Synopsis/Syllabi
FIRST DIVISION
[G.R. No. 132564. October 20, 1999]
SAMEER OVERSEAS PLACEMENT AGENCY, INC., petitioner, vs. NATIONAL LABOR
RELATIONS COMMISSION, Third Division, Q.C. and PRISCILA ENDOZO, respondents.
DECISION
PARDO, J.:
The case before the Court is a special civil action for certiorari with application for a temporary
restraining order seeking to set aside the resolution of the National Labor Relations Commission
affirming in toto the decision of Labor Arbiter Andres C. Zaballa finding the termination of
employment of respondent Priscila Endozo as domestic helper in Taiwan as unwarranted and
ordering petitioner to pay her salary for the unexpired portion of her contract of employment of
eleven (11) months and (19) nineteen days amounting to NT$151,996.60, plus ten percent (10%)
thereof as attorney's fees.
The facts are as follows:
In June 1993, respondent Priscila Endozo applied to petitioner Sameer Overseas Employment
Agency, a local recruitment placement agency, for overseas employment in Taiwan as a
domestic helper. As she was initially found to have a "minimal spot" she was advised to rest for
at least two (2) months.
On April 6, 1994, petitioner told respondent Endozo that she would be finally deployed to
Taiwan and required her to pay the amount of P30,000.00, which she did, but petitioner did not
issue any receipt.
On April 8, 1994, respondent Endozo left for Taiwan. She was to be employed as a housemaid of
Sung Kui Mei with a monthly salary of NT$13,380.00 for a period of one year.
However, she stayed in Taiwan only for eleven (11) days as her employer terminated her
services, and sent her home on April 19, 1994 for alleged incompetence.
Immediately upon her return, she confronted petitioner agency and Rose Mahinay of said agency
told her that she was just unlucky and that she would be refunded the amount of P50,000.00.
On June 20, 1995, private respondent filed with the Philippine Overseas Employment
Administration a complaint against petitioner for illegal dismissal, payment of salary
corresponding to the unexpired portion of her contract, illegal exaction, violation of the Labor
Code, falsification of contract of employment, attorneys fees and costs.