Republic of the Philippin

HOUSE OF REPRESENTA
Quezon City, Metro Manila

ENTATIVES

HOUSE OF REPK

SEVENTEENTH CONGREBS

First Regular Session

ed
House Bill No. 1355 pretsTRATION UNIT

BILLS 4N (NDEX SERVICE

Introduced by Hon. Karlo A. B. Nograles and Hon. Jericho Jonas B. Nograles

EXPLANATORY NOTE

The 1987 Constitution of the Philippines specifically provides: “All persons shall
have the right to a speedy disposition of their cases before all judicial, quasi-judicial, or
administrative bodies.” This provision contemplates not only the speedy disposition of
cases within a particular judicial, quasi-judicial or administrative body, but speedy
disposition of cases in its entirety, ie. from filing of a case to the lower court (court of
origin) up to the final review by the higher court.

Prior to the ruling of the Supreme Court in the case of St. Martin Funeral Homes vs.
NLRC, dated 16 September 1998, decisions of the NLRC in the exercise of its appellate
jurisdiction was directly reviewable by the Supreme Court via Petition for Certiorari. The
Supreme Court in said case came out with a ruling that, “judicial review” over decisions of
the NLRC shall first be lodged before the Court of Appeals.

It is apparent that the purpose of the Supreme Court in the said case was to de-clog
its docket. However, this is a clear case of “judicial legislation” since the Court itself
acknowledged in the same aforecited case that: “In fine, Congress did intend to provide for
judicial review of the adjudications of the NLRC in labor cases by the Supreme Court, but
there was an inaccuracy in the term used for the intended mode of review, x x x.”

This will now clearly put into law the accurate “intended mode of review” of NLRC
decisions directly with the Supreme Court

Significantly, with the reforms implemented by the Department of Labor and
Employment (DOLE) on Single-Eniry Approach (SEnA) and Project Speedy and Efficient
Delivery of Labor Justice (SpeED), majority of labor cases are now finally settled and
decided at the level of the Regional Arbitration Branches and Commission Proper. But with
the present set-up of three (3) stages/level of appeal/review of labor cases, the mandate of
providing speedy labor justice will still be negated particularly for lowly workers who could
ill afford a protracted, costly and frustrating litigation before another level of appellate body
This additional layer of appeal affects the whole workforce in the country, including the
overseas contract workers, agricultural workers and domestic helpers



Notably, from 2009-2013, of the total 63,000 or 12,600 average cases decided per
year by the Commission Proper, only 5,844 or 1,168 average cases are appealed to the Court
of Appeals. Thus, only 9% of the decisions of the Commission Proper are appealed to the
Court of Appeals. Of this 1,168 average cases appealed to the Court of Appeals per yea
980 average cases are also appealed to the Supreme Court. Comparatively, of 12,600 cases
decided by the Commission Proper, 11,432 or 91% attained finality in the Commission
level, on the other hand, of 1,168 cases decided by the Court of Appeals, only 188 or 16%
attained finality in the Court of Appeals level, hence, the remaining 980 or 84% are still
appealed to the Supreme Court for final decision. In effect, had decisions of the
Commission Proper been directly appealable to the Supreme Court by way of Petition for
Certiorari, the 9% appealed/reviewed decisions of the Commission Proper or the 84%
appealed/reviewed decisions of the Court of Appeals will be disposed of in a much shorter
time by the Supreme Court with finality.

Interestingly, the process cycle time of appeal/review in the Commission Proper to
the Court of Appeals and then to the Supreme Court is quite longer because of the different
modes of appeal/review with different procedural requirements and periods. The decision
of the Commission Proper is reviewable via Petition for Certiorari to the Court of Appeals
under Rule 65 of the Rules of Court, and the decision of the Court of Appeals is reviewable
Via Petition for Review on Certiorari to the Supreme Court under Rule 45 of the Rules of
Court. It must be noted that Rule 65 is a special civil actions governed by different
procedural rules and requirements. The procedural requirements and processes required by
two (2) different modes of appeal before the case attains finality defeat the very purpose of
the Constitution on speedy labor justice. This bill will lessen the level of appeal/review and
simplify the procedural requirements and processes.

Hence, early passage of the bill hereby earnestly sought.

JERICHO J! # NOGRALES

KARLO A. B. NOGRALES


Republic of the Philippines
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Quezon City, Metro Manila
SEVENTEENTH CONGRI

First Regular Session

9
House Bill No, 1358

Introduced by Hon. Karlo A. B. Nograles and Hon. Jericho Jonas B. Nograles

AN ACT
PROVIDING FOR THE REMEDY OF FILING A PETITION FOR CERTIORARI
TO THE SUPREME COURT TO REVIEW THE DECISIONS OF THE NATIONAL.
LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION, AMENDING FOR THE PURPOSE
ARTICLES 223 AND 224 OF PRESIDENTAL DECREE NO. 442, AS AMENDED,
OTHERWISE KNOWN AS THE “LABOR CODE OF THE PHILIPPINES”

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the Philippines in Congress
assembled

SECTION 1. Article 223 of Presidential Decree No. 442, as amended, otherwise

known as the “Labor Code of the Philippines”, is hereby further amended to read as
follows

“Art. 223.Appeal; PETITION FOR CERTIORARI.

