This case has been cited 4 times or more.
|
2005-10-12 |
QUISUMBING, J. |
||||
| This petition for review on certiorari docketed as G.R. No. 152689, assails the Decision[1] dated March 7, 2002 of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. SP No. 61528. It is consolidated with the Motions for Reconsideration of this Court's Decision[2] dated December 3, 2002 in G.R. No. 154072. | |||||
|
2005-10-12 |
QUISUMBING, J. |
||||
| On the other hand, Paguio sought for partial reconsideration. Upon the appellate court's denial[7] of his motion for reconsideration, Paguio elevated the case to this Court where it was docketed as G.R. No. 154072. On December 3, 2002, the Court rendered judgment in G.R. No. 154072 and held that Paguio was not entitled to the monetary award representing the 16% monthly salary increase. However, the Court awarded him moral and exemplary damages and attorney's fees.[8] | |||||
|
2004-11-25 |
AUSTRIA-MARTINEZ, J. |
||||
| Thus, we hold that respondent Rilles was constructively removed and illegally dismissed by petitioner. He is entitled to reinstatement and back wages as a necessary consequence of petitioner's acts.[31] Back wages are paid as part of the penalty petitioner has to pay for illegally dismissing respondent. It is computed from the time of respondent's dismissal, in this case June 25, 1994, the day after the expiration of his last assignment, up to the time of his reinstatement,[32] less whatever amount petitioner may prove that the respondent might have earned in the interim.[33] Petitioner is also liable to refund respondent's cash bond, in the amount of P2,460.00 as found by the Labor Arbiter, and 10% of the total amount to be received by respondent, as attorney's fees, since respondent was compelled to litigate and incur expenses to enforce and protect his rights.[34] | |||||