Orozco v CA

August 13, 2008

J. Nachura

Subject Area: employer-employee relationship, control test, economic reality test

Facts: Orozco was a columnist of PDI whose column was discontinued. She is now
suing for illegal dismissal as an employee.

Issue: (In the first place) WON a columnist is an employee of the newspaper.

Decision: No.

Ratio:
Control Test - The main determinant of the ee-er relationship is whether the rules
set by the er are meant to control not just the results of the work but also the
means and methods to e used by the hired party in order to achieve the results.
Petitioner was engaged as a columnist for her talent, skill, experience, and unique
viewpoint as a feminist advocate. How she utilized all these in writing her column
was not subject to dictation. Any rules imposed on her as to length of articles, time
of submission, etc. are merely general guidelines dictated by the nature of the
newspaper business itself.

Economic Reality Test – This is especially appropriate when there is no written

agreement, as in this case. The benchmark is the economic dependence of the
worker on the employee.
Petitioner’s main occupation is not as columnist but as women’s rights advocate,
and she also contributes articles to other publications.
Magalang vs. CA
February 26, 2008
J. Nachura

Subject area: CivPro, decisions – final and executor; effect, decisions – coordinate
courts
Facts: Magalang filed for illegal dismissal. NLRC rendered a decision, denied Motion
for Reconsideration of Magalang who filed an appeal with the CA 9th Division; denied
MFR of employer who filed an appeal with the CA 4th Division. CA 9th Division
promulgated decision first, no appeal made. 4th Division subsequently rendered
inconsistent decision.

Issue: WON the decision of the 4th Division is valid

Decision: No.

Ratio:
Various divisions of the CA are, in a sense, coordinate courts, and pursuant to the
policy of judicial stability, a division of the appellate court should not interfere with
the decision of other divisions.

Further, no appeal was interposed against the 9th Division’s decision; therefore, it
already attained finality. When a decision becomes final and executor, the court
loses jurisdiction and not even an appellate court will have the power to review the
said judgment. Just as the losing party has the privilege to file an appeal within the
prescribed period, so does the winner have the correlative right to enjoy the finality
of the decision.