San Miguel Vs Gomez
San Miguel Vs Gomez
Gomez, respondent
G.R. No. 200815; August 24,2020
HERNANDO, J.:
FACTS:
In 2001, San Miguel Corporation (SMC) entered into business with C2k, a corporation engaged
in courier and delivery services. After three months, there business relationship began to strain when C2K
encountered difficulty in collecting its service fee from SMC. It was found out that C2K’s former
manager, Daniel Tamayo, formed another courier services group, Starnec, which had been using fake
C2K receipts and collecting the fees pertaining to C2K.
However, C2K claims that it was through Rosario Gomez’s intervention, who was then assigned
as coordinator in the Mailing Department of SMC, that Tamayo was able to transact with SMC. In the
affidavit executed by C2K’s President, Gomez was mentioned to have been collecting 25% commission
from the total payment received by the C2K; and in the audit conducted it was alleged that she was
involved in anomalies which caused tremendous losses to SMC.
Hence, SMC conducted an administrative investigation and hearing to address the matters in
hand. After investigation, SMC issued a Notice of Termination of Services on December 20,2002 on the
grounds of fraud or willful breach of trust; reposed on her due to her alleged acceptance of commission
from C2K and Tamayo’s group, and for allegedly allowing the courier to increase the actual weights of
the package in order to compensate her commission.This prompted Gomez to file a case for illegal
dismissal with the National Labor Relations Commisions (NLRC).
In March 30, 2006, the Labor Arbiter (LA) held that Gomez was validly dismissed from service.
NLRC, however reversed and set aside Labor Arbiter’s decision. Which was later on affirmed by the
Court of Appeals in October 20, 2011, pointing out that Gomez’s reason for dismissal was not founded on
clearly established facts. Thus, herein petitioner filed with the Supreme Court a Petition for Review on
Certiorari seeking to challenge and reverse Court of Appeal’s Decision.
Issue:
Whether or not, Gomez was illegally dismissed.
Ruling:
Yes. In Cadavas vs. Court of Appeals, the Court summarized the requisites for valid dismissal on
ground of loss of trust and confidence: 1) the employee concerned must be holding a position of trust and
confidence; 2) there must be an act that would justify the of loss of trust and confidence; 3) such loss of
trust relates to the employee’s performance of duties.
In view of the foregoing, the Court finds that Respondent holds a position of trust and confidence,
since she was entrusted with SMC’s property, which she was routinely charged with custody of mail
matter. In addition, SMC substantially proved the second requisite. Since Starnec was able to transact
with SMC; where Gomez as the Mail Department Coordinator should have known and notice the said
fake receipts since she previously transacted with C2K. Thus,the Court finds that Gomez willfully,
knowingly and pursposedly and without justifiable cause diregards her company (SMC) ’s rules and
regulations. Also the Court gave credence to the fact that Gomez was found guilty of receiving bribes
through commission.
With these findings, SMC sufficiently discharded the burden of of proving Gomez’s dismissal.
Hence, The Court held that Gomez was validly terminated on the ground of loss of trust and confidence.