Lontoc-Cruz v. Cruz

G.R. No. 201988
October 11, 2017

Whether the psychological conditions of the parties fall under Article 36 of the Family Code to warrant the declaration of nullity of marriage

No.

Psychological incapacity must be characterized by: (a) gravity (i.e., it must be grave and serious such that the party would be incapable of carrying out the ordinary duties required in a marriage); (b) juridical antecedence (i.e., it must be rooted in the history of the party antedating the marriage, although the overt manifestations may emerge only after the marriage); and (c) incurability (i.e., it must be incurable, or even if it were otherwise, the cure would be beyond the means of the party involved)."

"Mere showing of 'irreconcilable differences' and 'conflicting personalities' [as in the present case,] in no wise constitutes psychological incapacity."59 "Nor does failure of the parties to meet their responsibilities and duties as married persons" amount to psychological incapacity. 60 We further elucidated in Yambao v. Republic that the psychological condition should render the subject totally unaware or incognitive of the basic marital obligations.

Sadly, a marriage, even if unsatisfactory, is not a null and void marriage.

Meatworld International, Inc. v. Hechanova

G.R. No. 208053

October 18, 2017

“In constructive dismissal cases, the employer is, concededly, charged with the burden of proving that its conduct and action were for valid and legitimate grounds.”

Respondent was illegally dismissed.

In illegal dismissal cases, the employer bears the burden of proving that the employee’s termination was for a valid or authorized cause. This rule, however, presupposes that the employee was dismissed from service.

The Court finds that although there was no actual dismissal, the failure of petitioner to assign respondent to a specific branch without any justifiable reason constituted illegal dismissal.

Constructive dismissal is defined as a “cessation of work because continued employment is rendered impossible , unreasonable, or unlikely.” Similarly, there is constructive dismissal “when an act of clear discrimination, insensibility, or disdain by an employer has become so unbearable to the employee leaving him with no option but to forego with his continued employment. Simply put, it is a “dismissal in disguise or an act amounting to dismissal but made to appear as if it were not.”

While the Court recognizes that the management has the discretion and prerogative to regulate all aspects of employment which includes the transfer of employees, work assignments, discipline, dismissal and recall of workers, the exercise of power is not absolute as “it must be exercised in good faith and with due regard to the rights of labor.” More important, “management prerogative may not be used as a subterfuge by the employer to rid himself of an undesirable worker.

Did this post help you? Please leave a thumbs up or comment below.