46496; 27 FEB 1940] Sunday, February 01, 2009 Posted by Coffeeholic Writes Labels: Case Digests, Political Law

Facts: There was agreement between Ang Tibay and the National Labor Union, Inc (NLU). The NLU alleged that the supposed lack of leather material claimed by Toribio Teodoro was but a scheme adopted to systematically discharge all the members of the NLU, from work. And this averment is desired to be proved by the petitioner with the records of the Bureau of Customs and Books of Accounts of native dealers in leather. That National Worker's Brotherhood Union of Ang Tibay is a company or employer union dominated by Toribio Teodoro, which was alleged by the NLU as an illegal one. The CIR, decided the case and elevated it to the Supreme Court, but a motion for new trial was raised by the NLU. But the Ang Tibay filed a motion for opposing the said motion.

Issue: Whether or Not, the motion for new trial is meritorious to be granted.

Held: To begin with the issue before us is to realize the functions of the CIR. The CIR is a special court whose functions are specifically stated in the law of its creation which is the Commonwealth Act No. 103). It is more an administrative board than a part of the integrated judicial system of the nation. It is not intended to be a mere receptive organ of the government. Unlike a court of justice which is essentially passive, acting only when its jurisdiction is invoked and deciding only cases that are presented to it by the parties litigant, the function of the CIR, as will appear from perusal of its organic law is more active, affirmative and dynamic. It not only exercises judicial or quasi-judicial functions in the determination of disputes between employers and employees but its functions are far more comprehensive and extensive. It has jurisdiction over the entire Philippines, to consider, investigate, decide, and settle any question, matter controversy or disputes arising between, and/ or affecting employers and employees or laborers, and landlords and tenants or farm-laborers, and regulates the relations between them, subject to, and in accordance with, the provisions of CA 103. As laid down in the case of Goseco v. CIR, the SC had the occasion to point out that the CIR is not narrowly constrained by technical rules of procedure, and equity and substantial merits of the case, without regard to technicalities or legal forms and shall not be bound by any technical rules of legal evidence but may inform its mind in such manner as it may deem just and equitable. The fact, however, that the CIR may be said to be free from rigidity of certain procedural requirements does not mean that it can in justiciable cases coming before it, entirely ignore or disregard the fundamental and essential requirements of due process in trials and investigations of an administrative character. There cardinal primary rights which must be respected even in proceedings of this character:

(2) The tribunal must consider the evidence (3) The decision must have something to support itself. in all controversial questions. (5) The decision must be based on the evidence presented at the hearing. http://cofferette. So ordered. or at least contained in the record and disclosed to the parties affected. the motion for a new trial should be. (6) The tribunal or body or any of its judges must act on its own independent consideration of the law and facts of the controversy. The failure to grasp the fundamental issue involved is not entirely attributable to the parties adversely affected by the result. and not simply accept the views of a subordinate.(1) the right to a hearing. and the entire record of this case shall be remanded to the CIR. and the reason for the decision rendered. and otherwise proceed in accordance with the requirements set forth. with instruction that it reopen the case receive all such evidence as may be relevant. (4) The evidence must be substantial. render its decision in such manner that the parties to the proceeding can know the various Issue involved. which includes the right to present one's cause and submit evidence in support thereof. (7) The Board or body should. Accordingly. and the same is hereby granted.blogspot.html .

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful