G.R. No.

L-68544 October 27, 1986

LORENZO C. DY, ZOSIMO DY, SR., WILLIAM IBERO, RICARDO GARCIA AND RURAL BANK OF AYUNGON,
INC., petitioners,
vs.
NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION (NLRC) AND EXECUTIVE LABOR ARBITER ALBERTO L.
DALMACION, AND CARLITO H. VAILOCES, respondents.

Facts:
Carlito H. Vailoces was a bank manager. In a special stock holder’s meeting called for the
purpose of electing the entire membership of the board of directors, petitioners obtained the
seat. After which, a board resolution was effected relieving him as the bank manager. He filed a
complaint for illegal dismissal, non-payment of COLA, and underpayment of wages before the
Minister of Labor alleging that he was not re-elected as bank manager because of filing of
petition for recognition of natural child of the father of elected president of the bank. He also
claimed that the said election in a special stock holder’s meeting was illegally convoked and that
the elected members therein were illegally instituted. The Labor Arbiter ruled that there was
illegal dismissal due to resentment of the elected members of the board of directors against
Vailoces and that he was not afforded due process. Petitioners appealed raising the issue of
jurisdiction as the case was under the power of the Securities and Exchange Commission
(SEC) to hear and decide. It was, however, dismissed being filed late. Hence, the appeal.

Issue:
Whether or not the SEC has jurisdiction over the subject matter of the case.

Held:
Yes, the SEC has jurisdiction over the subject matter of the case. The matter of controversies in
election as well as complained acts of the board in issuing a resolution relieving him as bank
manager were an intra-corporate controversy for which the SEC has original and exclusive
jurisdiction to hear and decide as vested by Presidential Decree 902-A. The jurisdiction of a
court over the subject matter of the action is a matter of law and may not be conferred by
consent or agreement of the parties. The lack of jurisdiction of a court may be raised at any
stage of the proceedings, even on appeal. These considerations make inevitable the conclusion
that the judgment of the Labor Arbiter and the resolution of the NLRC are void for lack of
jurisdiction.