PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES v. MELISSA CHUA a.k.a.

CLARITA NG CHUA
G.R. No. 187052, September 13, 2012
Villama, Jr., J.

FACTS:

Private petitioners Rey Tajadao, Billy Danan, Alberto Aglanao and Roylan Ursulum filed a
complaint for illegal recruitment before the Philippine Overseas Employment Agency (POEA)
against respondent Melissa Chua. Petitioners claim that respondent offered them a job as factory
worker to be deployed in Taiwan. The respondent then require petitioners to secure passports,
undergo medical examination and a pay of placement fee amounting to Php. 80,000.00.
Respondent Chua assured the petitioners that whoever pays the application fee the earliest can
leave sooner.

Private petitioners pay the amount of Php. 80,000.00 to Melissa Chua. Rey Tajadao, Billy Danan
and Alberto Aglanao were able to secure a voucher for their payment of placement fee from
respondent. However, Roylan Ursulum failed to secure the same.

Billy Danan, upon follow up on the status of their deployment, respondent Chua informed Danan
that his departure was re-scheduled as Taiwan had suspended admission of overseas workers until
after the festival. Hence, petitionersonly learned that respondent was not authprized and licensed
to recruit workers for overseas employment.

The prosecution likewise presented as witness Severino Maranan, Senior Labor Employment
Officer of the POEA. Maranan confirmed that respondent Chua was neither licensed nor
authorized to recruit workers for overseas employment. In support, he presented to the court a
certification issied by the POEA to that effect.

In the defense of the respondent, she denies having recruited complainants for overseas
employment. According to her, she was only a cashier at Golden Gate which is owned by Marilen
Callueng.

The Regional Trials Courts's found that Melissa Chua is guilty beyond reasonable doubt of illegal
recruitment in large scale and four counts of estafa. The Court of Appeals affirmed the decision of
the trial court. Hence, Chua elevated the case by filing a Notice of Appeal.

ISSUE:

Wheter or not the prosecution was able to prove that Melissa Chua is guilty for the crime of
illegal recruitment in large scale.
RATIO DECIDENDI:

Yes. In order to hold a person liable for illegal recruitment, the following elements must concur:
1. The offender undertakes any of the activities within the meaning of "recruitment and
placement" under Article 13(b) of the Labor Code, or any of the prohibited practices enumerated
under Article 34 of the Labor Code (now Section 6 of Republic Act 8042); and
2. The offender has no valid license or authority required by law to enable him to lawfully engage
in recruitment and placement of workers.

In the case of illegal recruitment in large scale a third element is added: that the offender ckmmits
any of the acts of recruitment and placement against three or more person, individually or as a
group. All three elements are present in the case at bar.

FALLO / WHEREFORE CLAUSE:

The decision of the Court of Appeals is hereby affirmed with modification in that the appellant os
ordered to pay a fine of Php. 1,000,000.00 and to indemnify each of the private complainants
Alberto Aglanao, Billy Danan and Rey Tajadal in the amount of Php. 80,000.00. With costs
against accused-appellant.