Case Summary (A.C. No. 9186)
Background and Facts
RREC secured a judgment awarding it roughly P10,926,071.29 for expenses related to the reclamation of a property now housing the Cultural Center of the Philippines. Following the court’s award, RREC’s Board instructed Atty. Roxas to defer the issuance of a Writ of Execution, a directive he disregarded by filing the motion anyway. Subsequently, the Republic contested the Writ of Execution, resulting in an appellate court declaring it null and void. Atty. Roxas, without RREC’s consent, filed further motions and complaints, which provoked RREC to terminate his representation.
Procedural Developments
After his termination, Atty. Roxas continued to represent RREC in legal proceedings and threatened legal action against the RREC Board members. Atty. Villonco subsequently lodged a formal complaint against Atty. Roxas for misconduct regarding his unauthorized legal activities. In response, Atty. Roxas claimed long-standing competent service and an unjust termination, asserting that he had blanket authority to act on behalf of RREC.
Findings of the Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP)
The IBP investigated the complaint and determined that Atty. Roxas violated the rules governing attorneys, particularly concerning his failure to adhere to RREC's directives and his improper actions taken on behalf of the corporation without consent. The IBP originally recommended a penalty of censure, which was later modified by the IBP Board of Governors to a six-month suspension from the practice of law.
Court’s Ruling on the Case
Upon review, the Court upheld the IBP’s findings, emphasizing the fiduciary nature of the lawyer-client relationship, which is foundational to legal practice. It was determined that Atty. Roxas’s disregard of explicit instructions from RREC’s Board constituted a breach of trust and professional responsibility. The Court reiterated that the practice of law requires maintaining high ethical standards and that attorneys are accountable not only to their clients but also to the
...continue readingCase Syllabus (A.C. No. 9186)
Case Background
- The present case arises from a complaint filed by Atty. Juan Paolo T. Villonco against Atty. Romeo G. Roxas, alleging gross misconduct and violations of the Code of Professional Responsibility (CPR).
- Atty. Villonco serves as the president of Republic Real Estate Corporation (RREC), who engaged Atty. Roxas as counsel on a contingency basis for a legal dispute involving reclaimed land, now the Cultural Center of the Philippines (CCP) complex.
Factual Antecedents
- RREC was awarded approximately ₱10,926,071.29 for expenses incurred during the reclamation of the CCP complex.
- The case was remanded to the Regional Trial Court (RTC) in Pasay City for execution of the decision.
- RREC's Board of Directors instructed Atty. Roxas to defer the filing of a motion for a Writ of Execution, but he proceeded to file it anyway.
- The Republic of the Philippines subsequently filed a Petition for Certiorari against the Writ of Execution, leading to the Court of Appeals (CA) declaring it null and void.
- Atty. Roxas filed a Motion for Reconsideration and a Motion for Inhibition with the CA without RREC’s consent, as well as complaints against CA Justices and a petition questioning the constitutionality of Presidential Decree No. 774, all without authorization.
Termination of Retainer Agreement
- After unauthorized actions, RREC's Board requested Atty. Roxas to withdraw as counsel, which he refused.
- Consequently, RREC terminated its retainer agreement with Atty. Roxas and hired ano