Title
Hydro Resources Contractors Corp. vs. Pagalilauan
Case
G.R. No. 62909
Decision Date
Apr 18, 1989
Rogelio Aban, hired as a Legal Assistant, was illegally dismissed by Hydro Resources Contractors Corp. The Supreme Court ruled an employer-employee relationship existed, affirming jurisdiction and awarding reinstatement, backwages, and attorney’s fees.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 62909)

Employment and Dismissal Events

Rogelio A. Aban was employed by Hydro Resources Contractors Corporation on October 24, 1978, with an initial salary of ₱1,500.00 and a gradually increasing living allowance. On September 4, 1980, he was informed of his termination effective October 4, 1980, due to alleged poor performance, leading Aban to file a complaint for illegal dismissal on October 6, 1980. The Labor Arbiter ruled in favor of Aban, which was affirmed by the NLRC, prompting the current petition for review.

Jurisdictional Issue

The core issue presented by the petitioner is whether an employer-employee relationship existed between Hydro Resources and Aban. The petitioner contends that their relationship was akin to that of a client and a lawyer, arguing that lawyers cannot be regarded as employees while performing legal services. Consequently, it asserts that the labor arbiter and NLRC lacked jurisdiction over the case.

Court's Analysis on Employer-Employee Relationship

The court disagrees with the petitioner's position, stating that lawyers can indeed be employees, highlighting the difference between in-house counsel, who may be treated as employees, and external legal practitioners. The determination of an employer-employee relationship considers factors such as the manner of selection and engagement, mode of payment, power of dismissal, and crucially, the power to control the employee's conduct. The right-of-control test is the decisive factor in this analysis.

Evidence of Employment by Hydro Resources

Aban's status as an employee was corroborated by evidence, including his appointment paper and the fact that he was paid a regular salary and allowance. Aban's duties extended beyond strictly legal tasks, as he assisted with internal administrative functions, further solidifying the characterization of his role as that of an employee.

Estoppel and Procedural Issues

The court points out that the petitioner presented evidence seeking to argue for Aban's managerial status during the proceedings but now attempts to disclaim any employment relationship. The court holds that the company is estopped from contesting the jurisdiction of the labor tribunal based on its prior assertions and documentation.

Decision and Relief Granted

The court affirms that since Aban's dismissal was illegal, he is entitled to reinstatement to his previous position with seniority rights intact and to three years’ worth of back wages, alongside reasonable attorney’s fees. Sh

...continue reading

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