DREAMLAND HOTEL vs.

JOHNSON Furthermore, Johnson submitted a Certification from DOLE

FACTS
1. Dreamland Hotel c/o its president, Prentice, averred that
he engaged the services of fellow Australian, Johnson,
who allegedly offered to invest in the former’s hotel.
2. Prentice required Johnson to submit his Alien Employment
Permit (AEP) and Tax Identification Number (TIN), which
Johnson supposedly promised to accomplish.
3. The two had an employment agreement which stipulated
that Johnson will serve as operations manager for 3 years.
4. Prentice asked Johnson for the latter’s AEP and TIN.
Johnson purportedly claimed that he already has the
documents in his possession. Three weeks after
commencing hotel operations, Johnson stopped reporting
for work.
Regional Office III, stating that he is exempted from securing
an AEP as a holder of Permanent Resident Visa.
Consequently, the condition imposed upon Johnson’s
employment, if there is any, is in truth without effect to its
validity.
Anent the requirement of securing a TIN to make the contract
of employment efficacious, records show that Johnson secured
his TIN only on December 200728 after his resignation as
operations manager. Nevertheless, this does not negate the
fact that the contract of employment had already become
effective even prior to such date.
In addition to the foregoing, there is no stipulation in the
employment contract itself that the same shall only be effective
upon the submission of AEP and TIN. The petitioners did not
present any proof to support this agreement prior to the
execution of the employment contract.

5. Johnson, on the other hand, claims he was not the one

who offered to invest in Dreamland, stating that it was
Prentice who actively advertised the position of resort
manager.

6. During engagement, Prentice convinced Johnson to give

the former a loan so that the hotel can commence
operations. Johnson accepted the resort manager position
while loaning Prentice $100k.

7. Johnson avers that he was not paid his stipulated salary,

denied benefits, and was not given authority due him as a
resort manager. He was eventually forced to submit his
resignation, of which Prentice considered to be in effect
immediately.

8. Johnson filed a complaint for illegal dismissal and non-

payment of salaries. LA ruled for Prentice, stating that
Johnson voluntarily resigned. NLRC reversed.

ISSUE

WON the employment contract of Johnson is inefficacious

because the said contract is subject to the presentation of
Johnson of his AEP and TIN – NO

RATIO

Johnson has adduced proof that as a permanent resident, he

is exempted from the requirement of securing an AEP as
expressed under Department Order No. 75-06, Series of 2006
of the Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE), which
we quote:

Rule I- Coverage and Exemption

xxxx

2. Exemption. The following categories of

foreign nationals are exempt from securing
an employment permit:

xxxx

2.7 Resident foreign nationals