In Metro Manila Transit Corporation vs Court of Appeals (G.R. No.

104408,
June 21, 1993), the Supreme Court through Associate Justice Florenz
Regalado stated:

“In order that the defense of due diligence in the selection and supervision of
employees may be deemed sufficient and plausible, it is not enough to
emptily invoke the existence of said company guidelines and policies on
hiring and supervision. As the negligence of the employee gives rise to the
presumption of negligence on the part of the employer, the latter has the
burden of proving that it has been diligent not only in the selection of
employees but also in the actual supervision of their work. The mere allega
tion of the existence of hiring procedures and supervisory policies, without
anything more, is decidedly not sufficient to overcome such presumption.

We emphatically reiterate our holding, as a warning to all employers, that

“the formulation of various company policies on safety without showing that
they were being complied with is not sufficient to exempt petitioner from
liability arising from negligence of its employees. It is incumbent upon
petitioner to show that in recruiting and employing the erring driver the
recruitment procedures and company policies on efficiency and safety were
followed. x x x.”
Applying the above-quoted decision to your situation, the employer or the
company cannot escape his liability by simply raising the fact that it has a
policy on the hiring and selection of its employees. In order for the company
to be absolved from its liability, it is necessary to prove its diligence in the
selection and actual supervision in the work of its employees.

Under the Fire Code, the Bureau of Fire Protection is required to conduct fire
safety inspections as pre-requisite to the grant of licenses and permits for
the use and occupancy of buildings, structures, facilities and their premises
including the installation of fire protections and fire safety equipment and
electrical systems in any building structure or facility; and the storage of
explosives or combustible, flammable, toxic and other hazardous materials.

The BFP is likewise responsible for designating fire inspectors who shall
inspect every building at least once a year, and every time the owner,
administrator or occupant [renews] its business permit or permit to occupy;
to issue a business permit or permit to operate only after securing a Fire
Safety Inspection Certification (FSIC); require the building owner occupant
to submit plans and specifications and other pertinent documents of
building/structure in order to ensure compliance of applicable codes and
standards and issue a written notice to the owner and/or contractor to stop
work on portion of any work due to absence or in violation of approved plans
and specifications; to inspect at reasonable time, any building, structure or
premises and order the owner/occupant to remove hazardous materials
and/or stop operation if the standards are not met; to declare and
summarily abate hazardous conditions of the buildings or structures and/or
declare the same as fire hazards.

It is worthy to note that despite the long period of time from the occurrence
of the fire until the termination of this investigation, the Cabiao BFP headed
by FO3 ESQUIVEL has yet to submit its report and findings. However,
inasmuch as FO3 ESQUIVEL has bungled the investigation of the fire
by removing items from the scene of the fire and his failure to
explain the disappearance of other electrical debris, the opening and
enlargement of the iron grill where the sole survivor passed, the
back door broken, and the non-recording of the investigations, FO3
Esquivel's action and behaviors are highly suspect of a massive
cover up of the real cause of the fire.