Pacific Asia Overseas Shipping vs NLRC and Rances

Pacific Asia is an overseas employment agency that provided Rances

work abroad. Rances was engaged by Gulf-East Ship Management a
Radio Operator but due to insubordination he was dismissed our months
later. According to Rances he sued Gulf-East in Dubai and the Gulf-East
compromised with him that instead of paying him $9k+ they’ll just pay him
$5.5k plus his fare going home to the Philippines plus if in case the wife
does not agree with the amount of the allowance being sent to her via
Pacific Asia, Rances is entitled to have $1.5k more from pacific Asia.
Back in the Philippines, Rances was sued by Pacific Asia for acts
unbecoming of a marine officer (due in part to his insubordination to
Pacific Asia’s client). Rances filed a counterclaim for the $1.5k as his wife
did not agree with the monthly allowance sent by Pacific Asia to her.
POEA ruled in favor of Pacific Asia but did not rule on Rances’
counterclaim. Rances then filed a separate case for his $1.5k claim.
Rances produced the original copy of the Dubai court decision awarding
him the compromised amount of $5.5k. The said court decision was in
Arabic but it came with an English translation. It also came with a
certification from a certain Mohd Bin Saleh who was purportedly an
Honorary Consul for the Philippines. This time he won.
Pacific Asia appealed but its appeal was one day late after the
reglementary period. POEA denied the appeal. NLRC likewise denied the
appeal.

ISSUE: Whether or not Pacific Asia can be allowed to appeal.

HELD:
Yes. The delay was due to an excusable mistake. Apparently, there
was a mistake in the filing of the appeal when the new messenger
honestly thought that the appeal was supposed to be filed in NLRC
Intramuros but actually it was supposed to be in POEA Ortigas (that
happened to be the last day as well, and when he was advised to go to
Ortigas, offices were already closed).

Also, on the merits; POEA has no jurisdiction to enforce foreign judgments.

It’s the regular courts that have jurisdiction. The POEA is not a court; it is an
administrative agency exercising, inter alia, adjudicatory or quasi-judicial
functions. Further, Rances is not suing on the strength of an employer-
employee relationship between him and Gulf-East, but rather on the
strength of a foreign judgment.

And, even if the POEA has jurisdiction over the matter, it cannot
take in evidence the alleged original copy o the court decision from
Dubai as it was not properly authenticated pursuant to the Rules of Court
(Sect 25, 26 Rule 132). The translation was also not duly authenticated.
And an honorary consul is not authorized to make authentication of
foreign public records.