G.R. No. 198656 - NANCY S. MONTINOLA, VS. PHILIPPINE AIRLINES.D E C I S I O N - Supreme Court E-Library

Ruling

WHEREFORE, premises considered, the petition is DENIED . Respondent NLRCs Decision in NLRC LAC No. 01000263-09 (NLRC NCR CN 08-11137-08), dated June 9, 2009, is AFFIRMED with MODIFICATION in that the award of moral and exemplary damages and attorneys fees to private respondent are deleted . [40] (Emphasis supplied) The Court of Appeals deleted the moral and exemplary damages and attorneys fees stating that: Relevant to the award of moral damages, not every employee who is illegally dismissed or suspended is entitled to damages. Settled is the rule that moral damages are recoverable only where the dismissal or suspension of the employee was attended by bad faith or fraud, or constituted an act oppressive to labor, or was done in a manner contrary to morals, good customs or public policy. Bad faith does not simply mean negligence or bad judgment. It involves a state of mind dominated by ill will or motive. It implies a conscious and intentional design to do a wrongful act for a dishonest purpose or some moral obliquity. The person claiming moral damages must prove the existence of bad faith by clear and convincing evidence for the law always presumes good faith. In the case at bar, there is no showing that PAL was moved by any ill will or motive in suspending private respondent. It is evident that petitioner gave private respondent every opportunity to refute the charges against her and to present her side as part of due process. These negate the existence of bad faith on the part of petitioner. Under the circumstances, we hold that private respondent is not entitled to moral damages and exemplary damages. Furthermore, the Court finds the award of attorneys fees improper. The award of attorneys fees was merely cited in the dispositive portion of the decision without the RTC [sic] stating any legal or factual basis for said award. [41] (Citations omitted) Montinola filed a partial motion for reconsideration, [42] praying that the award of moral and exemplary damages and attorneys fees be reintegrated into the decision. PAL also filed a motion for reconsideration, [43] but its motion sought a complete reversal of the decision. The Court of Appeals denied both motions. [44] Only Montinola sought to continue challenging the Court of Appeals decision through a petition for review on certiorari [45] brought to this court. The sole issue in this case is whether Montinolas illegal suspension entitled her to an award of moral and exemplary damages and attorneys fees. Montinola claims that she is entitled to moral damages because her illegal suspension was attended by bad faith, causing her to suffer mental anguish, fright, serious anxiety, and moral shock. [46] Furthermore, the illegal suspension tarnished her good standing. [47] Prior to this incident and in her 12 years of service, she was never charged administratively. [48] The illegal suspension likewise affected her family because it created a state of uncertainty and adversity. [49] Mont