G.R. NO. 161003 - FELIPE O. MAGBANUA, CARLOS DE LA CRUZ, REMY ARNAIZ, BILLY ARNAIZ, ROLLY ARNAIZ, DOMINGO SALARDA, JULIO CAHILIG AND NICANOR LABUEN, VS. RIZALINO UY.D E C I S I O N - Supreme Court E-Library

Ruling

WHEREFORE, having found that public respondent NLRC committed grave abuse of discretion, the Court hereby SETS ASIDE the two assailed Resolutions and REINSTATES the order of the Labor Arbiter dated February 27, 1998 ." [4] The assailed Resolution denied reconsideration. The Facts The CA relates the facts in this wise: "As a final consequence of the final and executory decision of the Supreme Court in Rizalino P. Uy v. National Labor Relations Commission, et. al. (GR No. 117983, September 6, 1996) which affirmed with modification the decision of the NLRC in NLRC Case No. V-0427-93, hearings were conducted [in the National Labor Relations Commission Sub-Regional Arbitration Branch in Iloilo City] to determine the amount of wage differentials due the eight (8) complainants therein, now [petitioners]. As computed, the award amounted to P1,487,312.69 x x x. "On February 3, 1997, [petitioners] filed a Motion for Issuance of Writ of Execution. "On May 19, 1997, [respondent] Rizalino Uy filed a Manifestation requesting that the cases be terminated and closed, stating that the judgment award as computed had been complied with to the satisfaction of [petitioners]. Said Manifestation was also signed by the eight (8) [petitioners]. Together with the Manifestation is a Joint Affidavit dated May 5, 1997 of [petitioners], attesting to the receipt of payment from [respondent] and waiving all other benefits due them in connection with their complaint. x x x x x x x x x "On June 3, 1997, [petitioners] filed an Urgent Motion for Issuance of Writ of Execution wherein they confirmed that each of them received P40,000 from [respondent] on May 2, 1997. "On June 9, 1997, [respondent] opposed the motion on the ground that the judgment award had been fully satisfied. In their Reply, [petitioners] claimed that they received only partial payments of the judgment award. x x x x x x x x x "On October 20, 1997, six (6) of the eight (8) [petitioners] filed a Manifestation requesting that the cases be considered closed and terminated as they are already satisfied of what they have received (a total of P320,000) from [respondent]. Together with said Manifestation is a Joint Affidavit in the local dialect, dated October 20, 1997, of the six (6) [petitioners] attesting that they have no more collectible amount from [respondent] and if there is any, they are abandoning and waiving the same. "On February 27, 1998, the Labor Arbiter issued an order denying the motion for issuance of writ of execution and [considered] the cases closed and terminated x x x. "On appeal, the [National Labor Relations Commission (hereinafter "NLRC")] reversed the Labor Arbiter and directed the immediate issuance of a writ of execution, holding that a final and executory judgment can no longer be altered and that quitclaims and releases are normally frowned upon as contrary to public policy." [5] Ruling of the Court of Appeals The CA held that compromise agreements may be entered into even after a final jud