Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence


Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence > Year 1990 > April 1990 Decisions > G.R. No. 69816 April 17, 1990 - POLICARPIO Y. FAUSTO v. VICENTE LEOGARDO, JR., ET AL.:




PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

FIRST DIVISION

[G.R. No. 69816. April 17, 1990.]

POLICARPIO Y. FAUSTO, Petitioner, v. VICENTE LEOGARDO, JR., as Deputy Minister, Ministry of Labor and Employment and MCDERMOTT DUBAI/OCEANIC CONTRACTORS, INC., Respondents.

Manuel Y. Fausto for Petitioner.

Sycip, Salazar, Feliciano & Hernandez for Private Respondent.


SYLLABUS


1. CONSTITUTIONAL LAW; BILL OF RIGHTS; OBLIGATION OF CONTRACTS; NOT IMPAIRED IN CASE AT BAR. — The issue of the propriety of the termination of Fausto’s employment was resolved on the strength of the official approval by the Overseas Employment Development Board of the addendum to Fausto’s original contract, and on the absence of showing by Fausto that he "would be prejudiced thereby economically or otherwise," upon which premises the Deputy Minister concluded that Fausto had "no valid reason to refuse the terms and conditions . . . (of the addendum) had he wanted to maintain his relationship with respondent (company)." The Solicitor General points out that the addendum "actually secured a 2% salary increase for petitioner" and thus "could not have impaired the obligations of his ‘Employment Contract’ . . . since the prohibition to impair the obligation of contracts signifies unreasonable impairment only . . ., and not as in this case, where petitioner’s employment has been enhanced."


D E C I S I O N


NARVASA, J.:


Policarpio Y. Fausto filed a complaint with the National Capital Region of the Ministry of Labor accusing McDermott Dubai/Oceanic Contractors, Inc. (hereafter simply, McDermott) of illegal termination of his employment. 1 According to Fausto:chanrob1es virtual 1aw library

1) he signed an employment contract with McDermott on October 23, 1979 undertaking to work as clerk-typist in Saudi Arabia at an agreed monthly salary of $555.00, based on a guaranteed 48 hours of straight time and 12 hours overtime per week;

2) that barely 2 months after he had commenced work, he received an inter-office communication from his employer dated December 17, 1979 (a) enclosing an addendum embodying amendments to his employment contract to be effective January 1, 1980; (b) advising that the amendments were meant to "clarify how overtime payments are calculated, and increasing his salary "to about 2% in most cases based on working 10 hours per day, 6 days per week; and (c) advising that should he not wish to sign the addendum, he would "be given early contract completion on or about January 1, 1980," the letter serving as "official 15-day notice of separation;

"3) that because he refused to sign the addendum, believing it would be prejudicial to him, McDermott terminated his services on January 1, 1980. 2

Answer having been duly filed by McDermott, and evidence thereafter adduced by the parties, Regional Director Francisco L. Estrella resolved the case on the merits by Order dated September 26, 1980 finding that Fausto’s employment had indeed been illegally terminated, and sentencing McDermott "to reinstate . . . (him) to his former position with full back wages to be computed at $555.00 a month from the time his contract of employment was illegally terminated up to his actual reinstatement." 3

McDermott filed a motion for reconsideration, contending that the Regional Director had no jurisdiction over the case, exclusive jurisdiction over it being vested in the Bureau of Employment Services, and said Director had gravely erred in disregarding the addendum to complainant’s contract duly approved by the Overseas Employment and Development Board and which said complainant had unwarrantedly declined to sign. The motion was treated as an appeal from the Order of September 26, 1980 and was referred to and passed upon in due course by respondent Deputy Minister of Labor and Employment.chanrobles virtualawlibrary chanrobles.com:chanrobles.com.ph

The Deputy Minister’s verdict was embodied in an Order dated January 7, 1985, promulgated "by authority of the Minister." 4 He ruled McDermott’s contention of lack of jurisdiction of the Regional Director to be without merit, it having appeared and participated in all proceedings and prayed for affirmative relief without at any time impugning the Director’s competence and consequently thereby becoming estopped by laches from raising that issue upon receiving adverse judgment. 5 The Deputy Minister however ruled that Fausto had in fact "opted for an early contract completion when given the choice between such termination and to work under the amended contract as per the addendum required for him to sign." Said the Deputy Minister:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph

