"The heart has reasons of its own which reason does not know"
- Blaise Pascal
- Blaise Pascal
"There are stories of love deemed by others as inappropriate. However, true love defies odds, move mountains, and for this instance, compels a Supreme Court Justice to be extra-mushy in his ruling."
Law students love this case.. in fact it was considered one of the well read cases searched in its original script. The yellowing pages of the SCRA.
Not only because of the tidal reversal decisions it went through from administrative, quasi-judicial, and judicial bodies that took cognizance of it by virtue of their respective jurisdictions, but the controversy and the uniqueness of the situation that were it not for it this would have been just another case of illegal dismissal.
In fact one tiny portion of the decision was lifted and went down in courts history as one of the Top 5 Best Supreme Court Love Quotes of all times. The words topped the survey and the case etched its own engraving as one of the most favorite landmark cases of all times.
"If the two eventually fell in love, despite the disparity in their ages and academic levels, this only lends substance to the truism that 'the heart has reasons of its own which reason does not know'." - Chua-Qua vs Clave 189 SCRA 117
The underlined words were of course borrowed from a famous saying of Blaise Pascal. But the effect had perfectly complemented and fit the whole structure of this high court's lingering quote upon which it was invoked.
The case was decided by a three (3) man division chaired by no less than Justice Ameurfina Melencio Herrera, the other two justices were Justice Paras and Justice Padilla. Indeed a woman's sense of judgment is never deserving to be downplayed.
Although I am not sure about the ponente who wrote this decision but I'm thinking it was Justice Regalado who penned it. Judging by the choice of words mannerly pervading with great Filipino writers that proliferated and stood engraved in the halls of our Modern Philippine Literature, the likes of Jose Garcia Villa, Nick Joaquin, Carlos Bulosan, Sionil Jose. Justice Florenz D. Regalado is considered one of the high court's illustrious judicial writers of all times.
Some none-legal writers nowadays even refer to it (the Chua-Clave case) as "A truly remarkable case wherein the Supreme Court ruled in favor of “love”. Yes. This was a love story. The case was decided in 1990 but the dispute arose in 1976. This is a story of a teacher who fell in-love with her student and the student felt the same. Or should we appropriately say the student falling in love with his teacher and the teacher in the course of her lessons have learned to develop feelings for her student.
What aggravated the case is the marriage of both. Herein petitioner (30 years of age) who as we have established was a classroom teacher, entered into matrimony with her student who was fourteen (14) years her junior. This was considered by the school authorities as sufficient basis for terminating her services.
Allow me to proudly present to you the facts of the case:
Private respondent Tay Tung High School, Inc. is an educational institution in Bacolod City. Petitioner herein Evelyn Chua was a teacher therein employed since 1963 and was the class adviser in the sixth grade during 1976 where one Bobby Qua was enrolled.
It was the policy of the school to extend remedial instructions to its students usually conducted after the regular class hours and so therefore Bobby Qua was imparted with such instructions in school by petitioner teacher Evelyn Chua same as other students as well.
But here's the thing..
In the course thereof?.. the couple fell in love.
And on December 24, 1975, they got married. Evelyn was 30 years old and Bobby, 16 years old, an age gap of 14 years.
LABOR ARBITER:
Consequently, on February 4, 1976 Tay Tung High School filed with the Labor Arbiter an application for clearance to terminate Evelyn’s employment stating her “actuations as a teacher constitute serious misconduct, if not an immoral act, a breach of trust and confidence reposed upon her and, thus, a valid and just ground to terminate her services”. And that she violated the Code of Ethics for Teachers, the pertinent provision of which states that 'a school official or teacher should never take advantage of his/her position to court a pupil or student’.” And that such act were "abusive and unethical amounting to a conduct unbecoming of a dignified school teacher and that her continued employment is inimical to the best interest, and would downgrade the high moral values, of the school."
