6/9/2020 E-Library - Information At Your Fingertips: Printer Friendly ordered Pentagon to pay Adelantar the amount of Dhs 24,738.00 representing the latter’s three (3) months basic salary inclusive of overtime pay. All other claims were denied for lack of merit.[3] Adelantar appealed to the NLRC arguing that the Labor Arbiter erred in granting backwages of only three (3) months and in not granting attorney’s fees, moral and exemplary damages and reinstatement. The NLRC affirmed the Labor Arbiter’s decision and held that under Section 10 of R.A. 8042, otherwise known as the Migrant Workers and Overseas Filipinos Act of 1995, an illegally dismissed contract worker is entitled to the salaries corresponding to the unexpired portion of his contract, or for three (3) months for every year of the unexpired term, whichever is less. Thus, the NLRC awarded backwages to Adelantar equivalent to three (3) months of his basic salary, but exclusive of overtime pay.[4] Aggrieved, Adelantar filed a petition for certiorari with the Court of Appeals. On September 26, 2002, the Court of Appeals rendered judgment modifying the amounts awarded by the Labor Arbiter and the NLRC. The Court of Appeals awarded full backwages to respondent computed from the time of the dismissal up to the finality of the decision. It ruled that Section 10 of R.A. No 8042 is not applicable in this case because said provision only contemplates a fixed period of employment. Moreover, Article 279 of the Labor Code should apply and not Section 10 of R.A. No. 8042, considering that Adelantar’s first contract provided for an unlimited period of employment. Pentagon International Shipping, Inc. filed the instant petition for review on certiorari raising the following arguments: I THE COURT OF APPEALS ERRED IN (a) COMPLETELY IGNORING AND REFUSING TO FOLLOW THE RULING OF THE SUPREME COURT IN THE LANDMARK CASE OF MILLARES, et al. vs. NLRC, et al., G.R. NO. 110524, JULY 29, 2002 AND (b) IN APPLYING PRIMARILY ARTICLES 279 AND 280 OF THE LABOR CODE INSTEAD OF THE MIGRANT WORKERS AND OVERSEAS FILIPINOS ACT OF 1995 (R.A. 8042) AND (c) POEA RULES AND REGULATIONS IN DETERMINING THE LIABILITY OF PETITIONER AND THE EMPLOYMENT STATUS OF RESPONDENT. II THE COURT OF APPEALS ERRED IN RULING THAT THE CONTRACT EXECUTED EXCLUSIVELY BETWEEN RESPONDENT ADELANTAR AND DUBAI PORTS AUTHORITY UNDER FOREIGN LABOR LAWS WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF POEA AND PARTICIPATION OF PENTAGON IS THE VALID AND BINDING CONTRACT CONTRARY TO THE PRINCIPLE OF FORUM NON CONVENIENS elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocsfriendly/1/45733 2/6