This case has been cited 2 times or more.
|
2015-12-07 |
SERENO, C.J. |
||||
| Consequently, separation pay must be duly awarded to Lazaro because reinstatement is no longer feasible. However, the Court has consistently ruled that the same must be computed only up to the time the employer ceased operations.[25] It cannot be held liable to pay separation pay beyond such closure of business because even if the illegally dismissed employees would be reinstated, they could not possibly work beyond the time of the cessation of its operation.[26] This is especially true when the closure was "due to legitimate business reasons and not merely an attempt to defeat the order of reinstatement."[27] | |||||
|
2014-07-09 |
DEL CASTILLO, J. |
||||
| To hold a director or officer personally liable for corporate obligations, two requisites must concur: (1) it must be alleged in the complaint that the director or officer assented to patently unlawful acts of the corporation or that the officer was guilty of gross negligence or bad faith; and (2) there must be proof that the officer acted in bad faith.[60] | |||||