Jeimy Dyanne Cruz
IR 207.1
CASE DIGEST 6
A. TITLE OF THE CASE
G.R. No. L-48494 February 5, 1990
Brent School, Inc., and Rev. Gabriel Dimache, petitioners,
Vs
Ronaldo Zamora, the Presidential Assistant for Legal Affairs, Office of the President and Doroteo R. Alegre,
respondents.
B. PERTINENT FACTS
Doroteo R. Alegre was engaged as athletic director by Brent School Inc at a yearly compensation of
P20,000.00.
The contract fixed a specific term of five years from July 18, 1971 to July 17, 1976.
Subsequent subsidiary agreements dated March 15, 1973, and September 14, 1974 reiterated the
same terms and conditions including expiry date.
On April 20, 1976, Alegre was given a copy of report filed by Brent School with the Department of
Labor advising of the termination of his serves effective July 16, 1976. The stated ground for
termination was “completion of contract, expiration of the definite period of employment.”
On May 26, 1976, Alegre accepted the amount of P3,177.71 and signed a receipt containing the
phrase, “in full payment of services for the period May, 16 to July 17, 1976 as full payment of
contract.”
Alegre protested the announced termination of his employment and argued that although his
contract did stipulate that the same would terminate on July 17, 1976, since his services were
necessary and desirable in the usual business of his employer, and his employment lasted for five
years, he had acquired the status of a regular employee and could not be removed except for a valid
cause.
The Regional Director:
o considered Brent School's report as an application for clearance to terminate employment
(not a report of termination), and accepting the recommendation of the Labor Conciliator,
refused to give such clearance and instead required the reinstatement of Alegre, as... a
"permanent employee," to his former position without loss of seniority rights and with full
back wages.
Brent School filed a motion for reconsideration
The Regional Director denied the motion and forwarded the case to the Secretary of Labor for review
The latter sustained the Regional Director.
Brent appealed to the Office of the President.
That Office dismissed its appeal for lack of merit and affirmed the Labor Secretary's decision, ruling
that Alegre was a permanent employee who could not be dismissed except for just cause; and
expiration of the employment contract was not... one of the just causes provided in the Labor Code
for termination of services.
C. ISSUE FOR RESOLUTION
Whether or not the provision of the Labor Code, as amended, have anathematized “fixed period
employment” or employment for a term.
D. SUPREME COURT DECISION
Yes, the provision of the Labor Code, as amended, have anathematized “fixed period
employment” or employment for a term.
E. RATIO DECIDENDI
DECISION:
WHEREFORE, the public respondent's Decision complained of is REVERSED and SET ASIDE. Respondent
Alegre's contract of employment with Brent School having lawfully terminated with and by reason of the
expiration of the agreed term of period thereof, he is declared not entitled to reinstatement and the
other relief awarded and confirmed on appeal in the proceedings below. No pronouncement as to costs.
The decisive determinant in term employment should not be the activities that the employee is called
upon to perform, but the day certain agreed upon by the parties for the commencement and termination
of their employment relationship
It should have no application to instances where a fixed period of employment was agreed upon
knowingly and voluntarily by the parties, without any force, duress or improper pressure being brought to
bear upon the employee and absent... any other circumstances vitiating his consent, or where it
satisfactorily appears that the employer and employee dealt with each other on more or less equal terms
with no moral dominance whatever being exercised by the former over the latter.
Paraphrasing Escudero, respondent Alegre's employment was terminated upon the expiration of his last
contract with Brent School on July 16, 1976 without the necessity of any notice. The advance written
advice given the Department of Labor with copy to said petitioner... was a mere reminder of the
impending expiration of his contract, not a letter of termination, nor an application for clearance to
terminate which needed the approval of the Department of Labor to make the termination of his services
effective. In any case, such clearance should... properly have been given, not denied.
