Saturday, May 10, 2008 Appeal bond By Dominador A. Almirante Labor case digest
PETITIONERS timely filed their Appeal Memorandum in connection with their appeal from the decision of he labor arbiter to the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) within the 10-day reglementary period. Instead of posting a cash or surety bond, they filed a Motion to Reduce Appeal Bond on the grounds that it is too costly and will entail unnecessary expense considering the strong possibility of a reversal of the appealed decision. The required appeal bond was filed only four days after the expiration of the 10-day period.
The appeal was dismissed by the NLRC. Did the NLRC err?
Ruling: No.
It bears to emphasize that the appeal of a decision involving the monetary award in labor cases may be perfected only upon posting of a cash or surety bond. Nowhere in the Labor Code or in the NLRC Rules of Procedure can we find that the filing of a motion to reduce the appeal bond stays the finality of a decision. On the contrary, Section 6, Rule VI of the New NLRC Rules of Procedure explicitly states that “the filing of the motion to reduce bond shall not stop the running of the period to perfect appeal.” It is a well-settled rule in statutory construction that when the law is clear, it leaves no room for interpretation.
Petitioner’s theory of substantial compliance totally transgresses the basic principle that the finality of a decision is a jurisdictional event that cannot be made to depend on the convenience of the party. To allow the party to determine at his discretion when to post an appeal bond, which is a necessary requisite in the perfection of an appeal, wound in effect, unduly delay the running of the period for a decision to attain its finality, thereby completely negating the purpose of the rule on the completeness of service, which is to place the date of receipt of pleadings, judgments and processes beyond the power of the party being served to determine at his pleasure.
(Colby Construction and Management Corporation, et. al. vs. NLRC, et. al., G.R. No. 170099, Nov. 28, 2007).
