BROWN v. MARSWIN

ERNESTO BROWN, petitioner, vs. MARSWIN MARKETING, INC. et al., respondents.

G.R. No. 206891

March 15, 2017

Facts: 

On October 4 or 5, 2009, Ernesto Brown (Brown) was employed as building maintenance/electrician by Marswin Marketing, Inc. (Marswin).

Brown contends that on May 28, 2010, Marswin informed him that it was already his last day of work; and thereafter, he was no longer admitted back to work. Brown insists that he was terminated without due process of law. On the other hand, Marswin confirmed having summoned Brown on May 28, 2010 but they denied that he was dismissed, but that he left the meeting and since then never returned for work. Marswin insists that Brown committed abandonment.

On June 7, 2010, Brown filed a complaint for illegal dismissal, non-payment of salary and 13th month pay as well as claim for moral and exemplary damages and attorney’s fees against Marswin. He also prayed for reinstatement with full backwages and payment of his other monetary claims.

Issue: 

Whether or not Brown was illegally dismissed from work by Marswin.

Held: 

Yes, Brown was illegally dismissed from work by Marswin.

In dismissal cases, the employer bears the burden of proving that the employee was not terminated, or if dismissed, that the dismissal was legal. Reluctantly, the failure of the employer to discharge such burden would mean that the dismissal is unjustified and thus, illegal. (DUP Sound Phils. v. CA, 676 Phil. 472, 479) The employer cannot simply discharge such burden by its plain assertion that it did not dismiss the employee; and it is highly absurd if the employer will escape liability by its mere claim that the employee abandoned his or her work. (People’s Security, Inc. v. Flores, G.R. No. 211312)

Nonetheless, apart from the allegation of abandonment, Marswin presented no evidence proving that Brown failed to return without justifiable reasons and had clear intentions to discontinue his work. In addition, [Brown’s] immediate filing of an illegal dismissal case especially so when it includes a prayer for reinstatement is totally contrary to the charge of abandonment. (Tan Brothers’ Corporation of Basilan City v. Escudero, 713 Phil. 401)

Given all these, there is clearly no showing that Brown committed abandonment; instead, evidence proved that he was illegally dismissed from work. / mmp