Scribd
Upload
138 views1 page

Labor 1 DFA V NLRC

The Asian Development Bank and its President were sued before the National Labor Relations Commission by a former employee for illegal dismissal. The ADB claimed immunity from legal process under its charter and headquarters agreement with the Philippines. The Labor Arbiter denied the claim of immunity. The Supreme Court granted certiorari, vacated the Labor Arbiter's decision as null and void, and declared that the issue of whether an international organization has diplomatic immunity is a political question determined by the executive branch.

Uploaded by

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

Labor 1 DFA V NLRC

The Asian Development Bank and its President were sued before the National Labor Relations Commission by a former employee for illegal dismissal. The ADB claimed immunity from legal process under its charter and headquarters agreement with the Philippines. The Labor Arbiter denied the claim of immunity. The Supreme Court granted certiorari, vacated the Labor Arbiter's decision as null and void, and declared that the issue of whether an international organization has diplomatic immunity is a political question determined by the executive branch.

Uploaded by

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

Case Title:

DEPARTMENT OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS, petitioner, vs. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS


COMMISSION, HON. LABOR ARBITER NIEVES V. DE CASTRO and JOSE C. MAGNAYI,
respondents.
Citation: 262 SCRA 39

Docket Number: G.R. No. 113191, September 18, 1996

Doctrine:
The above stipulations of both the Charter and Headqurters Agreement should be able,
nay well enough, to establish that, except in the specified cases of borrowing and guarantee operations,
as well as the purchase, sale and underwriting of securities, theADB enjoys immunity from legal
process of every form. The Bank's officers, on their part, enjoy immunity in respect of all acts
performed by them in their official capacity. The Charter and the Headquarters Agreement granting
these immunities and privileges are treaty covenants and commitments voluntarily assumed by the
Philippine government which must be respected.
Facts:

Jose C. Magnayi filed a case against the Asian Development Bank and its President, Kimimas
Tarumizu, before the NLRC for his alleged illegal dismissal by ADB and the latter's violation of
the labor-only contracting law.

Two summonses were served, one sent directly to the ADB and the other through the DFA, both
with a copyt of the complaint.

The ADB and the DFA notified respondent Labor Arbiter that the ADB, as well as its President
and Officers, were covered by an immunity from legal process except for borrowings,
guaranties or the sale of securities pursuant to Article 50 (1) and Article 55 of the Agreement
Establishing the Asian Development Bank (the Charter) in relation to Section 5 and Section
44 of the Agreement Between the Bank the Government of the Philippines Regarding the Bank's
Headquarters (the Headquarters Agreement).

The Labor Arbiter charged with the case, Ms. Nieves V de Castro, addressed a Notice of
Resolution/Order to the Bank which brought it to the attention of the DFA on the ground that
the service of such notice was in violation of the RP-ADB Headquarters Agreement which
provided, inter-alia, for the immunity of the Bank, its President and officers from every form of
legal process, except only, in cases of borrowings, guarantees or the sale of securities.

Issue: Whether or not ADB is entitled to diplomatic immunity


Held: The issue whether an international organization is entitled to diplomatic immunity is a political
question and such determination by the executive branch is conclusive on the courts and quasi-judicial
agencies. (Lacso vs. United Nations Revolving Fund for Natural Resources, 241 SCRA 681 [1995]
WHEREFORE, the petition for certiorari is GRANTED, and the decision of the Labor Arbiter, dated
31 August 1993 is VACATED for being NULL AND VOID. The temporary restraining order issued by
this Court on 07 April 1994 is hereby made permanent. No costs.

You might also like