LABREL DIGEST PRELIM

Associated Labor Union vs Borromeo

26 SCRA 88
Facts:
ALU is a duly registered labor organization, among
the members thereof are employees of Superior Gas
and equipment company. On January 1, 1965 ALU
and SUGECO entered into a collective bargaining
contract effective up to January 1, 1966.
There was an on-going negotiations for renewal of
contract late in February 1966 then 12 SUGECO
members resigned from ALU.
Thereupon negotiations stopped. ALU requested
that 12 employees not be allowed to report to work,
SUGECO rejected the request due to irreparable
injury and that the contract lapsed.
SUGECO stated that the 12 employees should rejoin
ALU to resume the negotiations. ALU wrote to
SUGECO of bargaining in bad faith.
ALU struck and picketed in the SUGECO plant in
Mandaue. SUGECO filed a case against ALU with CFI
Cebu to restrain the same from picketing in the said
plant and offices elsewhere in the Philippines.
CFI Cebu issued a preliminary injunction prayed for
by SUGECO.
ALU filed charges of ULP against SUGECO with CIR,
ALU filed a motion for reconsideration on the
issuance of the injunction.
CFI denied the motion. ALU filed a petition for
certiorari and prohibition against Judge Gomez and
Borromeo and SUGECO, prayed that CFI of Cebu has
no jurisdiction over the case.
SC annulled the preliminary injunction issued by CFI
Cebu and directed to dismiss the case.
The writ of injunction sought by ALU was granted
May 16, 1966.
ALU resumed picketing and began to picket at the
house of SUGECO's General Manager Mr. & Mrs. Lua
and Cebu Home store.
Mr. Lua filed a complaint with CFI Cebu to restrain
ALU from picketing the store and residence and
recover damages.

Judge Borromeo issued an order requiring ALU to

show cause order why the writ should not be issued.
ALU filed a motion to dismiss assailed the jurisdiction
of CFI Cebu to hear the case on the ground that it
has grown out from a labor dispute.
The judge denied the motion to dismiss and to
reconsider his order and dissolve the writ of
injunction of June 30 1966.
ALU commenced the present action for certiorari
and prohibition with preliminary injunction to annul
the writs dated June 30 and July 22 1966 and to
restrain the lower court from hearing the case.
Issue: Whether or not the strike held at the Cebu
home is valid?
Held: Yes, Now then there is no dispute regarding
the existence of a labor dispute between ALU and
SUGECO-Cebu that SUGECO's Manager Mrs. Lua is
the wife of the owner and manager of Cebu Home,
Antonio Lua, and that Cebu home is engaged in the
marketing of SUGECO products.
Likewise, it is clear that as a managing member of
conjugal partnership between him and his wife, Mr.
Lua of the business of SUGECO and in the success or
failure of her controversy in ALU, considering the
results thereof may affect the condition of the said
conjugal partnership.
Similarly, as distributor of SUGECO products, the
Cebu home has at least an indirect interest in the
labor dispute between SUGECO and ALU.
In other words, respondent herein have an indirect
interest in the said labor dispute, for which the
reason, we find that sec. 9 of RA 875 squarely
applies.
Wherefore, the orders of respondent Judge dated
June 30 and July 222, 1966 and writs of preliminary
injunction issued in accordance therewith hereby
declared null and void ab initio, with costs to the
respondents herein, Cebu Home and Industrial
Supply and Antonia Lua.
So ordered.