Bison Management Corporation v. AAA
REITERATIONFacts
The Antecedents: Respondents AAA and Dale P. Pernito (Pernito), overseas Filipino workers (OFWs) deployed by Bison Management Corporation (Bison), filed a complaint for illegal dismissal and discrimination. AAA, hired as a Cleaning Laborer, was diagnosed with Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) during a routine medical examination after 15 months of employment. His foreign employer terminated his employment based on Saudi Arabian law, which allegedly considers an HIV+ individual unfit to work. Pernito, hired as a Restaurant Worker, was terminated allegedly for expressing interest to resign and transfer employers, though he claimed it was because he was seen conversing with co-workers during a break. Procedural History: The Labor Arbiter dismissed the illegal dismissal complaint but awarded AAA unpaid salary and vacation leave pay. The National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) reversed this, finding both AAA and Pernito illegally dismissed and ordering Bison to pay them salaries for the unexpired portion of their contracts, vacation leave, moral and exemplary damages, and attorney's fees. The Court of Appeals (CA) affirmed the NLRC's decision, finding no grave abuse of discretion. The Petition: Bison Management Corporation filed a petition for review, assailing the CA's ruling that Pernito was illegally dismissed and its application of the principle of lex loci contractus over pacta sunt servanda in AAA's case.
Issue(s)
Whether the Court of Appeals erred in upholding the NLRC's ruling that Pernito was illegally dismissed. Whether the Court of Appeals erred in applying the principle of lex loci contractus rather than pacta sunt servanda in resolving the legality of AAA's dismissal.
Ruling
The Petition is DENIED. The Decision dated November 18, 2020 and Resolution dated May 25, 2021 of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. SP No. 164083 are AFFIRMED.
Ratio Decidendi
On the dismissal of Pernito: The Court affirmed the findings of the NLRC and CA that Bison failed to discharge its burden of proving that Pernito voluntarily resigned. The CA aptly described the purported email from Pernito's employer as self-serving and lacking in relevant details such as sender, recipient, email addresses, and date. Furthermore, the email's opening statement, "I would like to inform you that there is nothing going on from what you are saying," could be interpreted as corroborative of Pernito's claim that he and his co-employees complained about being overworked, which conditions eventually led to his dismissal, rather than proof of voluntary resignation. Bison failed to present any exceptional circumstance to warrant a deviation from the rule that only errors of law are cognizable in a Rule 45 petition. On the dismissal of AAA: The Court upheld the CA's application of the principle of lex loci contractus, which dictates that Philippine laws generally govern overseas employment contracts. Bison's invocation of the principle of pacta sunt servanda based on the "Agreement on Labor Cooperation" was found untenable because the alleged Saudi Arabian policy was not properly proven in accordance with the Philippine rules on evidence. Even if it were proven, such a policy would be contrary to Philippine law and public policy, specifically Section 49(a) of Republic Act No. 11166, which prohibits termination from employment solely on the basis of HIV status. The Court reiterated that contractual stipulations cannot render Philippine labor laws, which are imbued with public interest, illusory. The concession by Bison that HIV positive is not yet an illness/disease further weakened any argument for termination under Article 299 of the Labor Code. Therefore, AAA's termination solely on his HIV status constituted illegal dismissal.
Main Doctrine
Philippine law governs overseas employment contracts, and termination based solely on HIV status is unlawful and discriminatory under Philippine law, even if a foreign law or policy permits such termination.