You are on page 1of 2

Republic vs.

Humanlink Manpower Consultant

Facts: Carlos applied for a job at Humanlink manpower consultant and seeks to be
employed abroad with the aid of the said recruitment agency as a heavy equipment
driver. Awaiting his flight, the agency made him sign a new contract stating that he
will be recruited as a duct man.
Humanlink told Carlos that his employment as a duct man in said contract
was only for the purpose of entry and was assured that he would be recruited and
will be working as a heavy equipment driver as he wanted to be. Upon arrival at
Doha, he worked as a duct man, hence he filed a complaint with the POEA for
violations of the provisions of POEA for Humanlink made a misrepresentation of the
job application, accepting a fee without issuing a, and imposing an excessive
placement fee and thus upon being held guilty, was relieved of their license to
operate and disqualified its directors and managers from engaging in such
business.
CA denied the appeal of Humanlink but partially made modifications on the
findings of the lower court in disqualifying the directors of said agency from
engaging in such business for doing so would deny them of due process.

Issue: WON the POEA, upon revocation of their license, may disqualify the directors
and heads.
Ruling: The SC ruled that based on the listed qualifications and disqualifications of
the Rules, they are not qualified to participate in the governments overseas
employment program upon such cancellation.
Section 2f, Rule 1, Part II of the POEA Ruls and Regulations:
The following are not qualified to engage in the business of recruitment and
placement of Filipino workers overseas
f: Persons or partners, officers and directors of corporation whose licenses
have previously cancelled or revoked for violation of recruitment laws.

Arlene Lapasaran vs. Peopple of the Philippines 390 Phil 649

Facts: Spouses Menardo and Vilma met Arlene Lapasaran who worked at Silver Jet
Travel Tours Agency. For a fee of P85,000 Arlene processed papers in order to get
Menardo to work in South Korea. Upon reaching South Korea, Menardo was sent

back to the Philippines because his papers and documents were fake which
prompted him to contact Arlene which the latter promised to return him back to
Korea. After some time, such promise never came back.
Arlene testified as her defense that she never promised to take him back to
Korea. The trial court gave credence to the testimonies of Menardo and his wife.

Issue: WON the crimes of Estaf and Illegal recruitment may be applied in this case
Ruling: Yes, all the elements of estafa is there, namely the misrepresentation
through fraudulent means that she has power to recruit and t\hat damage and
prejudice capable of pecuniary estimation is caused to the offended party.

People vs. Carol Dela Piedra 350 SCRA 163


Facts: One afternoon Modesto and Araneta together with their friends Baez and
Aquino went to the house of Jasmine after having learned that a woman was there
to recruit. Ramos, an atty. of the POEA received a telephone call from an
unidentified woman inquiring about the legitimacy of the recruitment conducted
therein by a certain carol.
Ramos conducted a plan to entrap Carol which succeeded. Evidence adduced
were the biodata signed by Modesto and her friends thereby charging Carol for the
crime of illegal recruitment in large scale and was sentenced to life imprisonment.
Carol claimed that art 13b of the Labor code is void for being vague.
Issue: WON art 13b is vague.
Ruling: The SC reiterated the ruling in the case of Panis which stated that the
wordings inclined there at merely gives preference to a presumption and is not to
be interpreted in its literal sense, but on the intent of the framers of the Labor Code.
Subsequently the prosecution adduced evidence that she recruited only
Araneta and Modesto, not including those of their friends. Hence she is liable only
for 2 counts of simple illegal recruitment and is made to suffer only the penalty of 4
to 6 years imprisonment for each