G.R. No. 202446, September 16, 2015
EDUARDO BANDILLION, ET AL., PETITIONERS, VS. LA FILIPINA UYGONGCO CORPORATION (LFUC), RESPONDENT.

FACTS

Petitioners, truck drivers of respondent La Filipina Uygongco Corporation (LFUC), filed a complaint for violation of labor standard laws before the DOLE Region VI. The initial inspection found no violation, upheld by the Regional Director. On appeal, the DOLE Secretary reversed this finding in a June 4, 2003 Order, declaring LFUC liable for underpayment of wages, non-payment of holiday pay, rest day pay, and overtime pay, and remanded the case to DOLE Region VI for appropriate computation of individual entitlements. LFUC’s subsequent petitions to the Court of Appeals and this Court were denied, and an Entry of Judgment was issued on July 8, 2008. Pursuant to the DOLE Secretary’s Order, the DOLE Region VI Regional Director issued an Order dated August 28, 2006, directing LFUC to pay a total of Php3,345,657.94 to the 38 employees. A Writ of Execution was issued on July 15, 2008. LFUC filed a Petition for Certiorari and Injunction with the Court of Appeals, challenging the writ and later moving for reconsideration of the August 28, 2006 Order before DOLE Region VI, which was denied. LFUC’s appeal to the DOLE Secretary was also denied, and an Entry of Judgment was issued on March 5, 2012, declaring the denial final and executory. Meanwhile, the Court of Appeals, in its assailed Decision dated September 13, 2011, remanded the case to the DOLE Regional Director for reception of evidence and re-computation of monetary awards, finding that the computations were made without evidence and without considering a final NLRC decision on the valid dismissal of most employees. Petitioners’ motion for reconsideration was denied.

ISSUE

Whether the Court of Appeals erred in remanding the case to the DOLE Regional Director for reception of evidence and re-computation of monetary awards.

RULING

Yes. The Supreme Court granted the petition, reversed the Court of Appeals’ Decision and Resolution, and reinstated the DOLE Regional Director’s Order dated August 28, 2006 and the subsequent Writ of Execution. The Court held that the DOLE Secretary’s June 4, 2003 Order, which had become final and executory, conclusively determined LFUC’s liability for underpayment of wages, holiday pay, rest day pay, and overtime pay. The only task remanded to the DOLE Regional Director was the ministerial act of computing the exact amounts due based on that final liability. The Regional Director’s August 28, 2006 Order was a valid compliance order, and its computation was presumed correct. LFUC’s claims regarding the employees’ status as piece-rate workers, the existence of waivers, and the NLRC dismissal case were defenses that were or should have been raised in the original proceedings and could not be used to collaterally attack the final judgment. The principle of finality of judgment bars re-litigation of settled issues. The Court of Appeals’ order for a new reception of evidence constituted an unjustified re-examination of factual and legal conclusions already settled by the final and executory Order of the DOLE Secretary.