Who has the ‘burden of proof’ in cases of illegal dismissal?


  

  

 

“We have said that, in an illegal dismissal case, the onus probandi rests on the employer to prove that its dismissal of an employee is for a valid cause. As noted earlier, petitioner-spouses issued Memorandum dated 16 June 1998 to private respondent, apprising him of the cause of his dismissal.”

Dr. Danilo T. Ting and Mrs. Elena Ting VS. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 146174, July 12, 2006

 

“As correctly pointed out by petitioners, the burden of proving just cause for dismissing an employee rests upon the employer, and the employer’s failure to discharge such burden results in a finding that the dismissal is unjustified and therefore illegal. It is the employer who must prove the validity of the termination and not the employee who must prove the reverse. The employer must affirmatively show rationally adequate evidence that the dismissal was for a justifiable cause.”

Nelson Zagala and Feliciano M. Angeles VS. Mikado Philippines Corporation, et. al., G.R. No. 160863, September 27, 2006

 

“It is well-settled that the employer must affirmatively show rationally adequate evidence that the dismissal was for a justifiable cause. When there is no showing of a clear, valid and legal cause for the termination of employment, the law considers the matter a case of illegal dismissal and the burden is on the employer to prove that the termination was for a valid or authorized cause. For failure to prove otherwise, the Court has no recourse but to grant the petition.”

Hermonias L. Liganza VS. RBL Shipyard Corp., G.R. No. 159862, October 17, 2006

Topics in this post:

"illegal dismissal cases philippines", "illegal dismissal jurisprudence", "illegal dismissal philippines", "illegal dismissal of employee philippines", "dismmissal labour code philippines", "labor cases in the philippines", "labor case unjust dismissal philippine", "illegal dismissal Labor code of the philippines", "illegal dismissal case due to absenteeism philippines", "employee has a murder case philippines"

2 thoughts on “Who has the ‘burden of proof’ in cases of illegal dismissal?

  1. ask ko lng po ung article 194 is dat applicable to all regular emloyees khit hindi po cya ksama sa CBA or benefits of the employee?

    saka po ung article 133 regarding po sa maternity leave 2 weeks prior to the delivery is thAT applicable to all? dati po kc nag file ako ng 1wk before my delivery but it was deducted from my available vl, tpos wala po ako nareceived na payment from my employer for two months after my delivery pero sa SSS po meron…dapat po babayaran ako ng employer ko bukod pa sa matatangap ko sa SSS para dun sa 2 months na naka leave ako?

    regular employee po ako for 3 years in that company when I get pregnant.

    thank you po

    • Tama, tama uli, ung last dapat bayaran ka ng advance ng company ung maternity mo at ung matatanggap mo sa SSS ay kukunin nilang kabayaran mo at hindi tama na babayaran ka ng SSS at ng kumpanya, isa lang sa mga iyon ang dapat mong makuha.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>