Reference no: EM133398246

Subject: Law on Partnership and Corporation (Philippines)

25 Employees of Concept Builders, Inc. filed with the Labor Arbiter (NLRC) a complaint for illegal dismissal. In due course, the Labor Arbiter issued a Decision finding the Corporation liable and ordered it to pay the illegally dismissed employees a total amount P5,000,000. Concept Builders, Inc. paid only P 2,000,000. To collect for the deficiency, the employees filed with the Labor Arbiter an motion for the issuance of an alias writ of execution. The Labor Arbiter granted the motion. In compliance with the Order, the Sheriff went to the Office of Concept Builders, Inc. to auction away its properties to pay off the judgment deficiency. When the Sheriff arrived at Concept Builders, Inc.'s compound, he was surprised to find out that a different company-- AB Corporation was occupying the place and insists that the sheriff cannot enforce the Labor Arbiter's decision stating that under corporation law, AB Corporation has a separate and distinct personality from Concept Builders, Inc. The Sheriff noted in his return that he cannot enforce the alias writ because Concept Builders, Inc. cannot be found; that AB Corporation is the one occupying the business address of CB Corporation; That Concept Builders, Inc. and AB Corporation has the same Board of Directors and Officers; and that Concept Builders, Inc. and AB Corporation is in the same line of business which is construction.

If you were the Labor Arbiter, would you hold liable AB Corporation for the deficiency judgement of CB Corporation? Explain