CHERYLL S. LEUS v. ST. SCHOLASTICA’S COLLEGE WESTGROVE morality referred to in law is public and secular.

red to in law is public and secular. Otherwise, non-believers would therefore

Pregnancy Out of Wedlock | 28 January 2015 | J. Reyes
Nature of Case: Certiorari
Digest maker: Africa
SUMMARY: Leus was working as a non-teaching personnel at St. Scholastica's College
Westgrove (SSCW), a Catholic educational institution. She got pregnant out of wedlock, but
eventually married the father of her child. Later on, she was dismissed by SSCW on the
ground of disgraceful or immoral conduct, hence this illegal dismissal complaint. Court held
that there was no just cause for her termination since the man who impregnated her was
unmarried.
DOCTRINE: If the father of the child is himself unmarried, the woman is not ordinarily
administratively liable for disgraceful and immoral conduct. If the father of the child born
out of wedlock is himself married to a woman other than the mother, then there is a cause
for administrative sanction against either the father or the mother. In such a case, the
"disgraceful and immoral conduct" consists of having extramarital relations with a married
person.
FACTS:
1. Leus was hired by St. Scholastica as asn assistant to its director of the Lay Apostolate and
Community Outreach Directorate. In 2003, she and her boyfriend conceived a child out of
wedlock.
2. Upon learning of her pregnancy, Sr. Quiambao advised her to file a resignation letter. Due
to her refusal, she was formally directed to explain in writing why she should not be
dismissed for engaging in premarital sexual relations and getting pregnant as a result of it.
Leus complied but she was still dismissed from employment on the ground of disgraceful
or immoral conduct. She then filed an illegal dismissal complaint on the ground that SSCW
gravely abused its management prerogative as there was no just cause for dismissal.
3. SSCW argued that they are a Catholic educational institution, which caters exclusively to
young girls; that SSCW would lose its credibility if it would maintain employees who do
not live up to the values and teachings it inculcates to its students.
4. LA dismissed the complaint and held that Leus’ pregnancy is disgraceful and immoral.
Therefore, her dismissal is not without just cause.
be compelled to conform to a standard of conduct buttressed by a religious belief.
- To be considered disgraceful or immoral, it must be detrimental (or dangerous) to those
conditions upon which depend the existence and progress of human society and not because
the conduct is proscribed by the beliefs of one religion or the other.”
- Under these tests, these are the conclusions for cases involving an unmarried woman who
gives birth out of wedlock:
a. If the father of the child is himself unmarried, the woman is not ordinarily
administratively liable for disgraceful and immoral conduct.
b. If the father of the child born out of wedlock is himself married to a woman other than
the mother, then there is a cause for administrative sanction against either the father or
the mother. In such a case, the "disgraceful and immoral conduct" consists of having
extramarital relations with a married person.
- In this case, the father of her child was unmarried. Therefore, Leus cannot be held liable for
disgraceful and immoral conduct. Consequently, there is no just cause for her dismissal.
- The argument of SSCW that her pregnancy cause grave scandal to the institution and its
students is without basis. In fact, Leus is a non-teaching personnel; her interaction with
SSCW's students is very limited. It is thus quite impossible that her pregnancy out of
wedlock caused such a grave scandal, as claimed by SSCW, as to warrant her dismissal.
- It was also held that she shall be paid the separation pay in lieu of actual reinstatement as
her continued employment of the petitioner with SSCW would only serve to intensify the
atmosphere of antipathy and antagonism between the parties.
RULING: LA ruling REVERSED.

ISSUE/S & RATIO:

1. WON there was a just cause for Leus’ dismissal. — NO
- The determination of whether a conduct is disgraceful or immoral involves a two-step
process: 1) a consideration of the totality of the circumstances surrounding the conduct; and
2) an assessment of the said circumstances vis-à-vis the prevailing norms of conduct, i.e.,
what the society generally considers moral and respectable.
- In the case of Estrada v. Escritor,it was held that the distinction between public and secular
morality on the one hand, and religious morality, on the other, should be kept in mind. The