Philippine Supreme Court Resolutions > Year 2010 > April 2010 Resolutions > [G.R. No. 183810 : April 07, 2010] FARLEY FULACHE, MANOLO JABONERO,DAVID CASTILLO, JEFFREY LAGUNZAD, MAGDALENA MALIG-ON BIGNO, FRANCISCO CABAS, JR., HARVEY PONCE AND ALAN C ALMENDRAS, PETITIONERS VS. ABS-CBN BROADCASTING CORPORATION, RESPONDENT.:

Quoted hereunder, for your information,  is a resolution of this Court dated 07 April 2010:

G.R. No. 183810 - FARLEY FULACHE, MANOLO JABONERO,DAVID CASTILLO, JEFFREY LAGUNZAD, MAGDALENA MALIG-ON BIGNO, FRANCISCO CABAS, JR., HARVEY PONCE and ALAN C ALMENDRAS, petitioners -versus- ABS-CBN BROADCASTING CORPORATION, respondent.

For resolution is the Motion for Reconsideration^[1] filed on March 16, 2010 by the ABS-CBN Broadcasting Corporation (ABS-CBN) addressing our decision of January 21, 2010^[2] in the petition in caption. Our decision granted the petition and nullified as a consequence the decision dated March 25, 2008^[3] and the resolution dated July 8, 2008^[4] of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. SP No. 01838.^[5]

Our January 21, 2010 decision rendered judgment, as follows:

1. confirming petitioners Farley Fulache, Manolo Jabonero, David Castillo, Jeffrey Lagunzad, Magdalena Malig-on Bigno, Francisco Cabas, Jr., Harvey Ponce and Alan C. Almendras as regular employees of ABS-CBN entitled to all the rights, benefits and privileges of regular employees, including those arising from the CBA;
   
   
2. declaring illegal the dismissal of Fulache, Jabonero, Castillo and Lagunzad, and ordering their immediate reinstatement to their former positions without loss of seniority   rights with full backwages and all other monetary benefits from the time they were dismissed up to the date of their actual reinstatement;
   
   
3. awarding moral damages of P100,000.00 each to Fulache, Jabonero, Castillo and Lagunzad; and
   
   
4. awarding attorney's fees of 10% of the total monetary award.

Grounds for the Motion

ABS-CBN seeks the reconsideration of our decision on the following grounds:

1. On the Regularization Issue - That we erred in confirming that the petitioners are regular employees, for the following reasons:
   
   
   1. The issue is still pending with the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. SP No. 01834, entitled ABS-CBN Broadcasting Corp. v. NLRC, et al.
      
      
   2. Petitioners Fulache, et al. in this case, did not disclose the pendency of CA-G.R. SP No. 01834.
      
      
   3. The resolution of CA-G.R. SP No. 01834 is material to the present case and constitutes a prejudicial question to the entitlement of the petitioners to CBA benefits.
   
   
   
2. On the Findings of Illegal Dismissal - That our ruling declaring the petitioners' dismissal illegal is not in accord with time-honored labor law doctrines for the following reasons:
   
   
   1. The petitioners did not appeal the decision of the Labor Arbiter finding their dismissal valid; this decision therefore has become final and binding on them and cannot be re-opened without violating the doctrine of immutability of judgments.
      
      
   2. For their failure to appeal the arbiter's decision, the petitioners cannot obtain any affirmative relief from the appellate court other than that granted in the appealed decision.
      
      
   3. Factual findings of labor authorities - specifically, the labor arbiter and the NLRC who have acquired expertise in the matters within their jurisdictions - are generally accorded not only respect, but even finality, and are binding on the Court.
      

The Ruling of the Court


After a careful examination of the cited grounds, we resolve to DENY the motion for reconsideration with FINALITY. We have passed upon these same grounds in our decision and the movant presents no substantial argument or any compelling reason to warrant the reconsideration it seeks.

1. The argument that the regularization question is still pending before the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. SP No. 01834 is immaterial and therefore untenable. The record of the case shows that the CA decision we reviewed in the present petition AFFIRMED the NLRC resolution dated March 24, 2006^[6] and its order dated May 31, 2006.^[7] The March 24, 2006 resolution reinstated the two separate decisions of the labor arbiter dated January 17, 2002^[8] and April 21, 2003 ^[9] The January 17, 2002 decision of the Arbiter declared the petitioners regular employees of ABS-CBN entitled to the benefits and privileges of regular employees, while the April 21, 2003 decision found the dismissal of the petitioners valid. On the other hand, the May 21, 2006 NLRC Order denied the motion for reconsideration of its March 24, 2006 resolution. In the CA decision and in the petition filed before us, the issue of regularization was properly and squarely raised and we fully discussed and resolved the issue after hearing the parties' respective positions. Under these recorded developments, the movant is plainly grasping at straws in claiming that the regularization issue has not been resolved by the CA and was not therefore before us when we resolved the present case.
   
   
2. Likewise, the submission (a) that the petitioner did not appeal the decision of the labor arbiter finding their dismissal valid and (b) that the findings of facts of the labor authorities are binding on the Court must necessarily fail. As we extensively explained and discussed in our January 21, 2010 decision, both the labor arbiter and the NLRC grossly overlooked the respondent's patent bad faith in the petitioners' dismissal. Their decisions on the dismissal issue were therefore attended by "patent grave abuse of discretion" and were thus null and void. As such, the decision, even if not appealed, produces no legal effect and cannot be accorded respect, much less, finality.

WHEREFORE, premises considered, the motion for reconsideration of our decision rendered on January 21, 2010 is DENIED with FINALITY. No further pleadings shall be entertained. Let entry of judgment be made in due course.

SO ORDERED.

WITNESS the Honorable Antonio T. Carpio, Chairperson, Honorable Arturo D. Brion, Martano C. Del Castillo, Jose P. Perez and Jose C. Mendoza (designated additional member per S.O. No. 832 dated 30 March 2010 in lieu of Abad, J., on official business), Members, Second Division, this 7^th day of April, 2010.

Endnotes:

---

^[1] Rollo, pp. 619-675.

^[2] Id. at 597-617.

^[3] Id. at 9-22.

^[4] Id. at 32-33.

^[5] Farley Fulache, et al. v. NLRC, et al.

^[6] Rollo, pp. 300-310.

^[7] Id. at 311-312.

^[8] Id. at 127-130.

^[9] Id. at 183-191.

^[10] Court's Decision of January 21, 2010, p. 19, par. 1; id. at 615.