You are on page 1of 3

Candari, K-Phren

Coquilla, MarisseAnne Elaine
Grino, Princess Izra
Puerin, Jessalyn
1-Viada
Legal Writing MT 6-7 pm; 5-6 pm
July 03, 2015

C A S E

D I G E S T

EVELYN CHUA-QUA, petitioner,
vs.
HON. JACOBO C. CLAVE, in his capacity as Presidential Executive Assistant, and
TAY TUNG HIGH SCHOOL, INC., respondents.

Facts
The case was about the illegal dismissal of a classroom teacher, herein petitioner, Evelyn Chua,
filed by private respondent, Tay Tung High School, Inc. in Bacolod City on the grounds of
immoral conduct by reason of petitioner’s marriage to her student, Bobby Qua who was fourteen
(14) years younger than her. The school was being granted by the Department of Labor, without
conducting any formal hearing, the clearance to terminate the employment of petitioner. After
then, numerous appeals were made by the petitioner.

The petitioner worked as a teacher in the said school since 1963. During 1976, petitioner was a
Grade VI class adviser where Qua, 16 years old, was enrolled. While giving remedial lessons as

Holding The Supreme Court declared the dismissal illegal. Labor Arbiter Jose Aguirre. This was in turn reversed by the Minister of Labor. without conducting any formal hearing. Private respondent utterly failed to show that petitioner took advantage of her position to court her student. On December 24. the petitioner and her student became very close and eventually fell in love. they were married in a civil ceremony in Iloilo City. this only lends substance to the truism that the heart has reasons of its own which reason does not know. despite the disparity in their ages and academic levels. Clave. NLRC reversed the labor arbiter’s decision and ordered petitioner's reinstatement with back wages. Petitioner appealed to the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) claiming denial of due process for not having been furnished copies of the aforesaid affidavits where the labor arbiter relied to. reversed the decision of the Minister of Labor and ordered petitioner to be reinstated. The school filed with the Department of Labor an application for clearance to terminate petitioner’s employment on the ground of abusive and unethical conduct unbecoming of a dignified school teacher. awarded in favor of the school. Petitioner was suspended without pay. If the two eventually fell in love. Subsequently. yielding to this gentle and universal emotion is not to be so casually equated with immorality. and through Presidential Executive Assistant Jacobo C. Chua and Qua were married in a church wedding on January 10. 1975. but awarding six (6) months salary to petitioner as financial assistance. Legal Issue Whether there is an immoral act which renders the dismissal valid. However. definitely. who was then a minor. . The deviation of the circumstances of their marriage from the usual societal pattern cannot be considered as a defiance of contemporary social mores. public respondent reversed his earlier decision and supported petitioner’s dismissal from work but giving her separation pay equivalent to her six (6) months salary. Petitioner appealed to the Office of the President of the Philippines. Afterwards. 1976. But. where petitioner was thirty (30) years old.per school policy to Qua. received the consent and advice from his mother. Qua.

.Reasoning Finding that there is no substantial evidence of the imputed immoral acts. Private respondent utterly failed to show that petitioner took advantage of her position to court her student. The deviation of the circumstances of their marriage from the usual societal pattern cannot be considered as a defiance of contemporary social mores. is not at odds with and should not be capitalized on to defeat the security of tenure granted by the Constitution to labor. the burden of proving just and valid cause for dismissing an employee rests on the employer and his failure to do so would result in a finding that the dismissal is unjustified. Policy It would seem quite obvious that the avowed policy of the school in rearing and educating children is being unnecessarily bannered to justify the dismissal of petitioner. however. In termination cases. This policy. it follows that the alleged violation of Code of Ethics governing school teachers would have no basis.