FIRST DIVISION
[G.R. No. 213995. December 3, 2014.]
AUREA G. LIYAG, MARLON PITAO, ARRA F. BALONZO, JOAN CUYO, ODELON B. PABILONIA, AMELIA G. TAIÑO, ARNOLD L. LEBRILLA, EFREN PEREZ, ALFREDO B. ABEJAR, MELCHOR T. FELICIANO, JR., JOEL T. TAYAMORA, ARDEN T. VALENTE, ARNELO P. ESTRELLADO, SR., MERLYN CANCERAN, IRENE B. ABIJAR, ANVIE RABUTAZO, LUCITA M. LEBRILLA, ROSIE RAMIREZ, ERICKSON B. CUSTODIO, JOSELITO V. GOJAS, LITA RODILLAS, AND ROMNICK A. MARINAS, petitioners,vs. PK PARADISE RESORT, SOON SHIN LEE, AND JINKY LEE, respondents.
NOTICE
Sirs/Mesdames :
Please take notice that the Court, First Division, issued a Resolution datedDecember 3, 2014which reads as follows: HEITAD
"G.R. No. 213995 (Aurea G. Liyag, Marlon Pitao, Arra F. Balonzo, Joan Cuyo, Odelon B. Pabilonia, Amelia G. Taiño, Arnold L. Lebrilla, Efren Perez, Alfredo B. Abejar, Melchor T. Feliciano, Jr., Joel T. Tayamora, Arden T. Valente, Arnelo P. Estrellado, Sr., Merlyn Canceran, Irene B. Abijar, Anvie Rabutazo, Lucita M. Lebrilla, Rosie Ramirez, Erickson B. Custodio, Joselito V. Gojas, Lita Rodillas, and Romnick A. Marinas v. PK Paradise Resort, Soon Shin Lee, and Jinky Lee). — The petitioners' motion for an extension of thirty (30) days within which to file a petition for review on certiorari is GRANTED, counted from the expiration of the reglementary period.
After a judicious perusal of the records, the Court resolves to DENY the instant petition and AFFIRM the August 30, 2013 and August 26, 2014 Resolutions 1 of the Court of Appeals (CA) in CA-G.R. SP No. 131128 for failure to sufficiently show that the CA committed any reversible error in holding respondent PK Paradise Resort solely liable for the monetary awards of petitioners.
As correctly held by the CA, no grave abuse of discretion can be attributed to the National Labor Relations Commission in absolving Soon Shin Lee and Jinky Lee from any personal liability in the absence of evidence showing that they acted maliciously and in bad faith. It is settled that the following requisites must be present in order to hold an officer personally liable for corporate obligations, i.e., 1) complainant must allege in the complaint that the director or officer assented to patently unlawful acts of the corporation, or that the officer was guilty of gross negligence or bad faith; and, 2) complainant must clearly and convincingly prove such unlawful acts, negligence or bad faith, 2 both of which are absent in this case.
Moreover, findings of fact of the labor tribunals, as affirmed by the CA, are generally binding and conclusive upon the Court, 3 and are not to be disturbed unless they fall under the recognized exceptions, 4 which do not obtain in this case.
The Court of Appeals and the National Relations Commission are DELETED as party respondents in this case pursuant to Sec. 4, Rule 45, 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure, as amended.
SO ORDERED."
Very truly yours,
(SGD.) EDGAR O. ARICHETADivision Clerk of Court
Footnotes
1.Rollo, pp. 26-31 and 33-34, respectively. Penned by Associate Justice Myra V. Garcia-Fernandez with Associate Justices Magdangal M. de Leon and Stephen C. Cruz, concurring.
2.Francisco v. Mallen, Jr., G.R. No. 173169, September 22, 2010, 631 SCRA 118, 123-124; citations omitted.
3.Acevedo v. Advanstar Company, Inc., 511 Phil. 279, 287 (2005).
4.Cirtek Employees Labor Union-Federation of Free Workers v. Cirtek Electronics, Inc., G.R. No. 190515, June 6, 2011, 650 SCRA 656, 660.