Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

GERONIMO Q. QUADRA v. CA

This case has been cited 5 times or more.

	GR No. 187226 2015-01-28	CHERYLL SANTOS LEUS v. ST. SCHOLASTICA’S COLLEGE WESTGROVE REYES, J.
Nevertheless, the petitioner is not entitled to moral and exemplary damages. "A dismissed employee is entitled to moral damages when the dismissal is attended by bad faith or fraud or constitutes an act oppressive to labor, or is done in a manner contrary to good morals, good customs or public policy. Exemplary damages may be awarded if the dismissal is effected in a wanton, oppressive or malevolent manner."[61]
	GR No. 198587 2015-01-14	SAUDI ARABIAN AIRLINES v. MA. JOPETTE M. REBESENCIO LEONEN, J.
In a long line of cases, this court awarded exemplary damages to illegally dismissed employees whose "dismissal[s were] effected in a wanton, oppressive or malevolent manner."[122] This court has awarded exemplary damages to employees who were terminated on such frivolous, arbitrary, and unjust grounds as membership in or involvement with labor unions,[123] injuries sustained in the course of employment,[124] development of a medical condition due to the employer's own violation of the employment contract,[125] and lodging of a Complaint against the employer.[126] Exemplary damages were also awarded to employees who were deemed illegally dismissed by an employer in an attempt to evade compliance with statutorily established employee benefits.[127] Likewise, employees dismissed for supposedly just causes, but in violation of due process requirements, were awarded exemplary damages.[128]
	GR No. 178184 2014-01-29	GRAND ASIAN SHIPPING LINES v. WILFREDO GALVEZ DEL CASTILLO, J.
The Labor Arbiter's grant of actual/compensatory, moral and exemplary damages in the amount of P100,000.00 is, however, incorrect. In order to recover actual or compensatory damages, it must be capable of proof and must be necessarily proved with a reasonable degree of certainty.[74] While moral damages is given to a dismissed employee when the dismissal is attended by bad faith or fraud or constitutes an act oppressive to labor, or is done in a manner contrary to good morals, good customs or public policy. Exemplary damages, on the other hand, is given if the dismissal is effected in a wanton, oppressive or malevolent manner.[75] Here, the Labor Arbiter erred in awarding the damages by lumping actual, moral and exemplary damages. Said damages rest on different jural foundations and, hence, must be independently identified and justified.[76] Also, there are no competent evidence of actual expenses incurred that would justify the award of actual damages. Lastly, respondents were terminated after being accused of the charge of pilferage of the vessel's fuel oil after examination of the report made by the vessel's chief engineer which showed a considerable amount of fuel lost. Although the dismissal of Arguelles, Batayola, Fresnillo, Noble, Dominico, Nilmao and Austral is illegal, based on the circumstances surrounding their dismissal, petitioners could not have been motivated by bad faith in deciding to terminate their services.
	GR No. 160240 2008-10-29	WOODRIDGE SCHOOL v. JOANNE C. PE BENITO NACHURA, J.
A dismissed employee is entitled to moral damages when the dismissal is attended by bad faith or fraud; or constitutes an act oppressive to labor; or is done in a manner contrary to good morals, good customs or public policy. Exemplary damages, on the other hand, may be awarded if the dismissal is effected in a wanton, oppressive or malevolent manner.[59] The award of said damages cannot be justified solely upon the premise that the employer fired his employee without just cause or due process. It is necessary that additional facts be pleaded and proven that the act of dismissal was attended by bad faith, fraud, et al., and that social humiliation, wounded feelings and grave anxiety resulted therefrom.[60]
	GR No. 150896 2008-08-28	PUREFOODS CORPORATION v. NAGKAKAISANG SAMAHANG MANGGAGAWA NG PUREFOODS RANK-AND-FILE NACHURA, J.
We deem as proper the award of moral and exemplary damages. We hold that the sudden termination of the STFWU members is tainted with ULP because it was done to interfere with, restrain or coerce employees in the exercise of their right to self-organization. Thus, the petitioner company is liable for the payment of the aforesaid damages.[22] Notable, though, is that this award, while stated in the body of the NLRC decision, was omitted in the dispositive portion of the said ruling. To prevent any further confusion in the implementation of the said decision, we correct the dispositive portion of the ruling to include the payment of P500,000.00 as moral and exemplary damages to the illegally dismissed STFWU members.