Scribd
Upload
210 views

Tablante-Tungol Enterprises Vs Noriel

The petitioner company sought to cancel the union's registration due to their engagement in an illegal strike. However, the court ruled that an illegal strike is not valid grounds for cancellation. While strikes are legal, the phrase in question refers to activities like acting as a labor contractor or "cabo" system, not illegal strikes. If illegal strikes were meant to be included, it would have been expressly stated in the law.

Uploaded by

Mavic Morales
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
210 views

Tablante-Tungol Enterprises Vs Noriel

The petitioner company sought to cancel the union's registration due to their engagement in an illegal strike. However, the court ruled that an illegal strike is not valid grounds for cancellation. While strikes are legal, the phrase in question refers to activities like acting as a labor contractor or "cabo" system, not illegal strikes. If illegal strikes were meant to be included, it would have been expressly stated in the law.

Uploaded by

Mavic Morales
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

MORALES, MARIVIC A.

Labor Law II Block A

Case No. 88

TABLANTE-TUNGOL ENTERPRISES vs NORIEL


G.R. No. L-47848, August 23, 1978
FACTS:
Because the labor union had engaged in an illegal strike, the petitioner company in this case
seeks for the cancellation of its registration, on the basis of the provision of the law which states
that acting as a labor contractor or engaging in the "cabo" system, or otherwise engaging in any
activity prohibited by law is a ground for the cancellation of union registration.
ISSUE:
Can the engagement of a labor union in an illegal strike be a valid ground for the cancellation of
its union registration?
RULING:
No. The phrase engaging in any activity prohibited by law should not be interpreted or
construed to include an illegal strike engaged into by any union. This is so because the phrase 'or
otherwise engaging in any activity prohibited by law' should be construed to mean such activity
engaged into by a union that partakes of the nature of a labor contractor or 'cabo' system. The law
does not intend to include in the said phrase illegally declared strike simply because strike per se
is legal. Also, if the law intends to include illegally declared strike, the same could have been
expressly placed therein as had been previously done in Presidential Decree No. 823." Clearly,
an awareness of the relevance of the maxims noscitur a sociis and ejusdem generis ought to have
cautioned counsel for petitioner to shy away from this approach.

You might also like