Dear Atty. Shalie,

My husband was an employee of a transport company here in Manila. Before the pandemic, he was subject of an administrative case in his employment. In the course of the administrative case, he was given the penalties of suspension twice. Later, he was no longer given work, until he was being asked to pay a certain amount by his employer, in order for him to resume his driving duties. He could not raise the said amount and hence, continued to be without any assignment, and hence, could not earn a living. He decided to file a case against his employer for illegal dismissal. Unfortunately, while the case was on-going, my husband passed on, without the resolution on his case. We were advised that the case would no longer proceed, because of the death of my husband. Is it true that we could no longer pursue the case, because my husband’s death also terminated his employer’s liability?

Annette

Dear Annette,

Your husband’s case may proceed, despite his death. The Supreme Court has ruled that an illegal dismissal case, is unlike an ordinary civil action, as an employment contract is one imbued with public interest and subject to special laws on labor, and thus, not merely private and individual or personal, but also public. Any violation of an employment contract would necessarily be of public interest. An illegal dismissal is a violation of the Labor Code and its implementing rules and regulations, and in fact, a violation of the right to security of tenure, guaranteed under the Constitution.

A case for illegal dismissal is predicated upon an injury to the rights of the complainant, or the purportedly illegally dismissed employee. One’s employment is a right and its violation is an injury. The award arising from the finding of illegal dismissal — the payment of back wages and/or reinstatement and other reliefs — is not merely for redress of a private right, but a command for the employer to make public reparation for their violation of the Labor Code. This special character with the public interest imbued in labor contractual relations distinguishes it from ordinary civil actions, insofar as the death of any of the parties and its effects are concerned. Substitution by the heirs of the deceased complainant in a pending complaint for illegal dismissal are allowed. Upon this premise, the NLRC Rules of Procedure were revised to allow substitution, as follows: “Section 20. Death of Parties. — In case any of the parties dies during the pendency of the proceedings, he/she may be substituted by his/her heirs. In the event a favorable judgment is obtained by the complainants, the same shall be enforced in accordance with Section 11, Rule XI of this Rules.”

Atty. Peachy Selda-Gregorio