6/7/2020 E-Library - Information At Your Fingertips: Printer Friendly Iladan's resignation was voluntary; there was no illegal dismissal In illegal dismissal cases, the employer has the burden of proving that the employee's dismissal was legal. However, to discharge this burden, the employee must first prove, by substantial evidence, that he had been dismissed from employment.[23] Iladan maintains that she was threatened and coerced by respondents to write the resignation letter, to accept the financial assistance and to sign the waiver and settlement. Consequently, she Insists that her act of resigning was involuntary. The Court is not convinced as we find no proof of Iladan's allegations. It is a settled jurisprudence that it is incumbent upon an employee to prove that his resignation is not voluntary.[24] However, Iladan did not adduce any competent evidence to prove that respondents used force and threat. For intimidation to vitiate consent, the following requisites must be present; (1) that the intimidation paused the consent to be given; (2) that the threatened act be unjust or unlawful; (3) that the threat be real or serious, there being evident disproportion between the evil and the resistance which all men can offer, leading to the choice of doing the act which is forced on the person to do as the lesser evil; and (4) that it produces a well-grounded fear from the fact that the person from whom it comes has the necessary means or ability to inflict the threatened injury to his person or property. In the instant case, not one of these essential elements was amply proven by [Iladan]. Bare allegations of threat or force do not constitute substantial evidence to support a finding of forced resignation.[25] Resignation is the voluntary act of an employee who is in a situation where one believes that personal reasons cannot be sacrificed in favor of the exigency of the service, and one has no other choice but to dissociate oneself from employment. It is a formal pronouncement or relinquishment of an office, with the intention of relinquishing the office accompanied by the act of relinquishment. As the intent to relinquish must concur with the overt act of relinquishment, the acts of the employee before and after the alleged resignation must be considered in determining whether in fact, he or she intended to sever from his or her employment.[26] In the instant case, Iladan executed a resignation letter in her own handwriting. She also accepted the amount of P35,000.00 as financial assistance and executed an Affidavit of Release, Waiver and Quitclaim and an Agreement, as settlement and waiver of any cause of action against respondents. The affidavit of waiver and the settlement were acknowledged/subscribed before Labor Attache Romulo on August 6, 2009, and duly authenticated by the Philippine Consulate. An affidavit of waiver duly acknowledged before a notary public is a public document which cannot be impugned by mere self-serving allegations. Proof of an irregularity in its execution is absolutely elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocsfriendly/1/61554 5/8