ChanRobles Virtual law Library

[ G.R. No. 126689. February 22, 1999]

LA CARLOTA PLANTERS ASSO., INC. et al. vs. NLRC, et al.

FIRST DIVISION

Gentlemen:

Quoted hereunder, for your information, is a resolution of this Court dated FEB 22, 1999.

G.R. No. 126689 (La Carlota Planters Association, Inc./Rudolfo Azcona vs. National Labor Relations Commission, et al.)

For the Court's consideration is a motion for reconsideration of the decision, promulgated on 27 October 1998, the dispositive portion of which reads:

"WHEREFORE, the Court is constrained to dismiss, as it hereby so DISMISSES, the instant petition for certiorari."

The Court, in fine, sustained the position likewise taken by the Solicitor General that no grave abuse of discretion, amounting to lack of jurisdiction, was committed by respondent National Labor Relations Commission in making its own factual assessments, particularly in weighing the evidence of the parties, even as it had failed to coincide with the findings of the Labor Arbiter,1 [See Philippine Advertising Counselors, Inc. vs. NLRC, 283 SCRA 395.]

It might be borne in mind that judicial review in labor cases elevated to the Supreme Court on a petition for certiorari is limited only to issues of jurisdiction or grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack of jurisdiction.2 [Flores vs. NLRC, 253 SCRA 494.] Unfortunately, it does not include, unlike in ordinary appeals, a review, correction or re-evaluation of the evidence.3 [Gesland vs. NLRC, 253 SCRA 612.]

The other basic issues raised in the instant motion for reconsideration have heretofore been deliberated and passed upon by the Court.

WHEREFORE, petitioners' motion for reconsideration is DENIED with FINALITY.

The opposition to the motion for reconsideration filed by private respondent is NOTED.

Very truly yours,

(Sgd.) VIRGINIA ANCHETA-SORIANO

Clerk of Court

Back to Home | Back to Main

CLICK HERE FOR THE LATEST SUPREME COURT JURISPRUDENCE