Practice question
The NLRC en banc temporarily reallocates cases from an overloaded division to another division with capacity during an emergency. The arrangement will impose unnecessary additional expenses on the litigants. The proponents argue that docket convenience alone satisfies RA 9347. Which is best?
- Any transfer is valid whenever one division has fewer cases
- Case reallocation is categorically forbidden
- RA9347 permits temporary or emergency reallocation only under its conditions, including available docket capacity and no unnecessary additional litigant expenses
- Only parties may appoint a new division
- A reallocated case automatically becomes a civil case
Legal references
- https://lawphil.net/statutes/repacts/ra2006/ra_9347_2006.html — RA 9347, section 1: composition, divisions, en banc functions, two-Commissioner concurrence and consultation.
- https://lawphil.net/statutes/repacts/ra1989/ra_6715_1989.html — RA 6715, sections 9 and 27: Labor Arbiter appeals and certified national-interest disputes.
- https://nlrc.dole.gov.ph/site/faq — Official NLRC FAQ, jurisdiction categories: original injunction and certified-dispute jurisdiction, and appellate Labor Arbiter and Article129 jurisdiction.
Answer this question in flashcards to review your response and continue practicing.