G.R. No. 199547 ; September 24, 2012
THE NEW PHILIPPINE SKYLANDERS, INC. and/or JENNIFER M. ENANO-BOTE, Petitioners, vs. FRANCISCO N. DAKILA, Respondent.

FACTS

Respondent Francisco N. Dakila was initially employed by petitioner corporation in 1987 and was terminated in 1997 upon its sale. He was immediately rehired in May 1997 under a “Contract for Consultancy Services.” In April 2007, Dakila informed petitioners of his compulsory retirement effective May 2, 2007, and requested payment of retirement benefits under the Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA). Instead of acting on his request, petitioners terminated his services effective May 1, 2007. Consequently, Dakila filed a complaint for illegal dismissal and monetary claims, asserting that the consultancy contract was a scheme to deprive him of regularization benefits. He submitted time cards, attendance sheets, and other documents showing he performed tasks necessary to the business under petitioners’ control and supervision.
Petitioners contended that no employer-employee relationship existed, as Dakila was a consultant paid a fixed fee, not included in the payroll, and not subject to regular working hours or control over his means and methods. They argued he terminated his own contract via his April 2007 letter. The Labor Arbiter ruled in favor of Dakila, finding him a regular employee illegally dismissed and ordering reinstatement with backwages and CBA benefits. The NLRC affirmed the illegal dismissal but, noting Dakila was beyond retirement age, ordered payment of retirement pay and reinstatement wages pending appeal instead of reinstatement. The Court of Appeals dismissed the petitioners’ certiorari petition, upholding the NLRC’s findings.

ISSUE

The core issue is whether an employer-employee relationship existed between the parties, rendering Dakila’s dismissal illegal and entitling him to monetary awards.

RULING

The Supreme Court denied the petition, upholding the finding of illegal dismissal but modifying the awarded remedies. The existence of an employer-employee relationship is a factual question, and the findings of the Labor Arbiter, NLRC, and Court of Appeals, supported by substantial evidence (like control-indicative documents), are conclusive. Dakila was a regular employee unjustly dismissed without cause. Under Article 279 of the Labor Code, an illegally dismissed employee is entitled to reinstatement and backwages.
However, since Dakila was terminated one day before his compulsory retirement date, reinstatement was no longer feasible. Thus, he was correctly entitled to retirement benefits under the CBA. His backwages were limited to one day only (May 1, 2007), and the award of reinstatement wages pending appeal was deleted for lack of basis. Furthermore, petitioner Jennifer M. Enano-Bote, as a corporate officer, cannot be held jointly and severally liable with the corporation absent independent proof of malice or bad faith in the dismissal, preserving the corporation’s separate juridical personality. The awards for moral and exemplary damages were also deleted for lack of factual and legal basis. The resolutions of the lower courts were modified accordingly.