Title
Supreme Court
Vigilla vs. Philippine College of Criminology, Inc.
Case
G.R. No. 200094
Decision Date
Jun 10, 2013
Janitors and janitresses, misled as employees of a dissolved contractor, claimed illegal dismissal against PCCr. SC upheld validity of quitclaims, ruled no solidary liability due to releases.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 200094)

Antecedents

The Philippine College of Criminology Inc. (PCCr) is a non-stock educational institution employing the petitioners as maintenance personnel. The petitioners were misled into believing they were employed by Metropolitan Building Services, Inc. (MBMSI), a company providing janitorial services, which was later discovered to have had its Certificate of Incorporation revoked in 2003. In 2009, PCCr terminated its relationship with MBMSI due to this revocation, leading to the dismissal of the petitioners. They subsequently filed complaints for illegal dismissal against MBMSI, PCCr, and Bautista.

Labor Arbiter's Ruling

The Labor Arbiter (LA) rendered a decision confirming that PCCr was the real employer, classifying MBMSI as a labor-only contractor. The LA ordered PCCr to reinstate the petitioners and pay various compensations, including back wages and moral damages. The LA noted that others, including Atty. Florante A. Seril, had acted on behalf of PCCr, furthering subordination.

NLRC Resolutions

Upon appealing to the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC), the respondents were partially vindicated as the NLRC acknowledged the releases, waivers, and quitclaims signed by the petitioners in favor of MBMSI. Consequently, the NLRC held that the petitioners’ claims were settled, thus absolving MBMSI and Atty. Seril from liability.

Court of Appeals' Decision

The Court of Appeals (CA) upheld the NLRC’s findings, emphasizing the validity of the releases, waivers, and quitclaims executed by the petitioners. It noted that the petitioners failed to adequately challenge these documents and substantiated their authenticity.

Grounds for Petition

The petitioners challenged the CA's affirmation of the NLRC’s decisions on several grounds, primarily arguing that there was no legal basis for considering MBMSI’s liability as solidary with PCCr and that the releases extinguished their claims against the respondents.

Court’s Analysis: Validity of Releases

The Court rejected claims of forgery related to the releases, waivers, and quitclaims, as they were duly notarized documents whose genuineness had not been adequately challenged during earlier proceedings. The petitioners’ later denial of execution was dismissed as an afterthought. The Court further emphasized that the rules on notarized documents presume authenticity unless proven otherwise.

Revocation of MBMSI’s Certificate of Incorporation

The Court addressed petitioners’ arguments concerning MBMSI’s lack of legal capacity due to its revoked incorporation. It cited that despite the revocation, the executed releases and quitclaims remained valid owing to the Corporation Code, allowing for a three-year period post-revocation for settling affa

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur is a legal research platform serving the Philippines with case digests and jurisprudence resources.