2013 (Labor Law) Bar Exam Questions: Question 5

[Read and answer/discuss the question below. Or go back to Labor Law Exam Instructions or the 2013 Bar Exam: Information, Discussions, Tips, Questions and Results; Jump to Labor Law Essay Questions: 1, 2, 3, 46, 7, 8, 9 and 10; Multiple Choice Questions: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17 and 18]

V

Cris filed a complaint for illegal dismissal against Baker Company. The Labor Arbiter dismissed the complaint but awarded Cris financial assistance. Only the company appealed from the Labor Arbiter’s ruling. It confined its appeal solely to the question of whether financial assistance could be awarded. The NLRC, instead of ruling solely on the appealed issue, fully reversed the Labor Arbiter’s decision; it found Baker Company liable for illegal dismissal and ordered the payment of separation pay and full backwages.

Through a petition for certiorari under Rule 65 of the Rules of Court, Baker Company challenged the validity of the NLRC ruling. It argued that the NLRC acted with grave abuse of discretion when it ruled on the illegal dismissal issue, when the only issue brought on appeal was the legal propriety of the financial assistance award.

Cris countered that under Article 218(c) of the Labor Code, the NLRC has the authority to “correct, amend, or waive any error, defect or irregularity whether in substance or in form” in the exercise of its appellate jurisdiction.

Decide the case. (8%)

 

6 comments

  1. The NLRC shall, in cases of perfected appeals, limit itself to reviewing those issues which are raised on appeal.  As a consequence thereof, any other issues which were not included in the appeal shall become final and executory. luna case, 2011

  2. when i answered this question i was thinking na pang remedial siya. Kasi naalala ko yung doctrine of finality of judgement. Yun ang diniscuss ko tapos sabi ko mali decsion nila na pakialaman yung hindi pinapareview.

  3. NLRC ruling is valid. There was no grave abuse of discretion. NLRC Rules of Procedure: “… if the order or resolution will cause injustice if not rectified.” 🙂

  4. The NLRC ruling is valid.

    Although it is a well-settled rule in Remedial law that appellate courts may only consider the issues raised on appeal, technical rules, however, do not apply in labor cases.

    By express provision of the Labor Code (Art. 218 (c)), the NLRC may look into other issues of the case even if they were not raised on appeal. Therefore, the NLRC did not rule with grave abuse of discretion.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *