Title
Development Bank of the Philippines vs. National Labor Relations Commission
Case
G.R. No. 108031
Decision Date
Mar 1, 1995
Leonor Ang, terminated after TPWII's foreclosure, sought separation pay. SC ruled worker preference under Labor Code requires formal bankruptcy/liquidation, absolving DBP of liability.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 108031)

Applicable Law

The primary legal considerations arise under Article 110 of the Labor Code, which discusses worker preference in cases of bankruptcy or liquidation of an employer's business. The provision emphasizes the priority of unpaid wages for workers over other creditors, and its interpretation has been shaped by relevant jurisprudence, including Development Bank of the Philippines v. Santos.

Findings of the Labor Arbiter

The Labor Arbiter determined that TPWII was primarily liable for Ang's separation pay along with vacation and sick leave pay, having cleared other claims following the complaint filing. The General Manager was absolved of any liability, while DBP was held subsidiarily liable, contingent upon TPWII's failure to satisfy the judgment. The Arbiter asserted that workers' rights to payment from employer assets supersede the rights of the mortgagee.

NLRC's Ruling

The NLRC upheld the Labor Arbiter's findings, addressing the applicability of Article 110 of the Labor Code without a formal declaration of bankruptcy or judicial liquidation. The NLRC argued that the provision still grants a preference for workers regarding their claims despite the absence of such formal proceedings.

Supreme Court's Determination of Abuse of Discretion

The Supreme Court determined that the NLRC committed grave abuse of discretion in its ruling, asserting that Article 110 should not be invoked without a declaration of bankruptcy or judicial liquidation. The Court emphasized that the enforcement of worker preference claims should adhere to the formalized procedures mandated by governing laws to ensure an orderly distribution of the debtor's assets.

Interpretation of Article 110

The Court examined the provisions of Article 110, noting that the previous interpretations emphasized the necessity of formal bankruptcy proceedings for workers’ claims to be considered. The provision, as amended under Republic Act No. 6715, broadened the scope of worker claims to include not only unpaid wages but also other monetary claims. However, the principles established in prior cases remained that without a formal bankruptcy declaration, the worker's preference cannot be operationalized.

Authority over Priority of Claims

The Supreme Court highlighted the distinction between a "preference" and a "lien", concluding that Article 110 does not create a lien on the employer's properties in favor of workers but provides a framework for credit preference within liquidation contexts. The Court re

...continue reading

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