Filing a Case for Employee Theft of Funds

FILING A CASE FOR EMPLOYEE THEFT OF FUNDS (PHILIPPINE CONTEXT)

Disclaimer: This article is for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For specific cases or scenarios, it is best to consult a qualified lawyer.

1. Overview

Employee theft of funds is a serious matter in the Philippines. It not only undermines an employer’s trust and confidence but also constitutes a criminal offense. Depending on the circumstances, employees who misappropriate company funds may face criminal charges under the Revised Penal Code (RPC). Employers may also pursue separate civil actions to recover the stolen amount.

2. Relevant Laws and Legal Framework

  1. Revised Penal Code (Act No. 3815)

    • Theft (Articles 308–309) – The basic definition and penalties for theft are provided here.
    • Qualified Theft (Article 310) – Theft becomes “qualified” when committed under certain circumstances, including when the offender is a domestic servant or an employee entrusted with the property. Qualified theft generally carries heavier penalties compared to ordinary theft.
    • Estafa (Article 315) – Also known as swindling, estafa can apply when the offender acquires money or property through deceit, abuse of confidence, or fraudulent means. If an employee acquired or withheld funds in such a manner, estafa might be charged as an alternative or together with qualified theft, depending on the factual circumstances.

  2. Labor Code of the Philippines (Presidential Decree No. 442)

    • While the Labor Code primarily deals with employment relations (e.g., hiring, firing, due process, separation pay), it is relevant when an employer contemplates terminating an employee for just causes such as serious misconduct, fraud, or breach of trust.
    • The Labor Code also provides the requirements for due process in administrative proceedings in the workplace (i.e., the so-called “two-notice rule” if the employer decides to terminate the employee).

  3. Rules of Court

    • Governs the procedures for filing criminal cases and civil actions in the Philippines. Complaints must generally be filed before the appropriate office (e.g., the Prosecutor’s Office) before it progresses through the court system.

3. Definitions and Key Concepts

  1. Theft

    • Under Article 308 of the RPC, theft is committed by any person who, with intent to gain, takes personal property belonging to another without the latter’s consent.

  2. Qualified Theft

    • Defined under Article 310 of the RPC. It is a theft committed with grave abuse of confidence, often involving a relationship of trust (e.g., by a domestic servant or employee).
    • Common scenario: An employee entrusted with collecting payments or handling company funds diverts the money for personal use.

  3. Estafa (Swindling)

    • Article 315 of the RPC covers various forms of deceit and abuse of confidence to acquire money or property.
    • If an employee pretends to deposit funds in the company account but keeps them, or if they use false pretenses to obtain money from the employer, estafa might be applicable.

4. Distinguishing Theft from Estafa

  • Theft typically involves taking property without consent, where the property is owned by another (e.g., physically taking cash from a register).
  • Estafa involves fraudulent or deceitful means to obtain or retain property/money. For instance, if the employee is entrusted with the funds for a particular purpose (like depositing it in a bank) but converts them for personal use, that could be estafa (or qualified theft, depending on the facts).

Courts look at the factual circumstances to determine the appropriate charge. If the employee physically takes cash from the drawer without permission, it is often qualified theft. If the employee uses deceit or false representations to gain control of the employer’s funds, it may be estafa.

5. Elements of Qualified Theft

To file a case for qualified theft, the prosecution must generally prove the following elements:

  1. Taking of personal property – The property (e.g., cash, checks) must belong to the employer or company.
  2. Without the consent of the owner – The employer did not authorize the conversion or appropriation of the funds.
  3. Intent to gain – The employee intended to benefit (financially or otherwise).
  4. Qualified by abuse of confidence – There is a fiduciary or trust relationship, such as when the employee is entrusted with custody or control of the funds.

6. Penalties

6.1. Penalties for Qualified Theft

  • Article 309 of the RPC details the penalties for theft depending on the value of the property stolen. Qualified theft under Article 310 imposes penalties two degrees higher than those specified for simple theft.
  • For instance, if the stolen amount falls within a range punishable by prision correccional in simple theft, a conviction for qualified theft might result in a heavier penalty (e.g., prision mayor).
  • The higher penalty recognizes the breach of trust and confidence inherent in an employee’s role.

6.2. Penalties for Estafa

  • The penalties vary depending on the amount involved, generally outlined in Article 315 of the RPC.
  • Estafa sentences can range from arresto mayor to reclusion temporal, depending on the value of the funds and the gravity of the offense.

7. Filing a Criminal Complaint

  1. Internal Investigation

    • Before filing a complaint, employers typically conduct an internal audit or investigation to gather evidence of misappropriation (e.g., financial statements, cash receipts, bank statements, cashier logs).
    • Employers should carefully document all findings (e.g., unusual transactions, witness statements, confessions, or admissions).

  2. Initial Consultation with Legal Counsel

    • It is highly advisable to consult a lawyer to determine the proper charge (theft vs. qualified theft vs. estafa) and to ensure all evidence is gathered and organized properly.

  3. Filing a Complaint with the Prosecutor’s Office

    • In the Philippines, criminal cases generally start by filing a Complaint-Affidavit before the Office of the City or Provincial Prosecutor.
    • The complainant (employer or authorized representative) must attach relevant evidence, including affidavits of witnesses, accounting documents, and any admission or confession from the employee if available.

