This case has been cited 2 times or more.
|
2014-01-29 |
DEL CASTILLO, J. |
||||
| We do not, however, agree with the findings of the NLRC that all respondents were dismissed for just causes. In termination disputes, the burden of proving that the dismissal is for a just or valid cause rests on the employers. Failure on their part to discharge such burden will render the dismissal illegal.[52] | |||||
|
2012-03-07 |
PEREZ, J. |
||||
| In AMA Computer College-East Rizal v. Ignacio[40] as reiterated in Gurango v. Best Chemicals and Plastics, Inc.,[41] the Court ruled that: In termination cases, the burden of proof rests on the employer to show that the dismissal is for just cause. When there is no showing of a clear, valid and legal cause for the termination of employment, the law considers the matter a case of illegal dismissal and the burden is on the employer to prove that the termination was for a valid or authorized cause. And the quantum of proof which the employer must discharge is substantial evidence. An employee's dismissal due to serious misconduct must be supported by substantial evidence. Substantial evidence is that amount of relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion, even if other minds, equally reasonable, might conceivably opine otherwise.[42] | |||||