Title
Supreme Court
Ace Promotion and Marketing Corp. vs. Ursabia
Case
G.R. No. 171703
Decision Date
Sep 22, 2006
Driver dismissed for willful disobedience after failing to respond to memoranda; dismissal valid but procedural due process violated, awarding nominal damages.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 171703)

Background of Employment

Reynaldo Ursabia was hired by Ace Promotion and Marketing Corporation in August 1994 as a company driver responsible for picking up products from Nestle Philippines, Inc. His reported issues began on July 6, 2001, when he failed to report for work, leading to a series of employer communications regarding his absence and subsequent actions.

Notices and Allegations

Upon his return on July 9, 2001, Ursabia was served a memorandum from his area supervisor, Gerry Garcia, notifying him of the alleged abandonment of duty due to his absence. Ursabia refused to acknowledge the memorandum, which was then sent via registered mail. Subsequently, another memorandum was issued on July 10, 2001, addressing damage to the company vehicle assigned to him, along with accusations of misbehavior. These documents demanded explanations for his actions and failure to respond promptly.

Development of Dismissal Case

On August 6, 2001, Ursabia was formally terminated from employment through a termination letter, which cited violations of company rules. Despite denying receipt, the termination letter was again sent via registered mail. In response, Ursabia filed a complaint for illegal dismissal, leading to a series of labor-related hearings.

Labor Arbiter’s Decision

The Labor Arbiter ruled in favor of Ursabia on May 9, 2002, declaring his dismissal illegal and awarding him back wages, separation pay, and other benefits totaling P129,537.65.

Appeals and Commission Findings

The decision was appealed to the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC), which in a decision dated November 27, 2003, overturned the Labor Arbiter’s ruling, finding that Ursabia had indeed abandoned his position. The Court of Appeals later reviewed the case, deciding on August 25, 2005, that Ursabia was illegally dismissed, reinstating the Labor Arbiter's decision minus the 13th-month pay.

Legal Grounds for Dismissal

The primary issues examined included whether there was just cause for dismissal and whether due process was afforded. The Court emphasized that abandonment requires both absence without valid reason and an intention to sever the employment relationship. The Court determined that Ursabia did not exhibit such intent, as he returned to work and did not implicitly terminate his employment.

Willful Disobedience and Procedural Due Process

While Ursabia's absence was noted as problematic, the Court found that his actions in not responding to the memoranda constituted willful disobedience. However, the Court also identified a lack of procedural due process, noting that Ursabia was n

...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.