View full case

NEW PHILIPPINE SKYLANDERS v. FRANCISCO N. DAKILA

FACTS:

The case involves a complaint for illegal dismissal and non-payment of retirement benefits filed by Francisco Dakila against The New Philippine Skylanders, Inc. and its President and General Manager, Jennifer Eñano-Bote. Dakila was initially employed by the corporation in 1987, but was terminated in April 1997 when the corporation was sold. He was then rehired as a consultant in May 1997. In April 2007, Dakila informed the petitioners of his compulsory retirement and requested for the payment of his retirement benefits, but instead, he was terminated from service. Dakila filed a complaint alleging constructive illegal dismissal, non-payment of retirement benefits, non-payment of wages, and other benefits. He claimed that the consultancy contract was a scheme to deprive him of the benefits of regularization. Dakila provided documentary evidence showing that he performed tasks under the direct control and supervision of the petitioners and that he was recognized as a regular employee. The labor arbiter ruled that Dakila was illegally dismissed and ordered his reinstatement with full backwages and unpaid benefits. The NLRC affirmed the labor arbiter's ruling but noted that reinstatement was no longer feasible due to Dakila's retirement. The NLRC ordered the payment of retirement pay and reinstatement wages. The CA dismissed the petition for certiorari and affirmed the NLRC's ruling. The Supreme Court modified the CA's ruling by absolving Eñano-Bote from liability, deleting the awards for reinstatement wages pending appeal and moral and exemplary damages, and limiting the computation of backwages to only a day prior to Dakila's compulsory retirement.

ISSUES:

  1. Whether or not respondent Dakila was a regular employee.

  2. Whether or not respondent Dakila was illegally dismissed.

  3. Whether or not petitioner Jennifer M. Eñano-Bote is personally liable for the monetary awards.

  4. Whether or not the awards of reinstatement wages, moral damages, and exemplary damages have basis.

RULING:

  1. The Court found that there is substantial evidence to support the finding that respondent Dakila was a regular employee who was illegally dismissed.

  2. The Court ruled that since respondent Dakila was terminated one day before his compulsory retirement, his reinstatement is no longer feasible. He is entitled to payment of retirement benefits instead.

  3. The Court absolved petitioner Jennifer M. Eñano-Bote, as the president and general manager of the corporation, from liability for the monetary awards. There was no independent proof of malice or bad faith.

  4. The Court ordered the deletion of the awards of reinstatement wages pending appeal, moral damages, and exemplary damages due to lack of basis.