You are on page 1of 2

Globe Mackay Cable and Radio Corp vs.

CAGR No 81262
august 25 1989
Resitituto Tobias was employed by Globe Mackay cable and radio
corp. as a purchasing agent and administrative assistant to
the engineering operations managers. When a fictitious purchase
was discovered, henry, the vice president and general manager of
the company confronted him stating that he was a number one
suspect concerning the matter and ordered him to take one
week off, leaving his drawer open and his office keys. After
one week has elapsed, henry went to him again and called him a
crook and swindler and ordering him to take a lie detector and
other test which the results are negative. Subsequently he was
suspended and despite the reports, he was sued for estafa but was
dismissed. When he was terminated, he applied to retelco and
without the request of the company, henry gave a character
evaluation stating that Restituto was dismissed from their company
due to dishonesty. This event lead restituto to file a case for
damages against Globe Mackay cable and radio corp alleging the
unlawful, malicious, oppressive and abusive acts of Globe Mackay
cable and radio corp. the lower court rendered the judgement in his
favour as well as the CA. Hence this appeal. The Globe Mackay
cable and radio corp. said they cant be held liable because they
have conducted the an a lawful dismissal while the restituto
contended that because of their abusive manner is dismissing
him and inhuman treatment, they are held liable for damges.
Whether or not Globe Mackay Cable and Radio Corp can be held
liable for damages resulting to abuse of right?
It is expected from the employer to be firm and to resolve to
uncover the truth but the treatment they have given to resituto
during his employment was uncalled for. Despite of the evidence
held, they accused restituto guilty without a basis and harass him
which are the standard of human conduct under art 19 of the civil
code. The right of the employer to dismiss an employee should bot
be confused with the matter in which the right is exercised and the
effects flowing form it. If the dismissal is done abusively, then the
employer is liable for damages to the employee. It is clearly
indicated that the Globe mackay cable and radio corp failed to

ecervise in al egitimate manner their right to dimiss Resituto, as

result, they are held liable for damages under article 21 of the civil
code which render the remedies for article 19.For the tortuous acts
committed by the corporation such as calling him name which held
no basis and the letter sent by them to retelco alleging resitituto
was dismissed due to dishonesty, they are also held liable for
art 2176 of the civil code.
Gr. No. 161921, July 17, 2013Joyce Ardiente,
P e t i t i o n e r
vs. Spouses Javier and Ma. Theresa Pastorfide, Cagayan deOro
Water District and Gaspar Gonzalez, Jr.,
R e s p o n d e n t s
Petitioner Ardiente and Spouses Pastorfide entered into a
Memorandum of Agreement (MOA)wherein the latter undertakes to
pay the amount of Php 70,000.00 as consideration of a unit held by
the former at Emily Homes Balulang, Cagayan De Oro City. It was
also stipulated in the MOA that electric and water bills will now be
transferred on the account of Pastorfide. However, the conflict
aroused when petitioner, without informing respondents, requested
that the waterline of the latter be cut off by Cagayan De Oro Water
District (COWD). COWD on its part, without due notice, acceded to

s request. When Ma. Theresa learned of such transaction, she paid

the water bills at the instant and requested that their water line be
re-connected. However, despite such payment, Manager Gonzales
failed to fulfill his obligation. Complaint for damages were filed
before the RTC by respondents against Ardiente and COWD. The
trial court ruled in favour of the spouses Pastorfide. On appeal, the
CA affirmed said ruling.
Whether, despite the stipulation in the MOA between Petitioner
Ardiente and Respondent Spouses Pastorfide that the latter will
undertake to have the water account to their names and despite
failure to do so, Ardiente may still be held liable for abuse of rights
under Article 19 of the New Civil Code.
Yes. Ardiente may still be held liable.It is true that it is within
petitioner's right to ask and even require the Spouses Pastorfide to
cause the transfer of the former's account with COWD to the
latter's name pursuant to their Memorandum of Agreement.

However, the remedy to enforce such right is not to cause the

disconnection of the respondent spouses' water supply. The
exercise of a right must be in accordance with the purpose for
which it was established and must not be excessive or unduly
harsh; there must be no intention to harm another. Otherwise,
liability for damages to the injured party will attach. In the present
case, intention to harm was evident on the part of petitioner when
she requested for the disconnection of respondent spouses water
supply without warning or informing the latter of such request.
Petitioner claims that her request for disconnection was based on
the advise of COWD personnel and that her intention was just to
compel the Spouses Pastorfide to comply with their agreement that
petitioner's account with COWD be transferred in respondent
spouses' name. If such was petitioner's only intention, then she
should have advised respondent spouses before or immediately

after submitting her request for disconnection, telling them that her
request was simply to force them to comply with their obligation
under their Memorandum of Agreement. But she did not. What
made matters worse is the fact that COWD undertook the
disconnection also without prior notice and even failed to reconnect
the Spouses Pastorfides water supply despite payment of their arrears. There
was clearly an abuse of right on the part of petitioner, COWD and
Gonzalez. They are guilty of bad faith. The principle of abuse of
rights as enshrined in Article 19 of the Civil Code provides that
every person must, in the exercise of his rights and in the
performance of his duties, act with justice, give everyone his due,
and observe honesty and good faith.