ESPIRIDION M. BRILLO, PLAINTIFF AND APPELLANT, VS. PEDRO BUKLATAN ET AL., DEFENDANTS AND APPELLEES.

This is an appeal taken by plaintiff from an order dismissing his complaint on motion of the defendants.

The
complaint contains four causes of action. In the first, plaintiff, as
President of the Leyte United Workers, seek’s to recover form several
defendants, the amounts of money which the latter, in their respective
capacities as chief foreman and foreman, have been collecting from
several groups of laborers, as their contribution to the funds of the
Leyte United Workers, being a duly registered Labor Union under
Commonwealth Act No. 213, has capacity to sue, and therefore, the
action should have been brought in its name. Plaintiff-appellant admits
that the Leyte United Workers has juridical capacity to sue. If this is
so, the the action should be brought in its own name, and not in the
name of its president, under Rule 3, section 2.

Furthermore,
the first cause of action is composed of separate claims against
several defendants of different amounts each of which is not more that
P2,000 and falls under the jurisdiction of the justice of teh peace
court under section 88 of Republic Act No. 293. The several claims do
not seem to arise from the same transaction or series of transactions
and there seem to be no questions of law or of fact common to all the
defendants as may warrant their joinder under Rule 3, section 6,
Therefore, if new complaints are to be filed in the name of the real
party in interest they should be filed in the justice of teh peace
court.

The second cause of action is directed against the
International Trust Corporation and Pacific Copra Export Company which
are alleged to have entered into a contract with the Leyte United
Workers whereby they agreed to increase by 20 per cent the wages of
their laborers who were members of the Leyte United Workers and they
failed to fulfill the terms of such agreement. It appears, however,
that the Leyte United Workers has already applied with the Court of
Industrial Relations for increase of wages of their laborers working
with the two defendant corporations, and it abandoned the supposed
agreement regarding the increase of 20 per cent after the two defendant
corporations denied having entered into such agreement, and instead it
claimed a general increase of 50 per cent which the Court of Industrial
Relations refused to grant. under such circumstances, the Leyte United
Workers cannot now be allowed to press upon the supposed agreement of
20 per cent increase which was abandoned in the Court of Industrial
relations which is the court with jurisdiction over that subject matter.

The third cause of action is for certiorari
against the Secretary of Labor for having granted licenses to new
unions, namely, the Leyte Stevedoring and Terminal Dock Workers Union
and the Visayan Workers Union, the registration of which is alleged to
be detrimental to Leyte United Workers. It is alleged that the new
labor unions were organized by old members of the Leyte United Workers,
with the aid of the employers, and the result may be the death of the
Leyte United Workers. It is maintained that the action of the Secretary
of Labor in approving the application of the said new labor unions
constitutes an excess of jurisdiction and grave abuse of discretion.

The petition for certiorari
does not lie because the Secretary of Labor did not exercise judicial
function. Furthermore, there is no allegation that the new labor unions
have the purpose of undermining or destroying the constituted
Government or of violating any law or laws of the Philippines, and
therefore, they cannot be denied registration and permission to operate
under section 2, of Commonwealth Act No. 213. (Umali vs. Lovina, 47 Off. gaz., 6196; 86 Phil., 313.)

The
fourth claim alleged in the complaint is a petition for declaratory
relief involving practically the same questions raised in the third
cause of action.

For all the foregoing, the order of dismissal appealed from is affirmed, the costs to be paid by appellant.

Ozaeta, Paras, Pablo, Bengzon, Tuason, Montemayor, and Reyes, JJ., concur.