It is not for an employee to prove
non-payment of benefits to which he is entitled by law. Rather, it is on the
employer that the burden of proving payment of these claims rests.
SCII
(employer) presented payroll listings and transmittal letters to the bank to
show that Canoy and Pigcaulan (employees) received their salaries as well as
benefits which it claimed are already integrated in the employees’ monthly
salaries. However, the documents presented do not prove SCII’s allegation. SCII failed to show any other concrete proof
by means of records, pertinent files or similar documents reflecting that the
specific claims have been paid. With
respect to 13th month pay, SCII presented proof that this benefit was paid but
only for the years 1998 and 1999. To
repeat, the burden of proving payment of these monetary claims rests on SCII,
being the employer. It is a rule that one
who pleads payment has the burden of proving it. “Even when the plaintiff alleges non-payment,
still the general rule is that the burden rests on the defendant to prove
payment, rather than on the plaintiff to prove non-payment.” Since SCII failed
to provide convincing proof that it has already settled the claims, Pigcaulan
should be paid his holiday pay, service incentive leave benefits and
proportionate 13th month pay for the year 2000. (ABDULJUAHID R. PIGCAULAN vs. SECURITY and CREDIT INVESTIGATION,INC., G.R. No. 173648, January 16, 2012)
The Hotel Casino & Racetrack, Wilkes-Barre, PA - MapYRO
ReplyDeleteFind The Hotel 광양 출장샵 Casino & Racetrack, 속초 출장샵 Wilkes-Barre, 상주 출장마사지 PA 포항 출장샵 real-time prices, 문경 출장마사지 Hotel Overview.