Skip to main content

Raymond A. Son, et al. v. University of Santo Tomas, et al., G.R. No. 211273 | 2018

Case Digest: G.R. No. 211273 | April 18, 2018

Raymond A. Son, Raymond S. Antiola, and Wilfredo E. Pollarco vs. University of Santo Tomas, et al.

Ponente: Justice Del Castillo

Nature of the Petition

This Petition for Review on Certiorari challenges the September 27, 2013 Decision of the Court of Appeals (CA) in CA-G.R. SP No. 128666, which reversed the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) Decisions dated August 10, 2011, October 30, 2012, and January 22, 2013. The CA reinstated the March 26, 2012 NLRC Decision and denied the petitioners’ Motion for Reconsideration on January 29, 2014.

Court Ruling

The Supreme Court DENIED the petition, affirming the Court of Appeals Decision and Resolution in full.

Key Doctrines

  • The requirement of a master's degree for tertiary-level educators is reasonable and necessary to uphold the quality of education.

  • Educational institutions serve public interest, and the government has the authority to ensure that only qualified teachers with adequate academic knowledge and teaching skills are employed.

  • Government regulation in education is essential for protecting both students and the public from underqualified faculty members.

  • Teachers may be required to possess postgraduate degrees or pass examinations before securing employment in higher education institutions.

Case Background

The primary issue was whether the petitioners were illegally dismissed from their teaching positions at the UST Colleges of Fine Arts and Design and Philosophy.

Employment Terms and Master's Degree Requirement

  • The petitioners were probationary faculty members, subject to the condition that they must obtain a master's degree within the probationary period to qualify for tenured status.

  • Although they enrolled in graduate programs, they failed to complete their master's degrees within the stipulated timeframe.

  • Despite this, they continued teaching beyond the prescribed period.

CHED Memorandum and Faculty Dismissals

  • On March 3, 2010, CHED Chairman Emmanuel Angeles issued a memorandum mandating strict implementation of minimum qualifications for faculty members teaching undergraduate courses.

  • UST enforced this directive, discontinuing the reappointment of faculty members who failed to meet the master’s degree requirement.

  • Faculty members facing dismissal were allowed to appeal if they were close to completing their degrees, but the petitioners did not submit appeals.

  • They argued that their tenure rights were protected under the Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA) despite their failure to meet CHED's academic qualification criteria.

Legal Findings

  1. The court ruled that the petitioners were not illegally dismissed, as they did not meet the qualification standards for undergraduate teaching positions.

  2. The tenure provision in the CBA contradicts the 1992 Revised Manual of Regulations for Private Schools and is therefore null and void.

  3. The petitioners were given ample time to comply but failed to obtain their required master's degrees.

  4. The Supreme Court upheld the dismissal, emphasizing that educators are expected to meet regulatory standards.

Conclusion

The Supreme Court confirmed that the petitioners’ failure to meet academic requirements justified their dismissal. Educational institutions have a legal and ethical duty to ensure faculty members are qualified to teach in their respective fields.

For more details, refer to the full ruling at the .

Popular posts from this blog

Mandamus and its Application in Judicial Proceedings

Mandamus is an extraordinary remedy compelling a tribunal, corporation, board, or person to perform a duty expressly required by law . It applies when: 1️⃣ An entity unlawfully neglects the performance of a legal duty arising from an office or trust. 2️⃣ An entity unlawfully excludes another from a right or office to which they are entitled. 3️⃣ There is no other adequate or speedy legal remedy available. 📌 Relevant Case: De Leon v. Duterte (G.R. No. 252118, 2020) Essential Elements of a Mandamus Petition 📌 To successfully invoke mandamus, the petitioner must prove: ✔ Legal Right – The petitioner must demonstrate a clear legal right to compel the action. ✔ Correlative Obligation – The respondent must have a duty to respect that right . ✔ Violation by the Respondent – There must be an act or omission violating the petitioner’s right . ✔ Refusal to Comply – A failure to perform the duty , whether explicit or implied, triggers a cause of action. 📌 Relevant Case: Phi...
Read more

People vs. Jugueta, 788 SCRA 331, G.R. No. 202124 April 5, 2016

G.R. No. 202124. April 5, 2016. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. IRENEO JUGUETA, accused-appellant. PONENTE:  PERALTA, J.:  Synopsis: In Criminal Case No. 7702-G, Irenneo Jugueta was charged with Multiple Attempted Murder along with Gilbert Estores and Roger San Miguel. However, Roger San Miguel moved for reinvestigation of the case and was eventually dismissed, leaving Irenneo as the only defendant. The prosecution's witness, Norberto, testified that Irenneo and the two other men entered his family's nipa hut and fired shots, causing the death of one daughter and injury to another. Irenneo offered a defense of denial and alibi, but this was found to be weak by the trial court, which ruled that Irenneo conspired with the two other men to shoot the family of Norberto. The trial court's judgment was affirmed by the Court of Appeals. The main issue raised in the appeal was the inconsistencies in Norberto's testimony, but these were deemed to be trivial an...
Read more

Mendoza v. de Los Santos G.R. No. 176422 |March 20, 2013

Case Digest: Mendoza v. de Los Santos G.R. No. 176422 | March 20, 2013 Ponente: 📌 Topic: Applicability of Reserva Troncal – First cousins of the descendant/prepositus are fourth-degree relatives and cannot be considered reservees/reservatarios. Facts The disputed parcel of land was originally owned by Exequiel Mendoza, who inherited it from Placido and Dominga Mendoza through an oral partition. Upon Exequiel’s death, ownership was transferred to his spouse Leonor and their only daughter, Gregoria. After Leonor’s passing, Gregoria became the sole owner. Gregoria died intestate, and her aunt Victoria Pantaleon, Leonor’s sister, adjudicated the property to herself as the sole surviving heir. Petitioners (grandchildren of Placido and Dominga) argued that the property should have been reserved for them under Article 891 of the Civil Code on Reserva Troncal. They filed an action for Recovery of Possession, Cancellation of TCT, and Reconveyance, which the RTC granted. However, the Court of A...
Read more