Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

JOEL B. DE JESUS v. NLRC

This case has been cited 4 times or more.

	GR No. 188637 2010-12-15	ARNALDO G. GABUNAS v. SCANMAR MARITIME SERVICES INC. SERENO, J.
In De Jesus v. National Labor Relations Commission,[22] judicial review by the Supreme Court does not extend to a re-evaluation of the sufficiency of the evidence that served as the basis for the proper labor tribunal's determination. The doctrine that this Court is not a trier of facts is firm and applies with greater force to labor cases.[23]
	GR No. 157861 2010-02-02	BIBIANA FARMS v. ARTURO LADO BRION, J.
Under the Labor Code, the requirements for the lawful dismissal of an employee are two-fold, consisting of substantive and procedural aspects. Not only must the dismissal be for a just or authorized cause; the basic requirements of procedural due process - notice and hearing - must likewise be observed before an employee may be dismissed. Without the concurrence of the two, the termination is illegal in the eyes of the law, for employment is a property right that the holder cannot be deprived of without due process. [24] The burden of proof rests on the employer to show that the employee's dismissal has met these due process requirements. The case of the employer must stand or fall on its own merits and not on the weakness of the employee's defense. [25]
	GR No. 166554 2008-11-27	JULITO SAGALES v. RUSTAN'S COMMERCIAL CORPORATION REYES, R.T., J.
Necessarily then, the employer bears the burden of proof to show the basis of the termination of the employee.[56]
	GR No. 165389 2008-10-17	NFD INTERNATIONAL MANNING AGENTS v. NLRC AUSTRIA-MARTINEZ, J.
Anent the first requisite, it is a basic principle that in the dismissal of employees, the burden of proof rests upon the employer to show that the dismissal is for a just and valid cause and failure to do so would necessarily mean that the dismissal is not justified.[25] This is in consonance with the guarantee of security of tenure in the Constitution and in the Labor Code. A dismissed employee is not required to prove his innocence of the charges leveled against him by his employer.[26] The determination of the existence and sufficiency of a just cause must be exercised with fairness and in good faith and after observing due process.[27]