". . . This addendum bears approval of the Overseas Employment Development Board; the agency specifically tasked to secure the best possible terms and conditions of employment for Filipino overseas contract workers. Being so, its implementation by respondent is a matter of course which must be given sanction by this office, more so as there was no showing that complainant would be prejudiced thereby economically or otherwise. As in fact, to insulate the workers for possible]e negative effect in its implementation, the respondents even went on to provide salary adjustment to the workers. Thus, complainant would have no valid reason to refuse the terms and conditions of his employment had he wanted to maintain his relationship with Respondent. In other words, even if we assume that the termination of the employment of complainant with the respondents as dismissal at the instance of respondents the same was for cause by complainant’s refusal to accept the addendum which respondent had all the right to implement."cralaw virtua1aw library

Accordingly, the Deputy Minister reversed the appealed order and entered a new judgment dismissing Fausto’s complaint for lack of merit. 6

Fausto has come to this Court praying that the Deputy Minister’s Order be set aside. He has not however succeeded in showing that that Order was rendered without or in excess of jurisdiction, or with grave abuse of discretion, 7 which is the only way by which this Court might properly nullify and set aside said Order. 8

The Deputy Minister disposed of the jurisdictional issue raised before him by McDermott on the authority of what he took to be the applicable case law. It is an issue that in any event is understandably not now raised by Fausto.chanrobles.com : virtual law library

The issue of the propriety of the termination of Fausto’s employment was resolved on the strength of the official approval by the Overseas Employment Development Board of the addendum to Fausto’s original contract, and on the absence of showing by Fausto that he "would be prejudiced thereby economically or otherwise," upon which premises the Deputy Minister concluded that Fausto had "no valid reason to refuse the terms and conditions . . . (of the addendum) had he wanted to maintain his relationship with respondent (company)." The Solicitor General points out that the addendum "actually secured a 2% salary increase for petitioner" and thus "could not have impaired the obligations of his `Employment Contract’ . . . since the prohibition to impair the obligation of contracts signifies unreasonable impairment only . . ., and not as in this case, where petitioner’s employment has been enhanced." 9

WHEREFORE, the petition is DISMISSED, and the challenged Order of January 7, 1985 is AFFIRMED. No costs.

SO ORDERED.

Cruz, Gancayco, Griño-Aquino and Medialdea, JJ., concur.

Endnotes:



1. This was in early 1980. In this connection, the Solicitor General observes that the case should have been filed with the OEDB (Overseas Employment Development Board), involving as it does the contract of a Filipino overseas worker who is not a seaman and, failing conciliation, the case should have been decided on the merits by the Bureau of Employment Services (Labor Code, Article 15 [8-b]), with appeal from the latter’s decision to the Ministry of Labor & Employment being provided for (Rollo, p. 99).

2. Rollo, p. 23.

3. Rollo, pp. 23, 25; 5, 7.

4. Id., pp. 29-31.

5. Citing Quimpo v. de la Victoria, 46 SCRA 139; Ching v. Ramolete, 51 SCRA 13; Zulueta v. Pan American World Airways, Inc., 49 SCRA 1 (Rollo, p. 30).

6. Rollo, p. 31.

7. Rule 65, Rules of Court.

8. Appeal therefrom to this Court under Rule 45 not being possible under the law in force at the time.

9. Rollo, p. 96.




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






April-1990 Jurisprudence                 

  • G.R. No. 47991 April 3, 1990 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. VICENTE ALDEGUER

  • G.R. No. 49856 April 3, 1990 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. VICTOR BAYBAYON, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 59154 April 3, 1990 - MERIDIAN ASSURANCE CORPORATION v. ABELARDO M. DAYRIT, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 61965 April 3, 1990 - NUEVA ECIJA I ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE, INC. v. MINISTER OF LABOR, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 63225 April 3, 1990 - ELEAZAR V. ADLAWAN v. VALERIANO P. TOMOL

  • G.R. No. 75619 April 3, 1990 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. DIONISIO DINGLASA

