Facts:

• Gerson R. Meneses filed a complaint for damages against Procter and Gamble Phils., Inc. in the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Manila.
• Meneses alleged that he suffered severe injuries caused by an explosion at the company's plant.
• Meneses claimed that the explosion was due to the company's negligence in replacing the steel cover of a kettle with a cheaper and more brittle fiberglass cover.
• Meneses sought damages for his injuries, including third-degree burns, amputation of toes, psychiatric treatment, and medical expenses.
• Procter and Gamble moved to dismiss the complaint on the grounds of laches and lack of jurisdiction.
• The trial court deferred the resolution of the motion until the trial.
• On June 5, 1992, the trial court issued an order dismissing the complaint for lack of jurisdiction, stating that the claim for damages arising from an employer-employee relationship falls within the exclusive jurisdiction of the Labor Arbiters of the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC).
• Meneses filed a motion to reconsider the dismissal order, but it was denied by the trial court.
• Instead of filing a notice of appeal, Meneses filed a petition for certiorari under Rule 45 of the Rules of Court with the Court of Appeals.
• The Court of Appeals dismissed the petition, stating that the proper remedy was an appeal to the Court of Appeals or a petition for review on certiorari to the Supreme Court.

Issue:

• (Unlock)

Ruling:

• The Supreme Court denied Meneses' petition for review and affirmed the dismissal of the complaint for lack of jurisdiction.
• The Court held that the proper remedy for Meneses was an appeal to the Court of Appeals or a petition for review on certiorari to the Supreme Court.
• The Court explained that the appellate procedures had been changed, and appeals from judgments of the Regional Trial Courts could only be made through a petition for review on certiorari in accorda...(Unlock)

Ratio:

• The Court ba...continue reading