Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

CECILIO P. DE LOS SANTOS v. NLRC

This case has been cited 5 times or more.

	GR No. 211211 2015-01-14	ROMMEL B. DARAUG v. KGJS FLEET MANAGEMENT MANILA MENDOZA, J.
This resolves the petition for review on certiorari[1] filed by petitioner Rommel B. Daraug (petitioner) questioning the September 25, 2013 Decision[2] and the January 29, 2014 Resolution[3] of the Court of Appeals (CA) in CA-G.R. SP No. 121327. The assailed CA issuances affirmed the Decision[4] and the Resolution[5] of the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC), which reversed the August 12, 2010 Decision[6] of Labor Arbiter Geobel A. Bartolabac (LA), granting petitioner's claim for permanent disability compensation, sick wages, damages, and attorney's fees by disposing the case as follows:
	GR No. 164257 2010-07-05	SAN MIGUEL CORPORATION v. VICENTE B. SEMILLANO MENDOZA, J.
Despite the fact that the service contracts[20] contain stipulations which are earmarks of independent contractorship, they do not make it legally so. The language of a contract is neither determinative nor conclusive of the relationship between the parties. Petitioner SMC and AMPCO cannot dictate, by a declaration in a contract, the character of AMPCO's business, that is, whether as labor-only contractor, or job contractor. AMPCO's character should be measured in terms of, and determined by, the criteria set by statute.[21] At a closer look, AMPCO's actual status and participation regarding respondents' employment clearly belie the contents of the written service contract.
	GR No. 164205 2009-09-03	OLDARICO S. TRAVEÑO v. BOBONGON BANANA GROWERS MULTI-PURPOSE COOPERATIVE CARPIO MORALES, J.
Petitioners' claim of employment relationship with the Cooperative's herein co-respondents must be assessed on the basis of four standards, viz: (a) the manner of their selection and engagement; (b) the mode of payment of their wages; (c) the presence or absence of the power of dismissal; and (d) the presence or absence of control over their conduct. Most determinative among these factors is the so-called "control test."[27]
	GR NO. 179807 2009-07-31	RAMY GALLEGO v. BAYER PHILIPPINES CARPIO MORALES, J.
The existence of an employer-employee relationship is determined on the basis of four standards, namely: (a) the manner of selection and engagement of the putative employee; (b) the mode of payment of wages; (c) the presence or absence of power of dismissal; and (d) the presence or absence of control of the putative employee's conduct. Most determinative among these factors is the so-called "control test."[36]
	GR No. 176240 2008-10-17	ROLANDO SASAN v. NLRC 4TH DIVISION CHICO-NAZARIO, J.
Etched in an unending stream of cases are four standards in determining the existence of an employer-employee relationship, namely: (a) the manner of selection and engagement of the putative employee; (b) the mode of payment of wages; (c) the presence or absence of power of dismissal; and, (d) the presence or absence of control of the putative employee's conduct. Most determinative among these factors is the so-called "control test."[52]