Sunace Intl Management v.

NLRC
G.R. No. 161757
January 25, 2006

FACTS:
Montehermozo (Divina) was deployed to Taiwan for a 1 year contract by Sunace. After the
expiration, she continued working for the Taiwanese employer for 2 years and came back to file
a complaint that she was jailed for 3 months and she was underpaid. Sunace alleged that it
cannot be held liable since the extension was without their knowledge and that the quitclaim
was executed by Divina.

ISSUE:
Whether or not the petitioner should be held liable for any claims by Divina arising from the
extension

RULING:
No. There being no substantial proof that Sunace knew of and consented to be bound under
the 2-year employment contract extension, it cannot be said to be privy thereto. As such, it and
its "owner" cannot be held solidarily liable for any of Divina's claims arising from the 2-year
employment extension. There was an implied revocation of its agency relationship with its
foreign principal when the foreign principal directly negotiated with Divina and entered into a
new and separate employment contract in Taiwan.