Practice question
After an original term expires, the recruiter itself negotiates the new salary, transmits the final agreement, and signs an express approval whose authenticity and authority are proved. It invokes Sunace only because the contract is post-expiry. Which is correct?
- The proved participation prevents mechanically importing Sunace’s no-knowledge-and-consent finding
- Every post-expiry agreement necessarily excludes the recruiter despite its proven acts
- The signed approval must be treated as a savings inquiry
- The worker must prove consent only through reverse imputation
- The agency may erase the evidence by calling it a renewal
Legal references
- Sunace v NLRC GR161757 January25,2006 MAIN: https://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocs/1/40781 Evidence of knowledge and consent; direction of imputation; new post-expiry contract.
- Civil Code: https://lawphil.net/statutes/repacts/ra1949/ra_386_1949.html Article1924.
Answer this question in flashcards to review your response and continue practicing.