Callanta VS. CARNATION PHILIPPINES, INC.

, and NLRC
G.R. No. 70615

Facts:

 Virgillo Callanta was employed in Carnation Philippines as a salesman in 1974

 In 1979, respondents filed with MOLE an application for clearance to terminate
Callanta on the alleged grounds of serious misconduct and misappropriation of
company funds amounting to 12,000.00 more or less.
 Callanta was terminated June 1, 1979.
 Callanta filed with the MOLE a complaint for illegal dismissal with claims for
reinstatement, back wages, and damages against respondent IN 1982.
 Carnation put n issue the timeliness of petitioner’s complaint alleging that the same is
barred by prescription for having been filed more than three years after Callanta’s
dismissal.
 In March 1983, Labor Arbiter Pedro C. Ramos rendered a decision finding the
termination of Callanta’s employment to be without valid cause. Carnation was then
ordered to reinstate Callanta to his former position.
 Carnation appealed to respondent NLRC which set aside the decision of the Labor
Arbiter. It declared the complaint for illegal dismissal to have already prescribed.

Issue:
Whether or not the action for illegal dismissal prescribed in 3 years pursuant to Art.
291 and 292 of the Labor Code.

Held:
No. a principle well recognized in this jurisdiction that one’s employment, profession, trade or
calling is a property right, and the wrongful interference is an actionable wrong. The right is
considered to be property within protection of the constitutional guarantee of Law.