G.R. Nos. L-32444-46 August 18, 1988
NATIONAL WATERWORKS AND SEWERAGE AUTHORITY, petitioner, vs. NWSA CONSOLIDATED UNIONS, COURT OF INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS, and ATANACIO PACIS, respondents.

FACTS

This case involves the propriety of a writ of execution issued by the defunct Court of Industrial Relations (CIR) to compel the National Waterworks and Sewerage Authority (NWSA) to pay attorney’s fees to Atty. Atanacio Pacis. A series of labor cases were resolved in favor of the NWSA Consolidated Unions, with attorney’s fees for the unions’ lawyers, including Pacis, fixed at 23% of the monetary awards in a final CIR Order dated November 27, 1964. NWSA eventually paid its employees a total of P800,000.00 in staggered amounts. While Atty. Pacis was paid his 6% share from the first partial payment, a dispute arose regarding his fee for the subsequent payments. The Supreme Court, in a prior related case (G.R. No. L-26890-92), affirmed a CIR order directing NWSA to pay Pacis P18,000.00, representing 6% of a P300,000.00 partial payment.
Following that Supreme Court affirmation, Atty. Pacis filed an urgent motion for execution, claiming his full 6% fee on the entire P800,000.00 settlement, amounting to P48,000.00. The CIR, in an Order dated July 15, 1970, granted the writ of execution for P48,000.00, noting no opposition was filed. NWSA filed a motion for reconsideration, which the CIR en banc denied in a Resolution dated August 11, 1970, ruling it was filed out of time. NWSA then petitioned the Supreme Court for review.

ISSUE

The primary issue is whether the CIR committed grave abuse of discretion in issuing the writ of execution for P48,000.00 and in denying NWSA’s motion for reconsideration as having been filed late.

RULING

The Supreme Court granted the petition, annulling the assailed CIR orders. The Court found the CIR’s denial of NWSA’s motion for reconsideration based on tardiness to be erroneous. Examining the CIR’s own rules, the Court clarified that a movant has five days to file a motion for reconsideration and a separate ten-day period thereafter to submit supporting arguments. NWSA complied with these periods, filing its motion on July 27, 1970, after receiving notice of the July 15 Order on July 22. Thus, the motion was timely filed, and the CIR en banc resolution denying it was issued with grave abuse of discretion.
Substantively, the Court found the July 15, 1970 Order itself patently defective. It directed NWSA to pay Pacis P48,000.00 directly, which would improperly compel NWSA to pay an amount exceeding its original P800,000.00 obligation. The P800,000.00 total award to employees already included the 23% allocation for attorney’s fees and union shares. The prior final orders contemplated that the attorney’s fees would be taken from, not added to, the amounts paid to the workers. Therefore, the CIR’s order for a direct payment from NWSA constituted a grave abuse of discretion, as it altered the fundamental structure of the final settlement. The writ of execution was annulled to prevent an unjust and anomalous result.