Title
Supreme Court
Abante, Jr. vs. Lamadrid Bearing and Parts Corp.
Case
G.R. No. 159890
Decision Date
May 28, 2004
Commission-based salesman denied employee status due to lack of control; Supreme Court upheld no employer-employee relationship, dismissing claims of coercion and illegal dismissal.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 159890)

Employment Background

Empermaco B. Abante, Jr. started working for Lamadrid Bearing & Parts Corporation as a salesman in June 1985, earning a commission of 3% on total paid-up sales for the Mindanao region. His income ranged from approximately P16,000 to P20,269.50 monthly. In addition to selling, he handled the collection of payments from customers. The president, Jose Lamadrid, exercised significant control over Abante's work assignments and activity planning.

Issue of Bad Accounts

In 1998, the petitioner faced issues with five customers who had accumulated bad accounts totaling P687,166.62. Respondent Lamadrid demanded that Abante issue personal checks to cover these bad accounts, threatening non-payment of his commissions and potential job loss if he did not comply. Despite his reservations, Abante issued the checks under the condition that they not be deposited and that their amounts be deducted from his commissions.

Execution of Promissory Note and Mortgage

The petitioner later signed additional documents, namely a Promissory Note and a Deed of Real Estate Mortgage, under conditions he later argued were coercive and misleading. Although initially assured that the checks would not be deposited, the respondents ultimately deposited them, leading to dishonor due to an "Account Closed" status.

Legal Action and Claims

Following a demand letter from the respondents for payment of the dishonored checks, Abante filed a complaint for illegal dismissal with money claims against Lamadrid and the corporation. The respondents defended against his claims by asserting that he was merely a freelance salesman and therefore not entitled to the protections granted to employees under the Labor Code.

Findings of the Labor Arbiter

The Labor Arbiter ruled in favor of Abante, awarding him a substantial amount for separation pay, back wages, unpaid commissions, and damages. The ruling was based on the determination of an employer-employee relationship, emphasizing the need for appropriate compensation and benefits due to Abante's long tenure.

Appeal to NLRC

The National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) overturned the Labor Arbiter’s decision, dismissing the complaint on the grounds of lack of cause of action, asserting that no employer-employee relationship existed between Abante and the respondents. The NLRC considered the nature of the commission-based relationship and the absence of control by the respondents over Abante's work.

Court of Appeals Decision

Abante's appeal to the Court of Appeals was also denied. The appellate court reiterated that the control test was absent, concluding that Abante was not an employee but rather acted as a commission-based freelance salesman. The court found that although Abante brought in substantial sales, he was free to enga

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur is a legal research platform serving the Philippines with case digests and jurisprudence resources. AI digests are study aids only—use responsibly.