Title
Supreme Court
PCL Shipping Phil. Inc. vs. National Labor Relations Commission
Case
G.R. No. 148418
Decision Date
Jul 28, 2005
Seafarer Lamique was illegally dismissed after reporting abusive treatment; courts upheld his claims, awarding damages for unexpired contract and due process violations.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 148418)

Relevant Facts

On August 11, 1995, Lamique entered into a contract with PCL Shipping Philippines, Inc. for a nine-month tour aboard MV "Alam Acapulco," starting on August 18, 1995. His employment conditions included a monthly salary of $1,280, vacation pay, and bonus pay. During his service, Lamique faced difficulties with the Chief Officer, who treated Filipino crew members abusively. On January 16, 1996, he found out that his services were no longer needed, leading to his repatriation on January 18, 1996.

Legal Proceedings in Labor Arbiter

On October 28, 1997, Lamique filed a complaint for illegal dismissal before the Labor Arbiter, requesting payment for the remainder of his contract, damages, and attorney's fees. The petitioners contended that Lamique had left the ship without permission on two occasions and refused to sign off or continue working, prompting his dismissal. The Labor Arbiter decided on August 14, 1998, in favor of Lamique, ordering the petitioners to pay the equivalent of $5,073.00 in Philippine currency and dismissing all other claims.

National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) Ruling

PCL appealed to the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC), which affirmed the Labor Arbiter's ruling and emphasized that Lamique was wrongfully terminated without due process. The NLRC modified the decision on November 20, 1999, upholding the salary award while ordering an additional indemnity of ₱10,000 due to the lack of procedural due process.

Court of Appeals Ruling

The petitioners' subsequent appeal to the Court of Appeals was denied on December 1, 2000, upholding the NLRC's decision for reinstatement and indemnity. The Court further denied a motion for reconsideration on May 18, 2001.

Issues Raised by Petitioners

The petitioners contended that the Court of Appeals erred in its assessment, claiming that the proceedings were abbreviated and that due process was not afforded to them. They also argued that the dismissal was valid and based on lawful cause, disputing the reinstatement of the Labor Arbiter's judgment and the indemnity award.

Legal Standards for Certiorari Appeals

In its review, the Supreme Court reiterated that Petitions for Certiorari under Rule 45 typically address only questions of law rather than issues of fact. The Court emphasized the discretionary nature of the Court of Appeals' proceedings post-comment submission, asserting that the Court's decision to render judgment without additional pleadings was within its authority.

Burden of Proof in Dismissal Cases

It was highlighted that the employer bears the burden of proof in demonstrating a just and valid cause for dis

...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.