In the case of Leo Abad, Romeo Abella et. al vs. San Roque Metals Inc., G.R. No. 255368, May 29, 2024, the Supreme Court held that compromise agreements and settlements between employers and employees that offer employees excessively low amounts are invalid.

In the case of People of the Philippines vs. Antonio M. Talaue, G.R. No. 248652, June 19, 2024, the Supreme Court held that a mayor does not have the positive duty to remit the GSIS premium contributions of all employees within his political subdivision.

The Local Government Code of 1991 refers to municipal mayors as “chief executives” and not “heads of offices” as contemplated under Section 52(g) of RA No. 8291. Moreover, nowhere in the Local Government Code of 1991 does it include the remittance of GSIS premiums as part of the duties of a mayor.

In the case of Bartolome vs. Toyota Quezon Avenue Inc., et al., G.R. No. 254465, April 3, 2024, the Supreme Court has held that demotion, verbal abuse, and indifferent behavior by an employer that forces an employee to resign constitute constructive dismissal.

In the case of C.P. Reyes Hospital vs. Barbosa, G.R. No. 228357, April 16, 2024, the Supreme Court ruled that backwages due to the illegally dismissed probationary employees are not limited to the unexpired portion of the probationary period but cover the time when the compensation was withheld up to reinstatement.

In the case of PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES vs. SI YOUNG OH a.k.a. “STEVE OH,” G.R. No. 262632, June 5, 2024 the Supreme Court reiterated the well-settled rule that the consent of the minor victim is immaterial in human trafficking cases.

In the case of Teodoro B. Bunayog vs. Foscon Shipmanagement Inc.,/ Green Maritime Co., Ltd.,/ Evelyn M. Defensor, G.R. No. 253480, April 25, 2023, consistent with the Court’s constitutional mandate to afford full protection to labor, the Court laid down guidelines to govern the disability benefits claims where the seafarer requests for a third doctor referral.

In the case Argelyn M. Labargan v. People of the Philippines, G.R. No. 246824, December 6, 2023, the Supreme Court emphasized that statements against public officers do not constitute oral defamation when made in relation to their discharge of official duties, unless the prosecution establishes that they were uttered with actual malice.

In the case People of the People of the Philippines vs. Adrian Adrales y Jurado a.k.a. “Alicia Bakla”, the Supreme Court reiterated that under Section 30(a) of the Rule on Examination of a Child Witness (RECW), evidence offered to prove that the alleged victim engaged in other sexual behavior, or offered to prove the sexual predisposition of the alleged victim, is not admissible in any criminal proceeding involving alleged child sexual abuse.

The Supreme Court has emphasized that contract of service or job order workers hired by the Philippine Amusement Gaming Corporation (PAGCOR) are not considered employees under the Civil Service Commission’s (CSC) jurisdiction.

The Supreme Court held that a trademark registered in bad faith is considered as unfair competition under the IP Code. Fraud and bad faith, in terms of trademark, go hand-in-hand. There is no distinction between these concepts since one necessarily presupposes the existence of the other. Under Section 151 of the IP Code, a certificate of registration may be canceled if, among others, it was fraudulently made.