Parties and Case

No.
Petitioner: OSCAR
VILLAMARIA, JR
Respondent: Court of
Appeals and Jerry
Bustamante

Controversy or
Issue
Whether or not the
Labor Arbiter has
jurisdiction over a
complaint for illegal
dismissal in a
boundary-hulog
agreement.

Does NLRC
have
jurisdiction?
YES.

Reason

There is employeremployee relationship in

a boundary-hulog
system. Thus, the Labor
Arbiter and the NLRC
has jurisdiction under
Article 217 of the Labor
Code is limited to
disputes arising from an
employer-employee
relationship which can
only be resolved by
reference to the Labor
Code, other labor
statues of their
collective bargaining
agreement.

Private respondent
Oscar Villamaria, Jr.
was ordered to pay
petitioner Jerry
Bustamante
separation pay
computed from the
time of his
employment up to
the time of
termination based on
the prevailing
minimum wage at the
time of termination;
and, to pay petitioner
Jerry Bustamante
back wages
computed from the
time of his dismissal
up to March 2001
based on the
prevailing minimum
wage at the time of
his dismissal.

YES.

The respondent

The jurisdiction of the

GR No. 165881

Petitioner:

Whether or not the

What happened to
the case

FRANCISCO GUICO
Respondent: HON.
LEONARDO
QUISIMBING
G.R. No. 131750

Regional Director
has jurisdiction
over the case since
the individual
monetary claims of
the 21 employees
exceed P5,000.00.

Secretary held that the

respondent Secretary
jurisdictional limitation
was sustained.
imposed by Article 129
on his visitorial and
enforcement power
under Article 128 (b) of
the Labor Code, as
amended, has been
repealed by Republic Act
No. 7730. He pointed
out that the amendment
"notwithstanding the
provisions of Article 129
and 217 of the Labor
Code to the contrary"
erased all doubts as to
the amendatory nature
of the new law, and in
effect, overturned this
Court's ruling in the case
of Servando's Inc. v.
Secretary of Labor and
Employment.
As the respondent
correctly pointed out,
this Court's ruling in
Servando --- that the
visitorial power of the

Secretary of Labor to
order and enforce
compliance with labor
standard laws cannot be
exercised where the
individual claim exceeds
P5,000.00, can no
longer be applied in
view of the enactment
of R.A. No. 7730
amending Article 128 (b)
of the Labor Code.
Petitioner: GEORG
GROTJAHN GMBH &
CO.
Respondent: HON.
LUCIA VIOLAGO
ISNANI
G.R. No. 109272

Whether or not the

RTC has jurisdiction
over the Collection
Case.

YES.

While the loans and

cash advances were
contracted between
employee and employer
during the subsistence
of their relationship, it
does not follow that
Article 217 of the Labor
Code covers their
relationship.

The SC writes:
Not every dispute
between an employer

The order of the RTC

was reversed and the
collection case was
reinstated.

and employee involves

matters that only labor
arbiters and the NLRC
can resolve in the
exercise of their
adjudicatory or quasijudicial powers. The
jurisdiction of labor
arbiters and the NLRC
under Article 217 of the
Labor Code is limited to
disputes arising from an
employer-employee
relationship which can
only be resolved by
reference to the Labor
Code, other labor
statutes, or their
collective bargaining
agreement.