CASE STUDY

Republic of the Philippines

SUPREME COURT

Manila

EN BANC

G.R. No. L-18185 September 28, 1962

VALLESON, INC., petitioner,

vs.

BESSIE C. TIBURCIO, respondent.

Del Rosario and Encarnacion for petitioner.

Balguma and Olandesca for respondent.

CONCEPCION, J.:

This decision is an appeal by certiorari taken by Valleson, Inc. from a decision of the Court of Industrial Relations.

The facts are set forth in said decision, from which we quote:

. . . petitioner was employed as cashier by respondent company from September 1, 1955 up to

November 23, 1957. She worked from 9:00 o'clock a.m. to 1:00 o'clock p.m. and from 4:00 o'clock p.m. to 7:00 o'clock p.m., or a total of seven (7) hours daily, for which she was paid P3.50 a day. During her employment, petitioner got married but inspite her marriage, they did not change her usual signature in the payroll. There is an unwritten policy in respondent company that all female employees should be single during their employment. Sometime in October, 1956, petitioner personally asked again Mr. Sibal, (not in writing) for maternity leave with pay but the latter refused to grant the same. On January 12, 1957, petitioner delivered her first child. Sometime in October, 1957, petitioner personally asked again Mr. Sibal for maternity leave with pay because she was then pregnant on her second child but she was again refused such benefit. Sometime in November, 1957, Ruben Mallari, the accountant of respondent company, found a shortage of P50.00 when he checked up the cashier's report of the petitioner. Mallari reported the matter to Mr. Sibal and the latter immediately conducted an investigation. It was found out that the petitioner, and one Lecita Abary, also a cashier in the respondent company, were, from time to time, taking from their cash registers certain amounts of money and lending them to different employees which practice was not only without the knowledge of the management but also contrary to the rules and regulations of said store. This finding was admitted by said cashiers in a written statement dated November 18, 1957. On November 23, 1957, upon recommendation of the legal department of respondent company, the two cashiers were temporarily suspended which was later made permanent dismissal. On January 2, 1958, petitioner gave birth to her second child.

1. State the main problem of the both sides.

2. State the different areas of consideration of the both sides following the guide below:

A.The Strength of the both sides

B. The Weakness of the both sides

C. The Opportunities of the both sides

D. The Threats of the both sides

3. Give the proposed solutions/alternative course of action or ACA( Minimum of three) to the both sides, also the advantages and disadvantages of each ACA.

4. State your recommendations based on your ACA.

6. Make a research on the decision given by the court.

7. Make a recommendation on the decision based on your acquired knowledge in MATERNITY LEAVE (RA 8282, as amended by RA 11210n ).

12) A promise to do something that one has a prior legal duty to do cannot be consideration. 13) The doctrine of implied in law contracts requires a clear and definite promise but not one that can be enforced as a written contract later. 14) When both parties are mistaken as to the same material fact, usually the contract can be avoided and will not be enforced.Page |5 QUESTION 5 With the aid of relevant case law and statutory provisions, discuss any five (5) obligations of the seller under a contract for the sale of goods in Ghana. ---END OF PAPER---Review Questions and I 1. Match each type of contract in Column A with the appropriate statement in Column B. A B (1) Express contract (a) Contract duties completely performed (2) Implied-in-fact (b) Formed by parties' conduct contract (3) Implied-in-law (c) Contract exists but cannot be contract enforced in court (4) Executed contract (d) Formed either by oral or written words or both (5) Executory contract (e) Imposed by law to prevent unjust enrichment (6) Void contract (f) One party has option of avoiding or enforcing contract (7) Voidable contract (g) Contract duties have not been performed (8) Unenforceable (h) Illegal contract contract N Comfort Company assumed the operation of a hotel. The previous owner had a contract with Linen Supply. Linen Supply continued to furnish services after Comfort Company assumed ownership. Comfort Company ber argues that it does not have to pay for the linen servicesWhich of the following rules may exclude from evidence written or spoken terms not contained in a written contract? O promissory estoppel. O the mirror image rule. O the statute of frauds. O the parol evidence rule. Question 12 2 pts All agreements modifying an existing contract for the sale of goods must be in writing to be enforceable. O True O False Question 13 2 pts The parol evidence rule forbids parties from modifying their contracts after the contracts have been signed. O True O False Question 14 2 pts Veronica orally agreed to buy Kay's house and the sale was completed. Either of them now may rescind the contract because it did not comply with the SOF. O True O False Question 15 2 pts Which of the following oral contracts is generally enforceable under the statute of frauds? O surety contracts (collateral contracts). O contracts for the sale of goods greater than $500. O contracts for the sale of land