitioners, v. COURT OF APPEALS, GREENPEACE SOUTHEAST ASIA (PHILIPPINES), MAGSASAKAAT SIYENTIPIKO SA PAGPAPAUNLAD NG AGRIKULTURA (MASIPAG), REP. TEODORO CASINO, DR. BEN MALAYANG III, DR. ANGELINA GALANG, LEONARDO AVILA III, CATHERINE UNTALAN, ATTY. MARIA PAZ LUNA, JUANITO MODINA, DAGOHOY MAGAWAY, DR. ROMEO QUIJANO, DR. WENCESLAO KIAT, JR., ATTY. H. HARRY ROQUE, JR., FORMER SEN. ORLANDO MERCADO, NOEL CABANGON, MAYOR EDWARD S. HAGEDORN AND EDWIN MARTHINE LOPEZ, RESPONDENTS. CROP LIFE PHILIPPINES, INC. Petitioner-in-Intervention.; G.R. No. 209301 - UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES LOS BANOS FOUNDATION, INC., Petitioner, v. GREENPEACE SOUTHEAST ASIA (PHILIPPINES), MAGSASAKAAT SIYENTIPIKO SA PAGPAPAUNLAD NG AGRIKULTURA (MASIPAG), REP. TEODORO CASINO, DR. BEN MALAYANG III, DR. ANGELINA GALANG, LEONARDO AVILA III, CATHERINE UNTALAN, ATTY. MARIA PAZ LUNA, JUANITO MODINA, DAGOHOY MAGAWAY, DR. ROMEO QUIJANO, DR. WENCESLAO KIAT, JR., ATTY. HARRY R. ROQUE, JR., FORMER SEN. ORLANDO MERCADO, NOEL CABANGON, MAYOR EDWARD S. HAGEDORN AND EDWIN MARTHINE LOPEZ, Respondents.; G.R. No. 209430 - UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES, Petitioner, v. GREENPEACE SOUTHEAST ASIA (PHILIPPINES), MAGSASAKAAT SIYENTIPIKO SA PAGPAPAUNLAD NG AGRIKULTURA (MASIPAG), REP. TEODORO CASINO, DR. BEN MALAYANG III, DR. ANGELINA GALANG, LEONARDO AVILA III, CATHERINE UNTALAN, ATTY. MARIA PAZ LUNA, JUANITO MODINA, DAGOHOY MAGAWAY, DR. ROMEO QUIJANO, DR. WENCESLAO KIAT, ATTY. HARRY R. ROQUE, JR., FORMER SEN. ORLANDO MERCADO, NOEL CABANGON, MAYOR EDWARD S. HAGEDORN AND EDWIN MARTHINE LOPEZ, Respondents.

  • G.R. No. 169694, December 09, 2015 - MEGAWORLD PROPERTIES AND HOLDINGS, INC., EMPIRE EAST LAND HOLDINGS, INC., AND ANDREW L. TAN, Petitioners, v. MAJESTIC FINANCE AND INVESTMENT CO., INC., RHODORA LOPEZ-LIM, AND PAULINA CRUZ, Respondents.

  •  





     
     

    G.R. No. 166581, December 07, 2015 - SOLIDBANK CORPORATION, Petitioner, v. COURT OF APPEALS, NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION, AND DANILO H. LAZARO, Respondents.; G.R. No. 167187 - DANILO H. LAZARO, Petitioner, v. COURT OF APPEALS, NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION AND SOLIDBANK CORPORATION, Respondents.

      G.R. No. 166581, December 07, 2015 - SOLIDBANK CORPORATION, Petitioner, v. COURT OF APPEALS, NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION, AND DANILO H. LAZARO, Respondents.; G.R. No. 167187 - DANILO H. LAZARO, Petitioner, v. COURT OF APPEALS, NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION AND SOLIDBANK CORPORATION, Respondents.

    PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

    FIRST DIVISION

    G.R. No. 166581, December 07, 2015

    SOLIDBANK CORPORATION, Petitioner, v. COURT OF APPEALS, NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION, AND DANILO H. LAZARO, Respondents.