Evelyn Chua was placed under suspension without pay on March 12, 1976. The Bacolod City NLRC Executive Labor Arbiter to whom the case was certified for resolution, required the parties to submit their position papers and supporting evidence. Affidavits were submitted by private respondent school to bolster its contention that petitioner Evelyn Chua..
First blood drawn... listen to this..
"defying all standards of decency, recklessly took advantage of her position as school teacher, lured a Grade VI boy under her advisory section and 15 years her junior into an amorous relation."
Tsk tsk - Such strong conclusive words huh?..
What the school was trying to establish here was the existence of an amorous relationship manifested within the premises of the school, inside the classroom, and within the sight of some employees. More specifically, private respondent raised issues on the fact that petitioner stayed alone with Bobby Qua in the classroom after school hours when everybody had gone home, with one door allegedly locked and the other slightly open.
But to the contrary..
Neither was there a direct evidences, or actual witnesses introduced to show that immoral acts were committed during those times, all the respondent school could do was point out that said scenario was enough for a sane and credible mind to imagine and conclude what transpired and took place during those times.
Now comes the arbitrary decision of the Labor Arbiter..
On September 17, 1976, Executive Labor Arbiter Jose Y. Aguirre, Jr., WITHOUT CONDUCTING ANY FORMAL HEARING, rendered an "Award" in favor of private respondent granting the clearance to terminate the employment of petitioner.
APPEAL TO THE NLRC:
Petitioner, however, denied having received any copy of the affidavits referred to. And so on October 7, 1976, petitioner appealed to the National Labor Relations Commission claiming denial of due process further contending that there was nothing immoral, nor was it abusive and unethical conduct unbecoming of a dignified school teacher, for a teacher to enter into lawful wedlock with her student.
Our heroine fights back..
December 27, 1976, the National Labor Relations Commission UNANIMOUSLY REVERSED the Labor Arbiter's decision and ordered petitioner's reinstatement with back-wages.
Here's the NLRC's findings..
Law students love this case.. in fact it was considered one of the well read cases searched in its original script. The yellowing pages of the SCRA.
Not only because of the tidal reversal decisions it went through from administrative, quasi-judicial, and judicial bodies that took cognizance of it by virtue of their respective jurisdictions, but the controversy and the uniqueness of the situation that were it not for it this would have been just another case of illegal dismissal.
In fact one tiny portion of the decision was lifted and went down in courts history as one of the Top 5 Best Supreme Court Love Quotes of all times. The words topped the survey and the case etched its own engraving as one of the most favorite landmark cases of all times.
"If the two eventually fell in love, despite the disparity in their ages and academic levels, this only lends substance to the truism that 'the heart has reasons of its own which reason does not know'." - Chua-Qua vs Clave 189 SCRA 117
The underlined words were of course borrowed from a famous saying of Blaise Pascal. But the effect had perfectly complemented and fit the whole structure of this high court's lingering quote upon which it was invoked.
The case was decided by a three (3) man division chaired by no less than Justice Ameurfina Melencio Herrera, the other two justices were Justice Paras and Justice Padilla. Indeed a woman's sense of judgment is never deserving to be downplayed.
Although I am not sure about the ponente who wrote this decision but I'm thinking it was Justice Regalado who penned it. Judging by the choice of words mannerly pervading with great Filipino writers that proliferated and stood engraved in the halls of our Modern Philippine Literature, the likes of Jose Garcia Villa, Nick Joaquin, Carlos Bulosan, Sionil Jose. Justice Florenz D. Regalado is considered one of the high court's illustrious judicial writers of all times.
Some none-legal writers nowadays even refer to it (the Chua-Clave case) as "A truly remarkable case wherein the Supreme Court ruled in favor of “love”. Yes. This was a love story. The case was decided in 1990 but the dispute arose in 1976. This is a story of a teacher who fell in-love with her student and the student felt the same. Or should we appropriately say the student falling in love with his teacher and the teacher in the course of her lessons have learned to develop feelings for her student.
