Title
Anvil Ensembles Garment vs. Court of Appeals
Case
G.R. No. 155037
Decision Date
Apr 29, 2005
Anvil Ensembles Garment unlawfully terminated driver Melecio Bonabon without evidence, leading to a Supreme Court ruling for his reinstatement and backwages.
Font Size

Case Digest (G.R. No. 155037)

Facts:

  • Anvil Ensembles Garment hired Melecio Bonabon as a probationary driver on January 7, 1997, with a monthly salary of P4,500.
  • On March 25, 1997, Bonabon was abruptly informed not to report for work, without any explanation.
  • Bonabon requested to keep his job, citing limited employment opportunities, but his plea was ignored.
  • On September 3, 1997, Bonabon filed a Complaint for Illegal Dismissal (NLRC Case No. RAB-IV-9-9316-97-RI).
  • The petitioner claimed Bonabon was negligent in handling a cutting machine, leading to P8,000 in repair costs.
  • The Labor Arbiter ruled on July 31, 1998, that the petitioner failed to prove negligence and that Bonabon was not given procedural due process.
  • Bonabon was ordered reinstated with back wages of P72,900 and attorney's fees.
  • The NLRC affirmed the Labor Arbiter's decision on November 23, 1999.
  • The Court of Appeals dismissed the petition for certiorari on January 18, 2002, modifying the award by removing attorney's fees.
  • The petitioner's motion for reconsideration was denied on August 23, 2002.

Issue:

  • (Unlock)

Ruling:

  • The Court of Appeals did not err in affirming the NLRC's ruling; Bonabon's dismissal was illegal.
  • The evidence presented by the petitioner was insufficient to justify Bonabon's dismissal.
  • The petitioner fail...(Unlock)

Ratio:

  • The Supreme Court upheld the findings of the Labor Arbiter, NLRC, and Court of Appeals, emphasizing respect for factual determinations made by quasi-judicial bodies when supported by substantial evidence.
  • The petitioner's evidence, particularly the joint affidavit, lacked specific details about Bonabon's alleged negligence.
  • The affidavit did not provide concrete evidence of gross negligence, which is necessary for valid dismissal under Article 28...continue reading

Jur is an AI-powered legal research platform in the Philippines for case digests, summaries, and jurisprudence. AI-generated content may contain inaccuracies; please verify independently.

© 2024 Jur.ph. All rights reserved.