You are on page 1of 4

FACTS

(1) C.F. Sharp v. Pioneer Insurance


(2) Jao v. BCC Products Sales Inc.
(3) Tenazas v. R. Villegas Taxi Transport

Tenazas, Francisco and Endraca


o filed a complaint for illegal dismissal against
R. Villegas, Romulado and Andy Villegas,
Isidro Endraca
o submitted documents (affidavit, pictures,
SSS certificate)

LABOR LAW
ISSUE/ HELD

1. W/N EE relationship exists between Tenazas,


Endraca and Francisco and R. Villegas.
a. Tenazas and Endraca YES
b. Francisco NO
- did not present substantial evidence (payroll, SSS,
logbook, testimonial evidence, etc.)

1. Tenazas (employees)
- taxi unit assigned to him was sideswiped by
another vehicle, causing dent near driver seat
- told to leave garage; can no longer drive taxi unit

2. W/N R. Villegas is guilty of illegal dismissal of


Tenazas
a. Tenazas and Endraca YES
b. Francisco NO

2. Francisco:
- suspicion for his alleged organization of labor
union

3. W/N petitioners are entitled to separation pay.


NO
- reinstatement is proper

3. Endraca:
- fell short of required boundary
- brought car to auto shop for repair
- drivers license was confiscated and told to settle
boundary first
R. Villegas Taxi Transport (employer)
1. admitted Tenazas (regular driver) and Endraca
(spare driver) as its employees, but not Francisco
2. Did not terminate Tenazas
- car due for overhaul for defects
- T did not report back to work

DOCTRINE

Elements of EE-relationship:
(1) selection and engagement of employee
(2) payment of wages
(3) power of dismissal
(4) power of control
Quantum of evidence required in labor cases:
substantial evidence

3. Endraca was a spare driver


- E stopped reporting for work

LA for respondents
o F: not employee, no evidence
o E: not illegally dismissed , stopped working
o T: not illegally dismissed, did not report for
work

NLRC for petitioners


o additional evidence proved EE-rel and illegal
dismissal LA did not receive earlier

CA for petitioners
o T and E: employees of R. Villegas; illegally
dismissed
o filed case soon after dismissal
o did not abandon work
o not entitled to separation pay
o reinstatement is possible

F: not employee of R. Villegas, not illegally


dismissed
o EE-rel. with R. Villegas was denied and not
rebutted by F
(4) Manila Hotel v. NLRC
Marcelo Santos, an overseas worker, was
employed in Mazoon Printing Press in the
Sultanate of Oman. He received a letter from Mr.
Shmidt, GM of Palace Hotel, Beijing, China,
informing him that he was recommended by
Nestor Beunio, a friend of his. Mr. Shmidt
offered him the position of a printer with a higher
monthly salary and increased benefits for a twoyear period. Santos accepted.
o

Elements of EE-relationship:
(1) selection and engagement of employee
(2) payment of wages
(3) power of dismissal
(4) power of control
Quantum of evidence required in labor cases:
substantial evidence

Mr. Henk, the Hotel Manager, mailed a ready to


sign employment contact to Santos. Santos
resigned from Mazoon Printing Press reasoning
that he was needed at home to help with the
familys piggery and poultry business. Santos
then sent four signed copies of the contract to
Palace Hotel.
Santos eventually left for Beijing and started
working at Palace Hotel. Santos signed an
amended employment agreement. In the
contract, Mr. Shmidt represented the Palace
Hotel and the VP for Operations and
Development of MHICL1, Mr. Cergueda signed
under the word noted.
After about 9 months, Palace Hotel informed
Santos via a letter, that his employment would
be terminated due to business reverses brought
about by the upheaval in China. He was
eventually terminated and paid all the benefits
due him including his airfare back to the
Philippines. He was then repatriated.
Santos, through his lawyer, demanded full
compensation which was rejected. He then filed
a complaint for illegal dismissal against MHC,
MHICL, the Palace Hotel and Mr. Shmidt with
the Arbitration Branch of NLRC. Palace Hotel
and Mr. Shmidt were not served with summons
hence neither participated in the proceedings.
(5) Jo v. NLRC
(6) Canlubang Security Agency v. NLRC
(7) Villamaria v. CA
(8) Phil. Global Communication v. De Vera
(9) Chavez v. NLRC
(10) Angelina Francisco v. NLRC
(11) Orozo v. CA
(12) SSS v. CA
(13) Tongko v. Manufacturers Life Insurance Co.

(14) Singer Sewing Machine v. Drilon


(15) Mafinca v. Orle
(16) Besa v. Trajano
(17) Tan v. Lagrama
(18) Aurora Land Projects Corp v. NLRC

You might also like