This case has been cited 2 times or more.
|
2014-09-08 |
LEONEN, J. |
||||
| If the case involves a contract, Article 2332 of the Civil Code provides that "the court may award exemplary damages if the defendant acted in a wanton, fraudulent, reckless, oppressive or malevolent manner." Thus, in Garcia v. NLRC,[84] this court ruled that in labor cases, the court may award exemplary damages "if the dismissal was effected in a wanton, oppressive or malevolent manner."[85] | |||||
|
2008-12-08 |
CHICO-NAZARIO, J. |
||||
| We have previously recognized that the constitutional policy of providing full protection to labor is not intended to oppress or destroy management.[17] The employer cannot be compelled to continuously pay an employee who can no longer perform the tasks for which he was hired. Seeing as petitioner continued to pay respondent his salaries and medical expenses for four years following the accident which caused his leg injury, despite the fact that respondent was unable to render actual service to petitioner, it would be the height of injustice to still require petitioner to pay respondent full backwages from the time of his termination in 1998 until the finality of this Decision. Reasons of fairness and equity, as well as the particular factual circumstances attendant in this case, dictate us to modify our Decision by ordering petitioner to pay respondent limited backwages (inclusive of allowances and other benefits or their monetary equivalent) for five years,[18] from 1 January 1998 to 31 December 2002, in addition to the separation pay of one month for every year of service awarded in lieu of reinstatement. We must clarify, however, that for purposes of computing respondent's separation pay, he must still be deemed in petitioner's employ until the finality of this Decision since his termination remains illegal, and is only mitigated by petitioner's good faith. | |||||