Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
vs PAL
In July 2003, petitioner and several female cabin crews, in a letter, manifested
that the provision in CBA on compulsory retirement is discriminatory. On July
2004, petitioners filed a Special Civil Action for Declaratory Relief with
issuanceof TRO with the RTC Makati. The RTC issued a TRO. After the denial of
the respondent on itsmotion for reconsideration for the TRO, it filed a Petition
with the CA. CA granted respondent’s petition and ordered lower court to
dismiss the case. Hence, this petition.
Issue: Whether or not the regular courts has jurisdiction over the case.
Being an ordinary civil action, the same is beyond the jurisdiction of labor
tribunals.The said issue cannot be resolved solely by applying the Labor Code.
Rather, it requires the application of the Constitution, labor statutes, law on
contracts and the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination
Against Women, and the power to apply and interpret the constitution and
CEDAW is within the jurisdiction of trial courts, a court of general jurisdiction.
In GeorgGrotjahn GMBH & Co. v. Isnani, this Court held that not every dispute
between an employer and employee involves matters that only labor arbiters
and the NLRC can resolve in the exercise of their adjudicatory or quasi-judicial
powers. The jurisdiction of labor arbiters and the NLRC under Article 217 of
the Labor Code is limited to dispute arising from an employer-employee
relationship which can only be resolved by reference to the Labor Code other
labor statutes, or their collective bargaining agreement