Case Digest (G.R. No. 235865)
Facts:
Jerome M. Bautista v. Eli Lilly Philippines, Inc., G.R. No. 235865, February 03, 2021, Supreme Court First Division, Caguioa, J., writing for the Court.
Bautista (petitioner) was hired by Eli Lilly Philippines, Inc. (ELPI, respondent) in 1998 as a sales representative, retrenched in 2003, rehired in 2005, and by 2011 was Sales and Marketing Services Manager. On November 4, 2011, ELPI issued a Show-Cause Letter accusing Bautista of simulating the purchase of four tires from Babila Tire Supply (BTS) on May 14, 2008 and claiming reimbursement; he was placed under a 30-day preventive suspension. ELPI initially did not disclose the source of the allegation but later submitted Official Receipt No. 000475, Sales Invoice No. 27274, and Car Repairs Request No. 8911. Bautista produced a certification by Lilia C. Babila (proprietress of BTS) confirming issuance of the receipt; ELPI later produced a notarized certification by Arnulfo Babila denying the sale, which Arnulfo then contradicted by another statement attributing issuance to his wife.
Bautista received a Notice of Termination on December 21, 2011 and filed for illegal dismissal with the Labor Arbiter (LA), seeking reinstatement or separation pay, backwages, damages, and attorney’s fees. The LA (October 1, 2012) dismissed the complaint, finding dismissal and preventive suspension valid and that due process was observed; it ordered Bautista to pay admitted outstanding obligations to ELPI. Bautista appealed to the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC).
The NLRC (November 19, 2013) reversed the LA, declaring Bautista illegally suspended and dismissed and awarding backwages, separation pay and attorney’s fees; in a May 30, 2014 Resolution the NLRC modified its award to delete salary for the preventive suspension (finding that issue final at the LA) but otherwise affirmed its monetary awards and reinstated the LA order requiring Bautista to pay his admitted debt. ELPI filed a petition for certiorari with the Court of Appeals (CA).
The CA (Decision dated August 17, 2017; Resolution November 22, 2017) granted ELPI’s petition, set aside the NLRC Decision and Resolution, and reinstated the LA’s October 1, 2012 Decision, rulin...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Was the Court of Appeals correct in setting aside the NLRC’s Decision and Resolution and in ruling that Bautista’s dismissal for dishonesty was v...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)