    G.R. No. 167187

    DANILO H. LAZARO
    , Petitioner, v. COURT OF APPEALS, NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION AND SOLIDBANK CORPORATION, Respondents.

    D E C I S I O N

    SERENO, C.J.:

    We resolve the Petitions for Review filed by Solidbank Corporation (Solidbank) in G.R. No. 166581, and Danilo H. Lazaro (Lazaro) in G.R. No. 167187 from the 19 January 2004 Decision,1 01 July 2004 Amended Decision,2 and 14 January 2005 Resolution3 of the Court of Appeals (CA) in CA-G.R.SP No. 73629.

    The Facts

    As culled from the CA, the antecedent facts are as follows:
    Petitioner Danilo H. Lazaro (Lazaro) joined respondent Solidbank Corporation on December 21, 1992. He rose from the ranks until he became Vice President, Head of the Branch Banking Group, Region 6 (Southern Luzon branches).

    On August 21, 1995, the Imus branch, one of the bank's branches under Lazaro, was audited for the first time by the bank's internal auditors, known as the Audit and Credit Examination Services (ACES). The audit uncovered certain irregularities committed by the branch manager and the accountant involving loan releases without proper documentation and approval of the Region Head and other appropriate approving bodies. Respondent bank was allegedly defrauded in the amount of P43 million through the fraudulent acts and/or activities allegedly committed by some officers of the said branch office, in connivance with some individual borrowers.

    Lazaro immediately tendered his resignation effective February 15, 1996, out of delicadeza, when his name was dragged by the ACES Audit Report into the Imus branch loan anomaly with a sweeping allegation "that he has given blanket authority to all the Branch Managers in his region to commit loans up to P1 Million subject to his confirmation." He was not however included among those criminally charged by the bank.

    Lazaro's resignation was not accepted by respondent bank president Vistan who categorically cleared him of any liability on the Imus case with the assurance that he (Vistan) personally, does not believe that petitioner Lazaro has anything to do with the said irregularity. Respondent Vistan persuaded Lazaro to stay and help resolve the Imus case. Thus was then assigned in a special project attached to the office of the legal counsel.

    Pursuant to respondent Vistan's instruction to concentrate on the Imus branch loans, Lazaro worked and coordinated closely with the bank's legal counsel. The bank filed criminal charges against several persons including the Imus Branch Manager, the accountant and four borrowers.

    Petitioner's Christmas bonus which was credited to his account on November 13, 1996 was ordered reversed by a debit memo from respondent's bank Human Resource Department (HRD) on November 15, 1996. Aggrieved, Lazaro wrote a letter to respondent Vistan seeking clarification. There was no response from respondent Vistan.

    On December 13, 1996, petitioner Lazaro was told by Ed Buenaventura of the Motorpool Section to surrender his service car. Later, Lazaro found out that his payroll for December 1-15, 1996 was not credited to his payroll account. He thus wrote another letter to respondent Vistan reiterating his earlier request for clarification. Again, there was no answer.

    Lazaro requested for a meeting with respondent Vistan. On January 7, 1997, they met together with respondent SVP Jazmines at the latter's office. Ten (10) months and twenty two (22) days after Lazaro was assigned to special projects, respondent bank president Vistan verbally dismissed petitioner Lazaro upon the recommendation of and after consultation with respondent Senior Vice President Jazmines because his (Lazaro's) continued presence "might be used as a basis to accuse the bank of abetting a senior officer who has been implicated by a "customer" in a case of public inquiry." The dismissal was made retroactive November 30, 1996, more that [sic] a month before he was informed of his dismissal.

