Add TAGS to your cases to easily locate them or to build your SYLLABUS.
Please SIGN IN to use this feature.
http://lawyerly.ph/juris/view/c4eb9?user=fbGU2WFpmaitMVEVGZ2lBVW5xZ2RVdz09
[RUFINO GALLARDO v. MANILA RAILROAD COMPANY](http://lawyerly.ph/juris/view/c4eb9?user=fbGU2WFpmaitMVEVGZ2lBVW5xZ2RVdz09)
{case:c4eb9}
Highlight text as FACTS, ISSUES, RULING, PRINCIPLES to generate case DIGESTS and REVIEWERS.
Please LOGIN use this feature.
Show printable version with highlights

[ GR No. L-16919-20, Sep 29, 1962 ]

RUFINO GALLARDO v. MANILA RAILROAD COMPANY +

DECISION

G.R. No. L-16919-20

[ G.R. No. L-16919-20, September 29, 1962 ]

RUFINO GALLARDO AND CATALINA VITAL DE GUEVARRA; MAXIMA DANTING, PLAINTIFFS-APPELLEES, VS. MANILA RAILROAD COMPANY, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

D E C I S I O N

BENGZON, C.J.:

SUMMARY

Both cases involved claims for money against the Manila Railroad Company. The claimants filed their respective claims with the Regional Office of the Department of Labor, which granted the claims. After the Labor Standard Commission affirmed the decision of the Regional Officer, the case was elevated to the Court of First Instance on appeal, which in turned also affirmed the appealed decision. The Manila Railroad Company appealed to this Court questioning the authority of the Regional Officer to decide claims for money, invoking Reorganization Plan No. 20-A of the Government Survey and Reorganization Commission. The Supreme Court set aside the appealed decision without prejudice to the plaintiffs  to sue  in the proper court.

HELD: Reorganization Plan No. 20-A is void insofar as it takes away from the courts the power and authority to decide claims for money, and the decision of the Regional Office or the Department of Labor is not appealable to the Court of First  Instance.

tags