This case has been cited 2 times or more.
|
2015-12-09 |
DEL CASTILLO, J. |
||||
| In labor cases, grave abuse of discretion may be ascribed to the NLRC when its findings and conclusions are not supported by substantial evidence or such relevant evidence that a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion.[64] The CA may grant a Petition for Certiorari if it finds that the NLRC committed grave abuse of discretion by capriciously, whimsically or arbitrarily disregarding the material evidence decisive of a case. It cannot "make this determination without looking into the evidence presented by the parties. Necessarily, the appellate court can only evaluate the materiality or significance of the evidence, which is alleged to have been capriciously, whimsically, or arbitrarily disregarded by the NLRC, in relation to all other evidence on record."[65] | |||||
|
2015-12-02 |
PERLAS-BERNABE, J. |
||||
| "To justify the grant of the extraordinary remedy of certiorari, petitioners must satisfactorily show that the court or quasi-judicial authority gravely abused the discretion conferred upon it. Grave abuse of discretion connotes judgment exercised in a capricious and whimsical manner that is tantamount to lack of jurisdiction. To be considered 'grave,' discretion must be exercised in a despotic manner by reason of passion or personal hostility, and must be so patent and gross as to amount to an evasion of positive duty or a virtual refusal to perform the duty enjoined by or to act at all in contemplation of law."[35] | |||||