Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 25 views

    Royale Homes vs. Alcantara, Bejerano

    Uploaded by

    Allen Jay Araneta Bejerano
    Alcantara filed a complaint against Royale Homes claiming he was an employee and was illegally dismissed. However, Royale Homes argued that Alcantara was an independent contractor based on their contract. The contract stated there was no employer-employee relationship and that Alcantara had freedom in how he conducted sales. The court examined the contract terms and the control Royale Homes exercised, finding the control was over goals, not methods. The court ruled Alcantara was an independent contractor based on the clear contract terms stating this.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content

    Royale Homes vs. Alcantara, Bejerano

    Uploaded by

    Allen Jay Araneta Bejerano
    25 views1 page
    Alcantara filed a complaint against Royale Homes claiming he was an employee and was illegally dismissed. However, Royale Homes argued that Alcantara was an independent contractor based on their contract. The contract stated there was no employer-employee relationship and that Alcantara had freedom in how he conducted sales. The court examined the contract terms and the control Royale Homes exercised, finding the control was over goals, not methods. The court ruled Alcantara was an independent contractor based on the clear contract terms stating this.

    Original Description:

    Original Title

    15. Royale Homes vs. Alcantara, Bejerano

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Alcantara filed a complaint against Royale Homes claiming he was an employee and was illegally dismissed. However, Royale Homes argued that Alcantara was an independent contractor based on their contract. The contract stated there was no employer-employee relationship and that Alcantara had freedom in how he conducted sales. The court examined the contract terms and the control Royale Homes exercised, finding the control was over goals, not methods. The court ruled Alcantara was an independent contractor based on the clear contract terms stating this.

    Copyright:

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

    Royale Homes vs. Alcantara, Bejerano

    Uploaded by

    Allen Jay Araneta Bejerano
    Alcantara filed a complaint against Royale Homes claiming he was an employee and was illegally dismissed. However, Royale Homes argued that Alcantara was an independent contractor based on their contract. The contract stated there was no employer-employee relationship and that Alcantara had freedom in how he conducted sales. The court examined the contract terms and the control Royale Homes exercised, finding the control was over goals, not methods. The court ruled Alcantara was an independent contractor based on the clear contract terms stating this.

    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

    Employer-Employee Relationship; Independent Contractors vs.

    Employees
    Case No. 15, Bejerano
    Royale Homes vs. Alcantara
    FACTS:
    Alcantara filed a Complaint for Illegal Dismissal against Royale Homes et al. He contended among others
    that he is a regular employee of Royal Homes since he is performing tasks that are necessary and
    desirable to its business and that his performance is subject to company rules and regulations, code of
    ethics, periodic evaluation, and exclusivity clause of contract. Royale Homes however argued that its
    contract with Alcantara is clear and unambiguous −it engaged his services as an independent contractor as
    can be seen from their contract stating that no employer-employee relationship exists between the parties;
    that Alcantara was free to solicit sales at any time and by any manner he may deem appropriate; that he
    may recruit sales personnel to assist him in marketing Royale Homes’ inventories; and, that his
    remunerations are dependent on his sales performance. Royale Homes likewise contended that CA
    grievously erred in ruling that it exercised control over Alcantara based on a shallow ground that his
    performance is subject to company rules and regulations, code of ethics, periodic evaluation, and
    exclusivity clause of contract. Royale Homes alleged that it is expected to exercise some degree of control
    over its independent contractors, but that does not automatically result in the existence of employer-
    employee relationship. For control to be considered as a proof tending to establish employer-employee
    relationship, the same must pertain to the means and method of performing the work; not on the
    relationship of the independent contractors among themselves or their persons or their source of living.
    ISSUE:
    Whether Alcantara was an independent contractor.
    RULING:
    Yes. In view of the conflicting findings of the tribunals the court is constrained to go over the factual
    matters involved in this case and examined the juridical relationship of the parties based on their written
    contract. The court also determined the juridical relationship of the parties based on Control Test.In this
    case, the contract, duly signed and not disputed by the parties, conspicuously provides that "no employer-
    employee relationship exists between" Royale Homes and Alcantara, as well as his sales agents. It is
    clear that they did not want to be bound by employer-employee relationship at the time of the signing of
    the contract. Since "the terms of the contract are clear and leave no doubt upon the intention of the
    contracting parties, the literal meaning of its stipulations should control." No construction is even needed
    as they already expressly state their intention.
    MAINPOINT:
    Not every form of control that a hiring party imposes on the hired party is indicative of employee-
    employer relationship. Rules and regulations that merely serve as guidelines towards the achievement of a
    mutually desired result without dictating the means and methods of accomplishing it do not establish
    employer-employee relationship.

    You might also like