    On April 24, 1997, petitioner Lazaro filed a complaint for illegal dismissal, non-payment of earned wages and bonus, reinstatement, backwages including moral and exemplary damages and attorney's fees.4ChanRoblesVirtualawlibrary
    The Labor Arbiter Ruling

    On 8 November 2001, Labor Arbiter (LA) Geobel Bartolabac issued a Decision5 dismissing the Complaint filed by Lazaro. The LA pointed out that absent any evidence that Lazaro was still performing the functions of a banker is tantamount to the bank's implied acceptance of his voluntary and irrevocable resignation. However, considering that he was "reasonably made to believe that his job would be given back to him by virtue of his earnest effort to recover whatever losses that respondent bank may have incurred as a result of the alleged scam,"6 and in view of the cessation of the bank's operation, Lazaro was awarded the following amounts:
    WHEREFORE, premises considered, judgment is hereby rendered dismissing the complaint for illegal dismissal.

    Respondent Solid Bank Corporation is, however, ordered to pay complainant Danilo H. Lazaro the following:
    1. Separation pay  
    From 12/21/92-6/30/2000 (sic):  
    (including the imputed service)  
    P53,962.64 x 8 years
    = P431,701.12
     
    2. Compensatory benefit:
    From 11/30/96-6/30/2000 (temporary date)
    P53,962.64 x 42 months/2
    = 1,133,215.40
    (But not less than P1 million nor more than P1.5 Million)
     
    3. 1996 Christmas bonus:
    53,962.64
     
    4. Moral and exemplary damages for arbitrary reversal of 1996 Christmas bonus.
    200,000.00
    TOTAL
    P1,818,879.12
    All other claims are also dismissed for lack of merit.

    SO ORDERED. (Emphasis in the original)
    Both parties appealed to the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC), for which a Decision7 promulgated on 17 April 2002 was issued. The NLRC affirmed with modifications the Decision rendered by LA Bartolabac, by deleting the award of moral and exemplary damages, as follows:
    WHEREFORE, in the light of the foregoing, the two (2) appeals assailing the Decision in this case are hereby, DISMISSED for lack of merit.

    The appealed Decision is hereby, AFFIRMED with MODIFICATION by deleting the award of moral and exemplary damages.

    SO ORDERED.
    Both parties moved for the reconsideration of the April 2002 Decision, but the motions were denied by the NLRC in a Resolution8 promulgated on 22 August 2002, as follows:
    Accordingly, the motion for reconsideration filed by complainant-appellant and partial motion for reconsideration filed by respondents-appellants are denied for lack of merit.

    No further motion for reconsideration shall be entertained.

    SO ORDERED.
    THE CA RULING

    Upon appeal of Lazaro, the CA, in its 19 January 2004 Decision,9 ruled that reassignment does not sever the tie between the employer and the employee. Tne fact that Solidbank still exercised control over Lazaro and assigned him to tasks that was deemed necessary for the bank indicates that there was no severance of the employer-employee relationship. Nonetheless, considering the cessation of the bank's operation, the appellate court was constrained to award Lazaro separation pay, backwages and other amounts due him, to wit:
    WHEREFORE, the petition is GRANTED. The NLRC resolution and decision dated August 22, 2002 and April 17, 2002, respectively, are hereby SET ASIDE. Finding petitioner Danilo Lazaro illegally dismissed, the November 8, 2001 decision of the Labor Arbiter is hereby MODIFIED. Respondent Solidbank Corporation is hereby ordered to pay petitioner Lazaro the following:
    1. Separation pay for every year of service starting December 21, 1992 up to the promulgation of this decision to be computed based on 150% of the gross monthly pay for every year of service per Category 2 of the Solidbank-Metrobank Merger
    (11 years) P80,943.96x11
    = P890,383.56
    2. Backwages computed from the time of illegal dismissal P53,962.64x 6 years
    = 323,775.84
    3. Compensatory benefit computed from November 1996 up to June 2000 at the rate of P53,962.64x 42 months/2
    = 1,133,215.40
    4. Payment of 1996 Christmas bonus
    = 53,962.64
    5. Payment of unpaid salary for December 1996
    = 53,962.64
    6. Moral and exemplary damages
    = 200,000.00
    TOTAL
    = 2,655,300.08
    7. Attorneys fees equivalent to ten percent
    (10%) of the sum of all the above
    = 265,530.00
    GRAND TOTAL
    = P2,920,830.08
    cralawlawlibrary

    SO ORDERED. (Emphasis in the original)
    On 3 February 2004 and 5 May 2004, Solidbank filed its Motion for Reconsideration10 and Supplemental Motion for Reconsideration11 respectively. Lazaro also filed his Motion for Clarification and/or Partial Motion for Reconsideration12 on 27 January 2004.

