4/15/2021 E-Library - Information At Your Fingertips: Printer Friendly Upon motion of any interested party, the Voluntary Arbitrator or panel of Voluntary Arbitrators or the Labor Arbiter in the region where the movant resides, in case of the absence or incapacity of the Voluntary Arbitrator or panel of Voluntary Arbitrators, for any reason, may issue a writ of execution requiring either the sheriff of the Commission or regular courts or any public official whom the parties may designate in the submission agreement to execute the final decision, order or award. In not a few instances, the Court has variably applied the 10-day period provided in Article 276 of the Labor Code and the 15-day period in Section 4, Rule 43 of the Rules of Court in determining the proper period of appeal from a decision or award rendered by a Voluntary Arbitrator or a Panel thereof to the CA. In 2004, the Court in Sevilla Trading Company v. Semana;[60] Manila Midtown Hotel v. Borromeo;[61] and Nippon Paint Employees Union-Olalia v. Court of Appeals[62] ruled that the decision of the Voluntary Arbitrator becomes final and executory after the lapse of the 15-day reglementary period within which to file a petition for review under Rule 43. In 2005, the Court made reference for the first time to the 10-day period for the filing of a petition for review from decisions or awards of Voluntary Arbitrators in Coca-Cola Bottlers Philippines, Inc., Sales Force Union-PTGWO-Balais v. Coca-Cola Bottlers Philippines, Inc.[63] This 10-day period was then applied in the same year in Philex Gold Philippines, Inc. v. Philex Bulawan Supervisors Union[64] in declaring the appeal to have been timely filed. The 15-day reglementary period to appeal under Rule 43 was reiterated in 2007 in Leyte IV Electric Cooperative, Inc. v. LEYECO IV Employees Union-ALU;[65] in 2008 in AMA Computer College-Santiago City, Inc. v. Nacino;[66] and Mora v. Avesco Marketing Corporation;[67] in 2009 in Samahan ng mga Manggagawa sa Hyatt-Nuwhrain-APL v. Voluntary Arbitrator Bacungan;[68] in 2010 in Saint Luis University, Inc. v. Cobarrubias,[69] in 2011 in Samahan Ng Mga Manggagawa sa Hyatt v. Hon. Voluntary Arbitrator Magsalin;[70] and in 2013 in Royal Plant Workers Union v. Coca-Cola Bottlers Philippines, Inc.-Cebu Plant.[71] However, in the 2014 case of Philippine Electric Corporation (PHILEC) v. Court of Appeals;[72] 2015 case of Baronda v. Court of Appeals;[73] and 2017 case of NYK-FIL Ship Management, Incorporated v. Dabu,[74] the Court applied the 10-day appeal period.[75] The period to be followed in appealing decisions or awards of Voluntary Arbitrators or Panel of Arbitrators had been settled once and for all by the Court sitting en banc in Guagua National Colleges v. Court of Appeals.[76] In this case, the Court ruled that the 10-day period stated in Article 276 of the Labor Code should be understood as the period within which the party adversely affected by the ruling of the Voluntary Arbitrator or the Panel may file a motion for reconsideration.[77] This is in line with the pronouncement in Teng v. Pahagac[78] where the Court had clarified that the 10-day period set in Article 276 of the Labor Code gave the aggrieved parties the opportunity to file their motion for reconsideration, in keeping with the principle of exhaustion of administrative remedies. Viz.: https://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocsfriendly/1/66237 13/37