Title
Ilas vs. National Labor Relations Commission
Case
G.R. No. 90394-97
Decision Date
Feb 7, 1991
Petitioners, recruited by unlicensed agency CBT/Shiek International, worked unpaid in Qatar. Claims against licensed agency All Seasons dismissed; SC ruled no liability due to lack of direct involvement and fraudulent use of name.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 90394-97)

Background of the Case

The petitioners sought overseas employment through CBT/Shiek International, an unlicensed recruitment agency. They engaged the services of the Ngohos, paid placement fees, and later received assistance from Espeno, who processed their paperwork. Upon arrival in Doha, the petitioners worked for four months without receiving any salaries. Following their return to the Philippines, they filed a complaint against All Seasons Manpower International Services for unpaid wages and sought recovery for their placement fees.

Initial Rulings

The Philippine Overseas Employment Administration (POEA) initially ruled in favor of the petitioners, ordering the refund of placement fees, but dismissing the claims for unpaid salaries due to lack of merit. Both parties appealed the decision, resulting in the NLRC subsequently awarding the petitioners four months of unpaid salaries but later retracting this decision to dismiss the case entirely after a motion for reconsideration from the private respondent.

Legal Issues and Arguments

The core issue addressed was whether a recruitment agency can be held liable for unpaid wages and claims when the recruitment was conducted without its knowledge or consent. The petitioners argued that public respondent committed a grave abuse of discretion in dismissing their case. However, the court indicated that it does not act as a trier of fact and respects the findings of administrative bodies like the NLRC unless a grave abuse of discretion is shown.

Findings of the Court

The court concluded that the petitioners failed to demonstrate that All Seasons Manpower International Services could be held liable. Key findings included that the petitioners directly applied to an unlicensed recruitment agency (CBT/Shiek International) and that their employment was contracted under this agency rather than the licensed entity. Importantly, the court noted that the documents used by the petitioners for deployment were deemed fake, and both the petitioners and Espeno ut

...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.