Title
Lim-Santiago vs. Sagucio
Case
A.C. No. 6705
Decision Date
Mar 31, 2006
A prosecutor, formerly employed by a company, was suspended for six months for engaging in private legal practice while in government service, despite being cleared of conflict of interest allegations.

Case Digest (A.C. No. 6705)

Facts:

  • Parties and Background
    • Complainant Ruthie Lim-Santiago is the daughter of Alfonso Lim and Special Administratrix of his estate; Alfonso Lim was a stockholder and former President of Taggat Industries, Inc.
    • Respondent Atty. Carlos B. Sagucio served as Personnel Manager and retained counsel of Taggat Industries, Inc. until his appointment as Assistant Provincial Prosecutor of Tuguegarao, Cagayan in 1992.
  • Corporate and Factual Context
    • Taggat Industries, Inc. is a domestic timber-concessions corporation sequestered by the Presidential Commission on Good Government in 1986; it ceased operations in 1997.
    • In July 1997, twenty-one former Taggat employees filed a criminal complaint (I.S. No. 97-240) against Ruthie Lim-Santiago, alleging unlawful withholding of salaries and wages from 1 April 1996 to 15 July 1997.
  • Preliminary Investigation and Complaints
    • As Assistant Provincial Prosecutor, respondent conducted the preliminary investigation and recommended filing of 651 informations for violations of Article 288 in relation to Article 116 of the Labor Code.
    • Complainant charged respondent with:
1) Conflict of interest under Rule 15.03, citing his prior role with Taggat and alleging he instigated charges and harassed employees. 2) Unauthorized private practice of law while a government prosecutor, presenting evidence of retainer fees (₱10,000 for Jan–Feb 1995; ₱10,000 for Apr–May 1995; ₱5,000 for Apr 1996).
  • Respondent’s Denials and IBP Proceedings
    • Respondent denied conflict, asserting he had resigned from Taggat in 1992; claimed consultancy fees were case-to-case and ceased in 1996; argued no harassment evidence.
    • The Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP) Investigating Commissioners heard the case; Commissioner Funa recommended suspension; the IBP Board of Governors adopted the recommendation with modification and forwarded the record to the Supreme Court, finding respondent guilty of conflict of interest, failure to safeguard a former client’s interest, and private practice prohibition, with a recommendation of three years’ suspension.

Issues:

  • Whether respondent violated Rule 15.03 of the Code of Professional Responsibility by representing conflicting interests in the preliminary investigation of I.S. No. 97-240.
  • Whether respondent engaged in the private practice of law in violation of the statutory prohibition (RA 6713 Section 7[b][2]) while serving as a government prosecutor.
  • What penalty, if any, should be imposed for proven violations of the Code of Professional Responsibility and related statutes.

Ruling:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Ratio:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Doctrine:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster, building context before diving into full texts. AI-powered analysis, always verify critical details.