This case has been cited 1 times or more.
|
2007-08-14 |
QUISUMBING, J. |
||||
| At the outset, it bears stressing that the Supreme Court is not a trier of facts except in certain instances. One of these is when there is a conflict between the findings of fact of the Labor Arbiter, on one hand, and the NLRC, on the other, which is the situation here. Thus, we are constrained to review the facts of the present case on the basis of the records.[10] | |||||