8/26/2020 E-Library - Information At Your Fingertips: Printer Friendly Petitioners thus assert that they are entitled to the payment of their salaries for the unexpired portion of their employment contracts.[37] On the other hand, respondents question the legality of the monetary damages awarded to petitioners. They assert that the Court of Appeals erred in nullifying the parities' Compromise Agreement, pointing out that the labor tribunals had already rendered it valid.[38] The agreement, they further argue, released them from liability on petitioners' other claims.[39] The chief issue for this Court's resolution is whether or not petitioners Julita M. Aldovino, Joan B. Lagrimas, Winnie B. Lingat, Chita A. Sales, Sherly L. Guinto, Revilla S. De Jesus, and Laila V. Orpilla are entitled to the payment of their salaries for the unexpired portion of their employment contract. Subsumed under this is the issue of whether or not Section 7 of Republic Act No. 10022, which reinstated the three (3)month cap, has the force and effect of law. To pass upon this issue, this Court must resolve the following: First, whether or not the Compromise Agreement barred all other claims against respondents Gold and Green Manpower Management and Development Services, Inc. and Sage International Development Company, Ltd., and Alberto C. Alvina; and Second, whether or not petitioners were illegally dismissed and, consequently, entitled to the reimbursement of their placement fees and payment of moral and exemplary damages and attorney's fees. The Petition is meritorious. It must be noted that this case is governed by Philippine laws. Both the Constitution[40] and the Labor Code[41] guarantee the security of tenure. It is not stripped off when Filipinos work in a different jurisdiction.[42] We follow the lex loci contractus principle, which means that the law of the place where the contract is executed governs the contract. In Triple Eight Integrated Services, Inc. v National Labor Relations Commission:[43] First, established is the rule that lex loci contractus (the law of the place where the contract is made) governs in this jurisdiction. There is no question that the contract of employment in this case was perfected here in the Philippines. Therefore, the Labor Code, its implementing rules and regulations, and other laws affecting labor apply in this case. Furthermore, settled is the rule that the courts of the forum will not enforce any foreign claim obnoxious to the forum's public policy. Here in the Philippines, employment agreements are more than contractual in nature. The Constitution itself, in Article XIII, Section 3, guarantees the special protection of workers. . . . https://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocsfriendly/1/65230 5/19