    On 1 July 2004, the appellate court issued an Amended Decision,13 correcting the amount of separation pay, backwages and unpaid salary for December 1996, as follows:
    [On separation pay]

    However, We agree with Solidbank's assertion that petitioner is no longer entitled to an increase in the original award for separation pay given by the NLRC considering that petitioner did not question the same in his petition. Hence, the amount of P890,383.56 shown in Item No. 1 (decretal portion of our January 19, 2004 Decision) representing petitioner's separation pay starting December 21, 1992 up to the promulgation of this decision is hereby corrected and reverted to the sum awarded by the NLRC in the total amount of P431,701.12.

    x x x x

    [On backwages]

    We hold that petitioner was illegally dismissed and is therefore entitled to backwages. However, We admit error in the computation of the same (Item No. 2, decretal portion, January 19, 2004 Decision) due to inadvertence. This Court multiplied his monthly salary of P53,962.64 by 6 years instead of 43 months, thus awarding only P323,775.84. To arrive at the correct amount of petitioner's backwages, we have to multiply his monthly salary by 43 months, viz: P53,962.64 x 43 = P2,320,993.52 less P40,375.10 = P2,280,018.42. This answers petitioner's motion for clarification and/or partial motion for reconsideration.

    [On the unpaid salary for December 1996]

    This Court also noticed a typographical error in encoding the amount of petitioner's unpaid salary for December 1996 as P53,962.64 when it should only be P40,375.10 representing his basic salary, as prayed for in the petitioner before Us. (Emphasis in the original)
    Lazaro filed another Motion for Reconsideration/Clarification14 on 26 July 2004, which the CA partially granted in a Resolution15 promulgated on 14 January 2005. The appellate court again corrected the amount of separation pay, backwages and unpaid salary for December 1996 by reviewing Lazaro's gross monthly pay, including all allowances and benefits due to him:
    We are taking cognizance of the oversight committed in the computation of the separation pay and backwages. However, considering that the Court cannot determine the other benefits allegedly enjoyed regularly by the petitioner to come up with his gross monthly salary, We based the gross monthly salary of petitioner in the amount of P53,962.64 according to the submitted evidence which were not contested by the private respondent. It is also noted that petitioner never questioned the computation of his monthly salary at P53,962.64 as contained in the decisions and resolutions of the Labor Arbiter, NLRC and this Court. Hence, in Our Amended Decision dated July 1, 2004, a re-computation of the separation pay and backwages due petitioner was made.

    x x x x

    Petitioner correctly argues that in the computation of the separation pay and backwages, the whole amount of his salaries plus benefits, bonuses and general increases to which he would have been entitled shall be included. However, the record is bereft of any evidence showing the other monthly benefits, bonuses, etc., aside from his monthly salary of P53,962.64 which is not contested by both parties.

    With respect to the 150% gross monthly salary pay for every year of service as separation pay based on the Solidbank-MetroBank Merger Agreement, We believe that the petitioner is not entitled to such benefit. He did not apply for the same and he was not offered said separation benefits by the respondent bank.

