Professional Documents
Culture Documents
_______________
* SECOND DIVISION.
614
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/000001673e42e569d928b642003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 1/27
11/23/2018 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 772
615
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/000001673e42e569d928b642003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 2/27
11/23/2018 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 772
616
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/000001673e42e569d928b642003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 3/27
11/23/2018 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 772
617
MENDOZA, J.:
The right to self-organization is not limited to unionism.
Workers may also form or join an association for mutual
aid and protection and for other legitimate purposes.
This is a petition for review on certiorari seeking to
reverse and set aside the July 4, 2013 Decision1 and the
January 28, 2014 Resolution2 of the Court of Appeals (CA)
in C.A.-G.R. S.P. No. 123397, which reversed the November
28, 2011 Resolution3 of the Bureau of Labor Relations
(BLR) and reinstated the April 20, 2010 Decision4 of the
Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE) Regional
Director, cancelling the registration of Samahan ng
Manggagawa sa Hanjin Shipyard (Samahan) as a worker’s
association under Article 243 (now Article 249) of the Labor
Code.
The Facts
On February 16, 2010, Samahan, through its authorized
representative, Alfie F. Alipio, filed an application for
registration5 of its name “Samahan ng Mga Manggagawa
sa Hanjin Shipyard” with the DOLE. Attached to the
application were the list of names of the association’s
officers and members, signatures of the attendees of the
February 7, 2010
_______________
618
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/000001673e42e569d928b642003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 5/27
11/23/2018 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 772
_______________
6 Id., at p. 61.
7 Id., at pp. 62-68.
8 Id., at pp. 69-75.
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/000001673e42e569d928b642003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 6/27
11/23/2018 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 772
619
The same claim was made by Samahan in its motion to
dismiss, but it failed to adduce evidence that the remaining
63 members were also employees of Hanjin. Its admission
bolstered Hanjin’s claim that Samahan committed
misrepresentation in its application for registration as it
made an express representation that all of its members
were employees of the former. Having a definite employer,
these 57 members should have formed a labor union for
collective bargaining.11 The dispositive portion of the
decision of the Dole Regional Director, reads:
_______________
9 Id., at p. 87.
10 Id., at p. 53.
11 Id., at pp. 86-91.
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/000001673e42e569d928b642003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 7/27
11/23/2018 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 772
620
The Ruling of the Bureau
of Labor Relations
Aggrieved, Samahan filed an appeal13 before the BLR,
arguing that Hanjin had no right to petition for the
cancellation of its registration. Samahan pointed out that
the words “Hanjin Shipyard,” as used in its application for
registration, referred to a workplace and not as employer or
company. It explained that when a shipyard was put up in
Subic, Zambales, it became known as Hanjin Shipyard.
Further, the remaining 63 members signed the Sama-
Samang Pagpapatunay which stated that they were either
working or had worked at Hanjin. Thus, the alleged
misrepresentation committed by Samahan had no leg to
stand on.14
In its Comment to the Appeal,15 Hanjin averred that it
was a party-in-interest. It reiterated that Samahan
committed misrepresentation in its application for
registration before DOLE Pampanga. While Samahan
insisted that the remaining 63 members were either
working, or had at least worked in Hanjin, only 10 attested
to such fact, thus, leaving its 53 members without any
workplace to claim.
_______________
12 Id., at p. 91.
13 Id., at pp. 92-100.
14 Id., at p. 97.
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/000001673e42e569d928b642003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 8/27
11/23/2018 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 772
621
_______________
16 Id., at p. 121.
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/000001673e42e569d928b642003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 9/27
11/23/2018 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 772
17 Id., at p. 122.
18 Id., at p. 121.
19 Id.
20 Id., at p. 123.
21 Id.
622
Unsatisfied, Samahan filed a petition for certiorari25
under Rule 65 before the CA, docketed as C.A.-G.R. S.P.
No. 123397.
In its March 21, 2012 Resolution,26 the CA dismissed the
petition because of Samahan’s failure to file a motion for
reconsideration of the assailed November 28, 2011
Resolution.
On April 17, 2012, Samahan filed its motion for
reconsideration27 and on July 18, 2012, Hanjin filed its
comment28 to oppose the same. On October 22, 2012, the
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/000001673e42e569d928b642003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 10/27
11/23/2018 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 772
_______________
623
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/000001673e42e569d928b642003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 11/27
11/23/2018 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 772
_______________
624
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/000001673e42e569d928b642003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 12/27
11/23/2018 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 772
_______________
36 Id., at p. 278.
37 Rollo, pp. 29-30.
38 Id., at p. 12.
625
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/000001673e42e569d928b642003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 13/27
11/23/2018 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 772
_______________
39 Id., at p. 15.
40 Comment, id., at pp. 50-73.
41 Reply, id., at pp. 96-102.
626
And Section 8, Article III of the 1987 Constitution also
states:
As Article 246 (now 252) of the Labor Code provides, the
right to self-organization includes the right to form, join or
627
_______________
628
_______________
629
_______________
630
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/000001673e42e569d928b642003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 18/27
11/23/2018 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 772
_______________
631
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/000001673e42e569d928b642003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 19/27
11/23/2018 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 772
Further, Article 243 should be read together with Rule 2
of Department Order (D.O.) No. 40-03, Series of 2003,
which provides:
RULE II
COVERAGE OF THE RIGHT TO SELF-
ORGANIZATION
632
Clearly, there is nothing in the foregoing implementing
rules which provides that workers, with definite employers,
cannot form or join a workers’ association for mutual aid
and
633
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/000001673e42e569d928b642003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 21/27
11/23/2018 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 772
_______________
634
Based on the foregoing, the Court concludes that
misrepresentation, to be a ground for the cancellation of
the certificate of registration, must be done maliciously and
deliberately. Further, the mistakes appearing in the
application or at-
_______________
635
_______________
636
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/000001673e42e569d928b642003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 24/27
11/23/2018 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 772
The policy underlying the prohibition in Section 18
against the registration of a corporate name which is
“identical or deceptively or confusingly similar” to that of
any existing corporation or which is “patently deceptive” or
“patently confusing” or “contrary to existing laws,” is the
avoidance of fraud upon the public which would have
occasion to deal with the entity concerned, the evasion of
legal obligations and duties, and the reduction of
difficulties of administration and supervision over
corporations.60
For the same reason, it would be misleading for the
members of Samahan to use “Hanjin Shipyard” in its name
as it
_______________
637
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/000001673e42e569d928b642003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 25/27
11/23/2018 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 772
Thus, in the directive of the BLR removing the words
“Hanjin Shipyard,” no abridgement of Samahan’s right to
self-organization was committed.
WHEREFORE, the petition is PARTIALLY
GRANTED. The July 4, 2013 Decision and the January 28,
2014 Resolution of the Court of Appeals are hereby
REVERSED and SET ASIDE. The September 6, 2010
Resolution of the Bureau of Labor Relations, as modified by
its November 28, 2011 Resolution, is REINSTATED.
SO ORDERED.
_______________
** Per Special Order No. 2222 dated September 29, 2015.
*** Designated acting member per Special Order No. 2223 dated
September 29, 2015.
638
——o0o——
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/000001673e42e569d928b642003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 27/27