Posts

Dacles v. Millenium Erectors Corporation, G.R. No. 209822, July 8, 2015

Dacles v. Millenium Erectors Corporation, G.R. No. 209822, July 8, 2015 Millenium Erectors Corporation is a domestic corporation engaged in the construction business. Petitioner Dacles was hired by Millenium as a mason in 1998. On June 7, 2010, while he was working on a project in Malakas Street, Quezon City (QC), he was advised by respondent's officer, Mr. Bongon, to move to another project in Robinson's Cubao, QC. However, upon arrival at the site, he was instructed to return to his former job site and, thereafter, was given a run-around for the two (2) succeeding days. When he requested to be given a post or assigned to a new project, he was told by the paymaster not to report for work anymore, prompting him to file a complaint for illegal dismissal. As a defense, Millenial claimed that Dacles’ employment as project employee was terminated on June 4, 2010 upon the completion of this masonry work assignment in their RCB-Malakas Project. He has been previously hir...
Post a Comment
Read more

Gadia v. Sykes Asia, Inc., G.R. No. 209499, January 28, 2015

Gadia v. Sykes Asia, Inc., G.R. No. 209499, January 28, 2015   Sykes Asia is a corporation engaged in Business Process Outsourcing (BPO) which provides support to its international clients from various sectors (e.g., technology, telecommunications, retail services) by carrying on some of their operations, governed by service contracts that it enters with them. On September 2, 2003, 12  Alltel Communications, Inc. (Alltel), a United States-based telecommunications firm, contracted Sykes Asia’s services to accommodate the needs and demands of Alltel clients for its postpaid and prepaid services (Alltel Project). Thus, on different dates, Sykes Asia hired petitioners as customer service representatives, team leaders, and trainers for the Alltel Project. Sometime in 2009, Alltel informed Sykes that it is terminating its contract with Sykes. As a result, Sykes sent each of the petitioners end-of-life notices informing them of their dismissal from service due to the term...
Post a Comment
Read more

People v. Perez, G.R. No. 21049, December 22, 1923

SEDITIOUS SPEECH People v. Perez, G.R. No. 21049, December 22, 1923. Perez was convicted of the crime of contempt of the ministers of the Crown for stating that “The Filipinos, like myself, must use bolos for cutting off Wood’s head for having recommended a bad thing for the Filipinos, for he has killed our independence.” It is of course fundamentally true that the provisions of Act No. 292 must not be interpreted so as to abridge the freedom of speech and the right of the people peaceably to assemble and petition the Government for redress of grievances. Criticism is permitted to penetrate even to the foundations of Government. Criticism, no matter how severe, on the Executive, the Legislature, and the Judiciary, is within the range of liberty of speech, unless the intention and effect be seditious. But when the intention and effect of the act is seditious, the constitutional guaranties of freedom of speech and press and of assembly and p...
Post a Comment
Read more