In this case, find out why an illegal dismissal complaint cannot be classified like an ordinary civil action insofar as the effect of death of any of the parties is concerned. 

Nedira v. NJ World Corp., G.R. No. 240005, December 6, 2022. 

#HernanDoIt #Bar2023 In one case, the LA ruled that the mandatory 3-day reporting requirement does not apply if repatriation results from the expiration of a seafarer's employment contract. 

Cabatan v. Southeast Asia Shipping Corp., G.R. No. 219495, February 28, 2022. 

#HernanDoIt #Bar2023 #WeCanDoIt The complainant presented pay slips and trip itineraries to support his assertion that he was an employee of the company. Were these sufficient to declare the company as his employer?

Ginta-Ason v. J.T.A. Packaging Corp., G.R. No. 244206, March 16, 2022.

In this case, the Supreme Court held that when the status of the employment is in dispute, the employer bears the burden to prove that the workers are independent contractors rather than regular employees. 

Ditiangkin, et al. v. Lazada, et al., G.R. No. 246892, September 21, 2022.

#HernanDoIt #Bar2023 In its appeal, the employer asserted that it was neither given summons relating to the employee’s amended complaint, nor notified of the scheduled hearings before the Office of the Labor Arbiter. Should it be allowed to present countervailing evidence on appeal? 

Reyes v. Rural Bank of San Rafael (Bulacan), Inc., G.R. No. 230597, March 23, 2022. 

#HernanDoIt #Bar2023 #WeCanDoIt The employer asserted that its business was slowing down and that it dismissed the complainant on the ground of redundancy. Was the complainant’s dismissal found valid? Teletech Customer Care Management Philippines, Inc. v. Gerona, Jr., G.R. No. 219166, November 10, 2021.

#HernanDoIt #Bar2023 #WeCanDoIt Bus drivers and conductors filed a complaint against their employer for money claims before the Office of the Labor Arbiter and alleged that the latter failed to comply with Department Order No. 118, Series of 2012. Does the Office of the Labor Arbiter have jurisdiction over the case? 

Del Monte Land Transport Bus, Co. v. Armenta, G.R. No. 240144, February 3, 2021. 

The accused pointed out that the POEA certification (which the trial court relied on in convicting him of the crime of illegal recruitment in large scale) was not authenticated in court by its signatory. Was this sufficient to overturn his conviction for the crime? 

People v. Bautista, G.R. No. 218582, September 3, 2020. 

#GetThatBar2022 #Bar2022 

The redundancy program was found to be valid and the employer was not found to have committed unfair labor practice. Learn why the employer was still held liable for separation pay and backwages for the dismissed employees.

San Fernando Coca-Cola Rank-and-File Union v. Coca-Cola Bottlers Philippines, Inc., G.R. No. 200499, October 4, 2017.

#GetThatBar2022 #Bar2022

#HernanDoIt #Bar2023 #WeCanDoIt The instructor in this case claimed to have completed her probationary period. Learn why the Court did not consider her as a permanent employee. 

Palgan v. Holy Name University, G.R. No. 219916, February 10, 2021.