18 Paflu vs. Binalbagan
18 Paflu vs. Binalbagan
42 SCRA 302
Facts:
The Court of Industrial Relations ordered the reinstatement with backwages for Entila and Tenazas. Cipriano
Cid & Associates, counsel of Entila and Tenazas filed a notice of attorney's lien equivalent to 30% of the
total backwages. Entila and Tenazas filed manifestation indicating their non-objection to an award of
attorney's fees for 25% of their backwages Quentin Muning filed a "Petition for the Award of Services
Rendered" equivalent to 20% of the backwages.Opposed by Cipriano Cid & Associates the ground that he is
not a lawyer. Court of Industrial Relations awarded 25% of the backwages as compensation for professional
services rendered in the case, apportioned as follows:
a. Cipriano 10%
b. Quintin Muning 10%
c. Atanacio Pacis 5%
ISSUE:
Ruling:
Lawyer-client relationship is only possible if one 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. Public policy demands that legal work in representation of parties’
litigant should be entrusted only to those possessing tested qualifications, for the ethics of the profession and
for the protection of courts, clients and the public.
The reasons are that the ethics of the legal profession should not be violated: Acting as an attorney with
authority constitutes contempt of court, which is punishable by fine or imprisonment or both, law will not
assist a person to reap the fruits or benefit of an act or an act done in violation of law. 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.