You're currently signed in as:
User

PHILIPPINE SPRING WATER RESOURCES INC. v. CA

This case has been cited 1 times or more.

2015-09-07
DEL CASTILLO, J.
Lastly, the quitclaim that respondent executed did not bar him from filing a complaint for illegal dismissal against petitioners. Said quitclaim was invalid because it did not fully or completely give or grant respondent what was due him as a matter of law and justice. It only covered respondent's accrued leave credits and his 3-day travel pay. Such payment involved only a part or portion of the amount of money actually and justly due him under the law; it was not a full and complete satisfaction of what is due him under the law.[37]