Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

This case has been cited 1 times or more.

	GR NO. 173076 2007-10-10	MT. CARMEL COLLEGE v. JOCELYN RESUENA CHICO-NAZARIO, J.
WHEREFORE, premises considered, the present petition is hereby DENIED DUE COURSE and accordingly DISMISSED for lack of merit. The assailed Decision and Resolution are AFFIRMED.[40] The general rule is that where there is conflict between the dispositive portion or the fallo and the body of the decision, the fallo controls. This rule rests on the theory that the fallo is the final order while the opinion in the body is merely a statement ordering nothing.[41] Clearly, the award of backwages to respondents does not merely cover the period from 15 May 1998 up to 25 May 1999 alone.[42] The findings of the NLRC, which were affirmed with finality in CA-G.R. SP No. 80639, and subject of execution in the instant petition, pronounced:We rule that [respondents] were illegally dismissed and must therefore be ordered reinstated with payment of backwages from the time they were illegally dismissed up to the time of their actual reinstatement.