TITLE: DE LA SALLE ARANETA UNIVERSITY VS.
BERNARDO
G.R. NO. 190809 DATE: FEBRAURY 13, 2017
PONENTE: LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J NATURE: EXPRESSIO UNIUS RULE
FACTS:
This is a petition for Review on Certiorari filed by De La Salle-Araneta University (DLS-AU) seeking the
annulment and reversal of the Decision dated June 29, 2009 and Resolution dated January 4, 2010 of
the Court of Appeals in which affirmed in toto the Decision of the National Labor Relations Commission
(NLRC). The NLRC reversed and set aside the Labor Arbiter's Decision dated December 13, 2004 and
found that respondent Juanito C. Bernardo (Bernardo) was entitled to retirement benefits.
Bernardo has been a part-time faculty of the DLS-AU since June 1, 1974. At the age of 65, the age of
retirement, Bernardo was granted another term of employment. Bernardo's contract with the university
only ceased when he reached the age of 75, the compulsory retirement age. He claimed, in accordance
with the Republic Act No. 7641, otherwise known as the New Retirement Pay Law, retirement benefits
after 27 years of employment and service
However, the petitioner countered Bernardo was not entitled to any kind of benefits including the
retirement benefits under the DLSU-AU’s policy and Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA); only full-
time permanent faculty can acquire postemployment benefits. Bernardo filed against DLSU-AU and its
owner, Dr. Oscar Bautista before the Labor Arbiter. It was dismissed on the ground that the claim for
retirement benefits is already barred by prescription. He appealed before the NLRC and the decision
was reversed granting retirement benefits to Bernardo. The petitioner appealed before the Court of
Appeals on the ground of grave abuse of discretion on the part of NLRC. The CA dismissed the petition
and affirmed the decision of the NLRC. Hence this petition.
ISSUE/S:
Whether or not Bernardo, a part-time employee/faculty, entitled for the retirement benefits
DOCTRINES | HELD:
RULING:
WHEREFORE, premises considered, the instant Petition is DISMISSED for lack of merit. The Decision
of the National Labor Relations Commission and Court of Appeals are AFFIRMED.
Yes. For the availment of the retirement benefits under Article 302 [287] of the Labor Code, as amended
by Republic Act No. 7641, the following requisites must concur: (1) the employee has reached the age
of 60 years for optional retirement or 65 years for compulsory retirement; (2) the employee has served
at least five years in the establishment; and (3) there is no retirement plan or other applicable
agreement providing for retirement benefits of employees in the establishment. Bernardo - being 75
years old at the time of his retirement, having served DLS-AU for a total of 27 years, and not being
covered by the grant of retirement benefits in the CBA - is unquestionably qualified to avail himself of
retirement benefits under said statutory provision; equivalent to one-half month salary for every year of
service, a fraction of at least six months being considered as one whole year.
It is a settled rule of statutory construction that the express mention of one person, thing, or
consequence implies the exclusion of all others. The rule is expressed in the familiar maxim, expressio
unius est exclusio alterius.
1
The rule of expressio unius est exclusio alterius is formulated in a number of ways. One variation of the
rule is the principle that what is expressed puts an end to that which is implied. Expressum facit cessare
taciturn. Thus, where a statute, by its terms, is expressly limited to certain matters, it may not, by
interpretation or construction, be extended to other matters.
The rule of expressio unius est exclusio alterius and its variations are canons of restrictive
interpretation. They are based on the rules of logic and the natural workings of the human mind. They
are predicated upon one's own voluntary act and not upon that of others. They proceed from the
premise that the legislature would not have made specified enumeration in a statute had the intention
been not to restrict its meaning and confine its terms to those expressly mentioned.
Thus, Bernardo, being covered by the Retirement Pay Law, is entitled for the retirement benefits.
NOTES:
R.A. No. 7641 or the Retirement Pay Law shall apply to all employees in the private sector, regardless
of their position, designation or status and irrespective of the method by which their wages are
paid. They shall include part-time employees, employees of service and other job contractors
and domestic helpers or persons in the personal service of another.
The law does not cover employees of retail, service and agricultural establishments or operations
employing not more than ten (10) employees or workers and employees of the National Government
and its political subdivisions, including Government-owned and/or controlled corporations, if they are
covered by the Civil Service Law and its regulations.
