Case Summary (A.C. No. 6708)
Engagement in Competing Security Agencies and Acts of Double-dealing
Beyond the litigation, Quiambao accused Bamba of inducing her to establish her own security firm, Quiambao Risk Management Specialists, Inc. (QRMSI), in which he allegedly acted as a silent partner via nominee Atty. Gerardo Hernandez. She further charged that Bamba facilitated her brother’s organization of San Esteban Security Services, Inc. (SESSI), diverted AIB funds to capitalize SESSI, and plotted to transfer AIB’s business to the new entities—all while continuing as AIB counsel.
Respondent’s Defense and Denials
Bamba acknowledged representing both parties but denied a personal lawyer-client relationship with Quiambao beyond his engagement by AIB. He contended the two cases were unrelated, no confidential information could be misused, and any consent to dual representation was implied. He also denied any silent partnership in QRMSI, explaining that his former partner Hernandez filled that role; and he maintained that SESSI complemented rather than competed with AIB, with only minimal shareholding on his part and operational management by Quiambao’s relatives.
Findings of the IBP Investigating Commissioner and Board
The IBP investigating commissioner found Bamba guilty of representing conflicting interests based on undisputed facts: simultaneous representation in the ejectment and replevin cases, and involvement in organizing QRMSI and SESSI while counsel for AIB. He recommended a one‐year suspension. The IBP Board of Governors adopted the findings but arbitrarily reduced the penalty to a stern reprimand without explaining its legal basis, in violation of Rule 139-B, Section 12(a) of the Rules of Court.
Supreme Court’s Legal Analysis on Conflict of Interest
Under Rule 15.03, Canon 15, a lawyer may not represent conflicting interests “except by written consent of all concerned given after a full disclosure of the facts.” Conflict arises not only when a lawyer must argue one side against another client but also when dual retainers impede undivided loyalty or invite suspicion of double-dealing. The Court rejected Bamba’s unrelated-cases argument, noting that simultaneous representation of opposing clients, however unconnected, breaches the duty of undivided fidelity. Bamba failed to obtain written consent from either Quiambao or AIB after full disclosure.
Violation of the Private Security Agency Law and Professional Duty
By organizing SESSI and facilitating its capitalization with AIB resources and participation of Quiambao’s brother and spouse, Bamba enabled a contravention of RA 5487, which prohibits interest in more than one security agency. His conduct violated Rule 1.02, Canon 1 of the Code of Professiona
...continue readingCase Syllabus (A.C. No. 6708)
Facts and Procedural Background
- Complainant Felicitas S. Quiambao served as president and managing director of Allied Investigation Bureau, Inc. (AIB) from June 2000 to January 2001.
- She engaged respondent Atty. Nestor A. Bamba for both corporate legal affairs of AIB and her personal ejectment case.
- On December 29, 2000, Quiambao filed Ejectment Case No. 11928 before the Metropolitan Trial Court (MeTC) of Parañaque City, with Bamba as counsel of record and after payment of attorney’s fees.
- On June 14, 2001—while still counsel for Quiambao’s pending ejectment case—Bamba filed a Replevin and Damages complaint on behalf of AIB against Quiambao before the MeTC of Quezon City, seeking recovery of a company vehicle.
Allegations of Misconduct
- Representing conflicting interests: acting for Quiambao in the ejectment case and for AIB in the replevin case without withdrawal or written consent.
- Disloyalty and double-dealing in corporate affairs:
- Proposed and assisted in forming Quiambao Risk Management Specialists, Inc. (QRMSI) in December 2000, allegedly as “silent partner” through Atty. Gerardo P. Hernandez.
- Convinced Leodegario Quiambao to establish San Esteban Security Services, Inc. (SESSI), where Bamba became incorporator, director, president and allegedly diverted AIB funds to incorporate and operate SESSI.
- Planned to “pirate” AIB clients and ultimately shift business from AIB to SESSI.
Respondent’s Defense
- Denial of “personal lawyer” status: believed handling personal cases fell within corporate counsel duties for AIB.
- Assertion of unrelated cases: ejectment and replevin involved different parties, issues, and no overlapping confidential information.
- Complainant’s alleged insistence: claimed Quiambao requested his continued representation and assistance in monetary claims.
- Denial of silent partnership in QRMSI: suggested Atty. Hernandez as corporate counsel and nominee shareholder (375 shares) instead of himself.
- Denial of fund diversion and conflict in SESSI: portrayed SESSI as complementary to AIB, controlled by Leodegario’