GLOBAL PROCESS MANAGERS INC. ND DORIS MAGSAYSAY, PETITIONERS, VS. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION- SECOND DIVISION, PUBLIC RESPONDENT,

On 09 June 2014, a Petition for Certiorari^[1] was filed by Global Process Managers, Inc. and Doris Magsaysay (“Petitioners”) seeking to annul and set aside the Decision^[2] and Resolution^[3] of the National Labor Relations Commission (“Public Respondent”) finding Ronica B. Pineda (“Private Respondent”) illegally dismissed from work and entitled to separation pay, full backwages, moral and exemplary damages, and ten percent (10%) attorney’s fees.

A Resolution^[4] promulgated by this Court on 03 October 2014 directed the Private Respondent to file her Comment on the Petition within ten (10) days from notice. Petitioners were also directed to filed their Reply within five (5) days from receipt of such Comment.

However, a Joint Motion to Withdraw Petition for Certiorari and Motion to Admit Settlement Papers^[5] was filed on 06 February 2015, as pending the resolution of the Petition, Private Respondent entered into an amicable settlement of her monetary claims with Petitioner. Pursuant to a Quitclaim and Release^[6] executed before the Office of Labor-Arbiter Rommel R. Veluz last 27 January 2015, Private Respondent, for and in consideration of ONE MILLION NINE HUNDRED THOUSAND PESOS (Php1,900,000.00), released and discharged Private Respondent from any and all money claims due.

In light of the Order^[7] by Labor-Arbiter dated 27 January 2015 declaring the case “FULLY SATISFIED; CLOSED AND TERMINATED” and lack of evidence of involuntariness, this Court is led to give credence to the validity of the Quitclaim and Release executed by Private Respondent. As per the case of Bantolino v. Coca-Cola Bottlers Phils.^[8],

XXX

“”Not all waivers and quitclaims are invalid as against public policy. If the agreement was voluntarily entered into and represents a reasonable settlement, it is binding on the parties and may not later be disowned simply because of a change of mind. It is only where there is clear proof that the waiver was wangled from an unsuspecting or gullible person, or the terms of settlement are unconscionable on its face, that the law will step in to annul the questionable transaction. But where it is shown that the person making the waiver did so voluntarily, with full understanding of what he was doing, and the consideration for the quitclaim is credible and reasonable, the transaction must be recognized as a valid and binding undertaking.”

XXX

WHEREFORE, based on the foregoing, the Petition for Certiorari is DISMISSED and is hereby declared CLOSED and TERMINATED.

SO ORDERED.

Castillo, M., Chairperson, and Galapate-Laguilles, Z.T., JJ., concur.

---

^[1] Rollo, p. 3.

^[2] Rollo, p. 489.

^[3] Rollo, p. 523.

^[4] Rollo, p. 544.

^[5] Rollo, p. 558.

^[6] Rollo, p. 562.

^[7] Rollo, p. 565.

^[8] Bantolino v. Coca-Cola Bottlers Phils., G.R. No. 153660, June 10, 2003.