Lubeca V Alcantara Mar 08

THIRD DIVISION
LUBECA MARINE MANAGEMENT G.R. No. 147628

(HK) LTD. and GERMAN MARINE
AGENCIES, INC., Present:
Petition
ers, YNARES-SANTIAGO, J.,
Chairperson,
AUSTRIA-MARTINEZ,
CHICO-NAZARIO,
- versus - NACHURA, and
REYES, JJ.
Promulgated:
MATEO ALCANTARA, March 14, 2008

Respon
dent.
x------------------------------------------------------------------------------------x
RESOLUTION
NACHURA, J.:
Before this Court is a Joint Motion to Approve Compromise Agreement dated
January 31, 2008 filed by counsel for petitioner and conformed to by respondent
with the assistance of his counsel. The Compromise Agreement, attached to the
Joint Motion, reads:
COMPROMISE AGREEMENT
WITH QUITCLAIM, RELEASE, WAIVER AND DESISTANCE
KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS:
This COMPROMISE AGREEMENT, made and entered into

this 30th day of January 2008, at Pasay City, Philippines, by and
between:
MATEO ALCANTARA, Filipino, of legal age, with

residence and postal address at Blk. 53, Lot 11, Teacher’s
Village, Catmon, Malabon City, hereinafter referred to as the
FIRST PARTY, assisted by his counsel, Atty. Marcel G.
Silvestre;
- and -
GERMAN MARINE AGENCIES, INC., a duly registered
and licensed manning agency, with principal office at No. 3912
General Macabulos Street, Bangkal, Makati City, Philippines,
herein represented by its counsel, ATTY. FRANCISCO S. DE
GUZMAN, and hereinafter referred to as the SECOND PARTY,
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, the FIRST PARTY is the complainant in

NLRC-NCR Case No. ADJ (M) 94-092745 entitled: “MATEO
ALCANTARA vs. GERMAN MARINE AGENCIES, INC., ET AL”.;
WHEREAS, on July 25, 1997 a Decision was rendered in

the abovementioned case in favor of the FIRST PARTY by the
Honorable Labor Arbiter RENATO A. BUGARIN:
WHEREAS, the SECOND PARTY appealed the aforesaid

Decision to the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC)
and docketed as NLRC CA No. 013641-97;
WHEREAS, on June 24, 2000, a Resolution was issued

by the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC), modifying
the decision of the Labor Arbiter;
WHEREAS, on November 7, 2000, the SECOND PARTY

filed a Petition for Certiorari with the Court of Appeals. The
same was, however, dismissed in the Resolution dated
November 10, 2000 issued by the Court of Appeals;
WHEREAS, on May 15, 2001, the SECOND PARTY filed

[a] Petition for Review with the Supreme Court. To date, the
said petition is still pending before the Supreme Court for its
resolution;
WHEREAS, considering the length of time that this case

has been pending, the parties came to a decision of finally
settling the instant case amicably.
NOW THEREFORE, premises considered, the FIRST

PARTY and the SECOND PARTY have by these presents
decided to settle their differences amicably and agree as
follows;
1. The SECOND PARTY agrees and undertakes to

pay the FIRST PARTY the amount of US$9,172.88 in the form
of Philippine National Bank Check Nos. 497997 and 497998 by
way of full payment and satisfaction of all his claims that may
have arisen from or connected with his overseas employment.
2. The FIRST PARTY hereby acknowledges

receipt of the said checks from the SECOND PARTY, as
evidenced by the signatures on the vouchers, copies of which
are hereto attached, marked as Annexes “A” and “A-1” and
made integral part hereof.
3. The FIRST PARTY declares that he has no

more claims or demands, monetary or otherwise, against the
SECOND PARTY, its directors, officers and employees and its
foreign employer, the same having been fully and finally
settled to his complete satisfaction and agrees to irrevocably
release and absolutely discharge the latter and all those
persons solidarily liable with it for whatever obligation that
may have arisen or connected with his overseas recruitment,
placement and employment.
4. The FIRST PARTY hereby forever waives all

rights and choses of action against the SECOND PARTY, its
directors, officers and employees, and his foreign employer,
arising from or connected with his overseas employment.
5. The FIRST PARTY agrees and undertakes to

desist from initiating, instituting and prosecuting any other
suit, action or proceeding against the SECOND PARTY, its
directors, officers and employees and his foreign employer,
arising from or connected with his overseas employment.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the FIRST PARTY and the

SECOND PARTY have by these presents signed this
Compromise Agreement with Release, Quitclaim, Waiver and
Desistance with full knowledge of its legal implications this 30th
day of January, at Pasay City, Philippines.
(Signed)
GERMAN MARINE
MATEO ALCANTARA AGENCIES, INC.
First Party Second Party
By:
(Signed)
ATTY. FRANCISCO S. DE
GUZMAN
Counsel for the
Second Party
With my conformity:
(Signed)
ATTY. MARCEL G. SILVESTRE
Counsel for the First Party
(Signature of two [2] witnesses)

