Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Javellana, Jr. VS Belen

    Uploaded by

    Mhali
    51 views1 page
    Labor Law

    Original Title

    JAVELLANA, JR. VS BELEN

    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
    Labor Law

    Copyright:

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

    Javellana, Jr. VS Belen

    Uploaded by

    Mhali
    Labor Law

    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

    JAVELLANA, JR.

    VS BELEN
    G.R. 181913
    Belen vs. Javellana Jr., and Javellana Farms Inc. G.R. 182158, March 5, 2010

    Back-wages and separation pay of an illegally dismissed employee, from what date up to what date these
    monetary awards shall be computed?

    Clearly the law (Aricle 279 of the Labor Code) intends the award of back-wages and similar benefits, to
    accumulate past the date of the LA’s decision until the dismissed employee is actually reinstated. But as in this
    case, reinstatement is no longer possible, back wages should be computed from the time of illegal dismissal
    until the date the decision becomes final, on September 2, 2008.

    Separation pay on the other hand is equivalent to one month pay for every year of service, a fraction of six
    months to be considered as one whole year. Here, that would be from January 31, 1994 when Al began his
    service. Technically the computation of separation pay would end on the day of his dismissal on August 20,
    1999 when he supposedly ceased to render service. But since Al was entitled to collect back wages until the
    judgment for illegal dismissal in his favor became final which was on September 2, 2008, the computation of
    his separation pay should also end on that date.

    Further since the monetary awards remained unpaid even after the judgment became final on September 2,
    2008, because of issues raised, respecting the correct computation of such awards, it is but fair that Dan be
    required to pay 12% interest per annum on those awards from September 2, 2008 until they are paid. The 12%
    interest is proper because monetary claims in labor cases are considered as forbearance of credit. What is
    decisive here is that the issue of illegal dismissal from which the order to pay the monetary claims to Al
    stemmed, had been long terminated.

    You might also like