This case has been cited 2 times or more.
|
2016-01-25 |
DEL CASTILLO, J. |
||||
| As members of the governing board of MWEU, respondents are presumed to know, observe, and apply the union's constitution and by-laws. ' Thus, their repeated violations, thereof and their disregard of petitioner's rights as a union member - their inaction on his two appeals which resulted in his suspension, disqualification from running as MWEU officer, and subsequent expulsion without being accorded the foil benefits of due process - connote willfulness and bad faith, a gross disregard of his rights thus causing untold suffering, oppression and, ultimately., ostracism from MWEU. "Bad faith implies breach of faith and willful failure to respond to plain and well understood obligation."[54] This warrants an award of moral damages in the amount of P100,000.00. Moreover, the Civil Code provides:Art. 32. Any public officer or employee, or any private individual, who directly or indirectly obstructs, defeats, violates or in any manner impedes or impairs any of the following rights and liberties of another person shall be liable to the latter for damages: | |||||
|
2012-01-30 |
DEL CASTILLO, J. |
||||
| Undoubtedly, Beltran was remiss in her duties for her failure to immediately turn over Chang's payment to the company. Such negligence, however, is not sufficient to warrant separation from employment. To justify removal from service, the negligence should be gross and habitual.[29] "Gross negligence x x x is the want of even slight care, acting or omitting to act in a situation where there is duty to act, not inadvertently but willfully and intentionally, with a conscious indifference to consequences insofar as other persons may be affected."[30] Habitual neglect, on the other hand, connotes repeated failure to perform one's duties for a period of time, depending upon the circumstances.[31] No concrete evidence was presented by MERALCO to show that Beltran's delay in remitting the funds was done intentionally. Neither was it shown that same is willful, unlawful and felonious contrary to MERALCO's finging as stated in the letter of termination it sent to Beltran.[32] Surely, Beltran's single and isolated act of negligence cannot justify her dismissal from service. | |||||