Case Digest (G.R. No. 205953)
Facts:
This is Dionella A. Gopio, Doing Business Under the Name and Style, Job Asia Management Services v. Salvador B. Bautista, G.R. No. 205953, June 06, 2018, the Supreme Court First Division, Jardeleza, J., writing for the Court.Petitioner Dionella A. Gopio (doing business as Job Asia Management Services) is a Philippine recruitment/placement agency; respondent Salvador B. Bautista was hired through Job Asia by foreign employer Shorncliffe (PNG) Limited as a Project Manager under a 31‑month employment contract. The contract, stamped by the POEA, stated a net monthly salary of P40,000.00 though Bautista alleged he was actually paid P115,850.00 monthly. Bautista departed for Papua New Guinea on October 4, 2008.
On July 6, 2009 Bautista was served a notice of termination effective July 10, 2009 on grounds of unsatisfactory performance; he received pay for July 1–10, annual leave credits, and one month’s pay in lieu of notice, and was repatriated on July 11, 2009. On July 27, 2009 he filed a complaint for illegal dismissal and monetary claims with the NLRC against Job Asia, Gopio, and Shorncliffe, claiming lack of due process and entitlement to salaries for the unexpired 22 months, unpaid benefits, damages, attorney’s fees and reimbursement of placement fee.
The Labor Arbiter (January 7, 2010) found the dismissal illegal because the employer failed to prove just cause and did not observe the required twin notices; it rejected Article 4.3 of the contract (one‑month pay in lieu of notice) as contrary to law and awarded P2,548,700.00 (unexpired salaries based on P115,850.00×22 months), moral and exemplary damages (P300,000.00) and attorney’s fees (P254,870.00). The NLRC reversed (May 17, 2010), finding that Article 4.3 and the POEA‑stamped contract permitted pre‑termination and that the post‑termination evaluation evidence supported just cause; it nevertheless awarded P40,000.00 as indemnity for lack of due process. The NLRC denied reconsideration (July 30, 2010).
Bautista sought certiorari with the Court of Appeals. The CA (August 31, 2012) annulled the NLRC decision and reinstated the Labor Arbiter, holding Article 4.3 violative of security of tenure and that the employer failed to substantiat...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Was Bautista illegally dismissed — i.e., did the employer prove just cause and observe the required due process before termination?
- If the dismissal was illegal, is Bautista entitled to the monetary claims awarded (placement fee reimbursement with interest, salaries for the unexpired contract, moral and exemplary damages, attorney’s fees), and are petitioner Job Asia/Gopio jointly and severally...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)