Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

ASIA WORLD RECRUITMENT INC. v. NLRC

This case has been cited 7 times or more.

	GR No. 160827 2014-06-18	NETLINK COMPUTER INCORPORATED v. ERIC DELMO BERSAMIN, J.
We remarked in C.F. Sharp & Co. v. Northwest Airlines, Inc.[11] that the repeal of Republic Act No. 529 had the effect of removing the prohibition on the stipulation of currency other than Philippine currency, such that obligations or transactions could already be paid in the currency agreed upon by the parties. However, both Republic Act No. 529 and Republic Act No. 8183 did not stipulate the applicable rate of exchange for the conversion of foreign currency-incurred obligations to their peso equivalent. It follows, therefore, that the jurisprudence established under Republic Act No. 529 with regard to the rate of conversion remains applicable. In C.F. Sharp, the Court cited Asia World Recruitment, Inc. v. NLRC,[12] to the effect that the real value of the foreign exchange-incurred obligation up to the date of its payment should be preserved.
	GR No. 169247 2014-06-02	MA. CONSOLACION M. NAHAS v. JUANITA L. OLARTE DEL CASTILLO, J.
As a fmal note, it is worth stating that recruitment agencies, as part of their bounden duty to protect the welfare of the Filipino workers sent abroad from whom they take their profit,[33] should in conscience not add to the misery of maltreated and abused Filipino workers by denying them the reparation to which they are entitled. Instead, they must "faithfully comply with their government prescribed responsibilities"[34] and be the first to ensure the welfare of the very people upon whose patronage their industry thrives.[35]
	GR No. 208232 2014-03-10	SURVIVING HEIRS OF ALFREDO R. BAUTISTA v. FRANCISCO LINDO VELASCO JR., J.
The facts are clear that Bautista sold to respondents his lots which were covered by a free patent. While the deeds of sale do not explicitly contain the stipulation that the sale is subject to repurchase by the applicant within a period of five (5) years from the date of conveyance pursuant to Sec. 119 of CA 141, still, such legal provision is deemed integrated and made part of the deed of sale as prescribed by law. It is basic that the law is deemed written into every contract.[15] Although a contract is the law between the parties, the provisions of positive law which regulate contracts are deemed written therein and shall limit and govern the relations between the parties.[16] Thus, it is a binding prestation in favor of Bautista which he may seek to enforce. That is precisely what he did. He filed a complaint to enforce his right granted by law to recover the lot subject of free patent. Ergo, it is clear that his action is for specific performance, or if not strictly such action, then it is akin or analogous to one of specific performance. Such being the case, his action for specific performance is incapable of pecuniary estimation and cognizable by the RTC.
	GR No. 167614 2009-03-24	ANTONIO M. SERRANO v. GALLANT MARITIME SERVICES AUSTRIA-MARTINEZ, J.
More significantly, the same principles were applied to cases involving overseas Filipino workers whose fixed-term employment contracts were illegally terminated, such as in First Asian Trans & Shipping Agency, Inc. v. Ople,[119] involving seafarers who were illegally discharged. In Teknika Skills and Trade Services, Inc. v. National Labor Relations Commission,[120] an OFW who was illegally dismissed prior to the expiration of her fixed-period employment contract as a baby sitter, was awarded salaries corresponding to the unexpired portion of her contract. The Court arrived at the same ruling in Anderson v. National Labor Relations Commission,[121] which involved a foreman hired in 1988 in Saudi Arabia for a fixed term of two years, but who was illegally dismissed after only nine months on the job -- the Court awarded him salaries corresponding to 15 months, the unexpired portion of his contract. In Asia World Recruitment, Inc. v. National Labor Relations Commission,[122] a Filipino working as a security officer in 1989 in Angola was awarded his salaries for the remaining period of his 12-month contract after he was wrongfully discharged. Finally, in Vinta Maritime Co., Inc. v. National Labor Relations Commission,[123] an OFW whose 12-month contract was illegally cut short in the second month was declared entitled to his salaries for the remaining 10 months of his contract.
	GR No. 166554 2008-11-27	JULITO SAGALES v. RUSTAN'S COMMERCIAL CORPORATION REYES, R.T., J.
Security of tenure is a paramount right of every employee that is held sacred by the Constitution.[50] The reason for this is that labor is deemed to be "property"[51] within the meaning of constitutional guarantees.[52] Indeed, as it is the policy of the State to guarantee the right of every worker to security of tenure as an act of social justice,[53] such right should not be denied on mere speculation of any similar or unclear nebulous basis.[54] Indeed, the right of every employee to security of tenure is all the more secured by the Labor Code by providing that "the employer shall not terminate the services of an employee except for a just cause or when authorized" by law. Otherwise, an employee who is illegally dismissed "shall be entitled to reinstatement without loss of seniority rights and other privileges and to his full backwages, inclusive of allowances, and to his other benefits or their monetary equivalent computed from the time his compensation was withheld from him up to the time of his actual reinstatement."[55]
	GR NO. 148893 2006-07-12	SKIPPERS UNITED PACIFIC v. NLRC AUSTRIA-MARTINEZ, J.
However, in the interest of substantial justice and to avoid further litigation on the matter,[28] it must be stressed that the peso amounts equivalent to the dollar awards of the Labor Arbiter can not be enforced for being contrary to law. The peso equivalent of the monetary award should be computed at the peso to dollar exchange rate prevailing at the time of payment,[29] as provided in Republic Act No. 8183, entitled "An Act Repealing Republic Act Numbered Five Hundred Twenty-Nine, As Amended, Entitled 'An Act to Assure the Uniform Value of Philippine Coin and Currency'," which provides:SECTION 1. All monetary obligations shall be settled in the Philippine currency which is legal tender in the Philippines. However, the parties may agree that the obligation or transaction shall be settled in any other currency at the time of payment.
	GR Nos. 113666-68 2000-01-19	GOLDEN DONUTS v. NLRC PARDO, J.
"The burden is on the employer to prove that the termination was after due process, and for a valid or authorized cause.[23] For the two requisites in our jurisdiction to constitute a valid dismissal are: (a) the existence of a cause expressly stated in Article 282 of the Labor Code; and (b) the observance of due process, including the opportunity given the employee to be heard and defend himself."[24]