Professional Documents
Culture Documents
_______________
* THIRD DIVISION.
308
309
310
311
CHICO-NAZARIO, J.:
Before this Court is a Petition for Review on Certiorari
under Rule 45 of the Revised Rules of Court, filed by
petitioner Eduardo Bughaw, Jr., seeking to reverse and set
aside the Decision,1 dated 14 June 2005 and the
Resolution,2 dated 8 May 2006 of the Court of Appeals in
CA-G.R. SP No. 85498. The appellate court reversed the
Decision dated 28 August 2003 and Resolution dated 27
February 2004 of the National Labor Relations
Commission (NLRC) in NLRC Case No. V-000231-02 that
found the petitioner to be illegally dismissed from
employment by respondent Treasure Island Industrial
Corporation. The dispositive portion of the assailed
appellate court’s Decision thus reads:
_______________
312
_______________
313
VOL. 550, MARCH 28, 2008 313
Bughaw, Jr. vs. Treasure Island Industrial Corporation
_______________
8 Id., at p. 121.
9 Id., at pp. 113-114.
10 Id., at pp. 39-43.
314
_______________
11 Id., at p. 42.
12 Id., at pp. 44-46.
13 Id.
315
_______________
316
_______________
317
318
_______________
319
_______________
320
_______________
321
to dismiss him. This decision, however, must come only after the
employee is given a reasonable period from receipt of the first
notice within which to answer the charge and ample opportunity
to be heard and defend himself with the assistance of a
representative if he so desires. This is in consonance with the
express provision of the law on the protection to labor and the
broader dictates of procedural due process. Non-compliance
therewith is fatal because these requirements are
conditions sine qua non before dismissal may be validly
effected.” (Emphases supplied.)
_______________
322
_______________
323
_______________
37 Id., at p. 617.
38 G.R. No. 151378, 28 March 2005, 454 SCRA 119, as cited in DAP
Corporation v. Court of Appeals, supra note 36.
324
_______________
325
_______________
employer’s cost-cutting measure without observance of the two-notice
rule as mandated by the Labor Code. In this case, this court ruled that
employer’s failure to comply with the notice requirement does not
constitute a denial of due process but mere failure to observe a procedure
for termination of employment which makes the termination ineffectual.
42 Agabon v. National Labor Relations Commission, supra note 36.
43 Electro System Industries Corporation v. National Labor Relations
Commission, G.R. No. 165282, 5 October 2005, 472 SCRA 199, 205.
** Per Special Order No. 497, dated 14 March 2008, signed by Chief
Justice Reynato S. Puno designating Associate Justice Dante O. Tinga to
replace Associate Justice Consuelo Ynares-Santiago, who is on official
leave under the Court’s Wellness Program and assigning Associate Justice
Alicia Austria-Martinez as Acting Chairperson.