GR L 77292; (April, 1987) (Digest)
G.R. No. L-77292. April 10, 1987. PANTRANCO NORTH EXPRESS, INC., petitioner, vs. EDUARDO SISON and the NATIONAL LABOR RELATION COMMISSION, respondents.
FACTS
The petitioner, Pantranco North Express, Inc., sought to set aside resolutions of the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) which dismissed its appeal from a Labor Arbiter’s decision as having been filed one day late. The NLRC’s resolution of August 22, 1986, stated that a copy of the Labor Arbiter’s decision was personally served upon petitioner’s counsel on August 9, 1985, as evidenced by a Sheriff’s Return dated August 8, 1985—a date which the Supreme Court noted was inherently contradictory, as a return cannot predate the service. In its verified petition, Pantranco asserted it received the decision on August 12, 1985, and filed its appeal on August 22, 1985.
ISSUE
Whether the National Labor Relations Commission committed grave abuse of discretion in dismissing Pantranco’s appeal for being filed out of time.
RULING
Yes, the NLRC committed grave abuse of discretion. The Court found the NLRC’s resolution opaque and contradictory regarding the actual date of receipt of the Labor Arbiter’s decision. The NLRC itself, in its resolution, stated the ten-day appeal period should be reckoned from August 12, 1985, to August 21, 1985. The Court took judicial notice that August 12, 1985, was a Monday, making receipt on the prior Sunday (August 11) improbable. Applying Article 13 of the Civil Code, which mandates the exclusion of the first day and inclusion of the last day in computing periods, an appeal filed on August 22, 1985, if reckoned from August 12, was timely filed on the tenth day. The NLRC’s conclusion that it was one day late was therefore a clear error in computation. Alternatively, if the NLRC believed receipt was on August 9, 1985 (a Friday), then its own reckoning from August 12 was mistaken, and the appeal would have been three days late, not one—further highlighting the inconsistency and arbitrariness of its ruling. Given this obscurity and to serve substantial justice, the Supreme Court granted the petition, set aside the NLRC resolutions, and directed the NLRC to reinstate Pantranco’s appeal for a determination on the merits.