G.R. No. 113600 May 28, 1999
Rizalina Lamzon, doing business under the name and style Rizal International Shipping Services, petitioner, vs. National Labor Relations Commission, First Division, Manila, Hon. Felicisimo O. Joson, in his capacity as Administrator Philippine Overseas Employment Administration, Manuel Banta and Edilberto Cuetara, respondents.

FACTS

Private respondents Edilberto Cuetara and Manuel Banta were hired by petitioner Rizal International Shipping Services for employment on board M/V Silver Hope. They filed a joint complaint before the Philippine Overseas Employment Administration (POEA) for non-payment of wages and other benefits. The POEA rendered a decision on October 28, 1992, ordering petitioner to pay the monetary claims of the private respondents.
On November 12, 1992, petitioner filed a Notice of Appeal and an Appeal Memorandum with the POEA, together with a receipt for payment of the appeal fee and a “Motion for Extension of Time to File Appeal Bond,” praying for a ten-day extension from November 13, 1992, to submit the required bond. Petitioner filed the appeal bond on November 20, 1992. The National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) dismissed the appeal in a Resolution dated October 26, 1993, ruling it was not perfected on time due to the late filing of the appeal bond. The NLRC denied petitioner’s motion for reconsideration, prompting this petition.

ISSUE

Whether the NLRC committed grave abuse of discretion in dismissing petitioner’s appeal for failure to perfect the appeal within the reglementary period due to the late posting of the appeal bond.

RULING

The Supreme Court dismissed the petition, affirming the NLRC’s resolutions. The legal logic is anchored on the mandatory and jurisdictional nature of the requirements for perfecting an appeal in labor cases. Under Article 223 of the Labor Code, an appeal from a decision involving a monetary award must be filed within ten calendar days from receipt of the decision and perfected only upon the posting of a cash or surety bond. The Court emphasized that the payment of the appeal bond is an indispensable and jurisdictional requisite, not a mere technicality.
Petitioner’s filing of a motion for extension to file the bond was ineffective. The reglementary ten-day period for perfecting an appeal is fixed by law and cannot be extended by mere motion. The rules explicitly state that no motion for extension of the period to perfect an appeal shall be allowed. Since the bond was filed only on November 20, 1992, which was beyond the ten-day period from receipt of the POEA decision, the appeal was not perfected on time. Consequently, the POEA decision became final and executory. The NLRC correctly lost jurisdiction over the appeal, and its dismissal was in accordance with law, absent any grave abuse of discretion.