In the instant case, we find substantial evidence to support the decision of
Labor Arbiter Lustria. Substantial evidence is such amount of evidence which a
reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion, even if other
equally reasonable minds might conceivably opine otherwise.63[63]
Late submission of documentary evidence admissible
OSCI asserts that Labor Arbiter Lustria gravely abused his discretion in
admitting as evidence the belated submissions of Bastol through his Manifestation/
Compliance filed on October 26, 2001 or five months after the instant case was
deemed submitted for decision on May 10, 2001. It considers suspicious the
submission of the Affidavit of Dr. Vicaldo, as Bastol never provided any
explanation for such late submission and much less did the Labor Arbiter require
Bastol for such explanation. OSCI also rues said admission when Labor Arbiter
Lustria did not act on its Motion to Dismiss filed on July 25, 2001 on the ground of
Bastol’s failure to present additional evidence. Neither did Labor Arbiter Lustria
give it an opportunity to submit contrary evidence by setting, at the very least,
another hearing. Thus, OSCI concludes that Labor Arbiter Lustria acted wantonly,
63[63] Bughaw, Jr. v. Treasure Island Industrial Corporation, G.R. No. 173151, March
28, 2008, 550 SCRA 307, 316; citing Vertudes v. Buenaflor, G.R. No. 153166, December 16,
2005, 478 SCRA 210, 230.
Select target paragraph3
Connect to a paragraph
Connect to an entity
Disable highlights
Add to table of contents