    The computation of the separation pay should be based on the petitioner's proven monthly salary (P53,962.64) from December 21, 1992 up to the promulgation of this resolution or for such additional years upon final execution. Likewise, petitioner's backwages should be computed based on petitioner's proven monthly salary (P53,962.64) from the time of his illegal dismissal on November 30, 1996 up to the promulgation of this resolution. (Emphasis in the original)
    Below is a summary of the fallo of the Decision, Amended Decision and Resolution issued by the appellate court:
     
    19 January 2004 Decision
    1 July 2004 Amended Decision
    14 January 2005 Resolution
    Separation pay
    For every year of service starting December 21, 1992 up to the promulgation of this Decision to be computed based on 150% of the gross monthly pay for every year of service per Category 2 of the Solidbank-Metrobank Merger at the rate of P80,943.96x 11 years
    From December 21, 1992 up to June 30, 2000 (including the imputed service) P5 3,962.64 x 8 years =
    From December 21, 1992 up to the promulgation of this Decision (January 2005) to be computed by multiplying the monthly salary (P53,962.64) by 12 years P53,962.64 x 12 =
           
      P890,383.56 P431,701.12 P647,551.68
           
    Backwages
    Computed from the time of illegal dismissal at the rate of P53,962.64 x 6 years
    Computed from the time of illegal dismissal on November 30, 1996 up to June 30, 2000 P53,962.64 x 43 mos. -P40,375.10 (representing December 1996 basic salary as prayed and awarded)
    Computed by multiplying the monthly salary (P53,962.64) by the number of months from his illegal dismissal on November 30, 1996 up to the promulgation of this decision P53,962.64 x 98 months
      P323,755.84 P2,280,018.42 P5,288,338.70
    Compensatory benefit
    Computed from November 1996 up to June 2000 at the rate of P53,962.64 x 42 months/2 Computed from November 1996 up to June 2000 at the rate of P53,962.64 x 42 months/2 Computed from November 1996 up to June 2000 at the rate of P53,962.64 x 42 months/2
      P1,133,215.40 P1,133,215.40 P1,133,215.40
    Payment of 1996 Christmas bonus P53,962.64 P53,962.64 P53,962.64
    Payment of unpaid salary for December 1996 P53,962.64 P40,375.10 None
    Moral and exemplary damages P200,000.00 P200,000.00 P200,000.00
    TOTAL P2,655,300.08 P4,139,272.68 P7,323,068.42
    Attorney's fees equivalent to ten percent (10%) of the sum of all the above P265,530.00 P413,927.26 P732,306.84
    GRAND TOTAL P2,920,830.08 P4,553,199.94 P8,055,375.26
    Hence, these petitions.

    Lazaro filed his Comment16 to Solidbank's petition (G.R. No. 166581) on 15 June 2005, while the latter filed its Reply17 on 20 July 2005. On the other hand, Solidbank filed its Comment18 to Lazaro's petition (G.R. No. 167187) on 12 August 2005, while the latter filed his Reply19 on 24 March 2006.

    In G.R. No. 166581, Solidbank argues that the CA gravely abused its discretion in not denying Lazaro's "second" Motion for Reconsideration/Clarification because it was filed without leave of court and in clear violation of the prohibition on filing a second motion for reconsideration. Moreover, Solidbank insists that the CA erred in awarding damages and attorney's fees despite the lack of legal, factual or equitable basis for these awards.

    In G.R. No. 167187, Lazaro argues that there is sufficient evidence on record to prove that all the allowances and benefits (e.g. accruing vacation leave, profit sharing, car benefits) he prays for have been consistently given to him, and thus forms part of his salary. Thus, he asserts that the monetary awards must be based on his gross monthly pay of P75,912.00 (basic salary with cost of living allowance, inclusive of all benefits and allowances)20 instead of only P53,962.64 (basic salary with cost of living allowance). He further insists that his separation pay must include other benefits21 in the total amount of P3,270,491.00.

    We now rule on the final review of the case.

    THE ISSUES

    From the foregoing, we reduce the issues to the following:
    1. Whether or not the appellate court erred in not denying the "second" Motion for Reconsideration/Clarification filed by Lazaro;

    2. Whether or not the appellate court erred in computing Lazaro's gross monthly pay; and

    3. Whether or not the CA rightly awarded damages and attorney's fees to respondent.
    OUR RULING

    Before we proceed, this Court laments the convoluted procedural mishaps attending these consolidated cases. However, it may not be amiss to point out that in the instant petitions, both parties did not question the appellate court's finding of illegal dismissal. What is before us - the monetary awards - are but a consequence of the finding of illegal dismissal. We shall therefore dispose of the procedural issues first, then proceed to the discussion of the awards.

