Practice question
Two complaints are filed. In the first, a person merely names a corporation as employer and offers no relevant connection, which the corporation denies. In the second, a company admits directly hiring and paying service providers but relies on independent-contractor status. Counsel proposes a single rule that the worker always bears every evidentiary burden and the company never has to support its assertion. Which is correct?
- The proposed rule follows Ditiangkin exactly
- Both complaints automatically succeed
- Neither party ever needs evidence in labor proceedings
- The first involves the claimant’s initial proof of the denied relationship; the second requires substantiation of the company’s asserted independent-contractor classification
- The corporation’s name conclusively answers both cases
Legal references
- Maricalum Mining, G.R. 221813 and 222723, July 23, 2018; Ditiangkin, G.R. 246892, September 21, 2022: https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2022/sep2022/gr_246892_2022.html
- Maricalum Mining, G.R. 221813 and 222723, July 23, 2018: https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2018/jul2018/gr_221813_2018.html
Answer this question in flashcards to review your response and continue practicing.