Case Summary (G.R. No. 197360)
Applicable Law
The applicable legal framework for this case is derived from the 1987 Philippine Constitution and the Code of Professional Responsibility governing the conduct of lawyers in the Philippines.
Initial Findings and Penalty
The Court found Atty. Revilla guilty of violating several provisions of the Code of Professional Responsibility, specifically Rule 1.01 of Canon 1, as well as Rules 15.06, 15.07 of Canon 15, and Rule 18.03 of Canon 18. As a result of these violations, the Court imposed a penalty of a fine amounting to P100,000.00, which was decreed to be immediately executory. The decision mandates that copies be disseminated to relevant authorities including the Office of the Court Administrator and the Integrated Bar of the Philippines.
Respondent's Request for Reduction of Penalty
Atty. Revilla subsequently filed a motion seeking a reduction of the fine from P100,000.00 to P50,000.00. In his appeal, he cited severe financial difficulties stemming from his disbarment on December 4, 2009, as well as significant health issues, including chronic kidney disease that necessitated regular dialysis treatments. He expressed remorse regarding his ethical violations, acknowledging his shortcomings and taking responsibility for his actions.
Consideration of Mitigating Factors
The Court referenced its previous rulings including Arganosa-Maniego v. Salinas, which highlighted the importance of mitigating factors when determining the appropriate penalties in administrative cases. Factors such as duration of service, acknowledgment of infractions, feelings of remorse, family considerations, and other humanitarian factors have been acknowledged as valid grounds for possibly reducing penalties. The discretion to consider these mitigating circumstances is supported by Section 53, Rule IV of the Revised Uniform Rules on Administrative Cases in the Civil Service.
Final Decision on Penalty Reduction
The Court, taking into accoun
...continue readingCase Syllabus (G.R. No. 197360)
Case Background
- The case involves a complaint filed by Gene M. Domingo against Atty. Anastacio E. Revilla, Jr., regarding violations of the Code of Professional Responsibility.
- The complaint was adjudicated by the Supreme Court of the Philippines, which found the respondent guilty of committing fraud against his client.
Court's Initial Decision
- On January 23, 2018, the Court issued a decision declaring Atty. Revilla guilty of multiple violations of the Code of Professional Responsibility.
- The specific rules violated include:
- Rule 1.01 of Canon 1
- Rules 15.06 and 15.07 of Canon 15
- Rule 18.03 of Canon 18
- The penalty imposed on Atty. Revilla was a fine of P100,000.00, which was made immediately executory.
- The decision mandates distribution of copies to relevant legal bodies, including:
- The Office of the Court Administrator
- The Integrated Bar of the Philippines
- The Office of the Bar Confidant
Respondent's Appeal for Reduction of Fine
- Following the decision, Atty. Revilla sought to reduce his fine from P100,000.00 to P50,000.00.
- His justific