RESOLUTIONS, awards, or orders of the Labor Arbiter are final and executory
unless appealed to the Commission by any or both parties within ten (10) calendar
days from receipt of such decisions, RESOLUTIONS, awards, or orders. NO
APPEAL OR PETITION FROM THE DECISIONS, RESOLUTIONS,
AWARDS, OR ORDERS OF THE LABOR ARBITER SHALL BE
ENTERTAINED BY ANY COURT OR AGENCY, EXCEPT BY THE
COMMISSION. Such appeal OR PETITION may be entertained only on any of
the following grounds:

“(a)If there is prima facie evidence of abuse of discretion on the part of the

Labor Arbiter:
“(b)If the decision, RESOLUTION, order or award was secured through

fraud or coercion, including graft and corruption;


“(c) If made purely on questions of law; and

“(d)If serious errors in the findings of facts are raised which would cause
grave or irreparable damage or injury to the appellant.

“In case of a judgment involving a monetary award, an appeal by the
employer may be perfected only upon the posting of a cash or surety bond issued
by a reputable bonding company duly accredited by the SUPREME COURT OR
Commission in the amount equivalent to the monetary award in the judgment
appealed from.

“In any event, the decision OR RESOLUTION of the Labor Arbiter
reinstating a dismissed or separated employee, insofar as the reinstatement aspect
is concerned, shall immediately be executory, even pending appeal. The employee
shall cither be admitted back to work under the same terms and conditions

prevailing prior to his dismissal or s

paration or, at the option of the employer,

merely reinstated in the payroll. The posting of a bond by the employer shall not

stay the execution for reinstatement provided herein.

“To discourage frivolous or dilatory appeals, the Commission or the Labor
Arbiter shall impose reasonable penalty, including fines or censures, upon the
erring parties.

In all cases, the appellant shall furnish a copy of the memorandum of appeal
to the other party who shall file an answer not later than ten (10) calendar days
from receipt thereof.

“The Commission shall decide all cases within twenty (20) calendar days
from receipt of the answer of the appellee.

The decision OR RESOLUTION of the Commission shall be final and

executory after ten (10) calendar days from receipt thereof by the parties.

‘Any law enforcement agency may be deputized by th etary of Labor

and Employment or the Commission in the enforcement of decisions,
RESOLUTIO!

“DECISIONS, RESOLUTIONS, ORDERS, OR AWARDS OF THE
COMMISSION SHALL BE REVIEWABLE ONLY BY THE SUPREME
COURT ON PETITION FOR CERTIORARI UNDER THE RULES OF
COURT SOLELY ON QUESTIONS OF LAW OR JURISDICTION IN THE

5, awards, or orders.



EXERCISE OF ITS POWERS UNDER PARAGRAPH (1) SECTION 5,
ARTICLE VIL OF THE 1987 CONSTITUTION OF THE REPUBLIC OF
THE PHILIPPINE

SEC. 2. Article 224 of the same Code, as amended, is hereby further amended to read
as follows:

“Art. 224, Execution of decisions, RESOLUTIONS, orders, or awards, —

“(a) The Secretary of Labor and Employment or any Regional
Director, the Commission or any Labor Arbiter or Med-Arbiter, or the
voluntary arbitrator or panel of voluntary arbitrators may, motu proprio or on
motion of any interested party, issue a writ of execution on a judgment within five
(5) years from the date it becomes final and exccutory, requiring a sheriff or a duly
deputized officer to execute or enforce final decisions, RESOLUTIONS, orders
or awards of the Secretary of Labor and Employment or Regional Director, the
Commission, or the Labor Arbiter or Med-Arbiter, or voluntary arbitrator or panel

of voluntary arbitrators. In any cas

it shall be the duty of the responsible officer

to sepa

ately furnish immediately the counsels of record and the parties with
copies of said decisions, RESOLUTIONS, orders or awards. Failure to comply
with the duty prescribed herein shall subject such responsible officer to
appropriate administrative sanctions

“(b) The Secretary of Labor and Employment, and the Chairman of the

Commission may designate special sheriffs and take any measure under existing
laws to ensure compliance with their decisions, RESOLUTIONS, orders or
awards and those of Labor Arbiters and voluntary arbitrators or panel of voluntary
arbitrators, including the imposition of administrative fines which shall not be less
than Five hundred pesos (P500.00) nor more than ‘Ten thousand pesos
(P10,000.00).”

SEC. 3. Presidential Decree No. 442, as amended, otherwise known as the “Labor Code
of the Philippines”, and all other laws, decrees, orders, rules and regulations and other
issuances or parts thereof which are inconsistent with the provisions of this Act are
hereby repealed or modified accordingly.

SEC. 4. This Act shall take effect fifteen (15) days after its publication in the Official
Gazette or in a newspaper of general circulation.

Approved,