[53] Guagua National Colleges v.
Court of Appeals (Hernandez) tainted with grave abuse of discretion can the grant of the extraordinary remedy
August 28, 2018| Appeals of certiorari be justified. A voluntary arbitrator by the nature of her functions
acts in a quasi-judicial capacity. There is no reason why her decisions involving
PETITIONER: PILTEL interpretation of law should be beyond this Court's review.
RESPONDENTS: Radiomarine Network, Inc.
The petition for review was filed in time, and cannot be dismissed just
SUMMARY: because the decision of the VA is final and executory.
Under Section 5(2) of Republic Act No. 6728 (Government Assistance To
Students and Teachers In Private Education Act), 70% of the increase in tuition The petition for review shall be filed within 15 days pursuant to Section
fees shall go to the payment of salaries, wages, allowances and other benefits of 4, Rules 43 of the Rules of Court; the 10-day period under Article 276 of the
the teaching and non-teaching personnel. Pursuant to this provision, the Labor Code refers to the filing of a motion for reconsideration vis-à-vis the
petitioner imposed a 7% increase of its tuition fees for school year 2006-2007. Voluntary Arbitrator's decision or award.
Shortly thereafter, and in order to save the depleting funds of the petitioner's The rule, therefore, is that a Voluntary Arbitrator's award or decision
Retirement Plan, its Board of Trustees approved the funding of the retirement shall be appealed before the Court of Appeals within 10 days from receipt of the
program out of the 70% net incremental proceeds arising from the tuition fee award or decision. Should the aggrieved party choose to file a motion for
increases. Respondents GNC-Faculty Labor Union and GNC Non-Teaching reconsideration with the Voluntary Arbitrator, the motion must be filed within
Maintenance Labor Union challenged the petitioner's unilateral decision by the same 10-day period since a motion for reconsideration is filed "within the
claiming that the increase violated Section 5(2) of R.A. No. 6728. period for taking an appeal
The parties referred the matter to voluntary arbitration after failing to settle the
controversy by themselves. FACTS:
Decision of the Voluntary Arbitrator This case focuses on the correct period for appealing the decision or award
of the Voluntary Arbitrator or Panel of Arbitrators. The issue arises because the
After hearing the parties, Voluntary Arbitrator Bacungan rendered his decision decision or award of the Voluntary Arbitrator or Panel of Arbitrators is appealable to
in favor of GNC, holding that retirement benefits fell within the category of the CA by petition for review under Rule 43 of the Rules of Court, which provides a
"other benefits" that could be charged against the 70% net incremental proceeds. period of 15 days from notice of the decision or award within which to file the
petition for review. On the other hand, Article 276 of the Labor Code sets 10 days as
After receiving a copy of the decision the respondents filed an Urgent Motion the period within which the appeal is to be made.
for Extension praying that the CA grant them an extension of 15 days from July
1, 2008, or until July 16, 2008, within which to file their petition for review. The Case
GNC hereby assails by petition for certiorari the resolution where CA
Whether the CA gravely abuse its discretion in denying the denied its Motion to Dismiss filed vis-à-vis the respondents' petition for certiorari.
petitioner's Motion to Dismiss despite the finality of the decision of the Antecedents.
Voluntary Arbitrator pursuant to Article 276 of the Labor Code?
Under Section 5(2) of Republic Act No. 6728 (Government Assistance To
No. There was no grave abuse of discretion because no definite rule as Students and Teachers In Private Education Act), 70% of the increase in tuition fees
to the reglementary period clearly established. Certiorari will not lie in this case. shall go to the payment of salaries, wages, allowances and other benefits of the
CA cannot be faulted for grave abuse of discretion in applying the equitable rule teaching and non-teaching personnel. Pursuant to this provision, the petitioner
on construction in favor of labor. imposed a 7% increase of its tuition fees for school year 2006-2007.
Further, even if the decision of the VA is immediately executory it Shortly thereafter, and in order to save the depleting funds of the petitioner's
remains subject to judicial review through certiorari. However, in this case Retirement Plan, its Board of Trustees approved the funding of the retirement
certiorari will not run because only when the denial of the motion to dismiss is program out of the 70% net incremental proceeds arising from the tuition fee
increases. Respondents GNC-Faculty Labor Union and GNC Non-Teaching There is no reason why her decisions involving interpretation of law should be
Maintenance Labor Union challenged the petitioner's unilateral decision by claiming beyond this Court's review.
that the increase violated Section 5(2) of R.A. No. 6728.
The petition for review was filed in time, and cannot be dismissed just
The parties referred the matter to voluntary arbitration after failing to settle because the decision of the VA is final and executory.
the controversy by themselves.
The petition for review shall be filed within 15 days pursuant to Section 4,
Decision of the Voluntary Arbitrator Rules 43 of the Rules of Court; the 10-day period under Article 276 of the Labor
Code refers to the filing of a motion for reconsideration vis-à-vis the Voluntary
After hearing the parties, Voluntary Arbitrator Bacungan rendered his Arbitrator's decision or award.
decision in favor of GNC, holding that retirement benefits fell within the category of
"other benefits" that could be charged against the 70% net incremental proceeds. The rule, therefore, is that a Voluntary Arbitrator's award or decision shall
be appealed before the Court of Appeals within 10 days from receipt of the award or
After receiving a copy of the decision the respondents filed an Urgent decision. Should the aggrieved party choose to file a motion for reconsideration with
Motion for Extension praying that the CA grant them an extension of 15 days from the Voluntary Arbitrator, the motion must be filed within the same 10-day period
July 1, 2008, or until July 16, 2008, within which to file their petition for review. since a motion for reconsideration is filed "within the period for taking an appeal."
Ruling of the CA
RATIO:
CA granted the extension.
The respondents filed the petition for review on July 16, 2008. ACCORDINGLY, the Court DISMISSES the unmeritorious petition for certiorari;
AFFIRMS the decision promulgated on December 15, 2008 by the Court of Appeals;
Subsequently, the petitioner filed its Motion to Dismiss, asserting that the and DIRECTS the Department of Labor and Employment and the National
decision of the Voluntary Arbitrator had already become final and executory. Conciliation and Mediation Board to revise or amend the Revised Procedural
Guidelines in the Conduct of Voluntary Arbitration Proceedings to amend the
The CA denied the Motion to Dismiss. Revised Procedural Guidelines in the Conduct of Voluntary Arbitration Proceedings
to reflect the foregoing ruling herein.
ISSUE:
Whether the CA gravely abuse its discretion in denying the petitioner's
Motion to Dismiss despite the finality of the decision of the Voluntary Arbitrator
pursuant to Article 276 of the Labor Code.
RULING:
No. There was no grave abuse of discretion because no definite rule as to
the reglementary period clearly established. Certiorari will not lie in this case. CA
cannot be faulted for grave abuse of discretion in applying the equitable rule on
construction in favor of labor.
Further, even if the decision of the VA is immediately executory it remains
subject to judicial review through certiorari. However, in this case certiorari will not
run because only when the denial of the motion to dismiss is tainted with grave abuse
of discretion can the grant of the extraordinary remedy of certiorari be justified. A
voluntary arbitrator by the nature of her functions acts in a quasi-judicial capacity.
