Case Digest (G.R. No. 246892)
Facts:
Chrisden Cabrera Ditiangkin, Hendrix Masamayor Molines, Harvey Mosquito Juanio, Joselito Castro Verde, and Brian Anthony Cubacub Nabong v. Lazada E-Services Philippines, Inc., G.R. No. 246892, September 21, 2022, Supreme Court Second Division, Leonen, J., writing for the Court. The petitioners are five former delivery riders (collectively, petitioners); the respondents are Lazada E-Services Philippines, Inc. and certain Lazada officers (collectively, respondents).In February 2016 petitioners were engaged to pick up items from sellers and deliver them to Lazada’s warehouse. Each signed an Independent Contractor Agreement providing for a one‑year engagement and a P1,200 per day service fee; they used their privately owned motorcycles. In January 2017 petitioners were told by a dispatcher that they would no longer be scheduled; after reporting to work for three days without assignments, they learned their routes had been given to others.
The riders filed a complaint with the Labor Arbiter for illegal dismissal and various monetary claims. The Labor Arbiter (Nov. 3, 2017) dismissed the complaint for lack of jurisdiction, finding no employer‑employee relationship because the Contracts expressly disclaimed such relationship and the riders exercised control over their means and methods. The National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) affirmed (Apr. 30, 2018) and denied reconsideration (Sept. 10, 2018), likewise relying on the Contract and applying the four‑fold test.
Petitioners filed a Rule 65 certiorari petition with the Court of Appeals challenging the NLRC decision; the Court of Appeals dismissed it outright (Jan. 14, 2019 and Mar. 15, 2019 Resolutions), reasoning the correct remedy was a Rule 43 action and finding no prima facie showing of grave abuse of discretion. Petitioners then filed a Petition for Review under Rule 45 be...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Did the Court of Appeals err in dismissing the certiorari petition for being the wrong procedural remedy?
- Are petitioners regular employees of Lazada rather than independent contractors?
- If petitioners are employees, are they entitled to reinstatement and the monetary b...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)