DONALD KWOK, petitioner,
vs. PHILIPPINE CARPET MANUFACTURING CORPORATION, respondent.
[G.R. No. 149252. April 28, 2005]
Petitioner filed a complaint against the respondent corporation for the recovery of accumulated vacation and sick leave credits before the NLRC. Petitioner clung to the verbal contract with Mr. Lim, the President of the respondent corporation and his father-in-law for his claims. Petitioner obtained favorable judgment. In their appeal, respondent averred that the position the petition held was not entitled cash conversions of vacation and sick leave credits. The decision of the Labor Arbiter was reversed. The Court of Appeals affirmed the reversed decision.
Whether or not the verbal contract in favor of petitioner is valid.
NO. It is true that for a contract to be binding on the parties thereto, it need not be in writing unless the law requires that such contract be in some form in order that it may be valid or enforceable or that it be executed in a certain way, in which case that requirement is absolute and independent. (Art. 1356, NCC) But the court disbelieved petitioner’s testimony and gave credence and probative weight to the collective testimonies of the employees and officers of the respondent corporation, including Mr. Lim, whom the petitioner presented as a hostile witness. Even assuming that the petitioner was entitled of such benefits, there was no record to show the record of absences to arrive at the actual number of leave credits. There was no conformity of such agreement with the Board and if so, such claim was already barred by prescription under Article 291 of the Labor Code.