Practice question
A tribunal says doubts reasonably arising from evidence can never favor labor, because only statutory ambiguity matters. The worker replies that no evidence of any material fact is ever needed. Which assessment correctly uses Masing and distinguishes the positions?
- Both propositions are correct.
- The tribunal is correct and Masing concerns only punctuation.
- The worker is correct because protection supplies every missing fact.
- Evidence is irrelevant in every labor proceeding.
- Both positions are overbroad: Masing recognizes reasonably arising evidentiary doubt, but protection does not dispense with establishing material facts.
Legal references
- Civil Code Article 1702: https://lawphil.net/statutes/repacts/ra1949/ra_386_1949.html
- Masing and Sons Development v Rogelio, G.R. 161787, April 27, 2011, main opinion: https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2011/jul2011/gr_161787_2011.html
- Simon v Results Companies, G.R. 249351-52, March 29 2022, main opinion: https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2022/mar2022/gr_249351-52_2022.html
Answer this question in flashcards to review your response and continue practicing.