NLRC Chairman clarifies joint and solidary liability of respondent company and its officers
In a Memorandum dated 27 February 2013, Chairman Gerardo C. Nograles clarifies and reminds all Executive/Labor Arbiters that where there is a finding of joint and solidary liability of respondents, the joint and solidary liability must be clearly stated and the respondents liable must be specifically named in the dispositive portion.
“It has been observed that the dispositive portion of Decisions rendered by some Labor Arbiters does not specify whether the respondents therein are jointly and solidarily liable. The said dispositive portion merely states “respondents are liable x x x,” Nograles said.
“This has caused confusion and delay in the execution of judgments, especially if the appeal is dismissed due to non-perfection,” he added.
Chairman Nograles cited the recent ruling of the Supreme Court in Park Hotel, J’s Playhouse Burgos Corp., Inc. vs. Harbutt, et. al. where it reiterates the doctrine laid down in Alberto Sunio, et. al. vs. NLRC, et. al. and MAM Realty Development Corporation vs. NLRC, et. al. that corporate officers may only be deemed solidarily liable with the corporation for the termination of employees if they acted with malice or bad faith. The term “bad faith” contemplates a “state of mind” affirmatively operating with furtive design or with some motive of self-interest or will or for ulterior purpose.
Accordingly, the Decision should discuss the basis for the joint and solidary liability of the corporate officers.
The NLRC, through the leadership of Chairman Nograles, continues to streamline the procedures pursuant to its commitment of reforming labor adjudication and arbitration.
The NLRC continues to reform labor arbitration and adjudication systems by streamlining procedures and restoring integrity and fairness in the system.
Research, Information and Publications Division
National Labor Relations Commission