  4. Preliminary Investigation

    • The Prosecutor will conduct a preliminary investigation to determine whether probable cause exists to charge the accused (employee) in court.
    • The employee, now the respondent, will be required to submit a counter-affidavit and supporting evidence.
    • If the prosecutor finds probable cause, an Information (formal charge) will be filed in the appropriate trial court.

  5. Arraignment and Trial

    • Once the case is filed, the court schedules an arraignment where the accused pleads guilty or not guilty.
    • The trial proceeds with the presentation of evidence from both prosecution and defense.
    • After trial, if the employee is found guilty beyond reasonable doubt, the court will impose the appropriate penalty.

  6. Civil Action for Recovery of Stolen Funds

    • Employers may file a separate civil action or reserve the right to institute it after the criminal case.
    • Alternatively, the civil action can be deemed instituted with the criminal action unless the complainant expressly reserves the right to file it separately.
    • The purpose of the civil action is to recover the stolen amount or seek damages.

8. Gathering Evidence and Best Practices

  1. Documentation

    • Maintain receipts, invoices, ledger entries, bank deposit slips, audit findings, and payroll records that establish a clear paper trail.
    • If the employee has e-mail correspondence or signed acknowledgments of receiving funds, keep those intact.

  2. Testimony from Witnesses

    • Supervisors, co-workers, or auditors who discovered the irregularities can be crucial witnesses.
    • Their affidavits and testimonies should highlight specific instances of misappropriation.

  3. Electronic Evidence

    • In today’s digital age, theft of funds may involve electronic transfers or manipulation of software.
    • Secure logs from the company’s accounting system, transaction history, or internal communications to demonstrate unauthorized changes.

  4. Chain of Custody

    • To ensure evidence is admissible, observe proper handling and custody of evidence.
    • For digital evidence, keep timestamps, relevant metadata, and ensure a clear record of how data was retrieved and stored.

  5. Coordinate with Law Enforcement or Forensic Experts

    • For complex fraud or large-scale financial anomalies, it may be necessary to involve the National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) or other forensic accountants.
    • They can provide expert reports to bolster the credibility of the evidence.

9. Administrative and Labor Implications

  1. Administrative Proceedings (Termination for Just Cause)

    • Under the Labor Code, serious misconduct, fraud, or willful breach of trust are just causes for termination.
    • Employers must observe due process: issue a written notice specifying the grounds for dismissal, allow the employee to explain or defend themselves, and then issue a notice of decision.

  2. Preventive Suspension

    • During the administrative investigation, if the presence of the employee poses a threat to company property or other employees, the employer may place the employee under preventive suspension (not exceeding 30 days in most cases).

  3. Documentation in the 201 File

    • Any disciplinary action taken by the employer should be properly documented in the employee’s 201 file (employee record).

10. Potential Defenses for the Employee

  1. Lack of Criminal Intent

    • The employee may argue there was no intention to gain or permanently deprive the employer of the funds (e.g., confusion in recording transactions, honest mistake).

  2. Authority or Consent

    • The employee might claim they had the employer’s consent to use or handle the funds in a specific way or that the employer regularly allowed such transactions.

  3. Mistaken Identity or Lack of Proof

    • The defense could question the sufficiency of evidence linking the accused to the theft or argue that someone else with access committed the misappropriation.

  4. Good Faith

    • If the accused believed in good faith that they were entitled to the amount (e.g., reimbursement for work-related expenses), they might raise this as a defense.

11. Practical Tips for Employers

  1. Strengthen Internal Controls

    • Implement checks and balances to reduce the likelihood of employee theft (e.g., segregate duties, require dual signatories for significant fund movements, conduct regular audits).

  2. Draft Clear Policies

    • A well-defined employee handbook can outline ethical and legal standards, potential sanctions for misappropriation, and the company’s stance on compliance.

  3. Conduct Regular Audits

    • Periodic financial reviews and surprise cash counts can detect irregularities early.

  4. Maintain Confidentiality

    • Keep investigations discreet to protect the company’s reputation and avoid defamation claims if the allegations are not yet proven.

  5. Seek Legal Advice Early

    • Engaging a lawyer or legal team at the onset ensures that the employer’s actions are consistent with both labor and criminal laws.

12. Conclusion

Filing a case for employee theft of funds in the Philippines involves navigating both criminal and labor law dimensions. The key statutes are found in the Revised Penal Code (particularly on theft, qualified theft, and estafa) and the Labor Code (for due process in termination). Employers must build a solid case by collecting and preserving evidence, following due process requirements, and consulting legal counsel.

Should an employer decide to file criminal charges, the typical steps include filing a complaint-affidavit with the Prosecutor’s Office, undergoing a preliminary investigation, and, if probable cause is found, proceeding to trial. In parallel, employers may also pursue administrative remedies (such as terminating the employee for just cause) and civil remedies (for the recovery of stolen funds).

By maintaining robust internal controls, conducting prompt and fair investigations, and observing proper legal procedures, employers can protect themselves against employee theft and uphold the integrity of their operations.

This article is a general guide and should not be used as a substitute for professional legal counsel. If you need specific legal advice tailored to your situation, consult a licensed attorney in the Philippines.

Disclaimer: This content is not legal advice and may involve AI assistance. Information may be inaccurate.

Privacy Policy

Terms of Use

Lawyer Login

 
 
Privacy Policy         Terms of Use         Lawyer Login