Title
Arde vs. De Silva
Case
A.C. No. 7607
Decision Date
Oct 15, 2019
Atty. Evangeline de Silva disbarred for misappropriating client funds, practicing law during suspension, and gross misconduct, violating professional ethics and court orders.

Case Summary (A.C. No. 7607)

Background and Allegations

In 2004, Natural Formula International, Inc. engaged Atty. de Silva's services for the licensing and registration of its products with the Bureau of Food and Drugs (BFAD). The complainant disbursed PhP 369,416.98 to de Silva, purportedly for these services. However, the complainant alleged that de Silva misappropriated the funds, as no Certificate of Product Registration was issued, and she did not return the money despite multiple demands. The complainant also filed a criminal complaint for estafa against her, which resulted in a finding of probable cause by the Office of the Provincial Prosecutor.

Previous Disciplinary Actions

It was revealed that when the complainant engaged de Silva's services, she was under a two-year suspension from the practice of law mandated by the Supreme Court in a prior case, Emilio Grande v. Atty. Evangeline de Silva. Despite being notified of the disbarment complaint against her, de Silva failed to file a comment.

Investigation and Findings

The Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP) investigated the complaint and found de Silva guilty of violating the Code of Professional Responsibility and recommended disbarment. The IBP Board of Governors adopted this recommendation, supporting it with substantial evidence of de Silva's malpractice and failure to fulfill her legal duties.

Court Ruling on Misappropriation of Funds

The Supreme Court emphasized that attorneys have a fiduciary duty to account for client funds and properties. De Silva's failure to return the money upon request established a presumption of misappropriation. Her actions constituted a breach of trust and confidence owed to her client, warranting a finding of grave misconduct.

Previous Conduct and Lack of Reform

De Silva’s previous conviction for deceit and her refusal to comply with court orders were taken into account. Despite prior disciplinary action, including suspension for issuing a bouncing check, de Silva displayed a pattern of dishonest behavior and disregard for court authority, indicating she had not reformed her conduct.

Practice of Law During Suspension

The Supreme Court noted that de Silva violated the suspension order by practicing law during the period of her imposed sanction. This blatant disregard for th

...continue reading

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.