Case Summary (A.C. No. 6942)
Factual Background
The controversy commenced on September 5, 2005, when STEELCORP, aided by the National Bureau of Investigation (NBI), secured a search warrant from the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Cavite City. This warrant led to a search of Sonic Steel’s factory and the confiscation of property. A week later, STEELCORP lodged a complaint against Sonic Steel and its officers for alleged violation of Republic Act No. 8293, concerning intellectual property rights.
Allegations Against the Respondent
Sonic Steel accused Atty. Chua of misleading authorities when he claimed that STEELCORP was the exclusive licensee of Philippine Patent No. 16269, which had already lapsed and was thus part of the public domain. Sonic Steel alleged that if Atty. Chua had disclosed the patent's status, the RTC would not have issued the search warrant. The patent, originally issued on August 25, 1983, expired in the early 2000s, and Sonic Steel contended that it could not be the basis for any infringement claims.
Patent License Misrepresentation
Documentation from Mr. Antonio Lorenzana, STEELCORP's Executive Vice-President, supported Sonic Steel’s assertions, stating the licensing agreement between STEELCORP and BIEC International, Inc. Atty. Chua was accused of intentionally withholding the patent information from the RTC during the hearing, thus misleading the court during the application for the search warrant. The ramifications of these actions included potential financial damages to Sonic Steel due to wrongful accusations and legal actions initiated by STEELCORP.
Respondent's Defense
In response, Atty. Chua denied making any misleading or false claims and emphasized that he only reserved the right to present necessary documents, including the trademark license. He contended that he had not explicitly claimed STEELCORP owned the patent but highlighted its exclusive rights as a licensee. However, the investigation revealed that Atty. Chua's defense was undermined by the fact that the patent was not valid at the time of the searches and complaints he initiated.
Findings of the Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP)
The IBP conducted an investigation and recommended a three-month suspension for Atty. Chua, emphasizing the necessity for honesty and responsibility in legal practice. The IBP found that Atty. Chua failed to act with proper candor and fair play, leading to a modified suspension of six months by the IBP Board of Governors upon review.
Supreme Court's Ruling
The Supreme Court upheld the finding
...continue readingCase Syllabus (A.C. No. 6942)
Parties Involved
- Complainant: Sonic Steel Industries, Inc.
- A corporation engaged in the manufacturing and distribution of zinc and aluminum-zinc coated metal sheets, marketed as Superzinc and Superlume.
- Respondent: Atty. Nonnatus P. Chua
- Vice-President, Corporate Legal Counsel, and Assistant Corporate Secretary of Steel Corporation (STEELCORP).
Background of the Case
- Date of Incident: September 5, 2005
- Event: STEELCORP, with aid from the National Bureau of Investigation, obtained a search warrant from the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Cavite City, Branch 17, targeting Sonic Steel Industries, Inc.
- Aftermath: The search warrant led to the seizure of properties from Sonic Steel's factory.
Allegations Against the Respondent
Misleading Claims:
- Sonic Steel alleged that Atty. Chua misled the court and the Department of Justice by asserting that STEELCORP was the exclusive licensee of Philippine Patent No. 16269, which had lapsed and was thus in the public domain.
- The patent, issued on August 25, 1983, lapsed in 2000, making it invalid for claims of infringement.
Deceptive Conduct:
- The respondent was accused of failing to provide the RTC with a copy of the lapsed patent during the search warrant application, leading the court to issue the warrant based on false premises.
Supporting Documents and Claims
Affidavit by Mr. Antonio Lorenzana:
- Claimed that STEELCORP was the exclusive licensee and manufacturer of GALVALUME products, deriving from the technical information and patent of Philippine Patent No. 16269.
- Asserted that