What aggravated the case is the marriage of both. Herein petitioner (30 years of age) who as we have established was a classroom teacher, entered into matrimony with her student who was fourteen (14) years her junior. This was considered by the school authorities as sufficient basis for terminating her services.
Allow me to proudly present to you the facts of the case:
Private respondent Tay Tung High School, Inc. is an educational institution in Bacolod City. Petitioner herein Evelyn Chua was a teacher therein employed since 1963 and was the class adviser in the sixth grade during 1976 where one Bobby Qua was enrolled.
It was the policy of the school to extend remedial instructions to its students usually conducted after the regular class hours and so therefore Bobby Qua was imparted with such instructions in school by petitioner teacher Evelyn Chua same as other students as well.
But here's the thing..
In the course thereof?.. the couple fell in love.
And on December 24, 1975, they got married. Evelyn was 30 years old and Bobby, 16 years old, an age gap of 14 years.
LABOR ARBITER:
Consequently, on February 4, 1976 Tay Tung High School filed with the Labor Arbiter an application for clearance to terminate Evelyn’s employment stating her “actuations as a teacher constitute serious misconduct, if not an immoral act, a breach of trust and confidence reposed upon her and, thus, a valid and just ground to terminate her services”. And that she violated the Code of Ethics for Teachers, the pertinent provision of which states that 'a school official or teacher should never take advantage of his/her position to court a pupil or student’.” And that such act were "abusive and unethical amounting to a conduct unbecoming of a dignified school teacher and that her continued employment is inimical to the best interest, and would downgrade the high moral values, of the school."
Evelyn Chua was placed under suspension without pay on March 12, 1976. The Bacolod City NLRC Executive Labor Arbiter to whom the case was certified for resolution, required the parties to submit their position papers and supporting evidence. Affidavits were submitted by private respondent school to bolster its contention that petitioner Evelyn Chua..
First blood drawn... listen to this..
"defying all standards of decency, recklessly took advantage of her position as school teacher, lured a Grade VI boy under her advisory section and 15 years her junior into an amorous relation."
Tsk tsk - Such strong conclusive words huh?..
What the school was trying to establish here was the existence of an amorous relationship manifested within the premises of the school, inside the classroom, and within the sight of some employees. More specifically, private respondent raised issues on the fact that petitioner stayed alone with Bobby Qua in the classroom after school hours when everybody had gone home, with one door allegedly locked and the other slightly open.
But to the contrary..
Neither was there a direct evidences, or actual witnesses introduced to show that immoral acts were committed during those times, all the respondent school could do was point out that said scenario was enough for a sane and credible mind to imagine and conclude what transpired and took place during those times.
Now comes the arbitrary decision of the Labor Arbiter..
On September 17, 1976, Executive Labor Arbiter Jose Y. Aguirre, Jr., WITHOUT CONDUCTING ANY FORMAL HEARING, rendered an "Award" in favor of private respondent granting the clearance to terminate the employment of petitioner.
APPEAL TO THE NLRC:
Petitioner, however, denied having received any copy of the affidavits referred to. And so on October 7, 1976, petitioner appealed to the National Labor Relations Commission claiming denial of due process further contending that there was nothing immoral, nor was it abusive and unethical conduct unbecoming of a dignified school teacher, for a teacher to enter into lawful wedlock with her student.
Our heroine fights back..
December 27, 1976, the National Labor Relations Commission UNANIMOUSLY REVERSED the Labor Arbiter's decision and ordered petitioner's reinstatement with back-wages.
Here's the NLRC's findings..
The Commission stated "Even if we have to strain our sense of moral values to accommodate the conclusion of the Arbiter, we could not deduce anything immoral or scandalous about a girl and a boy talking inside a room after classes with lights on and with the door open. Furthermore, Tay Tung High School naively insisted that the clearance application was precipitated by immoral acts which did not lend dignity to the position of Evelyn Chua. Aside from such gratuitous assertions of immoral acts or conduct unbecoming, no evidence to support such claims was introduced by the school officials. We reviewed the sequence of events from the beginning of the relationship between appellant Evelyn Chua and Bobby Qua up to the date of the filing of the present application for clearance in search of evidence that could have proved detrimental to the image and dignity of the school but none has come to our attention."
