Do You Need to Reply to an Appellant’s Rejoinder in an NLRC Appeal?

Short answer

No—there’s generally no need (and no requirement) to reply to an appellant’s rejoinder in an NLRC appeal. The NLRC Rules contemplate an appeal memorandum and an answer/comment. Anything after that—such as a “reply” or “rejoinder”—is not a matter of right and is entertained only at the Commission’s discretion. If your opponent files a rejoinder, you’re not in default if you don’t respond. Consider replying only if the rejoinder raises genuinely new and material matters and, even then, keep your filing targeted and procedural.

The procedural frame

What the NLRC Rules actually contemplate on appeal

Memorandum of Appeal (by appellant). Filed within the reglementary period (generally 10 calendar days from receipt of the Labor Arbiter’s decision).
Answer/Comment (by appellee). Typically 10 calendar days from receipt of the memorandum of appeal.
Resolution by the Commission. Appeals are generally decided on the record and the parties’ written submissions; technical rules are not strictly applied in labor cases, but timelines still matter.

The Rules do not grant a right to file a reply, rejoinder, or sur-rejoinder. The Commission may admit additional pleadings in its discretion when helpful to a full and fair resolution, but it can also ignore or strike superfluous filings.

What a “rejoinder” is (and why it’s often unnecessary)

A “rejoinder” is typically a second-layer responsive pleading—e.g., appellant replies to your answer. Because the NLRC appeal is designed to be streamlined, the Commission expects arguments to be fully laid out in the appeal and the answer. Repetitive back-and-forths rarely assist and can delay resolution.

Should you respond to a rejoinder?

Use this decision rule:

Do not respond when the rejoinder:
- Merely repeats points already raised in the appeal; or
- Offers new arguments that could (and should) have been raised earlier and don’t affect the outcome.
Consider a narrowly tailored response when the rejoinder:
- Introduces new, material issues (e.g., a fresh legal theory that, if unaddressed, could mislead);
- Attaches new evidence not previously submitted (you may want to object to admissibility, explain why it’s belated, or rebut if the Commission is likely to consider it); or
- Misstates critical facts or procedural history in a way that could prejudice your case.

If you decide to file, label it prudently (e.g., “Manifestation with Motion to Admit Comment on Rejoinder (Ad Cautelam)”) and explain that you limit your comments to new matters raised in the rejoinder. This shows respect for the Commission’s streamlined process.

Practical playbook

1) If you won’t respond

File nothing. The case will be deemed submitted for resolution after the lapse of the period for the answer/comment or upon completion of the pleadings the Commission allows.
You don’t waive your arguments by staying silent on a rejoinder that is repetitive or improper.

2) If you will respond (because of new, material matters)

Form & tone: A short manifestation/comment is better than a sprawling brief.
Scope: Confine the discussion to new arguments or attachments in the rejoinder. Say so expressly.
Objections: If new evidence appears:
- Object to admissibility as belated or self-serving, and note lack of opportunity for the Labor Arbiter to pass upon it.
- Argue prejudice and surprise, and that it offends the level-playing-field rationale of appellate review in the NLRC.
- Preserve your position by also providing focused rebuttal in case the Commission opts to consider it “in the interest of substantial justice.”
Prayer: Ask the Commission to (a) note your manifestation, (b) disregard the rejoinder (or the new evidence) for being improper, or (c) alternatively, consider your brief rebuttal solely on the new point.

3) Timing & service

There’s no fixed period for a sur-rejoinder in the Rules. If you file one, do it promptly (e.g., within a reasonable time from receipt of the rejoinder and before the case is marked submitted for decision).
Always include proof of service on the opposing party.

Substantive and evidentiary angles to remember

No new issues on appeal. Appellants may not raise issues for the first time on appeal; object when they try to smuggle new theories in a rejoinder.
New evidence is disfavored. The NLRC is not a trier of facts in the same way the Arbiter is. Exceptionally, it may receive additional evidence to avoid manifest injustice, but the proponent bears a heavy burden to justify lateness and materiality.
Burden of proof stays put. The employer still bears the burden to prove just/authorized cause and due process; employees bear the burden on money claims they assert. A rejoinder doesn’t shift burdens.
Substantial evidence standard. The Commission decides on substantial evidence—reiterations in a rejoinder don’t raise the quantum.

Risk management: when silence is the better strategy

Often, replying to every paper:

Bloats the record without improving your odds;
Signals weakness (appearing rattled by weak points); and
Invites more filings, slowing resolution.

If the rejoinder is harmless or redundant, rest on your answer. The Commission appreciates focus and economy.

Model boilerplates (copy-friendly)

A. If you won’t respond

Manifestation (No Further Pleadings Necessary) Appellee respectfully manifests that appellant’s rejoinder raises no new or material matters warranting further comment. The issues are fully joined by the appeal and the answer. Appellee submits the case for resolution.

B. If you will respond (limited)

Manifestation with Motion to Admit Comment on Rejoinder (Ad Cautelam) Appellee respectfully seeks leave to admit this brief comment limited to new matters raised in appellant’s rejoinder dated ____. I. Objection to New Evidence/Issues. The annexes marked ____ are belated and inadmissible on appeal; no justification for late submission is shown. II. Rebuttal (In the Alternative). Should the Commission consider the annexes, they fail to establish ____ for the following reasons: ____. Prayer. Appellee prays that the rejoinder (and its annexes) be disregarded; alternatively, that this limited comment be admitted and the appeal be denied for lack of merit.

Counsel’s checklist

Re-read the memorandum of appeal and your answer: are all material issues already joined?
Identify any new issue or new evidence in the rejoinder. If none, don’t file.
If yes, prepare a short manifestation/comment with objection + fallback rebuttal.
File promptly and include proof of service.
Keep the tone professional and restrained; avoid re-arguing settled points.

Bottom line

In NLRC appeals, the normal, rule-based exchange stops at appeal and answer. A rejoinder is not a required or guaranteed filing. Only reply if it truly matters—that is, if new, material matters are injected—and even then, stay concise, focus on procedure, and preserve objections. Otherwise, let the case proceed to resolution on the joined issues.