Digest: G.R. No. 172589: Jeffrey Nacague v. Sulpicio Lines, Inc.

 Jeffrey Nacague v. Sulpicio Lines, Inc.

G.R. No. 172589 | August 8, 2010

Carpio, J.

 

Facts:

This is a petition for review on the Court of Appeals decision holding that Sulpicio Lines, Inc. complied with both the procedural and substantive requirements of the law when it terminated the employment of Jeffrey Nacague. 

 

Nacague was hired by Sulpicio Lines as "hepe de viaje" or the representative of Sulpicio Lines onboard its vessel M/V Princess of the World (the ship).  Sulpicio Lines received an anonymous letter reporting the use of illegal drugs onboard the ship. Ceasar T. Chico, a housekeeper on the ship, submitted a report regarding the drug paraphernalia found inside the Mopalla Suite Room and the threat on his life made by Nacague and Chief Mate Reynaldo Doroon after he found the drug paraphernalia.

 

Sulpicio Lines then sent a notice of investigation to Nacague informing him of the charges against him for use of illegal drugs and threatening a co-employee. When the ship docked in the port of Manila some crew members of the ship, together with Nacague, were subjected to a random drug test.  They were taken to S.M. Lazo Medical Clinic (S.M. Lazo Clinic) and were required to submit urine samples.  The result of the random drug test revealed that Nacague was positive for methamphetamine hydrochloride or shabu.

 

Sulpicio Lines subjected Nacague to a formal investigation.  Nacague denied using illegal drugs. Nacague then went to Chong Hua Hospital in Cebu City to undergo a voluntary drug test.  The drug test with Chong Hua Hospital yielded a negative result, which was submitted to Sulpicio Lines. However, Sulpicio Lines memorandum to Nacague terminating him from the service. 

 

Feeling aggrieved, Nacague filed a complaint for illegal suspension, illegal dismissal, and for reinstatement with back wages.

 

The Labor Arbiter rendered a decision in favor of Nacague for illegal dismissal. The Labor Arbiter agreed with Nacague that the drug test result from S.M. Lazo Clinic was questionable because the clinic is not accredited by the Dangerous Drug Board and is not under its supervision.

 

The NLRC reversed the decision of the Labor Arbiter. The NLRC also said that there is a presumption that S.M. Lazo Clinic is an accredited drug testing center and that it was incumbent upon Nacague to show otherwise.

 

The Court of Appeals upheld the decision of the NLRC.

 

Issue/s:

Whether or not the Court of Appeals erred in ruling that Nacague’s termination from employment was valid.

 

Ruling: 

No, the termination of Nacague from employment is invalid. Sulpicio Lines failed to clearly show that Nacague was guilty of using illegal drugs. The lack of accreditation of S.M. Lazo Clinic made its drug test results doubtful.

 

Section 36 of R.A. No. 9165 provides that drug tests shall be performed only by authorized drug testing centers.  Moreover, Section 36 also prescribes that drug testing shall consist of both the screening test and the confirmatory test.

 

The law is clear that drug tests shall be performed only by authorized drug testing centers.  In this case, Sulpicio Lines failed to prove that S.M. Lazo Clinic is an accredited drug testing center.  Sulpicio Lines did not even deny Nacague's allegation that S.M. Lazo Clinic was not accredited.  Also, only a screening test was conducted to determine if Nacague was guilty of using illegal drugs.  Sulpicio Lines did not confirm the positive result of the screening test with a confirmatory test.  Sulpicio Lines failed to indubitably prove that Nacague was guilty of using illegal drugs amounting to serious misconduct and loss of trust and confidence.  Sulpicio Lines failed to clearly show that it had a valid and legal cause for terminating Nacague's employment. When the alleged valid cause for the termination of employment is not clearly proven, as in this case, the law considers the matter a case of illegal dismissal.