consequently worked in conjunction with petitioner in processing private respondents deployment.iv[4] On October 13, 1989, Deputy Administrator Cresencio M. Siddayao of the POEA rendered a decision disposing of the case as follows: WHEREFORE, in view of the foregoing, Prime Marine Services, Inc., R & R Management Services, Intl and Arabian Gulf Mechanical Services and Contracting Co. Ltd., are hereby ordered, jointly and severally, to pay complainant the following in Philippines Currency at the prevailing rate of exchange at the time of payment: SR 33,750.00 - representing salaries for the unexpired portion of the contract for 15 months at SR 2,250.00 a month; 350.00 - representing salary differential; 5% percent Attorneys fees of the award. Furthermore, R & R Management Services International is referred to the Antiillegal Recruitment Branch of this Office for appropriate action. Finally, the cross claim of Prime Marine Services, Inc. against R & R Management Services International is dismissed for lack of merit. SO ORDERED. Petitioner filed a motion for reconsideration with the National Labor Relations Commission which the latter treated as an appeal. In its decision, dated February 21, 1991, the NLRC affirmed in toto the POEAs decision. On March 26, 1991, it denied petitioners motion for reconsideration. Hence, this petition containing the following assignment of errors: I. Public respondent NLRC and/or POEA committed grave abuse of discretion when they ignored existing jurisprudence. II. Dismissal of the cross-claim (against private respondent R & R Management) constitutes also grave abuse of discretion. As to its first assignment of error, petitioner contends that the ruling of the NLRC goes against this Courts decision in Ilas v. NLRC.v[5] The contention has no merit. The case of Ilas simply held that a recruitment agency cannot be found liable for unpaid wages and other claims of overseas workers who have been recruited by its agent without its knowledge and consent. The Courts ruling denying liability against the recruitment agency (All Seasons Manpower International Services) was based on the following factual findings of the POEA and the NLRC, which the Court affirmed: