Professional Documents
Culture Documents
11/21/14, 4:29 PM
157
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000149d17811f9f419bca3000a0082004500cc/p/AKF899/?username=Guest
Page 1 of 19
11/21/14, 4:29 PM
_______________
*
SECOND DIVISION.
158
158
trial courts assumption of jurisdiction over the case has become the
law of the case which now binds the petitioners. The law of the
case doctrine has been defined as a term applied to an established
rule that when an appellate court passes on a question and
remands the cause to the lower court for further proceedings, the
question there settled becomes the law of the case upon subsequent
appeal. To note, the CAs decision in CA-G.R. SP No. 43059 has
already attained finality as evidenced by a Resolution of this Court
ordering entry of judgment of said case.
Same; Appeals; Petition for Review; The jurisdiction of the
Supreme Court in a petition for review on certiorari under Rule 45 of
the Revised Rules of Court is limited to reviewing only errors of law,
not of fact, unless the factual findings complained of are devoid of
support by the evidence on record, or the assailed judgment is based
on misapprehension of facts.Equally unavailing for the petitioners
is the review by this Court, via the instant petition, of the factual
findings made by the trial court that the composition of the panel of
arbitrators would, in all probability, work injustice to respondent
Zosa. We have repeatedly stressed that the jurisdiction of this Court
in a petition for review on certiorari under Rule 45 of the Revised
Rules of Court is limited to reviewing only errors of law, not of fact,
unless the factual findings complained of are devoid of support by
the evidence on record, or the assailed judgment is based on
misapprehension of facts.
Same; Same; Pleadings and Practice; Issues not raised below
cannot be resolved on review in higher courts.In this connection,
petitioners attempt to put respondent in estoppel in assailing the
arbitration clause must be struck down. For one, this issue of
estoppel, as likewise noted by the Court of Appeals, found its way
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000149d17811f9f419bca3000a0082004500cc/p/AKF899/?username=Guest
Page 2 of 19
11/21/14, 4:29 PM
for the first time only on appeal. Well-settled is the rule that issues
not raised below cannot be resolved on review in higher courts.
Contracts; Employment Agreements; Contracts of Adhesion;
Employment agreements are usually contracts of adhesion, and any
ambiguity in its provisions is generally resolved against the party
who drafted the document.Employment agreements such as the
one at bar are usually contracts of adhesion. Any ambiguity in its
provisions is generally resolved against the party who drafted the
document. Thus, in the relatively recent case of Phil. Federation of
Credit Cooperatives, Inc. (PFCCI) and Fr. Benedicto Jayoma vs.
NLRC and Victoria Abril, we had the occasion to stress that where
a contract of employment, being a contract of adhesion, is
ambiguous, any ambiguity therein should be construed strictly
against the party who prepared it.
159
159
Page 3 of 19
11/21/14, 4:29 PM
B, Rollo, p. 74.
par. 2 of the Pre-Trial Order dated October 21, 1996, Annex BB,
Rollo, p. 241.
3
160
Page 4 of 19
11/21/14, 4:29 PM
161
Page 5 of 19
11/21/14, 4:29 PM
10
11
12
13
162
Page 6 of 19
11/21/14, 4:29 PM
15
16
17
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000149d17811f9f419bca3000a0082004500cc/p/AKF899/?username=Guest
Page 7 of 19
11/21/14, 4:29 PM
163
163
19
20
21
Page 8 of 19
11/21/14, 4:29 PM
THE
ARBITRATION
CLAUSE
UNDER
THE
EMPLOYMENT
164
164
COURT
ALTED
WITHOUT
OR
IN
EXCESS
OF
COMPLAINT
INSTEAD
OF
REFERRING
THE
SAME
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000149d17811f9f419bca3000a0082004500cc/p/AKF899/?username=Guest
Page 9 of 19
11/21/14, 4:29 PM
165
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000149d17811f9f419bca3000a0082004500cc/p/AKF899/?username=Guest
Page 10 of 19
11/21/14, 4:29 PM
Agreement under the panel of three (3) arbitrators, one for the
plaintiff, one for the defendants, and the third to be chosen by both
the plaintiff and defendants. The other terms, conditions and
23
stipulations in the arbitration clause remain in force and effect.
23
166
Page 11 of 19
11/21/14, 4:29 PM
167
Page 12 of 19
11/21/14, 4:29 PM
Furthermore, the decision of the Court of Appeals in CA-GR. SP No. 43059 affirming the trial courts assumption of
jurisdiction over the case has become the law of the case
which now binds the petitioners. The law of the case
doctrine has been defined as a term applied to an
established rule that when an appellate court passes on a
question and remands the cause to the lower court for
further proceedings, the question there settled
becomes the
27
law of the case upon subsequent appeal. To note, the CAs
decision in CA-G.R. SP No. 43059 has already attained
finality as evidenced by a Resolution of this Court ordering
entry of judgment of said case, to wit:
_______________
25
26
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000149d17811f9f419bca3000a0082004500cc/p/AKF899/?username=Guest
Page 13 of 19
27
11/21/14, 4:29 PM
168
and that the same has, on September 17, 1997, become final and
executory and is hereby recorded in the Book of Entries of
28
Judgments.
Page 14 of 19
11/21/14, 4:29 PM
29
on misapprehension of facts.
Even if procedural rules are disregarded, and a scrutiny
of the merits of the case is undertaken, this Court finds the
trial courts observations on why the composition of the
panel of arbitrators
_______________
28
Rollo, p. 350.
29
Congregation of the Religious of the Virgin Mary vs. CA, 291 SCRA
385 [1998].
169
169
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000149d17811f9f419bca3000a0082004500cc/p/AKF899/?username=Guest
Page 15 of 19
11/21/14, 4:29 PM
170
Page 16 of 19
11/21/14, 4:29 PM
31
Casolita, Sr. vs. Court of Appeals, 275 SCRA 257 [1997]; Manalili vs.
171
Page 17 of 19
11/21/14, 4:29 PM
172
Page 18 of 19
11/21/14, 4:29 PM
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000149d17811f9f419bca3000a0082004500cc/p/AKF899/?username=Guest
Page 19 of 19