This case has been cited 3 times or more.
|
2009-09-03 |
CARPIO MORALES, J. |
||||
| Respondent Rañon later manifested before the Labor Arbiter that he was not reinstated to his former position in the Casino Gaming Area food and beverage section, but to the hotel's Riviera Restaurant which to him entailed a diminution of his benefits.[10] He thus moved to be restored to his former position. By Order[11] of September 10, 2001, the Labor Arbiter ordered petitioner to immediately reinstate Rañon to his former position. Petitioner appealed this Order to the NLRC[12] which denied the same[13] as it did petitioner's Motion for Reconsideration,[14] prompting petitioner to file a petition for certiorari before the Court of Appeals.[15] The petition was docketed as CA G.R. No. 73836 which petition was consolidated with CA-G.R. No. 56218. | |||||
|
2003-06-10 |
CARPIO, J. |
||||
| Petitioner invokes Naguiat v. Intermediate Appellate Court[16] in claiming that a civil action not arising from the offense charged may be consolidated with the criminal action. Indeed, Naguiat allowed the consolidation of the criminal case with a civil case arising ex contractu. In consolidating the two cases, Naguiat relied on Canos v. Peralta[17] where the Court consolidated a civil action for the recovery of wage differential with a criminal action for violation of the Minimum Wage Law. Canos, however, made an important qualification before a court may order the consolidation of cases. Canos held that:A court may order several actions pending before it to be tried together where they arise from the same act, event or transaction, involve the same or like issues, and depend largely or substantially on the same evidence, provided that the court has jurisdiction over the cases to be consolidated x x x. (Emphasis supplied) Thus, an essential requisite of consolidation is that the court must have jurisdiction over all the cases consolidated before it. Since the Sandiganbayan does not have jurisdiction over the collection case, the same cannot be consolidated with the criminal cases even if these cases involve similar questions of fact and law. Obviously, consolidation of the collection case with the criminal cases will be a useless and empty formality since the Sandiganbayan, being devoid of jurisdiction over the collection case, cannot act on it. | |||||