G.R. No. L-7586; January 30, 1957
NARCISA B. DE LEON, LVN PICTURES, INC., SAMPAGUITA PICTURES, INC., LEBRAN PICTURES, INC, INC., AND PREMIER PICTURES, INC., plaintiffs-appellants, vs. NATIONAL LABOR UNION, EULOGIO R. LERUM, JOSE HERNANDEZ, ALEJANDRO BARTOLOME, NICOLAS CABRERA, JOSE RAMOS, ET AL., defendants-appellees.

FACTS

Plaintiff Narcisa B. de Leon owned the land on which the Dalisay Theater stood. Prior to April 14, 1949, the theater was operated jointly by her co-plaintiff film companies as lessees. On that date, de Leon leased the land to Filipino Theatrical Enterprises, Inc. (FTE), which owned the theater building, with a stipulation that de Leon would become the owner of the building at the lease’s expiration. The defendants (except the National Labor Union and its officers Lerum and Hernandez) were employees of FTE at the Dalisay Theater from April 1949. On July 12, 1951, FTE notified these employees of the termination of their employment effective August 14, 1951. After the lease expired, possession of the theater was turned over to de Leon, who demolished the old building and constructed a new Dalisay Theater on the same site. On August 31, 1951, de Leon entered a contract with her co-plaintiffs to operate the new theater as a joint venture. When the plaintiffs reopened the new Dalisay Theater on January 10, 1952, they hired a new set of personnel, retaining only four old employees. On that reopening day, about thirty persons, including the defendant employees who were members of the National Labor Union, peacefully picketed the theater. They walked on the public sidewalk fronting the theater lobby, displayed placards with slogans like “Do not patronize the Dalisay Theater” and “Dalisay Theater is unfair to labor,” and tried to persuade patrons not to buy tickets. Their purpose was to secure reinstatement to their jobs. The plaintiffs filed a complaint seeking damages and an injunction, alleging the picketing caused reduced box-office receipts. The trial court dismissed the complaint and the defendants’ cross-claim and dissolved the preliminary injunction.

ISSUE

Whether the peaceful picketing by the defendants, who had no employer-employee relationship with the plaintiffs (the new management/operators of the Dalisay Theater), is lawful.

RULING

Yes. The Supreme Court affirmed the trial court’s judgment. The Court found that the defendants’ acts consisted only of walking slowly and peacefully on the public sidewalk in front of the theater and displaying placards publicizing their labor dispute. There was no clear and present danger of destruction to life or property or of any breach of the peace. The Court held that picketing peacefully carried out is not illegal even in the absence of an employer-employee relationship, as peaceful picketing is part of the freedom of speech guaranteed by the Constitution.