REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINNES

REGIONAL TRIAL COURT

ROSARIO BATANGAS
BRANCH 87

PEDRO PUTATCHING CIVIL CASE

Complainant Case No:
134245

-vs-

ACME CORPORATION
Respondent
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

COMPLAINANT MEMORANDUM
Complainant, by counsel, respectfully submits its memorandum in the case.

STATEMENT OF CASE
On October 4, 2013 complainant filed a case with National Labor Relation
Commission (NLRC)
On October 10, 2013 the respondent submitted his position paper
On November 7, 2013 The issues having been joined and evidences collected,
the case was submitted for decisions.

STATEMENT OF FACTS\
In order that the court may be enlightened and guided in this sequential
facts cited hereunder are pertinent details.

1. Complainant PEDRO PUTATCHING, at the time of his dismissal, was a regular

employee of respondent since July 1, 2007. he held the position of Information
Technology Specialist I with a monthly salary of Php 15,475.00

2. Respondent ACME CORPORATION, is a corporation engaged in the manufacture and

sale of baby products.

3. On August 6, 2013, at around 4;45 pm, Complainant opened an e-mail attachment

which, unknown to him, unleashed a computer virus.

4.On August 13, 2013, complainant received a letter from respondent requiring his
to explain in writing why he should not be dismissed from employment for serious
misconduct and gross negligence.

5. On August 14, 2013, complainant sent respondent a letter stating that he had no
intetion to cause harm or damage to the company; that he was sorry for whatever
inconvenience his actions may have caused; and, that this incident would never be
repeated again.

6.On August 23, 2013, complainant was informed that he was being dismissed from
employment.

STATEMENT OF ISSUE
1. Wheter or not PEDRO PUTATCHING was illegally dismissed.

ARGUMENTS
1.There was illegally dismissal in the employment of PEDRO PUTATCHING, under the
LABOR CODE OF THE PHILIPPINES, ARTICLE 282 provides that;
 Termination by employer. an employer may terminate an employment for
any of the following just cause;
a. Serious misconduct or willfully disobedience by the employee of the lawful order
of the employer or representative in connection with his work;

b. Gross and habitual neglect by the employee of his

c. Fraud or willful breach by the employee of trust reposed in him by his employer
or duly authorized representative;

d. Commission of a crime or offense by the employee against the person of his

employer or of any immediate member of his family or his duly-authorize
representative; and

e. Other cause analogous to the foregoing.

On this case prior to the dismissal of his employment, the complainant had
never been the subject of any disciplinary action because there is no such ground
for his employment.

According to VILLAMOR GOLF CLUB vs. PEHID, Gr no 166152, October 4, 2005

SERIOUS MISCONDUCT' as be a valid ground for dismissal of an employee is
defined as improper or wrong conduct; the transgression of some established and
definite rule of action, a forbidden act, a dereliction of duty, willful in
character, and implies wrongful intent and not mere error in judgement. to be
serious within the meaning and intendment of the law, the misconduct must be grave
and aggravated character and not merely trivial or unimportant. However serious
such misconduct. it must, nevertheless, be in connection with the employee's work
constitute just cause for his separation. the act complained of must be related to
the performance of the employee's duties such as would show him to be unfit to
continue working for the employer.
On this case.He was a model employee who, previously in 2011, received an
employee of the year award from respondent for his exemplary work performance, so
there is no intetion for him to do such serious misconduct to overthrown the
company, he is very dedicated to the company,
Therefore; he should not be dismissed for his employement.

CONCLUSION
That there was no valid grounds for the dismissal of the complainant, the
negligence was not gross and habitual. therefore there was a illegal dismissal of
the employment of PEDRO PUTATCHING in ACME CORPORATION.

PRAYER
WHEREFOR, pemises considered, the complainant respectfully prays from this
Honorable court that:

1. PEDRO PUTATCHING be reinstated to his regular employment

2.PEDRO PUTATCHING be paid backwages.

Other relief and remedies are also prayed for as the court may deem fair and
reasonable.