Gomez v. North Camarines Lumber the reasons abovementioned. Without pronouncement as to costs. It is so ordered.

August 18. 1958 | Felix, J. | ___________

PETITIONER: Reynaldo Gomez

RESPONDENTS: North Camarines Lumber Company, Inc. Bengzon, Bautista Angelo and Concepcion, JJ., concur.

SUMMARY: Gomez claims unpaid overtime services, underpayment of wage,
and lack of separation pay following his dismissal from service from North
Camarines Lumber. The initial case was heard by the Investigator of Department
of Labor; however, the said investigator forgot to issue a binding agreement to
render the process valid.
Gomez approached the Court of First Instance of Manila to file the case
following the dismissal from Department of Labor. North Camarines Lumber
alleges that case should end due to res judicata but the Court did not agree.
However, the Court also found that Gomez was incorrect in filing the case with
CFI. The proper court should be the Court of Industral Relations, granted that it
has jurisdiction according to the law.
DOCTRINE:
Paras, C.J., Montemayor and Endencia, JJ., concur in the result.
Reyes, J.B.L., J., concurs but reserves his vote on the separation pay issue.
RATIO:
1. The Court found that the ruling in Brillantes v. Castro should not be
applicable to the case as a written agreement citing full respect for the
decision of the Investigator does not exist. The absence of an agreement to
abide by the conclusion causes the Investigator’s findings to be non-
binding. The repeated use of the word “shall” in this case refers to the
mandatory filing of such agreement in connection to the legal process,
and without such document the procedure cannot be valid.

2. However, the petitinoner is also at fault as under Sec. 16 of the Minimum

Wage Law, the Court of First Instance only has jurisdiction over recovery
FACTS:
of underpayment. Herein, the law does not cite that the collection of
1. Reynaldo Gomez appealed an order regarding his complaint against unpaid overtime compensation shall be within the CFI’s jurisdiction.
overtime services, underpayment, and lack of separation pay. Gomez was
employed by respondent North Camarines Lumber from July 3, 1954 to
September 29, 1955. Under the Eight-Hour Labor Law (Com. Act 444) and Industrial Peace Act
2. Gomez eventually changed his claim to focus only on separation pay. (RA 875), the competent court with jurisdiction over the case shall be the
Investigator from Department of Labor dismissed the complaint for lack of Court of Industrial Relations. The same holds true for separation pay as
merit as the removal was justified, which means that no separation pay is under Com. Act 103 (creating the CIR) and Art. 2270 of New Civil Code,
needed. the Court of Industrial Relations is now granted to be the court that has
3. After a month, Gomez filed a new case to the Court of First Instance of authority to decide labor disputes. Herein, petitioner should actually file
Manila for collection of unpaid overtime and separation pay against same the case with CIR rather than other courts.
petitioner. Gomez alleges that he was made to work an additional 5 hours
per day. Respondent North Camarines Lumber alleges that Gomez was
removed from work due to poor conduct against passengers.
4. Lower court found that case is dismissed due to res judicata.

ISSUE/s:
1. WoN the case falls under res judicata as Gomez did not file a motion for
appeal against the Investigator of the Department of Labor – NO
2. WoN the case is conducted in the proper court - NO

RULING:

Wherefore, the order appealed from has to be affirmed and this case dismissed for