RAMIREZ VS.

CA

FACTS

 A civil case was filed by Socorro against Garcia for allegedly vexing, humiliating and insulting her.
In support of her claim, Socorro produced the verbatim transcript of the event. As a result of
petitioner’s recording of the event and alleging that the said act of secretly taping the
confrontation was illegal, private respondent file a criminal case for violation of RA 4200.
 Upon arraignment, petitioner filed a Motion to Quash on the ground that the facts charged do
not constitute an offense under RA 4200; and that the violation punished by RA 4200 refers to
the taping of communication by a person other than a participant to the communication.

ISSUE

WON RA 4200 applies to taping of a private conversation by one of the parties to the
conversation?

RULING

NO.

Legislative intent is determined principally from the language of the statute. Where the
language of the statute is clear and ambiguous, the law is applied according to its express terms and
interpretation would only be resorted where a literal interpretation would either impossible or absurd
or would lead to injustice.

The cited provision is clearly and unequivocally makes it illegal for any person, not authorized by
all the parties to any private communication, to secretly record such communication by means of tape
recorder. The law makes no distinction as to whether the party sought to be penalized by the statute
ought to be a party other than or different from those involved in the communication. The statute’s
intent to penalize all persons unauthorized to make such recording is underscored by the use of qualifier
“any”

Second, the nature of the conversation is immaterial to violation of statute. What RA 4200
penalizes are the acts of secretly intercepting, overhearing or recording of private communications by
means of devices enumerated therein.
REQUEST OF CA JUSTICES VELOSO, GACUTAN, AND SALAZAR FOR COMPUTATION OF LONGEVITY PAY

FACTS

Petitioners are all justices. Justice Fernando and Veloso claim longevity pay for services rendered within
and outside the Judiciary as part of their compensation package. Justice Gacuta, who have recently
retired, claims deficiency payment of her longevity pay for the services she have rendered before she
joined the Judiciary.

ISSUE

WON Sec 42 of IBP 129 should be given a liberal interpretation by the Court?

RULING

As written, the language and terms of the provision are very clear and unequivocal: longevity pay is
granted to a judge or justice who has rendered five years of continuous, efficient and meritorious service
in the Judiciary. The granted monthly longevity pay is equivalent to 5% of the monthly basic pay.

The plain reading of Sec 42 shows that longevity pay is not available even to a judicial official who is not
a judge or justice. It cannot also be available to a judge or justice for past services he or she did not
render within the Judiciary as services rendered outside the Judiciary for the purposes of longevity pay is
not contemplated by law.
 GMRC vs NLRC and IMELDA SALAZAR

FACTS

Salazar filed a complaint against Globe Mackay for illegal dismissal, vacation and sick leave benefits,
13month pay and damages. It was alleged that Salazar violated company regulation by involving herself
in transactions conflicting with the company’s interest by having full knowledge on the missing Fedder’s
airconditioning units but failed to inform her employer. Evidence showed that she signed as witness to
the articles of partnership between the Yambao and Salivar, who allegedly stole the missing Fedder’s
airconditioning units.

ISSUE

WON Salazar is illegally dismissed and shall be entitled to reinstatement?

RULING

Yes.

The wording of the Labor Code is clear and unambiguous: “An employee sho is unjustly dismissed from
work shall be entitled to reinstatement and his full backwages”.

Under the principle of statutory constructions, if a statute is clear, plain and free from ambiguity, it must
be given its literal meaning and applied without the need of interpretation. Verba legis non est
recedendum.