G.R. No. 131656, October 12, 1998
Asian Center for Career and Employment System and Services, Inc. (ACCESS), Petitioner, vs. National Labor Relations Commission and Ibno Mediales, Respondents.
FACTS
Petitioner ACCESS hired respondent Ibno Mediales as a mason in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, under a two-year contract from February 28, 1995, to February 28, 1997, with a monthly salary of 1,200 Saudi Riyals (SR). On May 26, 1996, Mediales applied for and was granted a vacation leave with pay. While en route to the Philippines, he was informed by co-workers that he had been dismissed from service, which information was later confirmed. On June 17, 1996, Mediales filed a complaint for illegal dismissal and other monetary claims. The Labor Arbiter found petitioner guilty of illegal dismissal and ordered payment of SR 13,200 for the unexpired portion of the contract and attorney’s fees. On appeal, the NLRC affirmed the illegal dismissal finding but deleted the order for refund of placement fee. Petitioner moved for reconsideration, arguing that under Section 10 of R.A. 8042 (Migrant Workers Act), its liability should be limited to three months’ salary (SR 3,600) for the unexpired portion, not the eight months remaining. The NLRC denied the motion, ruling that R.A. 8042, which took effect on July 15, 1995, did not apply because Mediales’s employment commenced in February 1995. Petitioner filed this certiorari petition, contesting the monetary award.
ISSUE
Whether Republic Act No. 8042 applies to determine the monetary award for the unexpired portion of respondent’s employment contract, and consequently, whether petitioner’s liability should be limited to three months’ salary.
RULING
Yes, R.A. 8042 applies. The Supreme Court ruled that jurisdiction is determined by the law in effect at the time the cause of action accrues. Respondent’s cause of action for illegal dismissal arose in June 1996, after R.A. 8042 took effect in July 1995. Therefore, Section 10 of R.A. 8042 governs, which entitles an illegally dismissed overseas worker to his salary for the unexpired portion of his contract or for three months for every year of the unexpired term, whichever is less. Since the unexpired portion was eight months, the award is limited to three months’ salary, totaling SR 3,600. The Court noted that the Labor Arbiter’s dispositive portion awarding SR 13,200 conflicted with the body of the decision, which correctly computed SR 3,600; the body prevails where the dispositive portion is clearly a mistake. The award of attorney’s fees (SR 360, or 10% of SR 3,600) was upheld due to petitioner’s bad faith in dismissing respondent. The NLRC decision was affirmed with modifications, ordering petitioner to pay the peso equivalent of SR 3,600 and SR 360 as attorney’s fees.
