Case Digest (G.R. No. 75209) Core Legal Reasoning Model
Core Legal Reasoning Model
Facts:
In Nestle Philippines, Inc. v. Hon. Augusto S. Sanchez and Kimberly Independent Labor Union for Solidarity, Activism and Nationalism-Olalia v. NLRC, decided en banc on September 30, 1987 under G.R. Nos. 75209 and 78791, two labor unions intensified pickets outside the Supreme Court’s Padre Faura gate from July 8 to 10, 1987. The Union of Filipro Employees and the Kimberly Independent Labor Union erected makeshift shelters on the sidewalk, obstructed access to justices’ chambers, set up cooking facilities, littered food containers, and used loudspeakers to harangue the Court. Despite warnings from Justices Yap and Fernan and a resolution issued on July 10, 1987, requiring their leaders and counsel to show cause why they should not be held in contempt, the pickets persisted. On July 14, 1987, union leaders and their counsel, Atty. Jose C. Espinas, appeared, apologized, and undertook to prevent recurrence. They submitted a written manifestation on July 17, 1987. The unions argued t Case Digest (G.R. No. 75209) Expanded Legal Reasoning Model
Expanded Legal Reasoning Model
Facts:
- Parties and Cases
- Nestlé Philippines, Inc. vs. Hon. Augusto S. Sanchez, Minister of Labor and Employment, and the Union of Filipro Employees (G.R. No. 75209).
- Kimberly Independent Labor Union for Solidarity, Activism and Nationalism–Olalia vs. NLRC, Manuel Aguilar, Ma. Estrella Aldas, Capt. Rey L. Lanada, Col. Vivencio Manaig, and Kimberly-Clark Philippines, Inc. (G.R. No. 78791).
- Picketing Activities (July 8–10, 1987)
- The two unions intensified intermittent pickets since June 17, 1987, in front of the Padre Faura gate of the Supreme Court.
- They erected provisional shelters, set up a kitchen, obstructed access to Court premises and justices’ offices, littered food containers and trash, and used loudspeakers to harangue the Court.
- Prior to July 10, 1987, Justices Yap and Fernan had received the union leaders and counsel Atty. Jose C. Espinas and warned that continued pickets would constitute direct contempt and impede entertaining of their petitions.
- En Banc Show-Cause Resolution (July 10, 1987)
- The Court en banc gave the unions opportunity to withdraw pickets; if not, they and their counsel were required to appear on July 14, 1987, at 10:30 A.M. to show cause why they should not be held in contempt.
- Named respondents: Tony Avelino, Lito Payabyab, Eugene San Pedro, Dante Escasura, Emil Sayao, Nelson Centeno (Union of Filipro); Ernesto Facundo, Fausto Gapuz Jr., Antonio Gonzales (Kimberly Independent), and counsel Atty. Jose C. Espinas.
- Show-Cause Hearing and Apology
- On July 14, the cited individuals, represented by Atty. Espinas, appeared; Atty. Espinas apologized on behalf of the respondents and assured non-repetition.
- He explained that pickets were led by PAMANTIK (an unregistered alliance of some 75 Southern Tagalog unions) and that delays were beyond the Court’s control.
- Respondents submitted a written manifestation on July 17, 1987, confirming understanding of their citation and promise not to repeat the acts.
Issues:
- Did the intermittent pickets and related acts of the Union of Filipro Employees and the Kimberly Independent Labor Union constitute direct contempt of court?
- Should the Court impose the sanctions for contempt or accept the respondents’ apologies and forego punishment?
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)