Philippine Supreme Court Resolutions > Year 2007 > January 2007 Resolutions > [G.R. No. 165756 : January 22, 2007] HOTEL ENTERPRISES OF THE PHILIPPINES, INC. (HEPI), OWNER OF HYATT REGENCY HOTEL VS. SAMAHAN NG MGA MANGGAGAWA SA HYATT-NATIONAL UNION OF WORKERS IN THE HOTEL AND RESTAURANT AND ALLIED INDUSTRIES (SAMASAH-NUWHRAIN) :

Quoted hereunder, for your information is a resolution of the Third Division of this Court dated 22 JANUARY 2007

G.R. No. 165756 - Hotel Enterprises of the Philippines, Inc. (HEPI), Owner of Hyatt Regency Hotel vs. Samahan ng mga Manggagawa sa Hyatt-National Union of Workers in the Hotel and Restaurant and Allied Industries (SAMASAH-NUWHRAIN)

R E S O L U T I O N

Petitioner posted a cash bond in the amount of One Million Pesos (P1,000,000.00) on December 19, 2005 pursuant to the Temporary Restraining Order issued in its favor in the Resolution dated December 5, 2005.

Petitioner filed a Motion for Substitution of Cash Bond with Surety Bond alleging that:

Petitioner was originally supposed to file a surety bond in the same amount but failed to do so due to the inability of the bonding company to prepare and transmit the surety bond to undersigned counsel due to the short period of time granted to the petitioner. Thus, petitioner posted the cash bond instead.

Notwithstanding the foregoing, the processing of the surety bond continued. Soon after the posting of the cash bond, petitioner obtained the Prudential Guarantee and Assurance, Inc. Surety Bond dated 15 December 2005 with Bond NO. BD-J08-HOM-0000016 in the amount of One Million Pesos (P1,000,000.00).

Petitioner now respectfully moves that the attached Prudential Guarantee and Assurance, Inc. Surety Bond dated 15 December 2005 with Bond No. BD-J08-HOM-0000016 in the amount of One Million Pesos (P1,000,000.00) be approved and, thereafter, substituted in place of the cash bond.

In its Comment, respondent submits to the discretion of the Court on whether to allow or not the substitution of the cash bond with the surety bond provided the rights of private respondent shall not be impaired.

In compliance with the Court's Resolution, dated September 6, 2006, petitioner submitted the following updated documents: a) Affidavit of Justification; b) Certificate of Authority issued by the Insurance Commission; c) Certificate of Authority issued by the Court Administrator, Supreme Court; and d) Duly Audited Statement of Assets and Liabilities.

Foregoing Considered, the Court resolved to APPROVE the surety bond filed by petitioner and SUBSTITUTE said bond in place of the cash bond.