Title
Temic Automotive , Inc. vs. Cantos
Case
G.R. No. 200729
Decision Date
Sep 29, 2014
Employee dismissed for alleged purchasing irregularities; Supreme Court ruled illegal dismissal due to lack of substantial evidence and procedural violations, affirming CA's reversal of NLRC decision.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 200729)

Antecedents

On March 9, 2009, Cantos filed a complaint for illegal dismissal against Temic and Wadewitz. Cantos began his tenure at Temic on July 16, 1993, serving in various capacities, ultimately as the Warehouse & Import-Export Manager. In late 2008, an audit from Temic's head office uncovered alleged irregularities in purchasing transactions, purportedly implicating Cantos due to his previous role as Purchasing Manager.

Allegations and Charges

Temic issued a Show Cause and Preventive Suspension Notice on December 11, 2008, citing violations of its purchasing procedures. Cantos was charged with failing to follow established protocols, including securing the required number of quotations for purchases and engaging suppliers without proper contracts. He was also accused of serious infractions, including insubordination and breach of trust.

Cantos's Defense

In his response, Cantos contended that he was unjustly targeted. He argued that deviations from purchasing procedures were permitted under certain circumstances and that he acted within acceptable limits while managing over 30,000 transactions. He highlighted that the specific purchase orders involved were within the jurisdiction of another entity, CTEPI, which had different purchasing procedures. During an administrative investigation, Cantos maintained his compliance with company policies and attributed the suspected irregularities to other employees.

Administrative and Judicial Proceedings

Labor Arbiter Jaime M. Reyno dismissed Cantos's complaint for lacking merit, affirming the loss of trust and confidence in him due to purported infractions. However, on appeal, the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) upheld the Labor Arbiter's ruling. Cantos subsequently sought relief from the Court of Appeals (CA), arguing that the NLRC had erred in its decision.

Court of Appeals Ruling

The CA reversed the NLRC's ruling, declaring that Cantos's dismissal was illegal. The CA found no valid cause for termination and determined that due process was not afforded to Cantos during the investigation process. It noted that Temic’s evidence primarily referenced transactions related to CTEPI, which was separate from Temic. Therefore, the CA ordered full backwages, separation pay, and damages for Cantos, while absolving Wadewitz of personal liability.

Temic's Petition

Temic appealed the CA’s judgment, asserting that the labor tribunals had appropriately evaluated the evidence and that Cantos had effectively admitted wrongdoing. Temic maintained that it had sufficient grounds for dismissal based on Cantos’s managerial responsibilities.

Court's Ruling

The Supreme Court denied the petition for la

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster—building context before diving into full texts.