Practice question
A warehouse custodian under investigation retains unrestricted access to valuable goods and records. Evidence establishes a serious and imminent risk of removal of goods or alteration of records if access continues. The employer imposes twenty days of preventive suspension to protect the property while investigating. Is the absence of a final finding of guilt alone fatal to the measure?
- Yes, preventive suspension requires a final dismissal decision first
- Yes, only a criminal conviction can justify it
- No; the proved immediate property threat may justify the temporary protective suspension even though guilt remains to be decided
- No, and the suspension conclusively proves guilt
- Yes, because only threats to life, never property, qualify
Legal references
- https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2021/nov2021/gr_227718_2021.html — Lagamayo v. Cullinan Group, Inc., G.R. 227718, November 11, 2021, main decision: Omnibus Rules, Rule XXIII, sections 8–9; thirty-day limit, reinstatement, paid extension and no reimbursement.
- https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2020/feb2020/gr_225100_2020.html — Every Nation Language Institute v. Dela Cruz, G.R. 225100, February 19, 2020, main decision: preventive suspension is protective, not a penalty; justified initial suspension.
- https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2017/jan2017/gr_207838_2017.html — Maula v. Ximex Delivery Express, Inc., G.R. 207838, January 25, 2017, main decision: serious and imminent threat required.
Answer this question in flashcards to review your response and continue practicing.