Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Bachrach Motors Co Inc

    Uploaded by

    Lemuel Angelo M. Eleccion
    82 views1 page
    Bachrach Motor Co. sought to discharge employee Maximo Jacob due to a traffic accident. The union filed a counter-petition denying the charges and alleging mechanical defects. The Court of Industrial Relations ordered Jacob reinstated with back wages. Bachrach appealed. The court found that Bachrach's sole witness failed to appear for cross-examination, so his testimony was stricken. Without evidence, Bachrach failed to prove grounds for Jacob's suspension. The order reinstating Jacob was affirmed.

    Original Description:

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    Bachrach Motor Co. sought to discharge employee Maximo Jacob due to a traffic accident. The union filed a counter-petition denying the charges and alleging mechanical defects. The Court of Industrial Relations ordered Jacob reinstated with back wages. Bachrach appealed. The court found that Bachrach's sole witness failed to appear for cross-examination, so his testimony was stricken. Without evidence, Bachrach failed to prove grounds for Jacob's suspension. The order reinstating Jacob was affirmed.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    82 views1 page

    Bachrach Motors Co Inc

    Uploaded by

    Lemuel Angelo M. Eleccion
    Bachrach Motor Co. sought to discharge employee Maximo Jacob due to a traffic accident. The union filed a counter-petition denying the charges and alleging mechanical defects. The Court of Industrial Relations ordered Jacob reinstated with back wages. Bachrach appealed. The court found that Bachrach's sole witness failed to appear for cross-examination, so his testimony was stricken. Without evidence, Bachrach failed to prove grounds for Jacob's suspension. The order reinstating Jacob was affirmed.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 1

    Bachrach Motors Co Inc, vs CIR

    Facts:

    Bachrach Motor Co., Inc. was in the transportation business and was operated by "Rural Transit".

    In 1958, Rural Transit Employees Association went on strike and the dispute between the management and the union reached the
    Court of Industrial Relations for compulsory arbitration.

    While this labor dispute was pending with the CIR, Bachrach filed a "Petition for Authority to discharge driver Maximo Jacob from
    the service", the reasons were alleged violations of the Motor Vehicle Law resulting in damage to property and injuries to third
    parties.

    An "Answer and Counter-Petition" was filed in behalf of Maximo Jacob by the Rural Transit Employees Association whereby it denied
    the charges and alleged that the accident was due to a mechanical defect of the bus which was beyond the control of the driver
    Jacob.

    In an order, the CIR lifted the suspension of driver Jacob, and ordered his reinstatement with backwages from the date of his
    suspension up to his actual reinstatement.

    Bachrach's motion for reconsideration having been denied

    Issue:

    WON the CIR erred in dismissing Bachrach’s Petition to discharge Maximo Jacob?

    Ruling:

    No.

    Petitioner presented only one witness, Joseph Kaplin, to prove its case against driver Jacob. The witness failed however to appear
    at the scheduled hearings for his cross-examination for the simple reason that he left for abroad. Having been deprived, without
    fault on its part, of its right to cross-examine Kaplin, respondent association was entitled to have the direct testimony of the witness
    stricken off the record.

    Ortigas Jr. v. Lufthansa German Airlines, 1975,

    “Oral testimony may be taken into account only when it is complete, that is, if the witness has been wholly cross-examined by
    the adverse party or the right to cross-examine is lost wholly or in part thru the fault of such adverse party. But when cross-
    examination is not and cannot be done or completed due to causes attributable to the party offering the witness, the uncompleted
    testimony is thereby rendered incompetent.”

    Considering the dismissal of Bachrach's petition to discharge Maximo Jacob, the lifting of the latter's suspension and his
    reinstatement in the service were but a necessary consequence thereof. For obvious reasons, the relief could be granted without
    need of evidence. The onus probandi was on the company, now petitioner, to justify the suspension of Jacob and his eventual
    separation from the service. Having failed to discharge that burden, there were no valid grounds for it to keep its employee away
    from his work.

    We hereby render judgment affirming the order of respondent Court of Industrial Relations, that petitioner shall pay its driver
    Maximo Jacob three (3) years backwages at the rate of the last salary received before he was suspended, without qualification and
    deduction.

    You might also like