Title
Benitez vs. Santa Fe Moving and Relocation Services/Vedit Kurangil
Case
G.R. No. 208163
Decision Date
Apr 20, 2015
Employee dismissed for verbally abusing superior at a company Christmas party; SC upheld dismissal for serious misconduct but reduced nominal damages for procedural due process violations.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 103525)

Antecedents

Petitioner Benitez filed a complaint asserting unfair labor practices and illegal dismissal after being terminated on December 20, 2010, based on purported serious misconduct for allegedly verbally abusing Kurangil during the Christmas party. Benitez contended that he was denied an opportunity to defend himself against the accusations and that the dismissal was disproportionate to the alleged offense. The respondents argued that Benitez's conduct constituted serious misconduct, warranting termination due to the inappropriate and disruptive nature of his actions during a public gathering attended by employees, their families, and clients.

Compulsory Arbitration Rulings

The Labor Arbiter found Benitez’s dismissal justified due to serious misconduct and affirmed the employer's decision. This was later upheld by the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC), which acknowledged procedural due process violations regarding the notice requirements but still confirmed the validity of the dismissal for serious misconduct. The NLRC awarded nominal damages to Benitez for the due process violation.

Court of Appeals Decision

The Court of Appeals (CA) upheld the NLRC's ruling, agreeing that the dismissal was justified based on the evidence presented. The CA stated that the findings were consistent with the evidence of serious misconduct, which warranted the termination despite the recognition of due process infringements.

The Petition

Benitez and the union sought a reversal of the CA’s ruling, arguing that the CA misapplied facts and relevant legal principles, particularly regarding allegations of serious misconduct. They claimed that the incident did not justify dismissal as it was not work-related and should be viewed as trivial behavior.

Respondents' Case

The respondents opposed the petition, asserting that it raised factual rather than legal questions, which are not generally suitable for review. They maintained that the evidence overwhelmingly supported Benitez’s termination for serious misconduct and that procedural irregularities concerning the two-notice requirement should not invalidate the dismissal.

Court’s Ruling on Procedural Issues

The Court resolved that the petition presented a question of law regarding the interpretation of the offense committed rather than solely a question of fact, which allowed it to proceed with the review. The uniformity of the ruling by multiple bodies indicated substantial evidence for Benitez's misconduct.

Substantive Analysis on Serious Misconduct

The Court reiterated that serious misconduct constitutes just cause for termination under Article 282 of the Labor Code. The evidence indicated that Benitez engaged in inappropriate and abusive

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur is a legal research platform serving the Philippines with case digests and jurisprudence resources.