Case Digest (G.R. No. L-25337)
Facts:
Delfin Mayormente v. Robaco Corporation and/or Its Manager, et al., G.R. No. L-25337. November 27, 1967, the Supreme Court En Banc, Castro, J., writing for the Court.Petitioner Delfin Mayormente, a pauper litigant, filed Case No. 182‑V in the Court of Industrial Relations (CIR) in Cebu City against respondent Robaco Corporation (and/or its manager). After the reception of the petitioner’s evidence, the presiding CIR judge, Emiliano C. Tabigne, issued an order (dated October 20, 1965) transferring the continuation of the hearing from Cebu City to Butuan City, where the company had its place of business.
The petitioner moved for reconsideration of the transfer order before the same CIR judge; the motion was denied. Thereafter Mayormente filed an original special civil action for certiorari and prohibition (with preliminary injunction) in the Supreme Court to set aside the CIR judge’s interlocutory order, alleging excess of jurisdiction and grave abuse of discretion.
Respondents defended the transfer order by invoking Commonwealth Act No. 103 (arguing the CIR’s nationwide jurisdiction under Sec. 1) and contended the petition was premature because, under precedent interpreting CA 103, the petitioner should first have sought reconsideration before the CIR in banc before appealing to the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court ac...(Pro-only)
Issues:
- Was the special civil action for certiorari premature because the petitioner did not first present the matter to the CIR in banc?
- Did the CIR judge act in excess of jurisdiction or with grave abuse of discretion in transferring the venue of Case No. 182‑V from Cebu C...(Pro-only)
Ruling:
- (Pro-only)
Ratio:
- (Pro-only)
Doctrine:
- (Pro-only)