Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 56 views

    PAFLU vs. Binalbagan Isabela Sugar Case Digest

    Uploaded by

    Doo Ra
    This case involves a petition by attorneys Cipriano Cid & Associates to annul a decision by the Court of Industrial Relations regarding attorney's fees. The court had awarded fees to Quintin Muning, a non-lawyer and president of the union representing the petitioners. Specifically, Muning was awarded 10% of fees, which the attorneys argued violated the rule against unauthorized practice of law. The Supreme Court ruled that Muning could not recover attorney's fees since he did not have an attorney-client relationship as a non-lawyer. Only licensed attorneys are allowed to represent parties in court and recover legal fees.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    PAFLU vs. Binalbagan Isabela Sugar Case Digest

    Uploaded by

    Doo Ra
    56 views2 pages
    This case involves a petition by attorneys Cipriano Cid & Associates to annul a decision by the Court of Industrial Relations regarding attorney's fees. The court had awarded fees to Quintin Muning, a non-lawyer and president of the union representing the petitioners. Specifically, Muning was awarded 10% of fees, which the attorneys argued violated the rule against unauthorized practice of law. The Supreme Court ruled that Muning could not recover attorney's fees since he did not have an attorney-client relationship as a non-lawyer. Only licensed attorneys are allowed to represent parties in court and recover legal fees.

    Original Title

    PAFLU vs. Binalbagan Isabela Sugar case digest

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    This case involves a petition by attorneys Cipriano Cid & Associates to annul a decision by the Court of Industrial Relations regarding attorney's fees. The court had awarded fees to Quintin Muning, a non-lawyer and president of the union representing the petitioners. Specifically, Muning was awarded 10% of fees, which the attorneys argued violated the rule against unauthorized practice of law. The Supreme Court ruled that Muning could not recover attorney's fees since he did not have an attorney-client relationship as a non-lawyer. Only licensed attorneys are allowed to represent parties in court and recover legal fees.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    56 views2 pages

    PAFLU vs. Binalbagan Isabela Sugar Case Digest

    Uploaded by

    Doo Ra
    This case involves a petition by attorneys Cipriano Cid & Associates to annul a decision by the Court of Industrial Relations regarding attorney's fees. The court had awarded fees to Quintin Muning, a non-lawyer and president of the union representing the petitioners. Specifically, Muning was awarded 10% of fees, which the attorneys argued violated the rule against unauthorized practice of law. The Supreme Court ruled that Muning could not recover attorney's fees since he did not have an attorney-client relationship as a non-lawyer. Only licensed attorneys are allowed to represent parties in court and recover legal fees.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 2

    PAFLU vs.

    Binalbagan Isabela Sugar

    SUBJECT CANON 9 - A LAWYER SHALL NOT, DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY, ASSIST IN THE


    TOPIC UNAUTHORIZED PRACTICE OF LAW.

    G.R. No. L-23959 DATE: November 29, 1971

    COMPLAINANTS PHILIPPINE ASSOCIATION OF FREE LABOR UNIONS (PAFLU), ENRIQUE ENTILA &
    VICTORIANO TENAZAS

    RESPONDENT BINALBAGAN ISABELA SUGAR COMPANY, COURT OF INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS, &


    QUINTIN MUNING 

    PONENTE REYES, J.B.L., J.:

    FACTS OF THE CASE The case is about the petition of Attys. Cipriano Cid &
    Associates, who sought to annul the decision of the Court of
    Industrial Relations on the attorney’s fee for the legal services
    rendered by Quintin Muning, a non-lawyer, that amounted to 10%
    compared to the compensation of Atty. Atenacio Pacis which is
    only 5%.

    - Quintin Muning is a president of the Union of employees


    (PHILIPPINE ASSOCIATION OF FREE LABOR UNIONS (PAFLU) that
    represented the petitioners before the Court of Industrial
    Relations

    - The issue of this case is in connection with the case of “PAFLU et al. vs. Binalbagan
    Isabela Sugar Co., et al. before the Court of Industrial Relations, which rendered its
    decision in favor of the complainants.
    - After the case ended, Cipriano Cid & Associates and Atty. Atanacio Pacis filed their
    respective charges for attorney’s fees.
    - On the other hand, one Quintin Muning also filed a "Petition for the Award of
    Services Rendered" which was opposed by Attys. Cipriano Cid & Associates on the
    ground that he is not a lawyer.
    - The records showed that the appearances made in behalf of the complainants were
    at first by Attorney Pacis and subsequently by respondent Quintin Muning.
    - The Court of Industrial Relations rendered its decision for compensation for
    professional services. Wherein Atty. Attys. Cipriano Cid & Associates (10%); Atty.
    Atanacio Pacis (5%); and a non-lawyer, Quintin Muning (10%)
    - The award of 10% to Muning, a non-lawyer, is the reason for this petition.

    ISSUE Whether or not a non-lawyer may recover attorney’s fees for legal services
    rendered

    RULING AND RATIO No. The existence of an attorney-client relationship is a condition for the recovery of
    DECIDENDI attorney's fees. Such a relationship cannot exist unless the client's representative in court is
    a lawyer.

    Since respondent Muning is not one, he cannot establish an attorney-client relationship with
    Enrique Entila and Victorino Tenezas or with PAFLU, and he cannot, therefore, recover
    attorney's fees. Certainly, public policy demands that legal work in the representation of
    parties litigant should be entrusted only to those possessing tested qualifications and who
    are sworn, to observe the rules and the ethics of the profession, as well as being subject to
    judicial disciplinary control for the protection of courts, clients and the public.

    DOCTRINE The principle enunciated in Amalgamated Laborers' Association, et al. vs. Court of
    Industrial Relations, et al.

    that an agreement providing for the division of attorney's fees, whereby a non-
    lawyer union president is allowed to share in said fees with lawyers, is condemned
    by Canon 34 of Legal Ethics and is immoral and cannot be justified. An award by a
    court of attorney's fees is no less immoral in the absence of a contract, as in the
    present case.

    Public policy demands that legal work in the representation of parties litigant should
    be entrusted only to those possessing tested qualifications and who are sworn, to
    observe the rules and the ethics of the profession, as well as being subject to judicial
    disciplinary control for the protection of courts, clients and the public.

    The reasons are that the ethics of the legal profession should not be violated; 7 that acting as
    an attorney with authority constitutes contempt of court, which is punishable by fine or
    imprisonment or both,8 and the law will not assist a person to reap the fruits or benefit of an
    act or an act done in violation of law;9 and that if were to be allowed to non-lawyers, it
    would leave the public in hopeless confusion as to whom to consult in case of
    necessity and also leave the bar in a chaotic condition, aside from the fact that non-
    lawyers are not amenable to disciplinary measures. 

    You might also like