ACKNOWLEDGMENT
Article 1306 of the Civil Code of the Philippines provides that contracting
parties may agree to such stipulations, clauses, terms, and conditions as they
may deem convenient, as long as they are not contrary to law, morals, good
customs, public order, or public policy. A compromise agreement is a contract

whereby the parties make reciprocal concessions to resolve their differences and
put an end to litigation.[1] It is an accepted, even desirable and encouraged,
practice in courts of law and administrative tribunals.[2]
Finding the above Compromise Agreement to be validly executed and not
contrary to law, morals, good customs, public order, or public policy, we,
therefore, approve the same.
WHEREFORE, in light of the foregoing, the Joint Motion to Approve
Compromise Agreement is GRANTED, the Compromise Agreement dated January
31, 2008 is APPROVED and judgment is hereby rendered in accordance
therewith. The instant case is dismissed. No pronouncement as to costs.
SO ORDERED.
ANTONIO EDUARDO B. NACHURA

Associate Justice
WE CONCUR:
CONSUELO YNARES-SANTIAGO
Associate Justice
Chairperson
MA. ALICIA AUSTRIA-MARTINEZ MINITA V. CHICO-NAZA
Associate Justice Associate Justice
RUBEN T. REYES
Associate Justice
ATTESTATION
I attest that the conclusions in the above Resolution were reached in

consultation before the case was assigned to the writer of the opinion of the
Court’s Division.
CONSUELO YNARES-SANTIAGO
Associate Justice
Chairperson, Third Division
CERTIFICATION
Pursuant to Section 13, Article VIII of the Constitution and the Division
Chairperson's Attestation, I certify that the conclusions in the above Resolution
had been reached in consultation before the case was assigned to the writer of
the opinion of the Court’s Division.
REYNATO S. PUNO
Chief Justice
[1] Xavierville III Homeowners Association, Inc. v. Xavierville II

Homeowners Association, Inc., G.R. No. 170092, December 6, 2006, 510 SCRA
619, 621; Rivero v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 141273, May 17, 2005, 458 SCRA
714, 735; Magbanua v. Uy, G.R. No. 161003, May 6, 2005, 458 SCRA 184, 190;
Alonzo v. San Juan, G.R. No. 137549, February 11, 2005, 451 SCRA 45, 58-59.
[2] Philippine National Oil Company-Energy Development Corporation
(PNOC-EDC) v. Abella, G.R. No. 153904, January 17, 2005, 448 SCRA 549, 565.

Lubeca V Alcantara Mar 08

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Lubeca V Alcantara Mar 08

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Lubeca V Alcantara Mar 08

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

THIRD DIVISION

LUBECA MARINE MANAGEMENT G.R. No. 147628

MATEO ALCANTARA, March 14, 2008

Before this Court is a Joint Motion to Approve Compromise Agreement dated

Joint Motion, reads:

KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS:

This COMPROMISE AGREEMENT, made and entered into

MATEO ALCANTARA, Filipino, of legal age, with

WHEREAS, the FIRST PARTY is the complainant in

WHEREAS, on July 25, 1997 a Decision was rendered in

WHEREAS, the SECOND PARTY appealed the aforesaid

WHEREAS, on June 24, 2000, a Resolution was issued

WHEREAS, on November 7, 2000, the SECOND PARTY

WHEREAS, on May 15, 2001, the SECOND PARTY filed

WHEREAS, considering the length of time that this case

NOW THEREFORE, premises considered, the FIRST

1. The SECOND PARTY agrees and undertakes to

2. The FIRST PARTY hereby acknowledges

3. The FIRST PARTY declares that he has no

4. The FIRST PARTY hereby forever waives all

5. The FIRST PARTY agrees and undertakes to

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the FIRST PARTY and the

(Signature of two [2] witnesses)

customs, public order, or public policy. A compromise agreement is a contract

put an end to litigation.[1] It is an accepted, even desirable and encouraged,

practice in courts of law and administrative tribunals.[2]

Finding the above Compromise Agreement to be validly executed and not

therefore, approve the same.

WHEREFORE, in light of the foregoing, the Joint Motion to Approve

Compromise Agreement is GRANTED, the Compromise Agreement dated January

31, 2008 is APPROVED and judgment is hereby rendered in accordance

therewith. The instant case is dismissed. No pronouncement as to costs.

ANTONIO EDUARDO B. NACHURA

I attest that the conclusions in the above Resolution were reached in

[1] Xavierville III Homeowners Association, Inc. v. Xavierville II

You might also like