Saturday, June 21, 2008 Appeal Memorandum By Dominador A. Almirante Labor Case Digest
IN his appeal from the decision of the labor arbiter to the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC), private respondent Eleazar Gran failed to furnish petitioner EDI a copy of his Appeal Memorandum. For this failure, the NLRC dismissed his appeal.
Did the NLRC err?
Ruling: Yes.
The failure to give a copy of the appeal to the adverse party was a mere formal lapse, an excusable neglect. Time and again
We have acted on petitions to review decisions of the Court
The failure to give a copy of the appeal to the adverse party was a mere formal lapse, an excusable neglect. Time and again We have acted on petitions to review decisions of the Court of Appeals even in the absence of proof of service of a copy thereof to the Court of Appeals as required by Section 1 of Rule 45, Rules of Court. We act on the petitions and simply require the petitioners to comply with the rule.
Accordingly, in such situation, the appeal should not be dismissed; however, it should not be given due course either. As enunciated in J.D. Magpayo, the duty that is imposed on the NLRC, in such a case, is to require the appellant to comply with the rule that the opposing party should be provided with a copy of the appeal memorandum.
While Gran’s failure to furnish EDI with a copy of the Appeal Memorandum is excusable, the abject failure of the NRLC to order Gran to furnish EDI with the Appeal Memorandum constitutes grave abuse of discretion. (EDI-Staffbuilders International, Inc. vs. NLRC, G.R. No. 145587, October 26, 2007 quoting J.D. Magpayo Customs Brokerage Corp. v. NLRC, 118 SCRA 645, 646).
