ALCALA

CASE NO. 11
Certification of Non-Forum Shopping
MHRC v. CA & Sheryl Oabel & MANRED 576 SCRA 463

FACTS: A Petition for Review on Certiorari assailing a resolution issued by the CA denying the Petition for Review filed by petitioner
Maranaw Hotels and Resort Corp (MHRC).
Respondent Oabel was initially hired by petitioner Maranaw Hotels and Resort Corp as an extra beverage attendant on April 24, 1995
until February 7, 1997. She worked in Century Park Hotel, an establishment owned by the petitioner MHRC.
Petitioner Maranaw Hotels contracted with Manila Resource Development Corporation (MANRED) on September 1996.
Subsequently, Oabel was transferred to MANRED, with the latter deporting itself as her employer.
MANRED has intervened at all stages of these proceedings and has consistently claimed to be the employer of Oabel.
For the duration of her employment, private respondent Oabel performed the following functions from 1997 to 1998: Secretary,
Public Relations Department, Gift Shop Attendant, Waitress and Shop Attendant.
Oabel filed before the Labor Arbiter a petition for regularization of employment against the petitioner. However, she was dismissed
from employment. She converted her petition into illegal dismissal.
LA denied Oabel’s petition on the ground that the Maranaw Hotel considers her a project employee which does not ripened into
regular employee.
On appeal, NLRC reversed the ruling of the LA and held that: (1) MANRED is a labor-only contractor, and (2) private respondent Oabel
was illegally dismissed.
Maranaw Hotels appealed before the CA. CA dismissed the petition because apparently Maranaw Hotel failed to append the board
resolution authorizing their counsel to file said petition before the CA. Maranaw Hotels filed a Motion for Reconsideration with an
appended Certification of Non-Forum Shopping and board resolution. CA denied the same.

ISSUE: W/N the filing of a motion for reconsideration with the certificate of non-forum shopping attached constitutes substantial
compliance with the requirement.

RULING & MP IN BOLD: NO. Well-settled is the rule that the certificate of non-forum shopping is a mandatory requirement.
Substantial compliance applies only with respect to the contents of the certificate but not as to its presence in the pleading wherein
it is required.

There is no substantial compliance in this case. The filing of a subsequent MR appended by the Certification of Non-Forum
Shopping and the board resolution did not cure the defect. It negates the very purpose for which the certification against forum
shopping is required: to inform the Court of the pendency of any other case which may present similar issues and involve similar
parties as the one before it. The requirement applies to both natural and juridical persons.

A lawyer acting for the corporation must be specifically authorized to sign pleadings for the corporation. Specific authorization
could only come in the form of a board resolution issued by the Board of Directors that specifically authorizes the counsel to
institute the petition and execute the certification, to make his actions binding on his principal, i.e., the corporation.

The present petition is DENIED. The resolution of the CA is affirmed.

Additional Notes:
On regularity of Oabel’s employment – SC sustained the finding of the NLRC that MANRED is a labor-only contractor. The real
employer of private respondent Oabel is Maranaw Hotels. It appears further that private respondent has already rendered more than
one year of service to the petitioner, for the period 1995-1998, for which she must already be considered a regular employee,
pursuant to Article 280 of the Labor Code.