G.R. No. 246410 . January 25, 2023
I-PEOPLE MANPOWER RESOURCES, INC., ELEC QATAR AND LEOPOLDO GANGOSO, JR., PETITIONERS, VS. COURT OF APPEALS AND JOMER O. MONTON, RESPONDENTS.

FACTS

On June 24, 2013, Elec Qatar, through its local agency I-People Manpower Resources, Inc. (IPMR), hired Jomer O. Monton as an electrical engineer under a two-year contract (November 9, 2013 to November 9, 2015). On October 6, 2014, Elec Qatar sent Monton a letter terminating his employment within 30 days, citing low company activity and lack of projects necessitating cost and manpower reduction. Monton was repatriated on November 10, 2014. He paid IPMR placement fees totaling QAR 6,260.00, deducted from his salary. On November 4, 2014, Monton sent an email titled “Letter of Gratitude” to Elec Qatar’s managing director, thanking him for the support and guidance. Monton filed a complaint for illegal dismissal against IPMR, Elec Qatar, and Leopoldo Gangoso, Jr., praying for payment of salaries for the unexpired portion of his contract, reimbursement of placement fees, damages, and attorney’s fees. The Labor Arbiter and the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) dismissed the complaint, ruling the dismissal was valid per the contract’s termination clause requiring only a one-month notice and that Monton acquiesced via his email. The Court of Appeals reversed, declaring Monton illegally dismissed, ordering payment of his salaries for the unexpired portion, reimbursement of placement fees with interest, and attorney’s fees. Petitioners assailed this via a Petition for Certiorari under Rule 65.

ISSUE

Whether the Court of Appeals acted with grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction when it reversed the NLRC and declared Monton illegally dismissed.

RULING

The Supreme Court dismissed the Petition. It first noted the petitioners availed of the wrong remedy; a judgment on the merits by the Court of Appeals should be challenged via a Petition for Review under Rule 45, not a special civil action for certiorari under Rule 65. On the substantive issue, the Court affirmed the Court of Appeals’ finding of illegal dismissal. The termination clause in the employment contract allowing termination with one-month notice cannot override the mandatory requirements of the Labor Code. Dismissal must be for a just or authorized cause and must comply with procedural due process. The employer’s claim of retrenchment was unsupported by evidence of substantial losses or compliance with the required criteria under the law. Monton’s “Letter of Gratitude” email did not constitute acquiescence to his termination but was a courteous gesture preceding his last day. Consequently, Monton was illegally dismissed and is entitled to his money claims. The Court of Appeals did not commit grave abuse of discretion.