8/10/2019 Lim VS. HMR Phils. Inc. Digest

1/3

CONRADO A. LIM, Petitioner, v.HMR PHILIPPINES, INC., TERESA SANTOS-

CASTRO, HENRY BUNAG AND NELSON CAMILLER, Respondents., G.R. No.

201483, Augu! 04, 2014

"#$!% On February 2001, petitioner (Lim) fled a case or illegal dismissal and

money claims against respondents (H! "#il $nc.) and its o%cers, &eresa '. antos*astro, Henry '. +unag and elson . *amiller. e L- dismissed t#e complaint orlac o merit. On -pril 200/, t#e L!* reersed t#e L- ecision and declared Lim to#ae been illegally dismissed. !espondents ere t#en ordered to pay t#e Lim #isull bacages 3reconed rom #is dismissal on February /, 2001 up to t#epromulgation o t#is ecision.4

Lim and H! "#il $nc. appealed to *-. e *- a%rmed t#e L!* ecision it#modifcation. *onse5uently, H! "#il $nc. appealed to * and as denied.

On eptember 2006, Lim moed or e7ecution. On oember 2006, t#e*omputation and !esearc# 8nit (*!8) o t#e L!* computed t#e bacages rom

February /, 2001, t#e date o t#e illegal dismissal, up to October /1, 2006, t#e dateo actual reinstatement.

H! opposed t#e computation arguing t#at t#e bac ages s#ould be computeduntil -pril 11, 200/ (t#e date o promulgation o t#e L!* decision), as stated in t#edispositie portion o t#e L!* decision, #ic# proided t#at bacages s#all be3reconed rom #is dismissal on February /, 2001 up to t#e promulgation o t#isecision.4 Lim argued t#at t#e body o t#e L!* decision e7plicitly stated t#at #eas entitled to ull bacages rom t#e time #e as illegally dismissed until #isactual reinstatement, #ic# as also in accord it# -rticle 269 o t#e Labor *odeand all preailing :urisprudence.

e L- issued t#e order granting t#e motion or e7ecution fled by Lim. Holding t#att#e bacages s#ould be reconed until -pril 11, 200/ only in accordance it# t#eL!* decision and not up to #is actual reinstatement. e L!* sustained t#ecomputation o t#e L-.

Iu&% ;O bacages s#ould be computed rom t#e time t#e employee asillegal dismissed until #is actual reinstatement.

H&'(< =es. 8nder -rticle 269 o t#e Labor *ode it is clear t#at an illegally dismissedemployee is entitled to #is ull bacages computed rom t#e time #iscompensation as it##eld up to t#e time o #is actual reinstatement, to itedby t#is &itle. -n employee #o is un:ustly dismissed rom or s#all be entitled toreinstatement it#out loss o seniority rig#ts and ot#er priileges and to #is ullbacages, inclusie o alloances, and to #is ot#er benefts or t#eir monetarye5uialent computed rom t#e time #is compensation as it##eld rom #im up tot#e time o #is actual reinstatement.

8/10/2019 Lim VS. HMR Phils. Inc. Digest

2/3

e -pril 200/ L!* decision e7pressly recogni>es t#at Lim is entitled to #is ullbacages until #is actual reinstatement, as ollos