This case has been cited 3 times or more.
|
2007-01-31 |
QUISUMBING, J. |
||||
| Indeed, a petition for review on certiorari under Rule 45 of the Rules of Court is limited to questions of law, and the Court is not a trier of facts. This rule, however, is not without exceptions. This Court may review the factual findings of the trial and the lower appellate courts when the findings of the Court of Appeals are contrary to those of the NLRC or of the Labor Arbiter.[7] Such is the situation in this case. We must caution, however, that the factual findings of labor officials, who possess the expertise in matters within their jurisdiction, have conclusive effect on this Court provided substantial evidence supports such factual findings.[8] | |||||
|
2006-11-28 |
CARPIO, J. |
||||
| The NLRC found that MPSI indeed reinstated respondents to their former positions or to substantially equivalent positions. The records of the case support this finding. Factual findings of labor officials, who possess the expertise in matters within their jurisdiction, are generally accorded great weight if substantial evidence support the findings.[22] | |||||
|
2006-03-23 |
YNARES-SANTIAGO, J. |
||||
| An employer may terminate an employee for fraud or willful breach by the employee of the trust reposed in him by his employer or duly authorized representative. However, the right of an employer to terminate an employee based on loss of confidence must not be exercised arbitrarily and without just cause. To be a valid reason for dismissal, loss of confidence must be genuine. Uncorroborated assertions and accusations by the employer will not suffice, otherwise it will jeopardize the constitutional guarantee of security of tenure of the employee. [25] | |||||