BVR & ASSOCIATES
  • HOME
  • OUR SERVICES
  • About
  • Articles
  • LAW
  • CPA REVIEW

a collections of case digests and laws that can help aspiring law students to become a lawyer


Montemayor v. Araneta University Foundation, 77 SCRA 321 (1977)

10/28/2020

0 Comments

 
Montemayor v. Araneta University Foundation, 77 SCRA 321 (1977) ​

FACTS:
  • Felix Montemayor was a full-time professor of Araneta University Foundation (AUF) who was complained for immorality by the Chaplain of the AUF on 17 April 1974, Then President, Dr. Juan Salcedo, Jr., created a committee to investigate the charge. The accusation centered on conversations on sex and immoral advances committed against the person of Leonardo de Lara.
  • The first hearing on 24 April 1974 was attended by Montemayor, de Lara and his two (2) witnesses. Montemayor sought the postponement of the investigation to 3 May 1974, which was granted. On 28 May 1974, he filed a motion to dismiss or to hold the hearing in abeyance, and on 17 June 1974, he filed an affidavit to sustain his defense. On 8 July 1974, the report and recommendation of the investigating committee came, recommending his demotion in rank by one degree.
  • On 8 November 1974, new charges were filed against Montemayor for conduct unbecoming of a faculty member and another committee was appointed. Montemayor moved to postpone the hearing set for 18 and 19 November 1974, but was denied. The hearing proceeded in his absence.
  • On 5 December 1974, the Committee submitted its report finding the charges against Montemayor to have been sufficiently established. On 10 December 1974, his dismissal was ordered effective 15 November 1974, the date of his preventive suspension.On 12 December 1974, the University filed with the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) a report of his suspension and application for clearance to terminate his employment.
  • Meanwhile, on 21 November 1974, Montemayor in turn lodged a complaint with the NLRC against AUF for reinstatement and payment of back wages and salaries, with all the privileges, benefits and increments attendant thereto. There was a motion to dismiss on the part of the latter but both the labor arbiter and the NLRC found in favor of Montemayor. He was ordered reinstated to his former position with back wages and without loss of seniority and other privileges.
  • Montemayor's complaint for unfair labor practice was, however, dismissed. AUF appealed to the Secretary of Labor who, on 14 July 1976, set aside the Commission's order for his reinstatement, finding Montemayor's dismissal justified. The AUF was, however, required to pay Montemayor the amount of P14,480.00 representing the latter's accrued back wages which the former voluntarily offered to extend him. Dissatisfied with the Secretary's decision, Montemayor filed a petition for certiorari.
 
ISSUE: 
 
Whether or not Montemayor was absolutely denied of due process in the proceedings relating to his dismissal from AUF
 
RULING:
 No.
In procedural due process, there must be a hearing before condemnation, with the investigation to proceed in an orderly manner, and judgment to be rendered only after such inquiry. Academic due process, a term coined, is a system of procedure designed to yield the best possible judgment when an adverse decision against a professor may be the consequence with stress on the clear, orderly, and fair way of reaching a conclusion. Every university or college teacher should be entitled before dismissal or demotion, to have the charges against him stated in writing, in specific terms and to have a fair trial on these charges before a special or permanent judicial committee of the faculty or by the faculty at large. At such trial the teacher accused should have full opportunity to present evidence. Herein, the procedure followed in the first investigation of Montemayor (June 1974) satisfied the procedure due process requisite. The second investigation (November 1974), however, did not. The motion for postponement therein was denied, the hearing proceeded as scheduled in the absence of Montemayor, and the committee lost no time in submitting its report finding the charges against Montemayor to have been sufficiently established and recommending his removal. The deficiency, however, was remedied, as Montemayor was able to present his case before the Labor Commission. Denial of due process happened only in the proceeding he had before the investigating committees and not in the proceedings before the NLRC wherein he was given the fullest opportunity to present his case, the latter being the subject matter of the petition for certiorari. Montemayor was afforded his day in court.

