G.R. No. 164662 & 165787; February 18, 2013
MARIA LOURDES C. DE JESUS, Petitioner, vs. HON. RAUL T. AQUINO, PRESIDING COMMISSIONER, NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION, SECOND DIVISION, QUEZON CITY, and SUPERSONIC SERVICES, INC., Respondents. / SUPERSONIC SERVICES, INC., Petitioner vs. MARIA LOURDES C. DE JESUS, Respondent.

FACTS

Maria Lourdes C. De Jesus, a Sales Promotion Officer for Supersonic Services, Inc., was dismissed for allegedly failing to account for and remit cash collections amounting to US$36,168.39 from clients under her account. The company contended that after discovering the unremitted collections, it issued memoranda to De Jesus requiring her to explain the discrepancy. Following an investigation where De Jesus allegedly admitted the obligation and executed a promissory note, she was terminated. De Jesus filed a complaint for illegal dismissal, arguing she was not afforded due process, claiming the promissory note was executed under duress, and asserting she had fully remitted all collections.
The Labor Arbiter and the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) upheld the dismissal as for a just cause (willful breach of trust) and found due process was observed. On appeal, the Court of Appeals affirmed the existence of a just cause for termination but reversed the finding on due process. The CA held that Supersonic failed to comply with the twin-notice requirement, as the notices sent were mere demands for payment and not the specific written notices of charge and termination mandated by law. Applying the ruling in Serrano v. NLRC, the CA awarded De Jesus full backwages from dismissal until finality of the decision due to the procedural defect.

ISSUE

Whether the dismissal of an employee for a just cause is valid despite the employer’s failure to comply with statutory due process requirements, and what is the correct legal consequence of such non-compliance.

RULING

The Supreme Court granted the petitions, modifying the CA decision. It upheld the finding that De Jesus was dismissed for a just cause, specifically loss of trust and confidence due to her failure to account for substantial company funds, which was sufficiently proven. However, the Court agreed with the CA that Supersonic failed to observe the two-notice rule under Article 277(b) of the Labor Code and its implementing rules. The memoranda sent were demands for payment, not the requisite first notice apprising the employee of the specific charges and giving her a genuine opportunity to respond.
Crucially, the Court abandoned the Serrano doctrine, which mandated payment of full backwages for a dismissal based on a just cause but lacking due process. The Court reinstated the rule in Wenphil Corp. v. NLRC and its progeny, as clarified in Agabon v. NLRC. The legal logic is that the dismissal based on a just or authorized cause remains valid. The due process violation is a separate procedural infirmity that does not negate the substantive validity of the termination. The sanction for such procedural lapse is not reinstatement or full backwages, but the payment of indemnity in the form of nominal damages. The purpose is to deter employers from ignoring due process while recognizing the legitimacy of dismissing an employee for cause. Consequently, the Court ordered Supersonic to pay De Jesus nominal damages of Thirty Thousand Pesos (P30,000.00) for its failure to comply with statutory due process. No backwages or reinstatement were awarded.