This case has been cited 3 times or more.
|
2015-11-23 |
PERALTA, J. |
||||
| For a dismissal to be valid, the.rule is that the employer must comply with both the substantive and the procedural due process requirements.[16] Substantive due process requires that the dismissal must be pursuant to either a just or an authorized cause under Articles 282, 283[17] or 284[18] of the Labor Code.[19] | |||||
|
2015-06-15 |
BRION, J. |
||||
| This conclusion finds support in cases emphasizing that an unsubstantiated accusation will not ripen into a holding that there is just cause for dismissal.[47] A mere accusation of wrongdoing is not sufficient cause for a valid dismissal of an employee. The facts for which a dismissal is based should be backed by substantial evidence at the time the employee is dismissed, and not at the time his dismissal is being questioned before the courts. | |||||
|
2015-02-18 |
PERLAS-BERNABE, J. |
||||
| It is well-settled that the burden of proving that the termination of an employee was for a just or authorized cause lies with the employer. If the employer fails to meet this burden, the conclusion would be that the dismissal was unjustified and, therefore, illegal.[57] In order to discharge this burden, the employer must present substantial evidence, which is defined as that amount of relevant evidence which a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to justify a conclusion,[58] and not based on mere surmises or conjectures.[59] | |||||