Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

ASSOCIATION OF MARINE OFFICERS v. BIENVENIDO E. LAGUESMA

This case has been cited 3 times or more.

	GR No. 178184 2014-01-29	GRAND ASIAN SHIPPING LINES v. WILFREDO GALVEZ DEL CASTILLO, J.
In the case before us, Galvez, as the ship captain, is considered a managerial employee since his duties involve the governance, care and management of the vessel.[56] Gruta, as chief engineer, is also a managerial employee for he is tasked to take complete charge of the technical operations of the vessel.[57] As captain and as chief engineer, Galvez and Gruta perform functions vested with authority to execute management policies and thereby hold positions of responsibility over the activities in the vessel. Indeed, their position requires the full trust and confidence of their employer for they are entrusted with the custody, handling and care of company property and exercise authority over it.
	GR No. 182216 2009-12-04	PLANTATION BAY RESORT v. ROMEL S. DUBRICO CARPIO MORALES, J.
While it is a well-settled rule, also applicable in labor cases, that issues not raised below cannot be raised for the first time on appeal,[14] there are exceptions thereto among which are for reasons of public policy or interest.
	GR No. 180719 2008-08-22	CENTENNIAL TRANSMARINE v. RUBEN G. DELA CRUZ YNARES-SATIAGO, J.
In Association of Marine Officers and Seamen of Reyes and Lim Co. v. Laguesma,[14] the Court held that the Chief Mate is a managerial employee because the said officer performed the functions of an executive officer next in command to the captain; that in the performance of such functions, he is vested with powers or prerogatives to lay down and execute management policies.