Exposição do sistema de dominação dos seres humanos e suas relações com a realidade existente.Descrição completa
Descripción completa
Descripción: d
Full description
Descripción completa
Official SS Officers list (Dienstaltersliste der Schutzstaffel)Full description
Documento - Formación Metodología Six SigmaDescripción completa
WPS & PQR for SS Duplex
Material Selection
Descrição completa
Descripción completa
annul report
Descripción completa
Full description
BALITE v. SS VENTURES
G.R. No. 195109; February 4, 2015; Perez, J.
SUMMARY :
Respondent SS Ventures International, Inc. (SS Ventures) dismissed petitioners Balite, Bihasa, and Anzaldo for violation of various company policies. Balite, Bihasa, and Anzaldo charged SS Ventures with illegal dismissal and recovery of backwages, 13th month pay, and attorney s fees before the Labor Arbiter. ’
The LA held that SS Ventures was liable for illegal dismissal for failing to comply with the procedural and substantive requirements in terminating employment. SS Ventures interposed an appeal to th e NLRC by filing a Notice of Appeal and paying the corresponding appeal fee. However, instead of filing a bond equivalent to the total amount of the monetary award (P490,308.00), SS Ventures filed a Motion to Reduce the Appeal Bond to P100,000.00 and appended a manager s check of the same amount, citing financial difficulty. ’
The NLRC dismissed the appeal for non-perfection, ruling that the posting of an appeal bond equivalent to the monetary award is indispensable, and that the reduction of such is not warranted in this case. On certiorari, the CA reversed on the ground that there was substantial compliance with the rules for the perfection of an appeal, as the appeal was seasonably filed and SS Ventures sufficiently proved its incapability to post the required bond, justifying its posting of a bond of a smaller amount. The CA d enied the motion for reconsideration. Upon review on certiorari, the SC affirmed the CA. DOCTRINE :
The posting of a cash or surety bond in an amount equivalent to 10% of the monetary award pending resolution of the motion to reduce appeal bond shall be deemed sufficient to perfect an appeal (McBurnie v. Ganzon). Such 10% is not a permissible bond, but provisional; it is only such amount that shall be deemed reasonable in the meantime that the appellant s motion is pending resolution by the Commission (Sara Lee v. Macatlang). The actual amount is necessarily greater. ’
With [SS Ventures s] demonstrated good faith in filing the motion to reduce the bond on demonstrable grounds coupled with the posting of the appeal bond in the requested amount, as well as the filing of the memorandum of appeal, the right of the employer to appeal must be upheld. ’