G.R. No. 207156 , January 16, 2017
TURKS SHAWARMA COMPANY/GEM ZEÑAROSA, Petitioners, vs. FELICIANO Z. PAJARON and LARRY A. CARBONILLA, Respondents.

FACTS

Respondents Feliciano Pajaron and Larry Carbonilla filed complaints for illegal dismissal and monetary claims against petitioners Turks Shawarma Company and its owner, Gem Zeñarosa. The Labor Arbiter ruled in favor of the respondents, finding them constructively and illegally dismissed, and awarded them monetary benefits totaling approximately Php 197,936.27. Petitioners appealed to the NLRC but filed only a partial cash bond of Php 15,000.00, accompanied by a motion to reduce bond. They claimed financial hardship, with Zeñarosa describing himself as a backyard micro-entrepreneur unable to afford the full bond.
The NLRC denied the motion to reduce bond and dismissed the appeal for non-perfection due to failure to post the required appeal bond. The NLRC ruled that the alleged financial difficulty was not a valid ground for reduction and was unsubstantiated by evidence. The Court of Appeals affirmed the NLRC’s orders, prompting the petitioners to elevate the case to the Supreme Court via a Petition for Review on Certiorari.

ISSUE

Whether the NLRC correctly dismissed the petitioners’ appeal for failure to perfect the same by not posting the required appeal bond.

RULING

Yes. The Supreme Court denied the petition and affirmed the rulings of the NLRC and the Court of Appeals. The posting of a cash or surety bond equivalent to the monetary award is a mandatory requirement for perfecting an appeal in labor cases, as provided under Article 223 of the Labor Code. This requirement is jurisdictional, and non-compliance results in the dismissal of the appeal for lack of perfection.
The Court rejected the petitioners’ plea for a liberal application of the rules. While procedural rules may be relaxed on equitable grounds, such liberality is not absolute and applies only under justifiable circumstances and for meritorious cases. The petitioners’ claim of financial hardship was deemed insufficient. They failed to provide competent evidence, such as a financial statement or a balance sheet, to substantiate Zeñarosa’s claim of being a mere micro-entrepreneur. The partial bond of Php 15,000.00 was also found grossly disproportionate to the total award of nearly Php 200,000.00, and thus not a “reasonable amount” that could be accepted in lieu of the full bond. Consequently, the NLRC did not commit grave abuse of discretion in dismissing the appeal for non-perfection.