Title
Comsavings Bank vs. National Labor Relations Commission
Case
G.R. No. 98456
Decision Date
Jun 14, 1996
Two bank employees dismissed for alleged policy violations challenged their termination; Supreme Court upheld reinstatement, citing insufficient evidence of misconduct.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 98456)

Applicable Law

This case invokes concepts related to employment and labor law, particularly regarding just causes for dismissal as stipulated under the Labor Code of the Philippines. Furthermore, the constitutional right to security of tenure for employees is a critical consideration in determining the legitimacy of the termination.

Factual Background

On May 2, 1988, internal auditors detected a P10,000 cash shortage in the Gen. Trias Branch, associated with withdrawals made by respondent Portuguez through respondent Caparas. Subsequent inquiries into this incident revealed discrepancies in their adherence to banking policies regarding cash management and overnight transactions. The Respondents submitted explanations but were eventually terminated for allegedly abusing co-management procedures and violating internal control measures.

Labor Arbiter's Decision

Respondents filed complaints for illegal dismissal with the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC). On September 11, 1989, the Labor Arbiter ruled in favor of the respondents, ordering their reinstatement and awarding significant moral damages. The decision emphasized the lack of credible evidence supporting the petitioner’s claims against the respondents, noting that their actions fell within accepted banking practices concerning overnight transactions.

NLRC's Ruling

Upon appeal, the Third Division of the NLRC affirmed the Labor Arbiter's decision on November 29, 1990, but modified the moral damages awards for excessiveness. The NLRC justified its decision by highlighting the absence of conclusive proof supporting the charges of misconduct against the respondents, alongside their historical performance and commendations received during their employment.

Petition for Certiorari

Dissatisfied with the NLRC’s ruling, Comsavings Bank sought recourse through a petition for certiorari under Rule 65 of the Revised Rules of Court, arguing grave abuse of discretion by the NLRC and Labor Arbiter. The petition contested the evaluation of evidence and the legitimacy of respondents' retention despite the alleged misconduct.

Supreme Court's Assessment

The Supreme Court dismissed the petition, finding no merit in the argument of grave abuse of discretion. It underscored that the standard for dismissals based on loss of confidence requires a factual basis supported by evidence. T

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster—building context before diving into full texts.