Sevilla v CA (1988) Sarmiento A contract by and between Noguera and Tourist World Service (TWS), represented by Canilao, wherein

TWS leased the premises belonging to Noguera as branch office of TWS which was run by appellant Sevilla. Later, TWS was informed that Sevilla was connected with rival firm, and since the branch office was losing, TWS considered closing down its office and thus, the contract was terminated. When neither appellant Sevilla nor any of his employees could enter, a complaint was filed. TWS insisted that Sevilla was a mere employee, being the branch manager of its branch office and that she had no say on the lease executed with the private respondent, Noguera. Sevilla, was not subject to control by the private respondent TWS. True employee cannot be made to part with his own money in pursuance of his employers business, orotherwise, assume any liability thereof. Sevilla was not in the companys payroll. Unlike an employee, who earns a fixed salary, she earned compensation in fluctuating amount depending on her booking successes. The fact that Sevilla had been designated branch manager does not make her a TWS employee. She had assumed personal obligation for the operation thereof, holding herself solidary liable for thepayment of rentals. In this jurisdiction, there has been no uniform test to determine the existence of an employer-employee relation. In general, we have relied on the so-called right of control test, "where the person for whom the services are performed reserves a right to control not only the end to be achieved but also the means to be used in reaching such end." Subsequently, however, we have considered, in addition to the standard of right-of-control, the existing economic conditions prevailing between the parties, like the inclusion of the employee in the payrolls, in determining the existence of an employer-employee relationship. ML Bejemino