GR 141926; (July, 2004) (Digest)
G.R. No. 141926 ; July 14, 2004
CONRADO TAN, petitioner, vs. RESTITUTO TIMBAL, JR., respondent.
FACTS
Restituto Timbal, Jr. and a co-worker were indefinitely suspended and subsequently barred from entering their workplace by Nationwide Steel Corporation (NSC) after being accused of filing a complaint with the SSS. They filed a complaint for illegal dismissal against NSC and impleaded its General Manager, Conrado Tan, as a respondent in his official capacity. The Labor Arbiter ruled in favor of the employees, declaring their dismissal illegal and ordering NSC to reinstate them and pay backwages. This decision became final and executory.
When the monetary award remained unsatisfied, the employees filed an omnibus motion, seeking payment from the unpaid subscribed capital stock of NSC’s incorporators, including Tan, based on the trust fund doctrine. The Labor Arbiter granted the motion and issued an alias writ of execution against Tan and other incorporators. Tan challenged this, arguing he was not a party to the case in his personal capacity and that the Labor Arbiter had no jurisdiction to enforce the judgment against him personally.
ISSUE
Whether the Labor Arbiter and the NLRC acquired jurisdiction over Conrado Tan in his personal capacity to enforce the final judgment against his unpaid capital subscription to satisfy the corporation’s obligation.
RULING
No. The Supreme Court affirmed the NLRC’s setting aside of the alias writ of execution. The Court emphasized that the Labor Arbiter’s final and executory decision only held NSC liable for illegal dismissal. Tan was impleaded solely in his official capacity as General Manager. The decision contained no finding of personal liability or that Tan acted with malice or bad faith.
To enforce a claim against a stockholder’s unpaid subscription, a separate action is required to establish such liability. The Labor Arbiter exceeded his jurisdiction by altering the final judgment through the alias writ, which effectively sought to enforce it against parties not originally held liable. The trust fund doctrine cannot be invoked in a summary execution proceeding against individuals who were not adjudged liable in the final decision. The proper remedy for the employees was to institute an independent action to pierce the corporate veil or to enforce the stockholders’ unpaid subscriptions.