Republic of the Philippines

Department of Labor and Employment

NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION
Regional Arbitration Branch No. II
Tuguegarao City, Cagayan

JOSE
Complainant,

- versus - NLRC Case No. RAB-II-11

MACUNAT CORP.,
Respondent.
x - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -x

REPLY TO THE OPPOSITION

TO MOTION FOR THE ISSUANCE OF WRIT OF EXECUTION

COMPLAINANT JOSE, by counsel, unto this Honorable Commission,

respectfully states that:

Prefatory Statements

At the onset, shortly after Labor Arbiter Carpio rendered

judgment declaring COMPLAINANT JOSE was illegally terminated,
ordering, therefore his reinstatement, payment of Back Wages a sum
of P 500,000.00, 13th Month Pay of P 15,000.00, Service Incentive
Leave of P 30,000.00, Holiday Pay of P 20,000.00 and 10%
Attorney’s Fees, COMPLAINANT JOSE, by the undersigned counsel
filed a petition for the issuance of a Writ of Execution in order to
enforce the judgment rendered and to collect the required
reinstatement which was consequently opposed by RESPONDENT
MACUNAT CORP.

Brief Arguments

1. The contentions of the respondent claiming that the Writ of

Execution is not reasonable and premature as they have filed a
Memorandum of Appeal before this Honorable Commission is
bereft of merit.
 2. It should be noted that both PD No. 442 as Amended and
Renumbered per DOLE Dept. Advisory No.1 s. 2015 otherwise
known as Labor Code of the Philippines and the 2011 National
Labor Relations Commission Rules, as Amended have the
similar proviso, viz:

Section 229 of Labor Code of the Philippines:

“xxx xxx xxx

“In any event, the decision of the Labor Arbiter reinstating a

dismissed or separated employee, insofar as the reinstatement
aspect is concerned, shall be immediately be executory, even pending
appeal.” (Underscoring supplied).

Section 19 of the 2011 NLRC Rules, as Amended:

“xxx xxx xxx

“In case the decision of the Labor Arbiter includes an order of

reinstatement, it shall likewise contain: (a) a statement that the
reinstatement aspect is immediately executory; and (b) a directive for
the employer to submit a report of compliance within ten (10) calendar
days from receipt of the said decision.” (Underscoring supplied).

3. Finally, as provided for in Section 229 of the Labor Code of the

Philippines specifically states that the posting of a bond by the
employer shall not stay the execution of reinstatement provided
therein.

Prayer

WHEREFORE, it is respectfully prayed that the Opposition be

considered unmeritorious and the subject Motion for the Issuance of
a Writ of Execution for the Reinstatement of COMPLAINANT JOSE
be granted in accordance with the cited existing law and rules.

Pasay City for Tuguegarao City 10 DECEMBER 2016.

MECSD LAW OFFICE

Counsel for the Complainant JOSE.
Penthouse, Park Avenue Mansions
Park Avenue, Pasay City, 1300
Tel. No. 834-2320/Telefax No. 5510328
2
 Email add: mecsd@gmail.com

By:

MA. ETHEL CHRISTINE S. DIN

Roll No. 25365
PTR No. 2675839/ Pasay/ 02-07-12
IBP No. 881970 / Manila III /2-07-12
MCLE Compliance No. V -0016268/5-11-10

NOTICE OF HEARING
AND EXPLANATION

NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION

Regional Arbitration Branch No. II
Tuguegarao City, Cagayan

ATTY. MABAGAL
Counsel for the defendant MACUNAT CORP.
8/F Chatham House
116 Valero St., Salcedo Village
Makati City, Metro Manila

GREETINGS:

Please take notice that undersigned counsel shall submit the

foregoing Reply to the Opposition to Motion for the Issuance of Writ
of Execution and approval of the Honorable Court on December 21,
2016 at 9:00 A.M.

Further this motion is being filed and served by way of

registered mail with return card as shown below, due only to the
considerable distance of the court and counsel and not for delay or
any ill motive.

MA. ETHEL CHRISTINE S. DIN

3
Copy Furnished:

LAW OFFICE OF ATTY. MABAGAL

Counsel for the defendant MACUNAT CORP.
RR No. _____
8/F Chatham House PCHPO
116 Valero St., Salcedo Village December 10, 2016
Makati City, Metro Manila