APPEAL TO DOLE:
So.. ehem.. dig that.. it's like winning the lottery and dying the next day..
Public respondent Hon. Jacobo C. Clave reasoned out and may I quote "This Office did not limit itself to the legal issues involved in the case, but went further to view the matter from the standpoint of policy which involves the delicate task of rearing and educating of children whose interest must be held paramount in the school community, and on this basis, this Office deemed it wise to uphold the judgment and action of the school authorities in terminating the services of a teacher whose actuations and behavior, in the belief of the school authorities, had spawned ugly rumors that had cast serious doubts on her integrity, a situation which was considered by them as not healthy for a school campus, believing that a school teacher should at all times act with utmost circumspection and conduct herself beyond reproach and above suspicion" (The fella has a point.. let's see if it will hold..)
And so our heroine had no choice but to continue the fight elevating the case to the Supreme Court by virtue of a petition for certiorari..
ISSUE:
Was her dismissal valid? Did petitioner commit an immoral act as a teacher warranting dismissal from work?
RULING:
The Supreme Court declared the dismissal illegal saying:
“Private respondent (the school) utterly failed to show that petitioner (30-year old lady teacher) took advantage of her position to court her student (16-year old). The petitioner’s dismissal was based solely on her marriage to Bobby Qua and the imputed charges of abuse, immorality and unethical conduct were unsubstantiated. Finding that there is no substantial evidence of the imputed immoral acts, it follows that the alleged violation of Code of Ethics governing school teachers would have no basis.
If the two eventually fell in love, despite the disparity in their ages and academic levels, this only lends substance to the truism that the heart has reasons of its own which reason does not know. But, definitely, yielding to this gentle and universal emotion is not to be so casually equated with immorality. The deviation of the circumstances of their marriage from the usual societal pattern cannot be considered as a defiance of contemporary social mores.”
Petition for certiorari granted, private respondent is ordered to pay petitioner back wages equivalent to three years without deduction and separation pay of one month for every year of service.
Here's a more concrete basis..
Court said.. It would seem quite obvious that the avowed policy of the school in rearing and educating children is being unnecessarily bannered to justify the dismissal of petitioner. This policy, however, is not at odds with and should not be capitalized on to defeat the SECURITY OF TENURE granted by the Constitution to labor. In termination cases, the burden of proving just and valid cause for dismissing an employee rests on the employer and his failure to do so would result in a finding that the dismissal is unjustified. The charge against petitioner not having been substantiated, we declare her dismissal as unwarranted and illegal.
The petition for certiorari was GRANTED and the resolution of public respondent Jacobo Clave is ANNULLED and SET ASIDE.
The teacher Evelyn Chua-Cua wins the case.. redeems her dignity.. and the heart of the person she loves.
Indeed, the heart has its own mind that even the own mind cannot fathom.
APPEAL TO DOLE:
Here now comes the school elevating the case to the Minister of Labor who, on March 30, 1977, REVERSED the decision of the NLRC. The teacher was, however, awarded six (6) months salary as financial assistance.
APPEAL to the OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT OF THE PHIL.:
Petitioner appealed the said decision to the Office of the President of the Philippines. (Ferdinand E. Marcos). After the corresponding exchanges, on September 1, 1978 said office, through Presidential Executive Assistant Hon. Jacobo C. Clave rendered its decision REVERSING the DOLE decision. Private respondent SCHOOL was ordered to reinstate petitioner EVELYN CHUA to her former position without loss of seniority rights and other privileges and with full back wages from the time she was not allowed to work until the date of her actual reinstatement.
