G.R. No. 229326 , November 05, 2018
ROMINA N. BISMONTE, ET AL., PETITIONERS, V. GOLDEN SUNSET RESORT AND SPA AND RICARDO “RICKY” REYES, RESPONDENTS.

FACTS

Petitioners, employed as various resort staff, filed complaints for illegal dismissal and non-payment of benefits against respondents. Three petitioners claimed actual dismissal, while five alleged constructive dismissal due to a reduction of their work schedule from six to three days a week. Respondents countered that petitioners were merely seasonal employees engaged under an arrangement akin to independent contractorship, without employer control. The Labor Arbiter dismissed the complaints, finding no employer-employee relationship. On appeal, the NLRC reversed, declaring petitioners as regular employees entitled to monetary awards, though it dismissed the illegal dismissal claims for lack of proof of dismissal or due to a valid reduction of workdays during the lean season.
Respondents elevated the case to the Court of Appeals via a petition for certiorari. The CA annulled the NLRC Decision and reinstated the Labor Arbiter’s dismissal. It ruled that petitioners’ appeal to the NLRC was filed out of time. The CA computed that since petitioners received the LA Decision on March 21, 2014, they had until March 31, 2014, to appeal. However, the NLRC received the appeal memorandum only on April 2, 2014. The CA also held that petitioners’ counsel, the PAO, should have personally filed the appeal given the proximity of their office to the NLRC branch instead of using registered mail.

ISSUE

Whether the Court of Appeals correctly ruled that petitioners’ appeal to the NLRC was filed out of time, thereby rendering the NLRC Decision void.

RULING

The Supreme Court granted the petition and reversed the CA. The Court held that the appeal was timely filed. Applying the suppletory application of the Rules of Court under the NLRC Rules, the date of mailing via registered mail is considered the date of filing. Petitioners’ appeal memorandum was mailed on March 31, 2014, as evidenced by the registry receipt. This date fell within the 10-day reglementary period from receipt of the LA Decision on March 21, 2014. The CA erred in using the date of receipt by the NLRC (April 2, 2014) as the filing date. The Court emphasized that for pleadings filed by registered mail, the date of mailing is the date of filing, and the sender’s lack of control over postal delivery delays should not prejudice the party. The CA’s directive for personal filing was an unwarranted imposition, as the rules allow filing by registered mail. Consequently, the NLRC validly acquired jurisdiction over the appeal. The Supreme Court reinstated the NLRC Decision, which had correctly found an employer-employee relationship and awarded monetary benefits, while dismissing the illegal dismissal claims for insufficiency of evidence.