Title
Bibiana Farms and Mills, Inc. vs. Lado
Case
G.R. No. 157861
Decision Date
Feb 2, 2010
Employee dismissed for releasing excess company property without authorization, breaching trust; dismissal upheld due to loss of confidence and compliance with due process.
Font Size:

Case Digest (G.R. No. 157861)

Facts:

Background of the Parties

  • Petitioner: Bibiana Farms and Mills, Inc., an agricultural corporation engaged in hog and cattle raising and corn milling, located in General Santos City.
  • Respondent: Arturo Lado, employed by the petitioner since November 2, 1982, initially as a Quality Controller of Feeds and later as a Warehouseman.

Incident Leading to Dismissal

  • On September 7, 1998, Mildred Manzo (buyer) transacted with Rosalia Manalo (cashier) to purchase 3,000 empty sacks. Manzo was advised to return in the afternoon for the price confirmation.
  • Upon returning, Manzo was quoted P3.50 per sack and given a note stating "3,000/mix-mix" to proceed to the warehouse.
  • Lado, upon seeing the note, showed Manzo the available sacks and loaded 68 bundles (3,400 sacks) onto a dump truck, despite Manzo only paying for 60 bundles (3,000 sacks).
  • Manzo attempted to pay for the excess with a personal check, but Manalo refused, resulting in only 60 bundles being paid for.
  • The excess 8 bundles were not unloaded and were left outside the guardhouse, where Manalo later discovered the discrepancy.

Company Investigation and Termination

  • On September 8, 1998, Lado was directed to explain the release of excess sacks and the use of one-use sacks instead of mix-use sacks.
  • Lado submitted explanations on September 9 and 10, 1998, apologizing for the incident but denying any fraudulent intent.
  • On September 9, 1998, Lado was placed under preventive suspension, and an investigation was scheduled for September 11, 1998.
  • Lado did not attend the investigation, claiming he was not notified. However, the company asserted that notice was sent to his residence.
  • On September 15, 1998, Lado was terminated for "serious misconduct, dishonesty, willful breach of trust, fraud, loss of confidence, and other grounds."

Labor Proceedings

  • Lado filed complaints for illegal suspension and illegal dismissal.
  • The Labor Arbiter dismissed the complaints, finding Lado guilty of fraud and breach of trust.
  • The NLRC initially reversed the Arbiter’s decision, ruling Lado was illegally dismissed, but later reinstated the Arbiter’s decision upon reconsideration.
  • The Court of Appeals (CA) ruled in favor of Lado, finding no fraudulent intent and a lack of due process in the termination.

Issue:

  • (Unlock)

Ruling:

  • (Unlock)

Ratio:

  1. Loss of Trust and Confidence:

    • Lado, as a warehouseman, held a position of trust and confidence, responsible for handling company property.
    • His actions in releasing 68 bundles of sacks, despite authorization for only 60 bundles, demonstrated a breach of trust. The Court found his explanations insufficient and uncorroborated.
    • The Court concluded that Lado’s actions were not merely negligent but part of a scheme to transport unpaid company property, justifying his dismissal.
  2. Due Process:

    • The Court found that Lado was given the opportunity to explain his side through written explanations and was notified of the investigation, even though he did not attend.
    • The essence of due process—the opportunity to be heard—was satisfied, as Lado was aware of the charges against him and had the chance to respond.

The Court emphasized that employers have the right to protect their operations from employees who breach trust, and Lado’s actions rendered him unfit for continued employment.


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.