GR 111148; (October, 1997) (Digest)
G.R. No. 111148 October 10, 1997
ENRIQUE A. SOBREPEÑA, JR., petitioner, vs. COURT OF APPEALS and PACIFIC MEMORIAL PLANS, INC., respondents.
FACTS
Petitioner Enrique A. Sobrepeña, Jr. retired as president of respondent Pacific Memorial Plans, Inc. after 13 years as president and an aggregate of 20 years and ten months of service. As president, his compensation included overriding commissions derived from premium payments on memorial plans sold, which became due and payable only upon the respondent corporation’s receipt of 7% of the purchase price of a plan sold. Upon retirement, he received P86,266.28 as the balance of overriding commissions and P47,558.62 as retirement benefits, but he disagreed with the computation. He filed a complaint in the Regional Trial Court (RTC) claiming unpaid overriding commissions totaling P991,390.75, cash commutation for 240 days of unused vacation leaves amounting to P400,000, and unpaid retirement benefits of P614,292.00. The RTC dismissed his complaint and ordered him to pay the respondent corporation P94,903.06 for overpaid retirement benefits, exemplary damages, and attorney’s fees. The Court of Appeals upheld the RTC’s dismissal of his claims.
ISSUE
The principal issue is whether the petitioner, upon his retirement, is entitled to overriding commissions arising from sales of memorial plans effected during his presidency but for which premium payments are collected after his retirement. Additional issues involve his claims for commutation of unused vacation leaves and unpaid retirement benefits, as well as the awards of exemplary damages and attorney’s fees.
RULING
The Supreme Court modified the Court of Appeals’ decision. It ruled that the petitioner’s right to overriding commissions is coterminous with his employment and does not extend beyond his retirement in November 1979. The Court found he was paid all commissions due from 1966 until his retirement. Regarding vacation leaves, the Court upheld that the company’s Administrative Standard No. 1005 did not provide for cash commutation of unused leaves in his situation. On retirement benefits, the Court deleted the order for petitioner to refund P94,903.06, finding no overpayment as his compensation consisted entirely of commissions, which were correctly included in the computation. The award of exemplary damages was deleted, but the award of attorney’s fees and costs against the petitioner was affirmed.