Title
Supreme Court
Rubberworld , Inc. vs. National Labor Relations Commission
Case
G.R. No. 126773
Decision Date
Apr 14, 1999
Rubberworld sought suspension of payments under P.D. 902-A; SC ruled labor claims must be suspended during rehabilitation to prioritize corporate recovery.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 217169)

Applicable Law

The decision references Presidential Decree No. 902-A, which governs insolvency proceedings and the corresponding suspension of actions against distressed corporations. This decree is crucial for understanding the treatment of claims against corporations undergoing rehabilitation.

Factual Background

Rubberworld (Phils.), Inc. was engaged in manufacturing footwear, bags, and garments. In November 1994, it petitioned the SEC for a suspension of payments, citing its inability to meet debts. The SEC granted this petition on December 28, 1994, creating a management committee and suspending all claims against the corporation—this included labor-related claims pending before the NLRC.

Proceedings Before the Labor Arbiter

From April to July 1995, the private respondents filed complaints against Rubberworld for claims including illegal dismissal and other labor-related compensation. Rubberworld's request to suspend these proceedings, based on the SEC's suspension order, was denied by the Labor Arbiter on September 25, 1995. The Arbiter ruled that while the SEC order applied to established rights, it did not extend to the pending labor claims, which required adjudication.

NLRC Resolutions

Rubberworld's subsequent appeal to the NLRC was dismissed, affirming the Labor Arbiter's decisions in resolutions dated April 26, 1996, and June 20, 1996. These decisions prompted Rubberworld to seek relief from the Supreme Court under Rule 65 of the Rules of Court, claiming that the NLRC acted with grave abuse of discretion.

Core Issue

The central issue raised by Rubberworld was whether the NLRC exceeded its jurisdiction by not suspending proceedings for labor claims in light of the SEC’s suspension order, as mandated by P.D. 902-A.

Supreme Court Ruling

The Supreme Court found merit in the petition and ruled that the actions of the NLRC were contrary to the provisions of P.D. 902-A. The Court emphasized that once a management committee is formed, all claims against the corporation, including labor-related lawsuits, must be suspended automatically. This automatic stay is put in place to ensure that the management committee can focus on rehabilitating the enterprise without the distraction of ongoing litigation.

Automatic Stay of Claims

The ruling articulated that allowing labor disputes to continue while a rehabilitation process is underway would undermine the legislative intent of the suspension provisions. It would necessitate the allocation of resources to litigation rather than rehabilitation efforts.

No Exceptions for Labor Claims

The Court clarified that no exceptions exist for labor claims within the context of the automatic stay as articulated in the relevant statutes. All claims for actions are treated uniformly under the law; as a result, the NLRC’s refusal to suspend labor claims was ruled as an overreach of its jurisdiction.

Relationship Between Rehabilitation and Labor Claims

The decision noted that labor claims gain priority only upon the declaration of insolvency or bankruptcy, which was not applicable in this case since the proceedings were focused on rehabilitation rather than liquidation. The constr

...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.