University of Nueva Caceres v. Torres
REITERATIONFacts
The Antecedents: On August 8, 1989, the University of Nueva Caceres Teachers Alliance (UNCTA) filed a petition for certification election with the Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE), Region V, naming the University of Nueva Caceres (petitioner) as respondent. On August 21, 1989, the University of Nueva Caceres Faculty and Employees Federation (FEDERATION) filed a petition for intervention, which was given due course. After pre-election conferences, Med-Arbiter Pedro M. Caño issued an order on December 14, 1989, directing that a certification election be held within twenty days, specifying the voting procedure and the contending parties (UNCTA, FEDERATION, and NO union). Procedural History: Petitioner received the Med-Arbiter's order on December 21, 1989. Petitioner filed its Memorandum on Appeal by registered mail on January 2, 1990. The FEDERATION also filed an appeal. On February 9, 1990, the Secretary of Labor and Employment, Ruben D. Torres, issued a joint resolution denying both appeals. Petitioner's appeal was denied for being filed out of time. Petitioner filed a motion for reconsideration, asserting that its appeal was timely filed on January 2, 1990, which it claimed was the last day of the calendar period for filing. The Petition: Petitioner filed a petition for certiorari with the Supreme Court, alleging that the Secretary of Labor and Employment committed grave abuse of discretion in dismissing its appeal on the ground of late filing.
Issue(s)
Whether the Secretary of Labor and Employment committed grave abuse of discretion in dismissing the petitioner's appeal on the ground of late filing, considering the intervening Sunday and legal holiday. Whether the petitioner's appeal was filed within the reglementary period, taking into account the extension provided by the Administrative Code for holidays.
Ruling
The petition is granted. The resolution of respondent Secretary Torres dated February 9, 1990, is set aside insofar as the petitioner University is concerned. Respondent Secretary Torres is ordered to give due course to petitioner's appeal.
Ratio Decidendi
On the issue of grave abuse of discretion and timely filing of the appeal: The Supreme Court held that the Secretary of Labor and Employment committed grave abuse of discretion in denying the petitioner's appeal for having been filed out of time. The Court referred to Rule V, Section 9 of the Omnibus Rules Implementing the Labor Code, which provides that an appeal shall be filed within ten (10) calendar days from receipt of the order. The petitioner received the order on December 21, 1989. Counting ten days from this date, the last day for filing the appeal fell on December 31, 1989, which was a Sunday. Furthermore, January 1, 1990, was a legal holiday (New Year's Day). On the issue of the reglementary period: Pursuant to Section 28, Chapter 7, Book I of the Administrative Code of 1987, where the last day for doing an act falls on a holiday, the act may be done on the next succeeding business day. Therefore, the petitioner validly filed its appeal on January 2, 1990, which was the next business day. The Court reiterated the principle established in SM Agri and General Machineries vs. NLRCL, where it was held that if the tenth day to appeal falls on a Sunday or a legal holiday, the appeal can be filed on the next business day, and the supposedly last day is not deemed the last day for filing.
Main Doctrine
The Secretary of Labor and Employment committed grave abuse of discretion in dismissing an appeal for late filing when the last day for filing fell on a Sunday and a legal holiday, allowing the appeal to be filed on the next succeeding business day.