This case has been cited 1 times or more.
|
2005-06-15 |
YNARES-SANTIAGO, J. |
||||
| As the Labor Arbiter observed, faced with the overwhelming evidence presented by respondents on one hand and the mere general denial of petitioner on the other, the invocation of the protective mantle of the law in favor of labor cannot be upheld in this case. This principle cannot be adopted where there is clear and convincing evidence of the truth. While this court endeavors to live up to its mandate that the workingman's welfare should be the primordial and paramount consideration,[24] it cannot do so if it will be at the expense of justice and will result in the oppression or self-destruction of the employer.[25] The interests of both the employers and employees are intended to be protected and not one of them is given undue preference.[26] | |||||