    The Amended Decision is an entirely new decision which supersedes the original decision, for which a new motion for reconsideration may be filed again.

    Anent the issue of Lazaro's "second" motion for reconsideration, we disagree with the bank's contention that it is disallowed by the Rules of Court. Upon thorough examination of the procedural history of this case, the "second" motion does not partake the nature of a prohibited pleading because the Amended Decision is an entirely new decision which supersedes the original, for which a new motion for reconsideration may be filed again.

    We pointed out in Planters Development Bank v. Sps. Lopez22 that "[t]here is also no merit to the respondents' argument that Planters Bank's motion for reconsideration is disallowed under Section 2, Rule 52 of the Rules of Court, x x x [T]here is a difference between an amended judgment and a supplemental judgment. In an amended judgment, the lower court makes a thorough study of the original judgment and renders the amended and clarified judgment only after considering all the factual and legal issues. The amended and clarified decision is an entirely new decision which supersedes or takes the place of the original decision. On the other hand, a supplemental decision does not take the place of the original; it only serves to add to the original decision."

    We thus rule that the appellate court did not err in not denying Lazaro's Motion for Reconsideration/Clarification on the Amended Decision because its filing is allowed under the rules.

    Separation pay and backwages must include the gross monthly salary of the dismissed employee, inclusive of all the allowances and benefits or their monetary equivalent, subject to evidentiary proof.

    As regards the alleged erroneous computation of Lazaro's monthly pay, it has been settled that if reinstatement is not possible, an illegally dismissed employee is entitled to separation pay and backwages, computed using his gross monthly pay, inclusive of allowances and other benefits or their monetary equivalent.23 Such amounts however must be duly proved before it may be granted by the Court.

    We are, however, compelled to deny Lazaro's prayer to include in his gross monthly salary the allowances and benefits outlined in his petition. The records are bereft of evidence to serve as a backbone for the allowances and benefits he desires. We therefore retain the amount of P53,962.64 as his gross monthly pay, which remains uncontested by both parties.24

    a. Separation pay

    Consequently, separation pay must be duly awarded to Lazaro because reinstatement is no longer feasible. However, the Court has consistently ruled that the same must be computed only up to the time the employer ceased operations.25 It cannot be held liable to pay separation pay beyond such closure of business because even if the illegally dismissed employees would be reinstated, they could not possibly work beyond the time of the cessation of its operation.26 This is especially true when the closure was "due to legitimate business reasons and not merely an attempt to defeat the order of reinstatement."27

    Considering that Solidbank ceased operations in 2000, Lazaro may then rightfully be considered as covered by the Solidbank-Metrobank Merger-Integration Agreement.28 The agreement dictates that separation pay will be given to Solidbank employees not absorbed by Metrobank, with the gross monthly pay increased by 150%.

    We disagree with the CA that Lazaro is not covered by the Merger-Integration Agreement because he did not apply for the same and was not offered separation pay.29 The argument behooves logic, for how can Metrobank offer him the agreement when he was illegally dismissed as early as November 1996 and the merger only took place in June 2000. Following the premise that an illegal dismissal is a void dismissal, then Lazaro is still considered to have been employed until the merger took place. He may therefore be considered as not having received any offer from Metrobank to join the new company.

