Scribd
Upload
302 views1 page

Ramil R. Valenzuela v. Alexandra Mining and Oil Ventures, Inc. and Cesar E. Detera

Valenzuela alleged he was illegally dismissed after 5 years of service as a company driver. The respondents claimed Valenzuela was a family driver, not an employee, and that he resigned. The court found Valenzuela was illegally dismissed as an employee. Cesar acted in bad faith by claiming Valenzuela was a family driver to justify dismissal without cause. Cesar and the company were held solidarily liable for monetary awards to Valenzuela.

Uploaded by

Anonymous LIJGqQxsag
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
302 views1 page

Ramil R. Valenzuela v. Alexandra Mining and Oil Ventures, Inc. and Cesar E. Detera

Valenzuela alleged he was illegally dismissed after 5 years of service as a company driver. The respondents claimed Valenzuela was a family driver, not an employee, and that he resigned. The court found Valenzuela was illegally dismissed as an employee. Cesar acted in bad faith by claiming Valenzuela was a family driver to justify dismissal without cause. Cesar and the company were held solidarily liable for monetary awards to Valenzuela.

Uploaded by

Anonymous LIJGqQxsag
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 1

RAMILR.VALENZUELAv.ALEXANDRAMININGANDOILVENTURES,INC.

AND
CESARE.DETERA
G.R.No.222419,October05,2016
REYES,J.:
THIRDDIVISION
ILLEGALDISMISAL

FACTS: Valenzuela alleged that he was hired as a company driver of the respondent
corporationandafterfiveyearsandfivemonthsofservice,hewastoldthathecannolonger
continue to work as there were no forthcoming funds to pay for his salary. However, the
respondentsallegedthatValenzuelawasactuallyhiredasafamilydriveroftheDeterasandit
wasthepetitionerwhofailedtoreporttoworkandlateroninformedthemofhisresignation.
Furthermore,therespondentsaverredthattherecanbenoillegaldismissalonthe
partofthecompanybecausethepetitionerisafamilydriverandnotacompaniesemployee.

ISSUE: Whetherornotthereisillegaldismissal

HELD: Yes. the company id solidarily liable to pay tthe monetary awards due the
dismissedemployee.Asarule,acorporateofficerisnotpersonallyliableforthemoneyclaims
of discharged corporate employees unless he acted with evident malice and bad faith in
terminatingtheiremployment.
In the case at bar, bad faith was manifested by his persistent assertion that
Valenzuela was merely a family driver in order to justify his unceremonious dismissal. He
repeatedlyinsistedthatasafamilydriverormemberofthehouseholdservice,Valenzuelamay
beterminatedatwill,whichwasexactlywhathedid.HeunreasonablysentValenzuelahome
whenthelatterreportedforwork,thelatterunawareofwhathehaddonetomeritsuchanabrupt
termination.Cesar'sadmissionontherecklessmannerofValenzuela'sdismissaljustifiesholding
himsolidarityliablewithAMOVI.

You might also like