Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

METRO TRANSIT ORGANIZATION v. NLRC

This case has been cited 3 times or more.

	GR No. 178520 2009-06-23	AMA COMPUTER COLLEGE-EAST RIZAL v. ALLAN RAYMOND R. IGNACIO CHICO-NAZARIO, J.
Gross negligence under Article 282 of the Labor Code connotes want of care in the performance of one's duties, while habitual neglect implies repeated failure to perform one's duties for a period of time, depending upon the circumstances.[43] Gross negligence has been defined as the want or absence of even slight care or diligence as to amount to a reckless disregard of the safety of person or property. It evinces a thoughtless disregard of consequences without exerting any effort to avoid them.[44] To constitute a just cause for termination of employment, the neglect of duties must not only be gross but habitual as well. The single or isolated act of negligence does not constitute a just cause for the dismissal of the employee.[45]
	GR No. 165969 2008-11-27	NATIONAL POWER CORPORATION v. HEIRS OF NOBLE CASIONAN REYES, R.T., J.
In quasi delicts, exemplary damages are awarded where the offender was guilty of gross negligence.[22] Gross negligence has been defined to be the want or absence of even slight care or diligence as to amount to a reckless disregard of the safety of person or property. It evinces a thoughtless disregard of consequences without exerting any effort to avoid them.[23]
	GR No. 166703 2008-04-14	AMA COMPUTER COLLEGE v. ELY GARCIA CHICO-NAZARIO, J.
In termination cases, the burden of proving just and valid cause for dismissing an employee from his employment rests upon the employer, and the latter's failure to discharge that burden would result in a finding that the dismissal is unjustified.[21]