Hana Rea O.

Tamse
CASE DIGESTS
In addition to the EDI case:
EDI STAFFBUILDERS INTERNATIONAL INC. v.
ELEAZAR GRAN

ATCI OVERSEAS CORPORATION, IKDAL and MINISTRY OF

PUBLIC HEALTH KUWAIT v. JOSEFA ECHIN
NLRC and

On the issue of: Whether or not Gran is entitled for backwages?

However, EDI questioned the legality of the award of backwages
and relied mainly on the Declaration signed by Gran which
petitioner claimed that it have been signed voluntarily and freely.
In the case of Land and Housing Development Corporation v.
Esquillo, the Supreme Court held that, the waivers should be
carefully examined, in regard not only to the words and terms
used, but also the factual circumstances under which they
have been executed.
The court finds the waiver and quit claim null and void for the
reason that the salary paid to Gran was unreasonably low and that
the factual circumstances surrounding the execution of the
Declaration would show that Gran did not voluntarily and freely
execute the document. Gran was told to leave Saudi Arabia after
two days and was instructed to pay his own plane ticket. He had
no other choice but to sign such document as he needed the
amount of 2,948.00 Saudi Riyals as payment for his plane ticket
going back to the Philippines.
Furthermore, it ruled that the Declaration purporting to be a
quitclaim and waiver is unenforceable under the Philippine Laws
in the absence of proof of the applicable law of Saudi Arabia. To
reiterate, the party who wants to have a foreign law applied to a
dispute or case has the burden of proving the foreign law.

Facts:
1. Echin was hired by ATCI Overseas Corporation in behalf of
its co-principal Ministry of Public Health Kuwait, Saudi
Arabia as Medical Technologist under a two-year contract
denominated as a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) with
a monthly salary of 1,200.00 USD.
2. Under the MOA, the newly hired employees undergo a
probationary period of one year and are covered by
Kuwaits Civil Service Board Employment.
3. However, Echin was terminated prior to her one year
anniversary with the company as she allegedly did not
pass the probationary period.
4. Echin asked for reconsideration but was denied and
returned to the Philippines shouldering her own fare then
filed a complaint for illegal dismissal.
5. The Labor Arbiter ruled that Echin was illegally dismissed
as petitioners neither showed that there was just cause to
warrant dismissal nor showed that Echin failed to qualify as
a regular employee. Thus, the Labor Arbiter ordered
petitioners to pay 3,600.00 USD representing her salary for
the three months unexpired portion of her contract.
6. The ATCI and Ikdal appealed before NLRC but the latter
affirmed the decision of the Labor Arbiter and consequently
denied the Motion for Reconsideration filed by the
petitioners.
7. The petitioner filed a petition before the Court of Appeals
contending that their principal is a foreign government
agency and, thus, immune from suit and such immunity is
extended to them. Furthermore, petitioners contend that

Hana Rea O. Tamse

CASE DIGESTS
Echin was validly dismissed for her failure to meet the
performance rating within one year period as required
under Kuwaits Civil Service Laws and that Ikdal should not
be held liable as an officer of petitioner ATCI.
8. However, the Court of Appeals affirmed the decision of
NLRC and ruled that:
a. A private employment agency shall assume all
responsibilities for the implementation of the
contract of employment of an overseas worker,
hence, it can be sued jointly and severally with the
foreign principal; and
b. That Ikdal is liable under R.A. 8042, also known as
Migrant and Overseas Filipinos Act, which provides
that officers of a recruitment agency may be sued
jointly and solidarily liable with the recruitment
agency for money claims and damages.
9. Hence, the petition.
On the issue of: Whether or not ATCI Overseas Corporation and
Ikdal are liable given that their foreign principal is a government
agency which is immune from suit?
Yes, ATCI Overseas Corporation and Ikdal are liable.

Although it is true that it was expressly provided in Echins

employment contract that the terms of her agreement shall be
governed by prevailing Kuwaiti Civil Service Laws and
Regulations, however, the party invoking the application of a
foreign law has the burden of proving the law under the doctrine of
processual presumption of which petitioners failed to discharge.
The documents submitted by the petitioners, whether taken singly
or as a whole, do not sufficiently prove that Echin was validly
terminated as a probationary employee under the Kuwaiti Civil
Service Laws because of instead submitting a copy of pertinent
Kuwaiti Labor Laws duly authenticated and translated by Embassy
officials thereat, instead, the petitioners submitted certifications
attesting to the correctness of translations of the MOA and the
termination letter.