Tiong King v CIR

Chester Cabalza recommends his visitors to please read the original & full text of the case cited. Xie xie

TIONG KING, petitioner,
vs.
COURT OF INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS and THE NATIONAL TAILOR'S ASSOCIATION, respondents

G.R. No. L-3587
December 21, 1951

Facts:

Gaw Pun So owned and operated a tailor shop known as the Army Shirt Factory, located in his own house at Nos. 231-245 Soler Street, Manila. In January, 1948, he had a labor dispute with his personnel and, pending the case in the Court of Industrial Relations, Gaw Pun So, irked and worried by the incidents of litigation, thought of dissolving the business and selling the sewing machines. Tiong King offered to take over the business by leasing the place and the sewing machines. The transfer was put in writing. Tiong King continued the Army Shirt Factory from the month of February with the same employees had by Gaw Pun So. This transfer was known to the personnel, so much so that the latter, as petitioner in the pending dispute in the Court of Industrial Relations, prayed that Tiong King be included as a respondent. In due time, the National Tailors Association entered that all cases were terminated against the respondents. This agreement was duly approved by the Court of Industrial Relations.

On April 27, 1948, Tiong King filed a petition in the Court of Industrial Relations Case No. 117-V-3, alleging that since he operated his shop in February, 1948, he had continually suffered losses; that as there remained only very little of the capital originally invested, and that he was definitely closing the shop on May 30, 1948. Tiong King accordingly prayed that he be allowed to close his tailor shop and business from six o'clock in the afternoon of May 29, 1948. On May 29, 1948, Presiding Judge Arsenio C. Roldan of the Court of Industrial Relations issued an order enjoining Tiong King not to close his factory and not to dismiss, suspend or lay off any laborer or employee without previous authority of said court.

Upon petitioner for reconsideration filed by counsel for Tiong King, the Court of Industrial Relations promulgated a resolution dated May 27, 1949, allowing Tiong King to close his business and shop, subject to the condition that, upon reopening the same, his former personnel would be taken back.

Upon motion for reconsideration filed by counsel for the National Tailor's Association, the Court of Industrial Relations, promulgated a resolution dated October 31, 1949, reaffirming their stand on the resolution of the Court of Industrial Relations under date of July 1, 1949.

The present appeal by certiorari was taken by Tiong King against the last resolution of the Court of Industrial Relations.

Issue:

Whether he was the owner or operator thereof and had the right to file the petition in the Court of Industrial Relations to close the tailor’s shop?

Held:

Upon this point, it is only sufficient to recall that the National Tailors Association entered into a stipulation with Tiong King alone whereby they agreed that all cases against the former owners of the business were terminated. That Tiong King was conceded to be the owner and operator of the army shirt factory at the time his petition to close it was filed, is conclusively borne out by the fact that Presiding Judge Roldan in his decision of January 13, 1949, ordered Tiong King, and not Gaw Pun So, to pay the salaries and wages of the personnel.

It is contended, however, that "If at all the court has approved of the agreement between the National Tailors' Association and Mr. Tiong King it was because — 'this arrangement is a very good solution to the present conflict as it is advantageous not only to the union but also the management, and, is in consonance with the contract entered into between the management and the new workers." This contention is followed with the remark that the approval of said agreement did not include a finding that Tiong King was either the owner or the lessee of the Army Shirt Factory. We are unable to agree. In entering into the agreement with the National Tailors Association, Tiong King acted in his own behalf, regardless of the former owners of the business. Indeed, it was covenanted that all the cases against the latter were deemed terminated. Considerations of fair play and justice demand that Tiong King be given the full legal effect of said agreement which before the sanction of the Court of Industrial Relations.

There being no question that Tiong King's capital invested in the Army Shirt Factory was almost exhausted at the time of the filing of his petition to close it, said petition must necessity be granted. It is admitted by all the Judges of the Court of Industrial Relations that an employer may close his business, provided the same is done in good faith and is due beyond his control. To rule otherwise, would be oppressive and inhuman.

Wherefore, reversing the resolution of the Court of Industrial Relations dated October 31, 1949, we hereby affirm the resolution of said court dated May 27, 1949. So ordered without costs.

Bengzon, Montemayor, Jugo, and Bautista Angelo, JJ., concur.

Reyes, J., concurs in the result.

Acknowledgement: Lanie Bornilla