Title
Supreme Court
Immaculate Conception Academy vs. Camilon
Case
G.R. No. 188035
Decision Date
Jul 2, 2014
A school accountant was dismissed for gross negligence after failing to supervise a cashier involved in misappropriating funds; her dismissal was upheld, but separation pay was denied.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 188035)

Facts Leading to Dismissal

The dismissal resulted from allegations of financial irregularities involving the school cashier, Janice Loba, which were uncovered during an audit prompted by a complaint from a student's parent regarding issues with payment documentation. The audit conducted by ICA's Internal Auditor revealed substantial unaccounted collections amounting to approximately P1,167,181.45, as well as manipulated records and missing official receipts, which raised concerns regarding Camilon's oversight of the financial operations within her department.

Suspension and Termination Process

Following the audit, on September 1, 2004, Campos suspended Camilon pending investigation, during which she denied any wrongdoing. Subsequently, on October 27, 2004, she was terminated for gross negligence and for failing to adequately supervise the cash department, despite her claims to the contrary.

Legal Proceedings and Initial Decisions

On November 26, 2004, Camilon filed a complaint for illegal dismissal against ICA and Campos. The Labor Arbiter ruled in favor of Camilon, declaring her dismissal illegal due to the lack of substantial evidence for the charges against her and for procedural lapses, such as inadequate notice of the termination grounds.

NLRC and CA Rulings

The National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) later reversed the Arbiter's decision, finding Camilon's dismissal and suspension to be legal while still ordering payment for her unpaid salaries and other benefits accrued prior to termination. The NLRC emphasized the extent of Camilon's negligence as justification for her termination.

The Court of Appeals (CA) upheld the NLRC's findings but modified the decision by awarding separation pay to Camilon, arguing that her long tenure at the institution warranted such an award despite the lawful basis for her dismissal.

Petitioner's Arguments Against Separation Pay

The petitioners challenged the CA's decision, arguing that separation pay should not be awarded due to the nature of Camilon's dismissal for gross and habitual negligence. They contended that such misconduct should negate any entitlement to separation pay, regardless of service length.

Supreme Court's Analysis

The Supreme Court analyzed whether the CA’s grant of separation pay was appropriate, referencing the established principle that employees who are dismissed for just causes, particularly thos

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur is a legal research platform serving the Philippines with case digests and jurisprudence resources. AI digests are study aids only—use responsibly.