This case has been cited 3 times or more.
|
2014-08-05 |
LEONEN, J. |
||||
| A valid dismissal requires both a valid cause and adherence to the valid procedure of dismissal.[75] The employer is required to give the charged employee at least two written notices before termination.[76] One of the written notices must inform the employee of the particular acts that may cause his or her dismissal.[77] The other notice must "[inform] the employee of the employer's decision."[78] Aside from the notice requirement, the employee must also be given "an opportunity to be heard."[79] | |||||
|
2014-07-09 |
BRION, J. |
||||
| Thus, we cannot rule that Simbajon's contract had been pre-terminated without any just or valid cause, and hold him entitled to payment of his salaries for the unexpired portion of his contract.[73] Otherwise we would be violating petitioners' due process rights. Petitioners never controverted such claim precisely because Simbajon never raised it as an issue. Moreover, the CA and the labor tribunals' rulings never touched on this. Hence, it is beyond the ambit of our review. | |||||
|
2013-07-10 |
PERALTA, J. |
||||
| Recently, in Skippers United Pacific, Inc. v. Daza,[15] this Court held that for a worker's dismissal to be considered valid, it must comply with both procedural and substantive due process, viz.: For a worker's dismissal to be considered valid, it must comply with both procedural and substantive due process. The legality of the manner of dismissal constitutes procedural due process, while the legality of the act of dismissal constitutes substantive due process. | |||||