Case Summary (G.R. No. 128805)
Dismissal of Employee
On January 15, 1992, Jaime Cagatan was dismissed from his position for allegedly being absent without leave for a prolonged period of six months. Following his dismissal, Cagatan filed a complaint for illegal dismissal before the NLRC, specifically under docket number NLRC-NCR Case No. 00-06-3163-92.
Motion to Dismiss
In response to Cagatan's complaint, Sulpicio Lines filed a Motion to Dismiss on June 25, 1992. The basis for this motion was improper venue, as the petitioner argued that the case should have been initiated in NLRC Regional Branch No. VII in Cebu City, where its principal office is located.
Labor Arbiter's Ruling
Labor Arbiter Arthur L. Amansec denied the Motion to Dismiss on August 21, 1992, stating that since Cagatan was a ship steward who traveled on the ship's route that included Manila, the location could be considered part of Cagatan’s territorial workplace.
NLRC Decision
Petitioner appealed the Labor Arbiter's ruling. However, on February 28, 1994, the NLRC found the appeal unmeritorious. The NLRC emphasized that under the New NLRC Rules, a change of venue could be ordered, and they stated that the labor arbiter acted within his discretion by allowing the case to proceed in Manila where Cagatan resided.
Reconsideration and Certiorari
After the NLRC denied a motion for reconsideration on July 22, 1994, Sulpicio Lines proceeded to file a Special Civil Action for Certiorari under Rule 65 of the Rules of Court. The petitioner claimed that the NLRC acted with grave abuse of discretion.
Petitioner’s Argument
The principal argument posited by the petitioner was that a vessel is considered an extension of its homeport. Sulpicio Lines claimed that because the vessel operates under the jurisdiction of Cebu City, any labor complaint should be filed there.
Court's Analysis on Venue
The court disagreed with the petitioner’s stance on venue, referencing previous rulings which assert that the question of venue is largely about convenience for the parties involved. The Court stated that rules of venue are designed to assure that justice is not impeded by procedural technicalities, especially in labor disputes.
Convenience of Complainant
The Court noted that holding hearings in Cebu City would impose undue hardship on Cagatan, who was a steward residing in Metro Manila. The Greater ease of access for the complainant was deemed crucial in determining the venue.
NLRC Rules on Venue
The Court examined the NLRC Rules, specifically Section 1, Rule IV, which gives discretion i
...continue readingCase Syllabus (G.R. No. 128805)
Case Overview
- The case involves Sulpicio Lines, Inc., the petitioner, and the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) along with Jaime Cagatan, the private respondent.
- Jaime Cagatan, employed as a messman on the MV Cotabato Princess, was dismissed on January 15, 1992, for allegedly being absent without leave for six months.
- Following his dismissal, Cagatan filed a complaint for illegal dismissal with the NLRC, specifically in its National Capital Region Arbitration Branch in Manila.
Procedural Background
- Sulpicio Lines, Inc. filed a Motion to Dismiss on June 25, 1992, claiming improper venue, arguing that the case should have been filed in NLRC Regional Branch No. VII in Cebu City, where the company’s principal office is located.
- The Labor Arbiter, Arthur L. Amansec, denied the Motion to Dismiss on August 21, 1992, stating that Manila was part of Cagatan’s territorial workplace as he worked aboard the vessel traveling along specified routes.
- This ruling was appealed to the NLRC, which upheld the Labor Arbiter’s decision on February 28, 1994, citing the principle that the State