Oxales v.

UNILAB
GR 152991
July 21, 2008

Facts: Alberto Oxales was compulsory retired by UNILAB and he received his share in
Trust Fund A, Trust Fund B and unused sick leaves and under United Retirement Plan
(URP). He claimed that total computed retirement pay was lacking P1,775,907.23.
UNILAB countered that provision of the URP excludes commissions, overtime, bonuses,
or extra compensations in the computation of basic salary of the retiring employee.

Issues:
1. W/N in the computation of his retirement and sick leaves
benefits, UNILAB should have factored such benefits like
bonuses, cash and meal allowances, rice rations, service
incentive leaves, and ½ of the 13th month pay
2. W/N RA 7641 is applicable for purposes of computing retirement
benefits
3. W/N UNILAB is liable for moral damages, exemplary damages,
and atty’s fees

Held: 1. The clear language of the URP should be respected. The law respects the
freedom to contract but, at the same time, it is very zealous in protecting the contracting
parties and the public in general. So much so that the contracting parties need not
incorporate existing laws in their contract. §quando abest, proviso parties, adest proviso
legis (when the provision of the party islacking, provision of the law supplies it)
Oxales is not entitled to the additional retirement benefits he is asking because
URP is very clear. URP is not contrary to law, morals, public policy, public order thus it
must be sustained. §inclusio unius est exclusion alterius (inclusion of one is the
exclusion of others)
2. RA 7641 does not apply in view of the URP which gives retiring employee more
than what the law requires. The Retirement Pay Law (RA 7641) only applies in the
situation where (1) there is no collective bargaining agreement/ other applicable
employment contract providing for retirement benefits or (2) there is such agreement
but is below requirements set by law because private contracts cannot derogate from
public law (§pacta privata juri public derogare non possunt).
Legislative intent (RA 7641) because many employers refuse/ neglect to adopt
a retirement plan for their employees due to the absence of any legal compulsion
URP grants more than what the law gives. Oxales is trying to have the best of
both worlds thus a sign of covetousness.
3. Oxales is not entitled to the awards. He claimed that the revocation of his medical
benefits caused him humiliation and anxiety. Medical benefits are not included in the
URP.
After he retired, he joined rival company which gives more reason to discontinue
benefits

DOCTRINE

Management also has its own rights. Justice should be dispensed in light of the
established facts and applicable law and doctrine. RA 7641 applies only when there’s no
agreement/ if there is, is below requirements set by law.