1) Royal Crown Internationale recruited Virgilio Nacionales for employment with ZAMEL as an architectural draftsman in Saudi Arabia, but ZAMEL terminated Nacionales' employment.
2) The POEA and NLRC found Royal Crown and ZAMEL jointly and severally liable to pay Nacionales.
3) The Supreme Court ruled that Royal Crown could be held jointly and severally liable with ZAMEL because as a private employment agency, Royal Crown had contractually undertaken full responsibility and liability for the proper use of its license and implementation of employment contracts with recruited workers.
1) Royal Crown Internationale recruited Virgilio Nacionales for employment with ZAMEL as an architectural draftsman in Saudi Arabia, but ZAMEL terminated Nacionales' employment.
2) The POEA and NLRC found Royal Crown and ZAMEL jointly and severally liable to pay Nacionales.
3) The Supreme Court ruled that Royal Crown could be held jointly and severally liable with ZAMEL because as a private employment agency, Royal Crown had contractually undertaken full responsibility and liability for the proper use of its license and implementation of employment contracts with recruited workers.
1) Royal Crown Internationale recruited Virgilio Nacionales for employment with ZAMEL as an architectural draftsman in Saudi Arabia, but ZAMEL terminated Nacionales' employment.
2) The POEA and NLRC found Royal Crown and ZAMEL jointly and severally liable to pay Nacionales.
3) The Supreme Court ruled that Royal Crown could be held jointly and severally liable with ZAMEL because as a private employment agency, Royal Crown had contractually undertaken full responsibility and liability for the proper use of its license and implementation of employment contracts with recruited workers.
1) Royal Crown Internationale recruited Virgilio Nacionales for employment with ZAMEL as an architectural draftsman in Saudi Arabia, but ZAMEL terminated Nacionales' employment.
2) The POEA and NLRC found Royal Crown and ZAMEL jointly and severally liable to pay Nacionales.
3) The Supreme Court ruled that Royal Crown could be held jointly and severally liable with ZAMEL because as a private employment agency, Royal Crown had contractually undertaken full responsibility and liability for the proper use of its license and implementation of employment contracts with recruited workers.
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
Download as docx, pdf, or txt
You are on page 1/ 1
SOLIDARY LIABILITY OF RECRUITMENT AGENT AND FOREIGN PRINCIPAL/EMPLOYER
ROYAL CROWN INTERNATIONALE vs. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSI0N and VIRGILIO P. NACIONALES G.R. No. 78085, October 16, 1989 CORTES, J.
FACTS: Royal Crown Internationale (Royal Crown) recruited and deployed Virgilio Nacionales (Nacionales) for employment with ZAMEL, Royal Crown’s foreign principal, as an architectural draftsman in Saudi Arabia. However, Zamel terminated the employment of Nacionales. After returning to the PH, Nacionales filed a complaint for illegal termination against Royal Crown and ZAMEL with the POEA. The POEA found Royal Crown and ZAMEL jointly and severally liable to pay Nacionales. On appeal, the NLRC affirmed the order of the POEA. Hence, this petition.
ISSUE: Whether Royal Crown may be held jointly and severally liable with Zamel.
RULING: YES.
Petitioner conveniently overlooks the fact that it had voluntarily assumed solidary liability under the various contractual undertakings it submitted to the Bureau of Employment Services. In applying for its license to operate a private employment agency for overseas recruitment and placement, petitioner was required to submit, among others, a document or verified undertaking whereby it assumed all responsibilities for the proper use of its license and the implementation of the contracts of employment with the workers it recruited and deployed for overseas employment [Section 2(e), Rule V, Book 1, Rules to Implement the Labor Code (1976)]. It was also required to file with the Bureau a formal appointment or agency contract executed by the foreign-based employer in its favor to recruit and hire personnel for the former, which contained a provision empowering it to sue and be sued jointly and solidarily with the foreign principal for any of the violations of the recruitment agreement and the contracts of employment [Section 10 (a) (2), Rule V, Book I of the Rules to Implement the Labor Code (1976)]. Petitioner was required as well to post such cash and surety bonds as determined by the Secretary of Labor to guarantee compliance with prescribed recruitment procedures, rules and regulations, and terms and conditions of employment as appropriate [Section 1 of Pres. Dec. 1412 (1978) amending Article 31 of the Labor Code].
These contractual undertakings constitute the legal basis for holding petitioner, and other private employment or recruitment agencies, liable jointly and severally with its principal, the foreign-based employer, for all claims filed by recruited workers which may arise in connection with the implementation of the service agreements or employment contracts.
