Session Delights vs CA Case Digest

G.R. No. 172149

February 8, 2010

SESSION DELIGHTS ICE CREAM AND FAST FOODS vs. CA

FACTS: Adonis Flora filed a complaint for illegal dismissal against Session Delights, which was ruled favourably by the Labor Arbiter. The decision ordered Session Delights to pay Flora back wages, separation pay in lieu of reinstatement, indemnity and attorney’s fees. Upon appeal, NLRC also ruled in favor of complainant. CA Decision affirmed but deleted the th

proportional 13  month pay and the award of indemnity (P5000) for failure to observe due process. In the course of the execution of the judgement, the Finance Analyst submitted an updated computation of the award which included the th

proportionate amount of 13  month pay. This was objected by Session, claiming that this was not consistent with the decision but the same was denied by NLRC. The CA, however, partially granted the petition by deleting the awarded proportionate 13th month pay. ISSUE: WON the updated computation was proper Held: Yes, the updated computation was proper. The issue in the case at bar is not the correctness of the awards, the finality of the CA’s judgment, nor the petitioner’s failure to appeal. Rather, it is the propriety of the computation of the awards made, whether this violated the principle of immutability of final judgments. The question is whether a re- computation in the course of execution, of the labor arbiter’s original computation of the awards made pegged as of the time the decision was rendered and confirmed with modification by a final CA decision, is legally proper. The Court held that under the terms of the decision under execution, no essential change is made by a re-computation as this step is a necessary consequence that flows from the nature of the illegality of dismissal declared in that decision. A re-computation (or an original computation, if no previous computation has been made) is a part of the law  – specifically,  – specifically, Article 279 of the Labor Code and the established jurisprudence on this provision  – that  – that is read into the decision. By the nature of an illegal dismissal case, the reliefs continue to add on until full satisfaction, as expressed under Article 279 of the Labor Code. The re-computation of the consequences of illegal dismissal upon execution of the decision does not constitute an alteration or amendment of the final decision being implemented. The illegal dismissal ruling stands; only the computation of the monetary consequences of this dismissal is affected and this is not a violation of the principle of immutability of final judgments. Assailed decision is AFFIRMED. Labor Arbiter is asked to conduct another RE-COMPUTATION to determine actual award based on Court’s directives.