This case has been cited 1 times or more.
|
2011-06-15 |
PEREZ, J. |
||||
| On the other hand, GMC's petition for certiorari assailing the NLRC's 20 July 2006 decision was docketed as CA-G.R. SP No. CEB-SP No. 02232 before the CA's Eighteenth Division [31] which subsequently rendered the decision dated on 16 November 2007, dismissing the same for lack of merit. Finding that both parties were given an opportunity to present their respective positions during the pre-execution conference conducted a quo, the CA ruled that the Executive Labor Arbiter's 27 October 2005 order had attained finality insofar as GMC is concerned, in view of its failure to perfect an appeal therefrom by paying the required appeal fee and posting the cash or surety bond in an amount equivalent to the benefits computed. In addition to rejecting GMC's argument that the quitclaims executed by its employees were in the nature of a supervening event which rendered execution proceedings impossible, the CA held that said quitclaims did not extend to the benefits provided under the imposed CBA and that the additional benefits supposedly received by GMC's employees should not be deducted therefrom, for lack of sufficient evidence to prove the same. [32] Aggrieved by the denial of its motion for reconsideration of the foregoing decision in the CA's resolution dated 10 July, 2008, [33] GMC filed the petition for review on certiorari docketed before us as G.R. No. 183889. [34] | |||||