Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 199 views

    Suntay V Suntay

    Uploaded by

    Arleen Ingrid Santos
    Atty. Rafael Suntay was suspended from the practice of law for two years for violating the confidentiality of his lawyer-client relationship with his nephew Federico Suntay and for unethical conduct. As Federico's lawyer, Rafael gained confidential information that he later used as the basis for complaints against Federico. The IBP found Rafael guilty of violating professional confidence and recommended a two-year suspension, which the Court approved, citing the importance of preserving client confidentiality even after termination of the lawyer-client relationship.

    Copyright:

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

    Suntay V Suntay

    Uploaded by

    Arleen Ingrid Santos
    199 views7 pages
    Atty. Rafael Suntay was suspended from the practice of law for two years for violating the confidentiality of his lawyer-client relationship with his nephew Federico Suntay and for unethical conduct. As Federico's lawyer, Rafael gained confidential information that he later used as the basis for complaints against Federico. The IBP found Rafael guilty of violating professional confidence and recommended a two-year suspension, which the Court approved, citing the importance of preserving client confidentiality even after termination of the lawyer-client relationship.

    Original Description:

    PALE

    Original Title

    Suntay v Suntay

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Atty. Rafael Suntay was suspended from the practice of law for two years for violating the confidentiality of his lawyer-client relationship with his nephew Federico Suntay and for unethical conduct. As Federico's lawyer, Rafael gained confidential information that he later used as the basis for complaints against Federico. The IBP found Rafael guilty of violating professional confidence and recommended a two-year suspension, which the Court approved, citing the importance of preserving client confidentiality even after termination of the lawyer-client relationship.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pptx, pdf, or txt
    199 views7 pages

    Suntay V Suntay

    Uploaded by

    Arleen Ingrid Santos
    Atty. Rafael Suntay was suspended from the practice of law for two years for violating the confidentiality of his lawyer-client relationship with his nephew Federico Suntay and for unethical conduct. As Federico's lawyer, Rafael gained confidential information that he later used as the basis for complaints against Federico. The IBP found Rafael guilty of violating professional confidence and recommended a two-year suspension, which the Court approved, citing the importance of preserving client confidentiality even after termination of the lawyer-client relationship.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pptx, pdf, or txt
    of 7

    FEDERICO C. SUNTAY, complainant, vs. ATTY. RAFAEL G.

    SUNTAY,
    respondent.

    [A.C. No. 1890. August 7, 2002]

    Arleen Ingrid A. Santos


    • Federico Suntay filed a disbarment case against his nephew, Atty. Rafael
    Suntay, alleging that the latter was the former’s legal counsel, adviser
    and confidant who was privy to all his legal, finance and political affairs

    • Since they parted ways because of politics and respondent’s overweening


    political ambitions, respondent had been filing complaints and cases
    against complainant, making use of confidential information gained
    while their attorney-client relationship existed, and otherwise harassing
    him at every turn.

    • Apparently, Atty. Rafael Suntay acted as counsel for clients in cases


    involving subject matters (two fishponds) regarding which he had either
    been previously consulted by complainant or which he had previously
    helped complainant to administer as the latter’s counsel and confidant.

    Facts
    • Respondent made use of the information he gained while he was the
    lawyer of complainant as basis for his complaint for the building of
    illegal dikes.
    • His possession and examination of Transfer Certificate of Title and the
    blueprint plan provided him the information that there used to be two
    creeks traversing the fishpond covered by the title.
    • Since he helped in the administration of the fishpond, he also came to
    know that the two creeks had disappeared.
    • He gained the data which became the basis of his complaint when he was
    a lawyer and part administrator of complainant. Under the
    circumstances, there is a violation of professional confidence.
    • The IBP found respondent guilty and recommended that he be suspended
    from the practice of law for two years for immoral conduct. The Court
    finds the IBP recommendation to be well taken.
    •
    • Whether or not Privilege communication of attorney-
    client relationship was violated

    Issue
    • IBP Resolution No. XIV-2001-169 dated 29 April 2001 is
    adopted and approved. For violating the confidentiality of
    lawyer-client relationship and for unethical conduct,
    respondent Atty. Rafael G. Suntay is SUSPENDED from
    the practice of law for two (2) years effective upon the
    finality hereof.

    Ruling
    • Atty. Rafael Suntay is suspended from the practice of law for
    two years for violating the confidentiality of lawyer-client
    relationship and for unethical conduct.
    • A lawyer shall preserve the confidences and secrets of his
    clients even after termination of the attorney-client relation.
    • Communications between attorney and client are, in a great
    number of litigations, a complicated affair, consisting of
    entangled relevant and irrelevant, secret and well known facts.
    In the complexity of what is said in the course of the dealings
    between an attorney and a client, inquiry in the nature
    suggested would lead to the revelation, in advance of the trial,
    of other matters that might only further prejudice the
    complainant’s cause.

    Explanation
    • Rule 21.01. a lawyer shall not reveal the confidences or secrets of
    his client except:

    • a) when authorized by the client after acquainting him of the


    consequences of the disclosure;
    • b) when required by law;
    • c) when necessary to collect fees or to defend himself, his
    employees ro associates or by judicial action.

    • Rule 21.02. a lawyer shall not, to the disadvantage of his client, use
    information acquired in the course of employment, nor shall he use
    the same to his own advantage or that of a third person, unless the
    client with full knowledge of the circumstances consents thereto.

    Explanation

    You might also like