This is a petition for certiorari seeking to annul 1 the Order dated Maof the Honorable Secretary of Labor and Employment in POEA, LRO/RRD Case No. (National Federation of Labor Union (NAFLU) v. Ople, supra) and in line with the well established principle that the findings of administrative agencies which have acquired expertise because their jurisdiction is confined to specific matters are generally accorded not only respect but at times even finality. Under the circumstances, no justifiable reason can be found to justify disturbance of the findings of facts of the respondent Secretary of Labor, supported as they are by substantial evidence and in the absence of grave abuse of discretion (Asia world Publishing House, Inc. Accordingly, owing to the absence of any controverting evidence, respondent Secretary of Labor admitted and considered private respondents’ testimonies and evidence as substantial. This, notwithstanding, both herein petitioner and Pan Pacific were again notified of the scheduled hearing, but, as aforestated they also failed to appear (Rollo, p. In the case at bar, it is undisputed that when the case was first set for hearing, only the private respondents appeared, despite summons having been served upon both herein petitioner and Pan Pacific. Well-settled is the rule that findings of facts of the respondent Secretary are generally accorded great weight unless there was grave abuse of discretion or lack of jurisdiction in arriving at such findings (Asia world Publishing House, Inc. ACCORDED GREAT WEIGHT ON APPEAL CASE AT BAR. Minister of Labor and Employment, 140 SCRA 381 ).ģ. Estoppel had barred herein petitioner from raising the issue, regardless of its merits (Akay Printing Press v. It was only when it filed this petition that it assailed the jurisdiction of the respondent Secretary of Labor, and that of the POEA. In the said motion for reconsideration, no jurisdictional challenge was made (Ibid., p. While Finman contends that herein respondent Secretary of Labor cannot validly assume jurisdiction over the case at bar, the records of the case reveal that herein Finman filed a motion for reconsideration of the adverse decision dated Maof respondent Secretary of Labor. SECRETARY OF LABOR JURISDICTION, LACK OF ISSUE THEREON MUST BE RAISED AT THE LOWER PROCEEDINGS CASE AT BAR. Moreover, as correctly stated by the Solicitor General, private respondents have a legal claim against Pan Pacific and its insurer for the placement and processing fees they paid, so much so that in order to provide a complete relief to private respondents, petitioner had to be impleaded in the case (Rollo, p. Tizon (20 SCRA 1182 ), this Court ruled that where the surety bound itself solidarily with the principal obligor, the former is so dependent on the principal debtor "that the surety is considered in law as being the same party as the debtor in relation to whatever is adjudged touching the obligation of the latter." Applying the foregoing principles to the case at bar, it can be very well said that even if herein Finman was not impleaded in the instant case, still it (petitioner) can be held jointly and severally liable for all claims arising from recruitment violation of Pan Pacific. Furthermore, in Government of the Philippines v.
Rizal Surety and Insurance Co., 16 SCRA 551 (1966). As such Finman is bound, in the absence of collusion, by a judgment against its principal even though it was not a party to the proceedings (Leyson v.
Accordingly, the nature of Finman’s obligation under the suretyship agreement makes it privy to the proceedings against its principal (Pan Pacific). 23), in keeping with Section 4, Rule V, Book I of the Implementing Rules of the Labor Code. It was also understood that under the suretyship agreement, herein petitioner undertook itself to be jointly and severally liable for all claims arising from recruitment violation of Pan Pacific (Ibid., p. It remains uncontroverted that herein petitioner and Pan Pacific entered into a suretyship agreement, with the former agreeing that the bond is conditioned upon the true and faithful performance and observance of the bonded principal (Pan Pacific) of its duties and obligations.
Assurance cenon code#
LABOR LAW LABOR CODE RECRUITMENT SECTION 4 RULE V BOOK I OF THE IMPLEMENTING RULES LIABILITY OF THE SURETY THEREUNDER IS SOLIDARY WITH ITS PRINCIPAL CASE AT BAR.
0 kommentar(er)
