You're currently signed in as:
User

GOVERNMENT SERVICE INSURANCE SYSTEM v. FERNANDO P. DE LEON

This case has been cited 2 times or more.

2013-11-19
LEONEN, J.
Due to this extraordinary purpose, the Constitution provides guidelines on periodically increasing retirement benefits.[9] On several occasions, this Court has liberally interpreted retirement laws in keeping with its purpose. In Government Service Insurance System v. De Leon:[10]
2012-12-04
BRION, J.
In the presently assailed Resolution No. 8808[16] dated March 30, 2010, the Comelec, on the basis of the Law Department's study, completely disapproved the petitioners' claim for a lump sum benefit under R.A. No. 1568. The Comelec reasoned out that: Of these four (4) modes by which the Chairman or a Commissioner shall be entitled to lump sum benefit, only the first instance (completion of term) is pertinent to the issue we have formulated above. It is clear that the non-confirmation and non-renewal of appointment is not a case of resignation or incapacity or death. The question rather is: Can it be considered as retirement from service for having completed one's term of office?