Case Digest (G.R. No. 117196)
Case Digest (G.R. No. 117196)
Facts:
Ladislao P. Vergara v. National Labor Relations Commission and Aris Philippines, Inc., G.R. No. 117196, December 05, 1997, Supreme Court Third Division, Panganiban, J., writing for the Court.Petitioner Ladislao P. Vergara was employed by Aris Philippines, Inc. and was dismissed effective November 7, 1987 after security guards discovered pieces of stripping leather in his bag when he attempted to leave the plant. The company filed a criminal information for attempted qualified theft (Criminal Case No. 4295), and Vergara was arrested and detained; he was subsequently acquitted on August 17, 1988 for failure of the prosecution to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
Vergara filed a complaint for illegal dismissal before the labor arbiter. At the hearing he was the sole witness; respondent company did not present live witnesses but offered certified copies of testimony from the criminal proceedings. The labor arbiter rendered a decision on November 3, 1989 finding the dismissal illegal and ordering reinstatement with backwages (the decision did not compute the monetary award) and attorneys’ fees of 10% of the monetary award.
Aris Philippines appealed to the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC). Because the labor arbiter’s award omitted a computation of backwages, the NLRC initially dismissed the appeal on May 31, 1991 for failure to post an appeal bond, but later reconsidered and, by order of September 29, 1993, directed respondent to post a bond after the Commission fixed the amount of the award at P59,904.00. After the bond was posted, the NLRC on April 29, 1994 set aside the labor arbiter’s decision and dismissed Vergara’s complaint. Vergara’s motion for reconsideration was denied by NLRC on August 17, 1994.
Vergara filed a petition for certiorari under Rule 65 of the Rules of Court assailing (a) NLRC’s allowance of Aris’s appeal despite its initial failure to timely post an appeal bond, (b) NLRC’s April 29, 1994 decision setting aside the labor arbiter and dismissing his illegal dismissal complaint despite his acquittal in the criminal case, and (c) NLRC’s denial of his motion for reconsideration. The case was submitted for resolution upon receipt of Aris’s memorandum on January 10, 1997.
Issues:
- May the NLRC give due course to an employer’s appeal despite the employer’s failure to timely post the appeal/supersedeas bond where the labor arbiter’s decision did not state the exact amount of the monetary award?
- Does an employee’s acquittal in a criminal case arising from the same act that led to dismissal automatically entitle the employee to reinstatement and backwages?
- Did the NLRC commit reversible error in denying Vergara’s motion for reconsideration by focusing on form and style rather than substance?
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)