Title
Celiz vs. Cord Chemicals, Inc.
Case
G.R. No. 200352
Decision Date
Jul 20, 2016
Mary June Celiz, a high-ranking employee, was dismissed for failing to account for P445,272.93 in cash advances, deemed a serious breach of trust. The Supreme Court upheld her termination, finding substantial evidence and due process compliance.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 200352)

Factual Antecedents

Mary June Celiz commenced her employment with Cord Chemicals, Inc. in 1992, eventually rising to the position of Chief of Sales. Following the death of Francisco Sanz, the former owner and her alleged paramour, Celiz faced dismissal purportedly due to unliquidated cash advances amounting to P713,471.00. She claimed that her dismissal was motivated by jealousy from Leonor Sanz and that the allegations of financial misconduct were fabricated. Despite Celiz's attempts to resign amicably, she was dismissed for failing to account for these advances.

Employment Dispute

Celiz's dismissal was preceded by a notice to explain her failure to liquidate advances, leading to preventive suspension. Following an internal audit revealing significant discrepancies in her financial management, she was officially dismissed on December 6, 2008. Celiz contested the dismissal through labor litigation, claiming illegal dismissal and asserting that the charges against her were unfounded.

Proceedings Before Labor Arbiter

Celiz’s claim of illegal dismissal was initially dismissed by the Labor Arbiter, who concluded that there was just cause for termination based on a serious breach of trust and confidence. The decision highlighted that as a managerial employee, she was obligated to handle funds with utmost integrity, and her failure to liquidate the cash advances constituted misconduct justifying her dismissal.

Appeal to the NLRC

Celiz elevated her case to the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC), which upheld the Labor Arbiter's ruling. The NLRC found no grounds for reconsideration, endorsing the Labor Arbiter’s findings of procedural compliance and substantial evidence backing the dismissal.

Court of Appeals Ruling

Celiz subsequently filed a petition for certiorari with the Court of Appeals, which also affirmed the NLRC's decision. The Court emphasized the compelling evidence demonstrating Celiz’s breach of trust and her inadequate defense against the claims of unliquidated cash advances. It reiterated that loss of trust and confidence does not require proof beyond a reasonable doubt but rather a reasonable basis for believing the employee’s misconduct.

Key Legal Principles

The decision accentuates the principle that employers must demonstrate a reasonable ground for dismissal based on trust loss, particularly for managerial employees. The jurisprudence also articulates that proced

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster, building context before diving into full texts. AI-powered analysis, always verify critical details.