Case Digest (G.R. No. 120319)
Facts:
In Luzon Development Bank (LDB) vs. Association of Luzon Development Bank Employees (ALDBE) and Atty. Ester S. Garcia (G.R. No. 120319, October 6, 1995), the parties bound by a Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA) and a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) dated April 1994 submitted a promotion dispute to Atty. Ester S. Garcia as Voluntary Arbitrator. They agreed to file Position Papers between December 1 and 15, 1994. ALDBE’s paper arrived on January 18, 1995; LDB failed to submit despite reminders and never filed as of May 23, 1995. On May 24, 1995, the Arbitrator ruled that LDB violated the promotion provisions of both the CBA and the MOA. LDB then petitioned the Supreme Court for certiorari and prohibition to annul and enjoin enforcement of that award, contending that the remedy lay elsewhere in law.Issues:
- Is a petition for certiorari to the Supreme Court the proper remedy for assailing the decision of a Voluntary Arbitr
Case Digest (G.R. No. 120319)
Facts:
- Parties and dispute
- Petitioners: Luzon Development Bank (LDB).
- Respondents: Association of Luzon Development Bank Employees (ALDBE) and Atty. Ester S. Garcia as Voluntary Arbitrator.
- Subject: Whether LDB violated the Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA) provision and the April 1994 Memorandum of Agreement on promotion.
- Arbitration proceedings
- The parties agreed to submit Position Papers between December 1 and 15, 1994.
- ALDBE filed its paper on January 18, 1995; LDB failed to file despite a reminder.
- As of May 23, 1995, LDB still had not filed.
- Arbitral award and petition
- On May 24, 1995, the Voluntary Arbitrator rendered an award finding that LDB violated the CBA and MOA on promotion.
- LDB filed a petition for certiorari and prohibition in the Supreme Court to set aside the award and enjoin its enforcement.
Issues:
- Is there an express mode of appeal from the decision or award of a voluntary arbitrator?
- Does the Supreme Court have original jurisdiction over certiorari petitions from voluntary arbitrator awards, or should such cases be referred to the Court of Appeals?
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)