This case has been cited 6 times or more.
|
2009-04-16 |
QUISUMBING, J. |
||||
| To determine the validity of the transfer of employees, the employer must show that the transfer is not unreasonable, inconvenient, or prejudicial to the employee; nor does it involve a demotion in rank or a diminution of his salaries, privileges and other benefits. Should the employer fail to overcome this burden of proof, the employee's transfer shall be tantamount to constructive dismissal.[17] | |||||
|
2008-02-29 |
CARPIO MORALES, J. |
||||
| Respecting the dismissal on November 15, 1992[34] of Auxtero, a regular employee of petitioner who had been working as utility man/helper since November 1988, it is not legally justified for want of just or authorized cause therefor and for non-compliance with procedural due process. Petitioner's claim that he abandoned his work does not persuade.[35] The elements of abandonment being (1) the failure to report for work or absence without valid or justifiable reason, and (2) a clear intention to sever the employer-employee relationship manifested by some overt acts,[36] the onus probandi lies with petitioner which, however, failed to discharge the same. | |||||
|
2007-07-27 |
NACHURA, J. |
||||
| The appellate court found the present petition sufficient in form when it proceeded to decide the case on the merits, without raising any question as to the sufficiency of the petition. Acceptance of a petition for certiorari, as well as granting due course thereto is addressed to the sound discretion of the court.[20] Where it does not appear, as in this case, that in giving due course to the petition for certiorari, the CA committed any error that prejudiced the substantial rights of the parties, there is no reason to disturb its determination that the copies of the pleadings and documents attached to the petition were sufficient to make out a prima facie case.[21] | |||||