  • G.R. No. 77397 April 3, 1990 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. RONALDO P. JOMAO-AS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 81026 April 3, 1990 - PAN MALAYAN INSURANCE CORP. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 81493 April 3, 1990 - SUPERSTAR SECURITY AGENCY, INC. v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 82112 April 3, 1990 - ROSA SABADLAN VALENCIA, ET AL. v. REGIONAL TRIAL COURT OF QUEZON CITY, BRANCH 90, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 86164 April 3, 1990 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. MELCHOR SIMENE

  • G.R. No. 88724 April 3, 1990 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. CEILITO ORITA

  • G.R. No. 89318 April 3, 1990 - MARIANO R. SANTIAGO v. K. CASIANO P. ANUNCIACION, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 91096 April 3, 1990 - CAPRICORN INTERNATIONAL TRAVEL AND TOURS, INC. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 69386 April 4, 1990 - ARMANDO DE GUZMAN, ET AL. v. INTERMEDIATE APPELLATE COURT, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-46208 April 5, 1990 - FIDELITY SAVINGS AND MORTGAGE BANK v. PEDRO D. CENZON, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-63735 April 5, 1990 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. WILFREDO MALINAO

  • G.R. No. L-64735 April 5, 1990 - ATLAS DEVELOPER & STEEL INDUSTRIES, INC. v. SARMIENTO ENTERPRISES, INC., ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 72194 April 5, 1990 - HEIRS OF CLARO L. LAURETA v. INTERMEDIATE APPELLATE COURT, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 75640 April 5, 1990 - NATIONAL FOOD AUTHORITY v. INTERMEDIATE APPELLATE COURT, ET AL.

  • G.R. Nos. 83843-44 April 5, 1990 - IN RE: ROSITA LABRADOR v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 84324 April 5, 1990 - SANTIAGO AQUINO, ET AL. v. GUILLERMO R. LUNTOK, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-42281 April 6, 1990 - GODOFREDA B. SUMALINOG v. CORAZON Q. DORONIO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-46364 April 6, 1990 - SULPICIA JIMENEZ, ET AL. v. VICENTE FERNANDEZ, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-47422 April 6, 1990 - ILDEFONSA CERDON v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-57025 April 6, 1990 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ALBERTO C. ARSENIO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-62021 April 6, 1990 - FLORA LAURON, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-63630 April 6, 1990 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. MEDEL B. TANGLIBEN

  • G.R. No. 76028 April 6, 1990 - SPS. JOSE R. LANSANG, JR., ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 76213 April 6, 1990 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. RUBY RONQUILLO

  • G.R. No. 85611 April 6, 1990 - VICTORIANO ZAMORAS v. ROQUE SU, JR., ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 86728 April 6, 1990 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. JESUS VARGAS, JR.

  • G.R. No. 87203 April 6, 1990 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. GABRIEL DAWANDAWAN

  • G.R. No. 87245 April 6, 1990 - UNIVERSAL TEXTILE MILLS, INC., ET AL. v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 87617 April 6, 1990 - JOE HODGES v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 88400 April 6, 1990 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. EMMANUEL GUINTO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 88602 April 6, 1990 - TOMASA VDA. DE JACOB v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-51973 April 16, 1990 - ELY CHAN SA VELASCO v. RODOLFO A. ORTIZ, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-35205 April 17, 1990 - NATIVIDAD VILLAFLOR v. JOSE JUEZAN

  • G.R. No. L-47916 April 17, 1990 - HOME INSURANCE COMPANY v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-60323 April 17, 1990 - MAGDALENA HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION, INC., ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 69816 April 17, 1990 - POLICARPIO Y. FAUSTO v. VICENTE LEOGARDO, JR., ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 70393 April 17, 1990 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ROLANDO LATI

  • G.R. No. 71889 April 17, 1990 - SOCORRO VDA. DE MONDRAGON, ET AL. v. INTERMEDIATE APPELLATE COURT, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 74203 April 17, 1990 - JOSE T. TAYOTO, ET AL. v. HEIRS OF CABALO KUSOP, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 75773 April 17, 1990 - TOMAS JIMENEZ, ET AL. v. INTERMEDIATE APPELLATE COURT, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 76838 April 17, 1990 - LUALHATI A. COJUANGCO v. PURIFICACION VILLEGAS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 88537 April 17, 1990 - REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL. v. SANDIGANBAYAN, ET AL.

