Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

WILLI HAHN ENTERPRISES v. LILIA R. MAGHUYOP

This case has been cited 4 times or more.

	GR No. 176040 2009-09-04	CASA CEBUANA INCORPORADA v. IRENEO P. LEUTERIO YNARES-SANTIAGO, J.
We cannot lend credence to petitioners' claim that respondent was merely given a "graceful exit." Their reliance on our ruling in Willi Hahn Enterprises and/or Willi Hahn v. Lilia R. Maghuyop[21] is misplaced, considering that, in said case, respondent had clearly resigned by tendering a resignation letter even before the petitioners could initiate termination proceedings. In contrast, respondent in this case did not execute any resignation letter and, in fact, resisted pressures for him to resign.
	GR NO. 148931 2006-09-12	CATHAY PACIFIC AIRWAYS v. PHILIP LUIS F. MARIN CALLEJO, SR., J.
Yes.[55] However, respondent rejected the suggestion and opted to file his complaint with the NLRC. A decision of petitioner to afford respondent a graceful exit is perfectly within its discretion.[56]
	GR NO. 148418 2005-08-28	PCL SHIPPING PHILIPPINES v. NLRC CHICO-NAZARIO, J.
The Supreme Court is bound in principle by the factual findings of administrative officials if supported by substantial evidence.[22] The factual findings of labor officials who are deemed to have acquired expertise in matters within their respective jurisdiction are generally accorded not only respect, but even finality, and bind the Supreme Court when supported by substantial evidence.[23]
	GR No. 148418 2005-07-28	PCL SHIPPING PHILIPPINES v. NLRC CHICO-NAZARIO, J.
The Supreme Court is bound in principle by the factual findings of administrative officials if supported by substantial evidence.[22] The factual findings of labor officials who are deemed to have acquired expertise in matters within their respective jurisdiction are generally accorded not only respect, but even finality, and bind the Supreme Court when supported by substantial evidence.[23]