Scribd
Upload
989 views1 page

Globe Mackay v. Court of Appeals

Petitioners Globe Mackay Cable and Radio Corp. and Herbert C. Hendry terminated respondent Restituto M. Tobias from his job due to fraudulent transactions that caused the company to lose thousands of pesos. When Tobias sought new employment at Republic Telephone Company (RETELCO), Hendry wrote them a letter stating Tobias was dismissed for dishonesty without being asked. Tobias sued for damages. The courts ruled in Tobias' favor, finding that while petitioners could legally fire Tobias, writing the letter to RETELCO without cause was a tortious act that caused further damages under Articles 21 and 2176 of the Civil Code, which provide for compensation for willful injuries contrary to morals, customs,

Uploaded by

Geneve Masahud
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
989 views1 page

Globe Mackay v. Court of Appeals

Petitioners Globe Mackay Cable and Radio Corp. and Herbert C. Hendry terminated respondent Restituto M. Tobias from his job due to fraudulent transactions that caused the company to lose thousands of pesos. When Tobias sought new employment at Republic Telephone Company (RETELCO), Hendry wrote them a letter stating Tobias was dismissed for dishonesty without being asked. Tobias sued for damages. The courts ruled in Tobias' favor, finding that while petitioners could legally fire Tobias, writing the letter to RETELCO without cause was a tortious act that caused further damages under Articles 21 and 2176 of the Civil Code, which provide for compensation for willful injuries contrary to morals, customs,

Uploaded by

Geneve Masahud
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 1

G.R. No.

81262 August 25, 1989


GLOBE MACKAY CABLE AND RADIO CORP., and HERBERT C. HENDRY, petitioners,
vs.
THE HONORABLE COURT OF APPEALS and RESTITUTO M. TOBIAS, respondents.
CORTES, J.:
FACTS:
Restituto M. Tobias was terminated by petitioner GLOBE MACKAY due to the discovery of
fictitious purchases and other fraudulent transactions for which it lost several thousands of pesos.
Private respondent, then, sought employment with the Republic Telephone Company (RETELCO).
However, petitioner Hendry, without being asked by RETELCO, wrote a letter to the latter stating that
Tobias was dismissed by GLOBE MACKAY due to dishonesty. Tobias filed a civil case for damages
anchored on alleged unlawful, malicious, oppressive, and abusive acts of petitioners. The RTC and CA
both ruled in favor of Tobias.
ISSUE:
WON Tobias is entitled to damages?
RULING:
YES. Petitioners claim that they did not violate any provision of law since they were merely
exercising their legal right to dismiss private respondent. This does not, however, leave private
respondent with no relief because Article 21 of the Civil Code provides that:
Art. 21. Any person who wilfully causes loss or injury to another in a manner that is
contrary to morals, good customs or public policy shall compensate the latter for the
damage.
This article, adopted to remedy the "countless gaps in the statutes, which leave so many victims of moral
wrongs helpless, even though they have actually suffered material and moral injury" should "vouchsafe
adequate legal remedy for that untold number of moral wrongs which it is impossible for human
foresight to provide for specifically in the statutes"
The next tortious act committed by petitioners was the writing of a letter to RETELCO sometime
in October 1974, stating that Tobias had been dismissed by GLOBE MACKAY due to dishonesty. Because
of the letter, Tobias failed to gain employment with RETELCO and as a result of which, Tobias remained
unemployed for a longer period of time. For this further damage suffered by Tobias, petitioners must
likewise be held liable for damages consistent with Article 2176 of the Civil Code.

You might also like