Title
Dela Torre vs. Twinstar Professional Protective Services, Inc.
Case
G.R. No. 222992
Decision Date
Jun 23, 2021
A security guard claimed illegal dismissal and underpayment after being placed on floating status. Courts ruled no constructive dismissal but awarded nominal damages for procedural due process violations, affirming the validity of a quitclaim.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 222992)

Facts of the Case

Jose R. Dela Torre was hired as a security guard by Twinstar Professional Protective Services, Inc., and was assigned at Las Haciendas in Tarlac City, earning a daily wage of P240.00. In January 2011, he sought help from a media personality for alleged underpayment of wages. He was later placed on floating status and subsequently did not report for duty, which led to him filing a complaint for illegal dismissal and non-payment of salaries on August 23, 2011. After an initial decision favoring him by the Labor Arbiter, Twinstar's appeal to the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) dismissed the claim, asserting that he did not incur constructive dismissal.

Ruling of the Labor Arbiter

On March 19, 2012, the Labor Arbiter ruled that Dela Torre had been constructively dismissed. The decision ordered Twinstar to pay backwages amounting to Php118,664.83 and separation pay of Php157,560.00. Twinstar appealed this decision to the NLRC.

Defense and Ruling of the NLRC

Twinstar argued that Dela Torre had been absent without leave (AWOL) since January 21, 2011, and provided evidence of attempts to make him return, including notices to report for duty. The NLRC, in a decision dated August 16, 2012, reversed the Labor Arbiter’s ruling, deeming there was no constructive dismissal but acknowledged procedural due process was not followed in the termination. The NLRC emphasized the existence of a valid Quitclaim signed by Dela Torre, dismissing the complaint for lack of merit.

Ruling of the Court of Appeals

The Court of Appeals, in its decision on September 3, 2015, upheld the NLRC’s ruling, stating that the admission of Twinstar's evidence during the appeal was not an abuse of discretion. It further validated the Quitclaim and denied Dela Torre's appeal for nominal damages, citing procedural infirmities in the termination process were alleviated by the Quitclaim.

Issues Presented

  1. Whether the CA erred in admitting Twinstar's new evidence submitted during the appeal.
  2. Whether the CA erred in determining that Dela Torre was not illegally dismissed.
  3. Whether the CA erred in denying the award of nominal damages due to the Quitclaim.

Supreme Court's Ruling

The Supreme Court denied the petition but recognized that while Twinstar had a valid ground for termination, it failed to adhere to due process requirements, violating the "two-notice rule" mandated by the Labor Code. Consequently, while no constructive dismissal occurred, Dela Torre was entitled to nominal damages for the procedural due process violation. The Court highlighted the need for proper notice and a fair opportunity for the employee to defend themselves in termination cases.

Nominal Damages and Quitclaim

...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.