Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 63 views

    Ando v. Campo 254

    Uploaded by

    Thea Dela Cruz Capunpon
    - Paquito Ando filed a case to prohibit the sale of his personal property to satisfy a monetary award against the company he was president of from an illegal dismissal case. - The regional trial court denied the request for a temporary restraining order, stating the petitioner must file a third-party claim with the NLRC sheriff. - The petitioner argued he could choose between filing with the sheriff or a separate court action, but the Supreme Court stated regular courts do not have jurisdiction over enforcement of NLRC decisions and the NLRC Manual on Execution must be followed.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Ando v. Campo 254

    Uploaded by

    Thea Dela Cruz Capunpon
    63 views2 pages
    - Paquito Ando filed a case to prohibit the sale of his personal property to satisfy a monetary award against the company he was president of from an illegal dismissal case. - The regional trial court denied the request for a temporary restraining order, stating the petitioner must file a third-party claim with the NLRC sheriff. - The petitioner argued he could choose between filing with the sheriff or a separate court action, but the Supreme Court stated regular courts do not have jurisdiction over enforcement of NLRC decisions and the NLRC Manual on Execution must be followed.

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    - Paquito Ando filed a case to prohibit the sale of his personal property to satisfy a monetary award against the company he was president of from an illegal dismissal case. - The regional trial court denied the request for a temporary restraining order, stating the petitioner must file a third-party claim with the NLRC sheriff. - The petitioner argued he could choose between filing with the sheriff or a separate court action, but the Supreme Court stated regular courts do not have jurisdiction over enforcement of NLRC decisions and the NLRC Manual on Execution must be followed.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    63 views2 pages

    Ando v. Campo 254

    Uploaded by

    Thea Dela Cruz Capunpon
    - Paquito Ando filed a case to prohibit the sale of his personal property to satisfy a monetary award against the company he was president of from an illegal dismissal case. - The regional trial court denied the request for a temporary restraining order, stating the petitioner must file a third-party claim with the NLRC sheriff. - The petitioner argued he could choose between filing with the sheriff or a separate court action, but the Supreme Court stated regular courts do not have jurisdiction over enforcement of NLRC decisions and the NLRC Manual on Execution must be followed.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    You are on page 1of 2

    [G.R. No.

    184007, February 16 : 2011]

    PAQUITO V. ANDO, PETITIONER, VS. ANDRESITO Y. CAMPO, ET AL., RESPONDENTS.

    FACTS: Paquito V. Ando was the president of Premier Allied and Contracting Services,
    Inc. (PACSI), an independent labor contractor. Respondents filed a case for illegal
    dismissal and some money claims with the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC).
    The Labor Arbiter ruled in respondents’ favor. PACSI and petitioner were directed to pay
    respondents’ separation pay and the award of attorney’s fees.

    Upon finality of the decision, respondents moved for its execution. To answer for the
    monetary award, NLRC Acting Sheriff issued a Notice of Sale on Execution of Personal
    Property over the property in the name of “Paquito V. Ando x x x married to Erlinda S.
    Ando.”, prompting petitioner to file an action for prohibition and damages with prayer
    for the issuance of a temporary restraining order (TRO) before the RTC Branch 50, Bacolod
    City. Petitioner claimed that the property belonged to him and his wife, not to the
    corporation, and, hence, could not be subject of the execution sale. Since it is the
    corporation that was the judgment debtor, execution should be made on the latter’s
    properties.

    The RTC denied the prayer for a TRO, holding that the trial court had no jurisdiction to try
    and decide the case. The RTC ruled that, pursuant to the NLRC Manual on the Execution
    of Judgment, petitioner’s remedy was to file a third-party claim with the NLRC Sheriff.

    Petitioner did not file a motion for reconsideration of the RTC Order. Instead, he filed a
    petition for certiorari under Rule 65 before the CA. He contended that the RTC acted
    without or in excess of jurisdiction or with grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or
    excess of jurisdiction in issuing the Order. Petitioner argued that the writ of execution was
    issued improvidently or without authority since the property to be levied belonged to him
    – in his personal capacity – and his wife. The RTC, respondent contended, could stay the
    execution of a judgment if the same was unjust. He also contended that, pursuant to a
    ruling of this Court, a third party who is not a judgment creditor may choose between
    filing a third-party claim with the NLRC sheriff or filing a separate action with the courts.

    ISSUE: WON the Petitioner can choose between filing a third-party claim with the sheriff
    of the NLRC or filing a separate action.

    HELD:NO, but his petition in meritorious and, justice demands that this Court look beyond
    his procedural missteps and grant the petition.

    The Court has long recognized that regular courts have no jurisdiction to hear and decide
    questions which arise from and are incidental to the enforcement of decisions, orders, or
    awards rendered in labor cases by appropriate officers and tribunals of the Department
    of Labor and Employment.
    Thus, it is, first and foremost, the NLRC Manual on the Execution of Judgment that governs
    any question on the execution of a judgment of that body. Petitioner need not look
    further than that. The Rules of Court apply only by analogy or in a suppletory character.

    You might also like

    pFad - Phonifier reborn

    Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

    Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


    Alternative Proxies:

    Alternative Proxy

    pFad Proxy

    pFad v3 Proxy

    pFad v4 Proxy