  • A.M. No. RTJ-89-425 April 17, 1990 - OSCAR PALMA PAGASIAN v. CESAR P. AZURA

  • G.R. No. 76100 April 18, 1990 - SALEM ALEX T. PALO v. FRANCIS J. MILITANTE

  • G.R. No. 77755 April 18, 1990 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. HONORIO P. CONSUELO

  • G.R. No. 82375 April 18, 1990 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. BONIFACIO DOMINGO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 83260 April 18, 1990 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. JUAN G. DE LA CRUZ, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 88550 April 18, 1990 - INDUSTRIAL ENTERPRISES, INC. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 85742 April 19, 1990 - JESUS F. SALAZAR, JR. v. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 70835 April 20, 1990 - ROGELIO P. CELI, ET AL. v. CRESENCIANO B. TRAJANO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 78750 April 20, 1990 - PRESIDENTIAL COMMISSION ON GOOD GOVERNMENT v. JOSE V. NEPOMUCENO

  • G.R. No. 86220 April 20, 1990 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. BONIFACIO P. CIOBAL, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 88561 April 20, 1990 - HERMAN ARMOVIT, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 89604 April 20, 1990 - ROQUE FLORES v. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 89879 April 20, 1990 - JAIME PABALAN, ET AL. v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-57308 April 23, 1990 - GREAT PACIFIC LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 66683 April 23, 1990 - RADIO COMMUNICATIONS OF THE PHIL., ET AL. v. NATIONAL TELECOMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-44905 April 25, 1990 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. RAUL MONEGRO TORRE

  • G.R. No. 68152 April 25, 1990 - CEFERINO ZAIDE, JR. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 78527 April 25, 1990 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. JOHN K. GUIAGUI

  • G.R. No. 88092 April 25, 1990 - CITADEL LINES, INC. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 88538 April 25, 1990 - ABOITIZ SHIPPING CORPORATION v. DIONISIO C. DELA SERNA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 89431 April 25, 1990 - ERIBERTO G. VALENCIA v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-43277 April 26, 1990 - STANDARD MINERAL PRODUCTS, INC. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-49298 April 26, 1990 - COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS v. DELGADO SHIPPING AGENCY, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-56838 April 26, 1990 - GENARO NAVERA, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 70008 April 26, 1990 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ROSALITO MOLINA

  • G.R. No. 79311 April 26, 1990 - PAPER INDUSTRIES CORPORATION OF THE PHILIPPINES v. DEPUTY EXECUTIVE SECRETARY, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 80298 April 26, 1990 - EDCA PUBLISHING & DISTRIBUTING CORP. v. LEONOR SANTOS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 81564 April 26, 1990 - ACTING REGISTRARS OF LAND TITLES AND DEEDS OF PASAY, ET AL. v. RTC, BRANCH 57, IN MKT., ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 82362 April 26, 1990 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. NORBERTO C. CLORES

  • G.R. No. 84313 April 26, 1990 - HEIRS OF DECEASED COSME RABE, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 85822 April 26, 1990 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. RONILO ALBURO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 85840 April 26, 1990 - SERVANDO’S INCORPORATED v. SECRETARY OF LABOR AND EMPLOYMENT, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 86163 April 26, 1990 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. BIENVENIDO SALVILLA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 87958 April 26, 1990 - NATIONAL UNION FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY OF PITTSBURG, ET AL. v. STOLT-NIELSEN PHIL., INC., ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-46845 April 27, 1990 - PEDRO T. SANTIAGO v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-47281 April 27, 1990 - JUAN SALA v. COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE OF NEGROS ORIENTAL (Branch V), ET AL.

  • G.R. Nos. L-49241-42 April 27, 1990 - RINCONADA TELEPHONE COMPANY, INC. v. CARLOS R. BUENVIAJE, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 68997 April 27, 1990 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ROBERTO C. LIBAG

  • G.R. No. 73010 April 27, 1990 - REVA RAZ v. INTERMEDIATE APPELLATE COURT, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 88586 April 27, 1990 - CONTINENTAL CEMENT CORPORATION v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.