    We thus compute Lazaro's separation pay from the time of his employment in 21 December 1992 up to the cessation of Solidbank's business in 31 July 2000 or 7.64 years, multiplied by his gross monthly pay increased by 150%.

    b. Backwages

    On the other hand, backwages are computed from the time of dismissal until the finality of the decision ordering separation pay, and not merely until promulgation of the Court's decision.30 However, considering that Solidbank ceased operations in 31 July 2000, we must compute backwages only up to the time of such cessation. To compute "backwages beyond the date of the cessation of business would not only be unjust, but confiscatory, as well as violative of the Constitution depriving the employer of his property rights."31

    Using this yardstick, we therefore compute Lazaro's backwages from the time of his illegal dismissal on 21 December 1992 up to the time when Solidbank ceased operations on 31 July 2000, or 91.67 months, multiplied by his gross monthly pay earlier determined.

    Damages and attorney's fees may only be awarded when the employee is illegally dismissed in bad faith and compelled to litigate to protect his rights by reason of the unjustified acts of the employer.

    We have said that while "dismissal may be contrary to law but by itself alone, it does not establish bad faith to entitle the dismissed employee to moral damages."32 We must note that "bad faith does not simply connote bad judgment or negligence - it imports a dishonest purpose or some moral obliquity and conscious doing of wrong. It means a breach of a known duty through some motive or interest or ill-will that partakes of the nature of fraud."33 The award of moral and exemplary damages thus cannot be justified solely upon the premise that the employer dismissed his employee without authorized cause and due process."34

    On the matter of attorney's fees, we have established that "attorney's fees may be awarded only when the employee is illegally dismissed in bad faith and is compelled to litigate or incur expenses to protect his rights by reason of the unjustified acts of his employer."35 However, "[t]here must always be a factual basis for the award of attorney's fees. This is consistent with the policy that no premium should be placed on the right to litigate."36

    After reviewing the records, we see no evidence that Lazaro's dismissal was tainted with bad faith nor is there any basis for the award of attorney's fees. We therefore delete the award of damages and attorney's fees.

    We will no longer touch upon the award of 1996 Christmas bonus and compensatory benefit as these were not appealed by both parties.

    WHEREFORE, the 19 January 2004 Decision, 1 July 2004 Amended Decision and 14 January 2005 Resolution of the CA in CA-G.R. SP No. 73629 are hereby MODIFIED in that Lazaro is awarded the following:chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary

    (1)
    separation pay computed from the time of his employment in 21 December 1992 up to the cessation of Solidbank's business in 31 July 2000 or 7.64 years, multiplied by his gross monthly pay of P53,962.64 increased by 150%, or atotal of P618,411.85;
    (2)
    backwages computed from the time of his illegal dismissal in 30 November 1996 up to 31 July 2000 (the date Solidbank ceased operations) or 91.67 months, multiplied by his gross monthly pay of P53,962.64, or atotal of P4,946,755.21;
    (3)
    payment of 1996 Christmas bonus in the amount of P53,962.64; and
    (4)
    compensatory benefit computed from November 1996 up to June 2000 or 42 months/2, multiplied by his gross monthly pay of P53,962.64, or a total of P1,133,215.40.

    The award of moral and exemplary damages and attorney's fees are deleted for lack of basis.

    SO ORDERED.chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary

    Leonardo-De Castro, Bersamin, Perez, and Perlas-Bernabe, JJ., concur.chanrobleslaw

    Endnotes:


    1Rollo, (G.R. No. 167187); pp. 79-89, penned by CA Associate Justice Eliezer R. De Los Santos, and concurred by Associate Justices B.A. Adefuin-De La Cruz and Jose C. Mendoza (now a Member of this Court).

    2 Id. at 73-77.

    3 Id. at 67-71.

    4 Id. at 81-82.

    5 Id. at 184-196.

    6 Id. at 193.

    7Rollo (G.R. No. 166581), pp. 87-98.

    8 Id. at 99-103.

    9 Supra note 1.

    10Rollo (G.R.No. 167187), pp. 456-465.

    11 Id. at 473-483.

    12 Id. at 439-448.

    13 Supra note 2.

    14Rollo (G.R. No. 167187), pp. 512-526.

    15 Supra note 3.

    16Rollo (G.R. No. 166581), pp. 228-255.

    17 Id. at 365-374.

    18Rollo (G.R. No. 167187), pp. 675-684.

