GR 181480; (January, 2009) (Digest)
G.R. No. 181480 January 30, 2009
JOSEFINA CADA, Petitioner, vs. TIME SAVER LAUNDRY/LESLIE PEREZ, Respondents.
FACTS
Petitioner Josefina Cada filed a complaint for illegal dismissal and various monetary claims against respondents Time Saver Laundry (TSL), a sole proprietorship, and its owner Leslie Perez. She alleged she was employed as a presser, dismissed on May 7, 2003, without being given an opportunity to explain after being accused of quarreling with a co-employee. Respondents failed to appear in the proceedings before the Labor Arbiter, who decided the case ex parte, finding illegal dismissal and awarding monetary benefits. Respondents appealed to the NLRC, arguing improper service of summons and lack of basis for the award. The NLRC affirmed the Labor Arbiter’s decision with modification. Respondents then filed a Petition for Certiorari with the Court of Appeals, which granted the petition, declaring the NLRC Resolutions null and void on the ground of lack of proper service of summons on respondent Leslie Perez, as the summons was received by one Alfredo Perez, a co-employee, and not by respondent personally.
ISSUE
Whether there was improper service of summons upon respondent Leslie Perez which renders the judgment by the NLRC against her null and void.
RULING
No. The Supreme Court ruled that service of summons was valid. Under the NLRC Rules, service may be effected personally or by registered mail, and in special circumstances, in accordance with the Rules of Court. The bailiff’s return showed several attempts at personal service at respondent’s given address failed. Service was then effected by leaving copies at respondent’s office with a person of sufficient age and discretion, which is allowed under the Rules of Court. The Court found this constituted a special circumstance justifying such mode of service. Furthermore, the Court held that respondents were not denied due process as they were able to file an appeal and motions for reconsideration, actively participating in the NLRC proceedings. The essence of due process is simply an opportunity to be heard, which they were afforded. The Court of Appeals’ decision was reversed, and the NLRC Resolutions were reinstated.