Case Digest (G.R. No. 161366)
Facts:
Sycip, Gorres, Velayo & Company v. Carol De Raedt, G.R. No. 161366, June 16, 2009, Supreme Court First Division, Carpio, J., writing for the Court.
In 1989 the Government of the Philippines and the Commission of the European Communities agreed to finance rural micro projects under the Central Cordillera Agricultural Programme (CECAP), which the Department of Agriculture (DA) would implement. The DA engaged Travers Morgan International Ltd. (TMI) on 22 May 1989 to provide technical assistance for CECAP. On 1 July 1989, TMI subcontracted part of those services to Sycip, Gorres, Velayo & Company (SGV) under a Sub-Consultancy Agreement; SGV in turn was to propose qualified consultants and facilitate their engagement subject to the approval of TMI, the DA and the Commission.
For the sociologist post SGV initially proposed Felino Lorente, but the DA's Thomas Gimenez disputed Lorente’s qualifications and recommended Carol De Raedt. TMI agreed to consider De Raedt and the DA and Commission later approved her nomination; De Raedt signed a letter-agreement with SGV on 14 July 1989 to start full-time work (ultimately on 15 August 1989) and resigned from her teaching post to take the assignment.
While on the CECAP project complaints—verbal and written—about De Raedt’s performance and interpersonal relations surfaced. TMI investigated and concluded her retention would be counter-productive; by letter of 14 June 1991 TMI instructed SGV to withdraw De Raedt, and SGV complied. De Raedt then filed a complaint for illegal dismissal and damages before the Labor Arbiter.
On 14 July 1999 the Labor Arbiter ruled in favor of De Raedt, declaring she was illegally dismissed by SGV and awarding unpaid salaries, moral and exemplary damages, and attorney’s fees. The National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) reversed the Labor Arbiter on 16 February 2000, finding no employer-employee relationship between SGV and De Raedt because (inter alia) selection came from TMI/DA, payments ultimately originated with TMI, SGV merely implemented TMI’s instruction to withdraw her, and the parties’ letter-agreement described De Raedt as an independent contractor. De Raedt petitioned the Court of Appeals (CA) for certiorari; on 7 October 2003 the CA reversed the NLRC and partially reinstated the Labor Arbiter’s award (affirming unpaid salaries, deleting moral/ex...(Pro-only)
Issues:
- Was there an employer-employee relationship between SGV and Carol De Raedt?
- If an employment relationship existed, was De Raedt illegally dismissed by ...(Pro-only)
Ruling:
- (Pro-only)
Ratio:
- (Pro-only)
Doctrine:
- (Pro-only)