Sie sind auf Seite 1von 1

DE ROCA VS PABUYAN ET AL.

G.R. No. 215281, March 5, 2018

FACTS:

In 2012, private respondents filed a complaint for illegal dismissal against “RAF Mansion Hotel Old
Management and New Management and Victoriano Ewayan.” Later, private respondents amended the
complaint and included petitioner De Roca as co-respondent.

Petitioner contends that he was not at any time the respondents’ employer but merely the owner-lessor
of the premises where Ewayan and his Oceanic Travel and Tours Agency operated the RAF Mansion
Hotel where respondents were employed as hotel staff; and that he was impleaded in the case only
because respondents could no longer trace the whereabouts of their true employer Ewayan, who
appears to have absconded.

ISSUE:

WHETHER OR NOT petitioner De Roca is solidarily liable with Ewayan / Oceanic Travel and Tours Agency
to private respondents

HELD:

NO. It would appear from the facts on record and the evidence that petitioner’s building was an existing
hotel called the “RAF Mansion Hotel” which Oceanic agreed to operate under the same name. There is
no connection between petitioner and Oceanic other than through the lease agreement executed by
them. Thus, to allow respondents to recover their monetary claims from petitioner would result in their
unjust enrichment.