Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

This case has been cited 2 times or more.

	GR No. 201494 2015-07-29	MARITES R. CUSAP v. ADIDAS PHILIPPINES BRION, J.
The petitioner submits that Adidas, JCA and PRIME failed to refute the above narration or to present any evidence to the contrary. Citing Lakas sa Industriya ng Kapatirang Haligi ng Alyansa-Pinagbuklod ng Manggawang Promo ng Burlingame v. Burlingame Corporation,[34] she argues that as promo girl, her work is directly related to Adidas' principal business or operations, which makes her a regular employee of the company.
	GR No. 155207 2008-08-13	WILHELMINA S. OROZCO v. FIFTH DIVISION OF CA NACHURA, J.
This Court has constantly adhered to the "four-fold test" to determine whether there exists an employer-employee relationship between parties.[24] The four elements of an employment relationship are: (a) the selection and engagement of the employee; (b) the payment of wages; (c) the power of dismissal; and (d) the employer's power to control the employee's conduct.[25]