Case Digest (G.R. No. 173946)
Facts:
In G.R. No. 104269, decided on November 11, 1993, the Department of Agriculture (hereafter “the Department”) sought relief from a writ of execution issued by the Regional Arbitration Branch X of Cagayan de Oro upon the decision of the Executive Labor Arbiter. On April 1, 1989 and May 1, 1990, the Department contracted with Sultan Security Agency for the deployment of security guards at its premises in Cagayan de Oro City. On September 13, 1990, several guards filed a complaint for underpayment of wages, non-payment of 13th month pay, allowances, shift differential, holiday and overtime pay, and for damages, docketed as NLRC Case No. 10-09-00455-90. On May 31, 1991, the Labor Arbiter rendered a decision finding the Department and Sultan Security Agency jointly and severally liable for P266,483.91. Neither party appealed, and the decision became final and executory. A writ of execution issued on July 18, 1991, and on July 19, 1991, the Cagayan de Oro City Sheriff levied three ToyoCase Digest (G.R. No. 173946)
Facts:
- Parties and Contracts
- On April 1, 1989 and May 1, 1990, the Department of Agriculture (DOA) contracted Sultan Security Agency for security services, with standard terms and a revised monthly rate of guards.
- Guards were deployed across DOA premises under those contracts.
- Labor Complaint and Arbiter’s Decision
- On September 13, 1990, several guards filed NLRC Case No. 10-09-00455-90 before Regional Arbitration Branch X, alleging underpayment of wages, 13th-month pay, allowances, night differential, holiday pay, overtime pay and damages.
- On May 31, 1991, the Executive Labor Arbiter found DOA and Sultan Security jointly and severally liable for ₱266,483.91; the decision became final for lack of appeal.
- Enforcement Proceedings
- On July 18, 1991, the Arbiter issued a writ of execution directing the City Sheriff to levy DOA properties; vehicles (Toyota Hi-Ace, Mini Cruiser, Crown) were seized on July 19, 1991.
- DOA filed a petition for injunction, prohibition and mandamus with the NLRC, arguing (a) lack of jurisdiction over the State, (b) non-suability doctrine, and (c) impairment of governmental functions.
- NLRC Resolution and Supreme Court Petition
- On November 27, 1991, NLRC Fifth Division: (a) suspended execution for two months, (b) required DOA to deposit sums or post a 50% supersedeas bond, (c) ordered release of seized properties upon bond, (d) dismissed the injunction petition, and (e) issued a temporary stay of execution.
- DOA filed a certiorari petition with the Supreme Court alleging grave abuse of discretion, improper jurisdiction, and violation of sovereign immunity; private respondents contended DOA impliedly waived immunity by contracting.
Issues:
- Jurisdictional Scope
- Whether the NLRC had jurisdiction over money claims against the DOA given the Commission on Audit’s exclusive competence under Commonwealth Act No. 327 (as amended).
- Doctrine of Sovereign Immunity
- Whether the NLRC violated the non-suability of the State by issuing and enforcing the writ of execution.
- Waiver of Immunity by Contract
- Whether DOA’s entry into a security services contract constituted implied consent to suit and execution.
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)