0 Comments



Leave a Reply.

    Archives

    January 2021
    December 2020
    November 2020
    October 2020
    September 2020
    August 2020
    July 2020
    June 2020
    April 2020
    March 2020
    October 2019
    September 2019
    August 2019
    March 2018

    Categories

    All
    Agrarian Law
    Articles-of-incorporation
    By-laws
    Constitutional Law
    Criminal Law
    Law
    Persons And Family Relations

    RSS Feed

Copyright Notice
Copyright © – 2020, All Rights Reserved.

Disclaimer
This  project primarily designed to assist students of law  and accounting in their studies. It is merely a tool. The use of our Services does not guarantee success in obtaining a law/accounting degree nor in passing the Bar/Board Exams. We makes no warranties or representations of any kind, whether expressed or implied for the Services provided.
The cases, laws, and other publications found in this site are of public domain, collected from public sources such as the Supreme Court online library. The content however have been heavily modified, formatted, and optimized for better user experience, and are no longer perfect copies of their original. We gives no warranty for the accuracy or the completeness of the materials. We also reserves the right to further improve, add, modify, or remove content with or without prior announcements.
This site also contains materials published by the students, professors, lawyers, and other users of the our Services. These materials are owned by such users and of their sole responsibility. While we may review user-published content, please do not assume that content you are accessing has been reviewed or curated. You may report abusive content through the listed contact details.
We does not guarantee against any loss or damage caused by third persons, delays, interruptions, unavailability, or by the termination of its Services.
We reserves the right to amend the terms and policies for its Services.

Terms of Service
By using our Services, you are agreeing to these terms. Please read them carefully.
Access our Services only through the interface and instructions provided. Do not misuse the Services, or use them in such ways that may interfere their availability, or in ways that may cause discredit to you, your school, or your profession.
These terms do not give you ownership of any intellectual property rights to the content you access on our Services. Do not use content from our Services other than for personal purposes unless you obtain permission from its owner or are otherwise permitted by law. Do not remove, obscure, or alter any legal notices and attributions displayed in or along with our Services.
We may send you service announcements, administrative messages, and other information. You may opt out of some of those communications.
Our Services are designed to be accessible on mobile devices. Do not use such Services in a way that distracts you and prevents you from obeying traffic or safety laws.
We may suspend or stop providing our Services to you if you do not comply with these terms and policies or if we are investigating suspected misconduct.

Privacy
Some services require you to login or register with minimal personal information this site.
Collected Information
Collected information includes user name, email address, Facebook ID and photo. The user may also optionally provide school, year level, BAR year, profession, office, address, and other information which may assist in improving our Services.
Uses of the Information
The collected information will only be used in connection with the use or for the improvement of our Services.
Users Created Content
Content created by users are published and shared for public use. Published content is always attributed to the author through his user account. A user may remain anonymous by changing his "display name" under his profile.
Data Analytics
We conducts data analytics for the improvement of the usability and design of our Services and the user experience. These may include but not limited to tracking time spent on the site, services availed, number of contents created or shared.

Content
Our Services allow you to create casebooks, digests, outlines, notes, and other content. You retain ownership of intellectual property rights that you hold in that content.
When you create content through our Services, you give us (and those we work with) a worldwide license to use, host, store, reproduce, modify, create derivative works, communicate, publish, publicly perform, publicly display and distribute such content. This license continues even if you stop using our Services (for example: your list of cases, digests, and outlines in your casebooks).
Make sure you have the necessary rights to grant us this license for any content that you submit to our Services.
We reserves the right to review your published content and may remove materials that are offensive, abusive, of no value, or not in line with the purpose of our Services. The amount of content or materials that you publish may be limited by us.
We also used cookies in our website.

Contact Us
  • HOME
  • OUR SERVICES
  • About
  • Articles
  • LAW
  • CPA REVIEW