Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

PLACIDO O. URBANES v. CA

This case has been cited 4 times or more.

	GR No. 175689 2014-08-13	GEORGE A. ARRIOLA v. PILIPINO STAR NGAYON LEONEN, J.
Considering the foregoing, we will not disturb the Labor Arbiter's findings that Arriola was not illegally dismissed and that he abandoned his employment. This is true especially since the National Labor Relations Commission and the Court of Appeals affirmed these factual findings.[98]
	GR No. 177467 2011-03-09	PFIZER v. GERALDINE VELASCO LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J.
The Court is cognizant of the prerogative of management to transfer an employee from one office to another within the business establishment, provided that there is no demotion in rank or diminution of his salary, benefits and other privileges and the action is not motivated by discrimination, made in bad faith, or effected as a form of punishment or demotion without sufficient cause.[26] Likewise, the management prerogative to transfer personnel must be exercised without grave abuse of discretion and putting to mind the basic elements of justice and fair play. There must be no showing that it is unnecessary, inconvenient and prejudicial to the displaced employee.[27]
	GR NO. 154006 2006-11-02	STAR PAPER CORPORATION v. CARLITO ESPIRITU AUSTRIA-MARTINEZ, J.
In this case, the main argument of petitioner is that the transfers were an act of management right and prerogative and respondents should not complain about such transfers since from the beginning of their employment, they (respondents) signified their willingness to be transferred to any of petitioner's branches as shown in the Information Sheet each of them accomplished as a pre-requisite for employment. Be that as it may, petitioner must show that the transfer was done in good faith. As stated in Urbanes, Jr. v. Court of Appeals,[12] "[t]he management prerogative to transfer personnel must be exercised without grave abuse of discretion and putting to mind the basic elements of justice and fair play. There must be no showing that it is unnecessary, inconvenient and prejudicial to the displaced employee."[13]
	GR NO. 152843 2006-07-20	INTERCONTINENTAL BROADCASTING CORPORATION v. REYNALDO BENEDICTO CORONA, J.
Petitioner is also liable for 10% of the total amount for attorney's fees since Benedicto and the present respondents were compelled to litigate and incur expenses to enforce and protect his rights.[51]