    19 Id. at 731-739.

    20 Id. at 56-57. Lazaro arrived at the amount of P75,912.00 using the following computation:
    Basic Salary
    P28,330.00
    Representation/Cost of Living Allowance
    25,633.00
    Other Benefits:
    Gasoline
    2,000.00
    Car Maintenance (P8,000.00/12 mos.)
    670.00
    Medicine Allowance (P2,000.00/12 mos.)
    167.00
    Mid Year Bonus (P53,953.00 x 2 mos./12)
    8,994.00
    Christmas Bonus (P53,963.00 x 2.25 mos./12)
    10,118.00
    Total Gross Monthly Pay
    P75,912.00
     
    P75,912.00
     
    x 12 years
     
    P910,944.00
    21 Id. at 57. Total Gross Monthly Pay
    Add Other Benefits:  
    Accrued Sick/Vacation Leave
    P431,704.00
    Car Benefits at P600,000.00
    every five (5) years from 1996 and 2005
    P1,800,000.00
    Profit Sharing (guaranteed 2 months)
    971,334.00
    Unpaid 1996 Christmas Bonus
    67,453.30
    Grand Total Separation Pay
    P3,270,491.00
    (1.25 mos. differential) (as of January 2005, the promulgation date)
    22 G.R. No. 186332, 23 October 2013, 708 SCRA 481, 492-493, citing Magdalena Estate, Inc. v. Caluag, 120 Phil. 338, 341 (1964); See Lee v. Trocino, 607 Phil. 690, 696 (2009).

    23Manila Jockey Club, Inc. v. Trajano, G.R. No. 160982, 26 June 2013.

    24Rollo (G.R. No. 167187), p. 69.

    25Industrial Timber Corporation Stanply Operations v. NLRC, 323 Phil. 753 (1996).

    26Polymer Rubber Corporation v. Salamuding, G.R. No. 185160, 24 July 2013, 702 SCRA 153, citing J.A.T. General Services v. NLRC, 465 Phil. 785, 798-799 (2004).

    27 Id., citing Chronicle Securities Corp. v. NLRC, 486 Phil. 560 (2004).

    28Rollo (G.R. No. 167187), pp. 315-318.

    29 Id. at 70.

    30Bani Rural Bank, Inc. v. De Guzman, G.R. No. 170904, 13 November 2013, 709 SCRA 330.

    31Retuya v. Dumarpa, G.R. No. 148848, 5 August 2003, citing Pizza Inn/Consolidated Foods Corporation v. NLRC, 162 SCRA 779, 28 June 1988.

    32Lambert Pawnbrokers and Jewelry Corporation v. Binamira, G.R. No. 170464, 12 July 2010, 624 SCRA 705, citing Manila Water Company, Inc. v. Peņa, 478 Phil. 68, 84 (2004).

    33Solidbank Corporation v. Gamier, G.R. No. 159460-61, 15 November 2010, 634 SCRA 554, citing Ford Philippines, Inc. v. CA, 335 Phil. 1,9 (1997).

    34 Supra note 28.

    35Pepsi Cola Products Philippines, Inc. v. Santos, 574 Phil. 400 (2008), citing Pascua v. NLRC, 351 Phil. 48, 74 (1998).

    36 Id., citing German Marine Agencies, Inc. v. NLRC, 403 Phil. 572, 597 (2001).

    G.R. No. 166581, December 07, 2015 - SOLIDBANK CORPORATION, Petitioner, v. COURT OF APPEALS, NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION, AND DANILO H. LAZARO, Respondents.; G.R. No. 167187 - DANILO H. LAZARO, Petitioner, v. COURT OF APPEALS, NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION AND SOLIDBANK CORPORATION, Respondents.


    Back to Home | Back to Main

     

    QUICK SEARCH

    cralaw

       

    cralaw



     
      Copyright © ChanRobles Publishing Company Disclaimer | E-mail Restrictions
    ChanRobles™ Virtual Law Library | chanrobles.com™
     
    RED