Case Digest (G.R. No. 228572)
Facts:
The case involves Michael Adriano Calleon (petitioner) and HZSC Realty Corporation, along with several respondents including John Leanlon P. Raymundo, Emerson D. Angeles, Lloyd T. Ison, Sherwin M. OdoAo, Lemuel D. Venzon, and Ronald F. Caling. The controversy arose from complaints filed by the respondents against HZSC and its President, Calleon, for illegal (constructive) dismissal, non-payment of salary, 13th month pay, separation pay, and claims for moral and exemplary damages, as well as attorney's fees. The complaints were triggered by HZSC's failure to rehire the respondents after a temporary shutdown of its operations due to business losses on January 23, 2015.
On April 29, 2016, the Labor Arbiter ruled in favor of the respondents, declaring HZSC and Calleon guilty of illegal dismissal for not adhering to the procedural requirements outlined in Article 283 (now Article 298) of the Labor Code. The Labor Arbiter ordered the payment of unpaid salaries, separatio...
Case Digest (G.R. No. 228572)
Facts:
Background of the Case
The case originated from complaints filed by respondents John Leanlon P. Raymundo, Emerson D. Angeles, Lloyd T. Ison, Sherwin M. Odoao, Lemuel D. Venzon, and Ronald F. Caling against HZSC Realty Corporation (HZSC) and its President, petitioner Michael Adriano Calleon. The complaints alleged illegal (constructive) dismissal, non-payment of salary, 13th month pay, separation pay, and claims for moral and exemplary damages and attorney's fees. These arose from HZSC's failure to rehire the respondents after a temporary shutdown of its business operations due to financial losses on January 23, 2015.
Labor Arbiter's Decision
The Labor Arbiter (LA) ruled in favor of the respondents, declaring HZSC and petitioner guilty of illegal (constructive) dismissal for failing to comply with procedural requirements under Article 283 (now Article 298) of the Labor Code. The LA ordered HZSC and petitioner to pay the respondents their unpaid salaries, separation pay, nominal damages, and attorney's fees.
NLRC's Decision
HZSC and petitioner appealed to the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC), which dismissed their appeal and denied their motions for reconsideration.
Petition Before the CA
Petitioner filed a petition for certiorari before the Court of Appeals (CA), seeking to absolve himself from liability, arguing the absence of malice or fraud on his part. The CA dismissed the petition for procedural deficiencies, and petitioner's motion for reconsideration was denied for being belatedly filed.
Discrepancy in Notice of Resolution
Petitioner claimed that his counsel, Atty. Ariel C. Santos, received notice of the CA's September 23, 2016 Resolution on October 17, 2016, making his motion for reconsideration timely. However, the CA denied the motion, reckoning the period from petitioner's personal receipt of the notice on October 5, 2016.
Supreme Court's Intervention
The Supreme Court issued a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) and directed the CA to elevate the complete records of the case to resolve the discrepancy in the notice of receipt.
Issue:
The sole issue before the Supreme Court was whether the CA erred in dismissing petitioner's motion for reconsideration for being belatedly filed.
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)