Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • DOCTRINE of LARA v. DEL ROSARIO

    Uploaded by

    Samantha Kaye
    22 views1 page
    This case involved former taxi drivers who were dismissed without one month's notice when their employer sold some of his vehicles. The Supreme Court held that the plaintiffs were not entitled to compensation under the Code of Commerce because the New Civil Code, which repealed the Code of Commerce, took effect on August 30, 1950, prior to the plaintiffs' dismissal in September 1950. As the dismissal occurred after the New Civil Code took effect, its provisions applied rather than those of the repealed Code of Commerce relied upon by the plaintiffs.

    Original Description:

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    This case involved former taxi drivers who were dismissed without one month's notice when their employer sold some of his vehicles. The Supreme Court held that the plaintiffs were not entitled to compensation under the Code of Commerce because the New Civil Code, which repealed the Code of Commerce, took effect on August 30, 1950, prior to the plaintiffs' dismissal in September 1950. As the dismissal occurred after the New Civil Code took effect, its provisions applied rather than those of the repealed Code of Commerce relied upon by the plaintiffs.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    22 views1 page

    DOCTRINE of LARA v. DEL ROSARIO

    Uploaded by

    Samantha Kaye
    This case involved former taxi drivers who were dismissed without one month's notice when their employer sold some of his vehicles. The Supreme Court held that the plaintiffs were not entitled to compensation under the Code of Commerce because the New Civil Code, which repealed the Code of Commerce, took effect on August 30, 1950, prior to the plaintiffs' dismissal in September 1950. As the dismissal occurred after the New Civil Code took effect, its provisions applied rather than those of the repealed Code of Commerce relied upon by the plaintiffs.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 1

    LARA v.

    DEL ROSARIO

    April 20, 1954 | Montemayor, J. | Effectivity Clause

    PETITIONER: MANUEL LARA, ET AL.

    RESPONDENTS: PETRONILO DEL ROSARIO, JR.

    SUMMARY: Lara et al were former taxi drivers of the defendant. When the
    latter sold some of his vehicles, the plaintiffs who were no longer needed were
    dismissed. Because their employer did not give them their one month’s salary in
    lieu of the notice required in Article 3! of the "ode of "commerce, this action
    was instituted. SC held that the new Civil Code of the Philippines took effect on
    Aug. 30, 1950. This date is exactly one year after the Official Gazette
    publishing the Code was released for circulation, the said release having been
    made on August 30, 1949. the plaintiffs are not entitled to any compensation,
    the New Civil Code having repealed the Code of Commerce

    DOCTRINE: In this case, the provisions of the Code of Commerce they are
    relying on was already repealed by the New Civil Code. Their Alleged dismissal
    from service without notice took place in September 1950 after the New Civil
    Code took effect.

    You might also like