Sarapat v. Salanga

AUSTRIA-MARTINEZ, J.:

Before the Court is a Petition for Review on Certiorari under Rule 45 of the Rules of Court assailing the Decision1 dated January 29, 2002 of the Court of Appeals (CA) in CA-G.R. SP No. 63688 which denied petitioners' Petition for Certiorari and the CA Resolution2 dated June 27, 2002 which denied petitioners' Motion for Reconsideration. The factual background of the case is as follows: Felizardo B. Sarapat, Amelita Durian and Fermin G. Castillo (petitioners) are President, Treasurer and Director, respectively, of the Philippine Veterans Bank Employees Union-National Union of Bank Employees (PVBEU-NUBE). Sylvia Salanga and Liwayway Silapan (respondents) are members of PVBEU-NUBE.

Sometime in 1985, the Philippine Veterans Bank (PVB) went bankrupt and was placed under receivership/liquidation by the Central Bank. As a result, the services of PVB employees were terminated. When PVB re-opened in 1992, the PVB employees were not re-hired.

Thus, PVBEU-NUBE filed a notice of strike and cases of unfair labor practice against PVB before the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) . On January 26, 1996, PVB and PVBEU-NUBE entered into a Compromise Agreement for the amicable settlement of all their cases and claims then pending with the NLRC and other tribunals. The total financial settlement granted to PVBEU-NUBE amounted to ₱35,000,000.00, 10% thereof as attorney's fees, and 5% thereof as special assessment fee to be deducted from the settlement amount of each member to defray the expenses incurred by the union in the prosecution of the labor cases.

On April 10, 1996, respondents, in their behalf and in behalf of 43 other PVBEU-NUBE members, filed with the Department of Labor and Employment-National Capital Region (DOLE-NCR) a petition3 requesting an audit of the finances of the PVBEU-NUBE. Specifically, the request requires a separate and full accounting of the ₱600,000.00 representing the special assessment fee of 5% of the first installment of ₱12,000,000.00 of the Compromise Agreement.4 Pre-audit conferences were called. However, despite notices and directives served upon petitioners for them to appear and submit pertinent documents for the audit, they failed to do so.

On April 23, 1999, DOLE-NCR Regional Director Maximo B. Lim issued an Order5 directing petitioners to open the union books of account to the respondents and to hold a general membership meeting to explain the financial status of the union to the members. Petitioners filed an appeal with the Bureau of Labor Relations (BLR) questioning the Order calling for the conduct of a general membership meeting.6 On September 22, 1999, the parties were summoned to a conference by the BLR. At said conference, the parties agreed that the case be limited to the audit and accounting of all litigation expenses incurred by the union, upon which the 5% special assessment fee was based.

They also admitted that the conduct of a general membership meeting of 529 members was no longer feasible because of the dissolution of the union and the termination of the members' employment in PVB. On March 17, 2000, the BLR issued an Order7 taking cognizance of the requested audit and accounting of the litigation expenses incurred by the union in the prosecution of its labor cases, considering that a general membership meeting was no longer feasible. Since petitioners did not submit any documents to the Regional Office in support of the alleged litigation expenses despite repeated summons made upon them, the BLR gave them a final chance to submit such documents.

The BLR also required PVBEU-NUBE to comment on the petition since ₱1,372,953.00, part of the ₱12,000,000.00 special assessment fee, was allegedly remitted to PVBEU-NUBE.

On April 25, 2000, the parties and PVBEU-NUBE were summoned to appear before the BLR. At said conference, Jose P. Umali, representing PVBEU-NUBE, denied participation in the preparation and execution of the Compromise Agreement relative to the PVBEU-NUBE cases with the NLRC, as well as receipt of a check from PVB or PVBEU-NUBE representing the 5% special assessment fee referred to in the Compromise Agreement. On the other hand, petitioner Sarapat stated that the litigation expenses incurred by PVBEU-NUBE was not limited to the NLRC but included the Supreme Court, the Office of the Secretary of Labor and Employment, and the NCR Arbitration Branch of the NLRC.

He requested a period of 20 days or until May 8, 2000 within which to submit the necessary documents to support the alleged litigation expenses. On May 9, 2000, petitioners filed their Compliance,8 attaching a Statement of Receipts and Disbursements for the period June 15, 1985 to December 31, 1999, indicating the following disbursements: Representation and entertainment ₱1,282,750.00 Gasoline Expense 110,756.75 Membership dues - NUBE 160,000.00 Legal Fees 883,720.00 Christmas Gifts 50,750.25 Office supplies 19,665.35 Advertisement 20,000.00 Research Expenses 10,000.00 Telegrams and Postage 7,546.65 Notarial and other fees 5,000.00 Transcript/clerical fees 5,000.00 Filing/appeal fees 10,000.00 Miscellaneous expenses (streamers) 15,000.00