Monday, September 10, 2012

Quisaba v. Sta. Ines-Melale Veneer and Plywood


JOVITO QUISABA v. STA. INES-MELALE VENEER & PLYWOOD [SIMVP]
1974 / Castro

FACTS
Quisaba was an internal auditor of SIMVP for 18 years. On January 1973, SIMVP VP Robert Hyde instructed him to purchase logs for the company's plant, but Quisaba, he refused to do so, saying that such task is inconsistent with his position. The next day, Hyde informed Quisaba of his temporary relief as internal auditor so that he could carry out the instructions given. Hyde warned him that failure to comply would be considered a ground for his dismissal.
Quisaba filed a complaint for moral damages, exemplary damages, termination pay and attorney's fees against SIMVP and its VP Robert Hyde. Quisaba was NOT asking for backwages nor reinstatement. Quisaba alleged that due to SIMVP’s acts, he suffered mental anguish, serious anxiety, besmirched reputation, wounded feelings, moral shock and social humiliation.
SIMVP moved to dismiss the complaint on the ground of lack of jurisdiction of the CFI, asserting that the proper forum is the NLRC. Quisaba opposed this, and he informed the court that an NLRC representative said that NLRC has no jurisdiction over claims or suits for damages arising out of employee-employer relationship. Nonetheless, CFI granted the motion to dismiss on the ground that the complaint involves an employee-employer relation.

ISSUE & HOLDING
Who has jurisdiction over the case? CFI has jurisdiction. This is a CIVIL dispute, not a labor dispute.

RATIO
This case is concerned with a civil (not a labor) dispute, as it has to do with an alleged violation of Quisaba's rights as a member of society, and it does not involve an existing employee-employer relation within the meaning of PD 21, Sec. 2(1).

Civil law consists of that mass of precepts that determine or regulate the relations that exist between members of a society for the protection of private interests.

NLRC jurisdiction is defined by PD 21, Sec. 2.
  • All matters involving employee-employer relations including all disputes and grievances which may otherwise lead to strikes and lockouts under RA 875
  • All strikes overtaken by Proc. 1081
  • All pending cases in the Bureau of Labor Relations.

Although the acts complained of seemingly appear to constitute "matters involving employee-employer relations," Quisaba’s complaint is grounded on the manner of his dismissal and the consequent effects of such dismissal, not on his dismissal per se, as he does not ask for reinstatement or backwages.

The "right" of SIMVP to dismiss Quisaba should not be confused with the manner in which the right was exercised and the effects flowing therefrom. If the dismissal was done anti-socially or oppressively, then SIMVP violated the following:
  • NCC 1701 – prohibits acts of oppression by either capital or labor against the other
  • NCC 21 – makes a person liable for damages if he willfully causes loss or injury to another in a manner that is contrary to morals, good customs or public policy

Moral damages may be recovered in acts and actions referred to in NCC 21. [NCC 2219 (10)]

ORDER SET ASIDE; CASE REMANDED FOR FURTHER PROCEEDINGS

No comments:

Post a Comment