So.. tsk tsk tsk.. considering that the case run the gamut of three prior adjudications of such administrative and quasi-judicial bodies with alternating reversals, well.. of course we would think that the petitioner teacher's calvary is now ended..
but wait.. there's more..
In a resolution dated December 6, 1978, public respondent Hon. Jacobo C. Clave, acting on a motion for reconsideration of herein private respondent school and despite opposition thereto, RECONSIDERED and MODIFIED the aforesaid decision, this time giving due course to the application of Tay Tung High School, Inc. to terminate the services of petitioner as classroom teacher but giving her separation pay equivalent to her six (6) months salary.
APPEAL to the OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT OF THE PHIL.:
Petitioner appealed the said decision to the Office of the President of the Philippines. (Ferdinand E. Marcos). After the corresponding exchanges, on September 1, 1978 said office, through Presidential Executive Assistant Hon. Jacobo C. Clave rendered its decision REVERSING the DOLE decision. Private respondent SCHOOL was ordered to reinstate petitioner EVELYN CHUA to her former position without loss of seniority rights and other privileges and with full back wages from the time she was not allowed to work until the date of her actual reinstatement.
So.. tsk tsk tsk.. considering that the case run the gamut of three prior adjudications of such administrative and quasi-judicial bodies with alternating reversals, well.. of course we would think that the petitioner teacher's calvary is now ended..
but wait.. there's more..
In a resolution dated December 6, 1978, public respondent Hon. Jacobo C. Clave, acting on a motion for reconsideration of herein private respondent school and despite opposition thereto, RECONSIDERED and MODIFIED the aforesaid decision, this time giving due course to the application of Tay Tung High School, Inc. to terminate the services of petitioner as classroom teacher but giving her separation pay equivalent to her six (6) months salary.
Public respondent Hon. Jacobo C. Clave reasoned out and may I quote "This Office did not limit itself to the legal issues involved in the case, but went further to view the matter from the standpoint of policy which involves the delicate task of rearing and educating of children whose interest must be held paramount in the school community, and on this basis, this Office deemed it wise to uphold the judgment and action of the school authorities in terminating the services of a teacher whose actuations and behavior, in the belief of the school authorities, had spawned ugly rumors that had cast serious doubts on her integrity, a situation which was considered by them as not healthy for a school campus, believing that a school teacher should at all times act with utmost circumspection and conduct herself beyond reproach and above suspicion" (The fella has a point.. let's see if it will hold..)
And so our heroine had no choice but to continue the fight elevating the case to the Supreme Court by virtue of a petition for certiorari..
ISSUE:
Was her dismissal valid? Did petitioner commit an immoral act as a teacher warranting dismissal from work?
RULING:
The Supreme Court declared the dismissal illegal saying:
“Private respondent (the school) utterly failed to show that petitioner (30-year old lady teacher) took advantage of her position to court her student (16-year old). The petitioner’s dismissal was based solely on her marriage to Bobby Qua and the imputed charges of abuse, immorality and unethical conduct were unsubstantiated. Finding that there is no substantial evidence of the imputed immoral acts, it follows that the alleged violation of Code of Ethics governing school teachers would have no basis.
If the two eventually fell in love, despite the disparity in their ages and academic levels, this only lends substance to the truism that the heart has reasons of its own which reason does not know. But, definitely, yielding to this gentle and universal emotion is not to be so casually equated with immorality. The deviation of the circumstances of their marriage from the usual societal pattern cannot be considered as a defiance of contemporary social mores.”
Petition for certiorari granted, private respondent is ordered to pay petitioner back wages equivalent to three years without deduction and separation pay of one month for every year of service.
Here's a more concrete basis..
The petition for certiorari was GRANTED and the resolution of public respondent Jacobo Clave is ANNULLED and SET ASIDE.
The teacher Evelyn Chua-Cua wins the case.. redeems her dignity.. and the heart of the person she loves.
Indeed, the heart has its own mind that even the own mind cannot fathom.
