This case has been cited 2 times or more.
|
2013-07-31 |
MENDOZA, J. |
||||
| In essence, ULP relates to the commission of acts that transgress the workers' right to organize. As specified in Articles 248 and 249 of the Labor Code, the prohibited acts must necessarily relate to the workers' right to self-organization and to the observance of a CBA.[30] Absent the said vital elements, the acts complained, although seemingly unjust, would not constitute ULP.[31] | |||||
|
2012-07-02 |
PERALTA, J. |
||||
| At the outset, the Court stresses that First Leverage's first assigned error raises issues of fact. Certainly the questions as to whether First Leverage's formal offer to buy the subject properties was validly made within the negotiation period; whether its offer is more advantageous to PNB Republic and to the Government than the offer of Solid Builders; whether Solid Builders did not make any formal offer to buy the disputed properties; whether the Deed of Promise to Sell in favor of Solid Builders was validly approved by the Loan and Assets Recovery Board Committee and the Board of Directors of PNB Republic; and, whether the said Deed of Promise to Sell was hastily executed in violation of law and contrary to public policy, are all questions which call for a review of the evidence on record to determine if they have factual basis. However, it is settled that under Rule 45 of the Rules of Court, only questions of law may be raised in a petition for review on certiorari.[13] This Court is not a trier of facts and it is not its function to analyze or weigh evidence.[14] The jurisdiction of this Court over cases brought to it via petition for review on certiorari is limited to the review and rectification of errors allegedly committed by the lower courts.[15] These issues should be properly threshed out before the trial court. | |||||