Republic of the Philippines

Department of Labor and Employment

PHILIPPINE OVERSEAS EMPLOYMENT ADMINISTRATION
ADJUDICATION OFFICE
Mandaluyong City

IN THE MATTER OF VIOLATION POEA CASE NO.:

OF RECRUITMENT RULES AND
REGULATIONS/REGULATION
IMPLEMENTING THE LABOR
CODE, AS AMENDED, CIRCULARS,
ETC.
FOR: Violation of Section 143 II (cc)
Rule III, Part VI of the 2016
POEA Rules and Regulations

PHILIPPINE OVERSEAS EMPLOYMENT

ADMINISTRATION,
Complainant,

- versus -

,
Respondent.
ATTY. ANNA PATRICIA P. JACOBO
Hearing Officer
X--------------------------X

URGENT MOTION FOR DISMISSAL

COMES NOW the respondent, , through the undersigned officer, and
unto this Honorable Administrator, Philippine Overseas Employment
Administration (POEA), most respectfully submits this Urgent Motion for
Dismissal and respectfully avers THAT:

1. The above-named complainant has caused the filing of the instant

complaint. As such, this Honorable Office issued a Show Cause
Order and thereafter required respondent to submit its Answer to
the instant complaint. After that, proceedings were further
conducted and the instant case was then deemed submitted for
resolution.

2. The herein respondent would like to respectfully manifest that the

subject worker (already executed a Receipt and Quitclaim in the
presence of Labor Arbiter. A copy of said Receipt and Quitclaim is
hereto attached as Annex “1.”

3. In said document, expressly confirmed that she has no more

claims of whatsoever nature against herein respondent and that
said worker had released and discharged the respondent from
 2

whatever claims and liabilities arising out of or in connection with

her previous employment in Saudi Arabia.

4. Likewise, the said Labor Arbiter issued an Order declaring the

aforesaid case settled, closed and terminated. A copy of said Order
is hereto attached as Annex “2.”

5. For sure, the settlement between and respondent in the NLRC as

well as the quitclaim she executed in the presence of the Labor
Arbiter (Annex “1”) shall be final and binding between the said
parties. (see Art. 227, Labor Code) Thus, the said document
executed by OFW Amora operates as a compromise between the
latter and respondent and has the effect and authority of res
judicata. (see Art. 2037, Civil Code)

6. In fact, the issues in the instant case necessarily involve facts or

matters which were settled in the NLRC case, i.e., issues or
grievances arising from employment in Saudi Arabia. Hence, the
settlement of the issues in the NLRC case constitutes a bar to the
herein case as the issues herein likewise arose from the overseas
employment of the subject worker.

7. And herself confirmed in her quitclaim ( Annex “1”) before the

Labor Arbiter that she has no more claims of whatever nature
against respondent and that she is releasing and discharging the
latter from all claims and liabilities. Indeed, execution of the said
quitclaim is tantamount to admission that respondent never
committed any violation of the POEA Rules. Thus, this is a fact
conclusively settled in the NLRC case and is res judicata as far as
any violation of the 2016 POEA Rules is concerned.

8. On the other hand, the abovementioned Receipt and Quitclaim

(Annex “1”) executed by has been notarized by an officer
authorized to administer oaths. In fact, said document was
subscribed before the Labor Arbiter of the NLRC in.

9. Hence, this is strong proof that knew full well the ramifications of
her actions in executing the same and that she only wanted to
convey the truth as stated in said quitclaim she executed, i.e., no
recruitment violations whatsoever were committed by
respondent in relation to her overseas employment in
Saudi Arabia.

10. In view of the foregoing arguments, it is respectfully moved

that the instant case be dismissed as it is clear that no valid
grounds exist to justify any liability against respondent.
 3

11. This Motion is not filed to cause undue delay to the instant
case but is being respectfully filed in the higher interest of
substantial justice.

PRAYER

WHEREFORE, premises considered, it is most respectfully prayed that

the instant Urgent Motion for Dismissal be GRANTED and the instant case be
accordingly DISMISSED.

Respondent further prays for such other reliefs which are just and
equitable under the premises.

Manila for Mandaluyong City, Philippines, June 5, 2018.

General Manager
 4

VERIFICATION

REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES ]

CITY OF MANILA ] S.S.

I, , of legal age, Filipino, and with business address at, hereby depose
and say THAT:

1. I am the Owner and General Manager of I caused the preparation of

this Motion and I have read the contents of the same; and

2. All the allegations and statements contained therein are true and
correct to the best of my own personal knowledge and based on
authentic records.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto affixed my signature this June

_____, 2018, at Manila, Philippines.

Affiant

SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this June _____, 2018. Affiant

exhibited to me his Passport No., issued on, issued at.

NOTARY PUBLIC

Doc. No. ___________;

Page No. ___________;
Book No. ___________;
Series of 2018.
 5

NOTICE

TO: ATTY.
Hearing Officer
Adjudication Office
Philippine Overseas Employment Administration

To All Concerned:

Please take notice that the undersigned officer is submitting the instant
Urgent Motion for Dismissal for consideration and approval of the Honorable
Hearing Officer of the above-entitled case immediately upon receipt hereof
and without further arguments.