This case has been cited 2 times or more.
|
2014-11-12 |
REYES, J. |
||||
| It has been held that in dismissing a cashier on the ground of loss of confidence, it is sufficient that there is some basis for the same or that the employer has a reasonable ground to believe that the employee is responsible for the misconduct, thus making him unworthy of the trust and confidence reposed in him.[27] Therefore, if there is sufficient evidence to show that the employer has ample reason to distrust the employee, the labor tribunal cannot justly deny the employer the authority to dismiss him.[28] Indeed, employers are allowed wider latitude in dismissing an employee for loss of trust and confidence, as the Court held in Atlas Fertilizer Corporation v. NLRC:[29] | |||||
|
2009-04-28 |
YNARES-SANTIAGO, J. |
||||
| In the Philippines, the term moral turpitude was first introduced in 1901 in Act No. 190, otherwise known as the Code of Civil Actions and Special Proceedings.[11] The Act provided that a member of the bar may be removed or suspended from his office as lawyer by the Supreme Court upon conviction of a crime involving moral turpitude.[12] Subsequently, the term "moral turpitude" has been employed in statutes governing disqualifications of notaries public,[13] priests and ministers in solemnizing marriages,[14] registration to military service,[15] exclusion[16] and naturalization of aliens,[17] discharge of the accused to be a state witness,[18] admission to the bar,[19] suspension and removal of elective local officials,[20] and disqualification of persons from running for any elective local position.[21] | |||||