[ G.R. No. L-16919-20. September 29, 1962 ]
[ G.R. No. L-16919-20. September 29, 1962 ]
[ G.R. No. L-16919-20. September 29, 1962 ]
RUFINO GALLARDO AND CATALINA VITAL DE GUEVARRA; MAXIMA DANTING, PLAINTIFFS-APPELLEES, VS. MANILA RAILROAD COMPANY, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.
D E C I S I O N
BENGZON, C.J.:
SUMMARY
Both cases involved claims for money against the Manila Railroad Company. The claimants filed their respective claims with the Regional Office of the Department of Labor, which granted the claims. After the Labor Standard Commission affirmed the decision of the Regional Officer, the case was elevated to the Court of First Instance on appeal, which in turned also affirmed the appealed decision. The Manila Railroad Company appealed to this Court questioning the authority of the Regional Officer to decide claims for money, invoking Reorganization Plan No. 20-A of the Government Survey and Reorganization Commission. The Supreme Court set aside the appealed decision without prejudice to the plaintiffs to sue in the proper court.
HELD: Reorganization Plan No. 20-A is void insofar as it takes away from the courts the power and authority to decide claims for money, and the decision of the Regional Office or the Department of Labor is not appealable to the Court of First Instance.
同类文件 SC Decisions
- [ G.R. NO. 155076. February 27, 2006 ](518 Phil. 409)
- G.R. No. 167523, June 27, 2008
- [ A.M. No. 04-5-118-MTCC. July 29, 2004 ](479 Phil. 255)
- [ G.R. No. 132860. April 03, 2001 ](408 Phil. 132)
- G.R. No. 167835, November 15, 2010
- [ G.R. No. L-6530. March 31, 1955 ]
- [ CA-No. 17. May 24, 1948 ]
- [ G.R. No. 181249. March 14, 2011 ](660 Phil. 568)
想要这份文件的分析?
让 ASG 法律 AI 为你总结、与其他判例对比,或说明它如何适用于你的情形 — 它检索的正是同一个数据库。