No.

16

a. Robbie is correct. The attorneys fees of 10% is an award

based on the amount of wages recovered. This is what is
expressly written in Art. 111 of the Labor Code. In this case,
the basis for the award of attorneys fees include the award
for damages in addition to recovered wages. The
computation for attorneys fees should not include the award
for damages.
b. Robbie is incorrect. Even if Apollo does not claim for
payment of interests, the court in the exercise of its sound
discretion may award said interest.

No. 18

a. This question is from the case of Fontera Brands Phils., Inc. vs.
Leonardo Largado and Teotimo Estrellado (G.R. No. 205300, March
18, 2015).

No. They are employees of Wave by the time they were

dismissed. This is because the have resigned from Style
when the latter has severed its ties with Empire, and
consequently sent their application with Wave who in turn
hired them for a period of 5 months. Wave is a legitimate job
contractor.
b. No. the TMRs were hired by Wave as fixed term EEs. The
TMRs, by accepting the conditions of the contract with
Wave, were well aware of and even acceded to the condition
that their employment thereat will end on said pre-
determined date of termination. They cannot now argue that
they were illegally dismissed by the latter when it refused to
renew their contracts after its expiration. This is so since the
non-renewal of their contracts is a management prerogative,
and failure of respondents to prove that such was done in
bad faith militates against their contention that they were
 illegally dismissed. The expiration of their contract withWave
simply caused the natural cessation of their fixed-term
employment thereat.

No. 19. Yes. an appeal from a judgment as that involved in the

present case is perfected only upon the posting of a cash or
surety bond. Accessories Specialist, Inc. v. Alabanza enlightens:

The posting of a bond is indispensable to the perfection of

an appeal in cases involving monetary awards from the
decision of the LA. The intention of the lawmakers to make
the bond a mandatory requisite for the perfection of an
appeal by the employer is clearly limned in the provision that
an appeal by the employer may be perfected only upon the
posting of a cash or surety bond. The word only makes it
perfectly plain that the lawmakers intended the posting of a
cash or surety bond by the employer to be the essential and
exclusive means by which an employers appeal may be
perfected. The word may refers to the perfection of an
appeal as optional on the part of the defeated party, but not
to the compulsory posting of an appeal bond, if he desires to
appeal. The meaning and the intention of the legislature in
enacting a statute must be determined from the language
employed; and where there is no ambiguity in the words
used, then there is no room for construction.

The filing of the bond is not only mandatory but also a

jurisdictional requirement that must be complied with in order to
confer jurisdiction upon the NLRC. Non-compliance therewith
renders the decision of the LA final and executory. This
requirement is intended to assure the workers that if they prevail
in the case, they will receive the money judgment in their favor
upon the dismissal of the employers appeal. It is intended to
discourage employers from using an appeal to delay or evade
their obligation to satisfy their employees just and lawful claims.

20.

A. No. Project employment has been defined as employment fixed

for a specific project or undertaking, the completion or termination of which
has been determined at the time of the engagement of the employee. In
this case, no such determination has been made with regard to the duration
of the employment based on completion of the project. Instead, the
termination of employment is based on the clients withdrawal of the project
which is not determined as to its date. Mario Brothers cannot stipulate such
condition on a contract of employment because it would be contrary to
public policy. A contract of employment is one impressed with public
interest, thus the employer cannot stipulate on the contract something
which would exempt it from liabilities and from giving its employees a
regular status.

B. yes. Whether Mario Bros. is a labor only contractor or an

independent job contractor, the principal which is Axis is liable to
the unpaid wages of the employees of Mario Bros. when the latter
fails to do so.