Title
Supreme Court
Noblejas vs. Italian Maritime Academy Philippines, Inc.
Case
G.R. No. 207888
Decision Date
Jun 9, 2014
Noblejas, a training instructor, claimed illegal dismissal after a verbal altercation; SC ruled him a regular employee but found no proof of dismissal, awarding proportionate 13th month pay and reinstatement.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 207888)

Background of the Case

Dionarto Q. Noblejas, the petitioner, filed a complaint for illegal dismissal against IMAPI and several individuals after he was informed of the alleged termination of his employment as a training instructor/assessor, a position he had held on a contractual basis. Noblejas was initially hired for three months at a salary of ₱75,000.00, after which he was rehired without a written contract. Following an incident on March 16, 2010, when he sought clarification regarding his employment status and benefits, he was reportedly dismissed by Capt. Terrei’s secretary, Ferrez.

Position of the Respondents

In response, the respondents contended that there was no formal dismissal from employment, arguing that Noblejas voluntarily severed his ties with IMAPI after becoming dissatisfied with their response to his demands. They characterized him as a contractual employee and asserted that he was not entitled to several claims he filed, including 13th month pay.

Labor Arbiter's Ruling

After evaluating the evidence, the Labor Arbiter found that Noblejas was indeed illegally dismissed. The Arbiter determined that he was a regular employee entitled to certain benefits, including back wages and separation pay, due to the essential nature of his work within IMAPI's business. Consequently, the Labor Arbiter ordered IMAPI to pay Noblejas his back wages, separation pay, and 13th month pay.

National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) Appeal

Dissatisfied with the Arbiter's decision, the respondents appealed to the NLRC. The NLRC reversed the Labor Arbiter’s ruling, stating that there was no evidence of a formal act of dismissal. They maintained that Noblejas was a contractual employee, and thus had no right to the financial benefits he claimed. The NLRC concluded that Noblejas had effectively resigned and had failed to provide substantial evidence to support his allegations regarding his dismissal.

Court of Appeals Decision

Noblejas subsequently filed a petition for certiorari with the Court of Appeals, challenging the NLRC's decision. However, the CA upheld the NLRC's findings, confirming that there was no illegal dismissal and reinforcing that Noblejas was a contractual employee.

Supreme Court's Evaluation

In the Supreme Court, the core issues revolved around the determination of Noblejas’ employment status and whether he had been illegally dismissed. The Court found Noblejas to be a regular employee based on the essential nature of his work and the continuity of his engagement after the initial cont

...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.