Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

This case has been cited 2 times or more.

	GR No. 166554 2008-11-27	JULITO SAGALES v. RUSTAN'S COMMERCIAL CORPORATION REYES, R.T., J.
So too did the Court pronounce in Felix v. National Labor Relations Commission,[68] Gutierrez v. Singer Sewing Machine Company,[69] Associated Labor Unions-TUCP v. National Labor Relations Commission,[70] Dela Cruz v. National Labor Relations Commission,[71] Philippine Long Distance Telephone Company v. Tolentino,[72] Hongkong and Shanghai Banking Corporation v. National Labor Relations Commission,[73] Permex, Inc. v. National Labor Relations Commission,[74] VH Manufacturing, Inc. v. National Labor Relations Commission,[75] A' Prime Security Services, Inc. v. National Labor Relations Commission,[76] and St. Michael's Institute v. Santos.[77]
	GR NO. 156994 2005-08-31	BANK OF PHILIPPINE ISLANDS v. RAMON A. UY CALLEJO, SR., J.
It is an oft-repeated rule that in termination disputes, the burden of proof is always on the employer to prove that the dismissal was for a just and valid cause.[23] Taking into account the character of the charges and the penalty meted to an employee, the employer is bound to adduce clear, accurate, consistent and convincing evidence to prove the same.