CASE DIGEST: SY CHIE JUNK SHOP v. FOITAF

G.R. No. L-30964. May 9, 1988. SY CHIE JUNK SHOP and SY CHIE SENG, Petitioners, v. FEDERACION OBRERA DE LA INDUSTRIA Y OTROS TRABAJADORES DE FILIPINAS (FOITAF), ISMAEL CASIDSID, BIENVENIDO JAVIER, JOSE OBADO, JOSE MACATANGAY, RODOLFO RUBIO and THE COURT OF INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS, Respondents.

FACTS: 

Petitioner Sy Chie Seng, the owner and proprietor of Sy Chie Junk Shop leased premises owned by Alejandro Garcia. Here, the respondent-workers work for the Petitioner until they were allegedly dismissed from their jobs because of their affiliation with the respondent union. Respondent-employees filed a case before the Court of Industrial Relations (CIR) for unfair labor practices. Petitioner denied committing unfair labor practices and reasoned that they close their business due to repeated demands of the Garcia and by invoking the Nationalization of Retail Trade Act for prohibiting them from transferring their place of business. Hence this petition.

ISSUE:

Does the Nationalization of Retail Trade Act justify the cessation of the business operations of the Petitioner?

RULING:

No, the Nationalization of Retail Trade Act cannot be used to justify the cessation of business operations of the Petitioner.

The Nationalization of Retail Trade Act only disallows the putting up of an entirely new or additional business site and not the physical movement of an existing one.

In this case, the Petitioner’s claim that the Nationalization of Retail Trade Act prohibited them to change the physical site of their junk shop does not hold water because it will only apply to an entirely new or additional business site. Here, the Junk Shop will merely relocate because of the demands of the owner of the property; it need not put up an entirely new or additional business site.