Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Roxas vs. de Zuzuarregui Attorney's Fees

    Uploaded by

    NARAG LAW OFFICE
    39 views1 page
    The National Housing Authority filed an expropriation case against the Zuzuarreguis for 179 hectares of land. The Zuzuarreguis hired attorneys Roxas and Pastor. They signed an agreement stating they would accept PHP 17 per square meter for the land, with any excess going to the attorneys' fees. The NHA paid PHP 54.5 million total, but the attorneys only gave PHP 30.52 million to the Zuzuarreguis. The court affirmed the agreement was valid but ruled the attorneys' 44% fee was excessive given there was no full trial, and ordered them to return PHP 17 million to the Zuzuarreguis.

    Original Description:

    Original Title

    Roxas-vs-de-Zuzuarregis

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    The National Housing Authority filed an expropriation case against the Zuzuarreguis for 179 hectares of land. The Zuzuarreguis hired attorneys Roxas and Pastor. They signed an agreement stating they would accept PHP 17 per square meter for the land, with any excess going to the attorneys' fees. The NHA paid PHP 54.5 million total, but the attorneys only gave PHP 30.52 million to the Zuzuarreguis. The court affirmed the agreement was valid but ruled the attorneys' 44% fee was excessive given there was no full trial, and ordered them to return PHP 17 million to the Zuzuarreguis.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    39 views1 page

    Roxas vs. de Zuzuarregui Attorney's Fees

    Uploaded by

    NARAG LAW OFFICE
    The National Housing Authority filed an expropriation case against the Zuzuarreguis for 179 hectares of land. The Zuzuarreguis hired attorneys Roxas and Pastor. They signed an agreement stating they would accept PHP 17 per square meter for the land, with any excess going to the attorneys' fees. The NHA paid PHP 54.5 million total, but the attorneys only gave PHP 30.52 million to the Zuzuarreguis. The court affirmed the agreement was valid but ruled the attorneys' 44% fee was excessive given there was no full trial, and ordered them to return PHP 17 million to the Zuzuarreguis.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 1

    Roxas vs.

    De Zuzuarregui
    Attorney’s Fees
    FACTS:
    The National Housing Authority (NHA) filed expropriation proceedings against the Zuzuarreguis
    for parcels of land (179 hectares) belonging to the latter situation in Antipolo, Rizal. The Zuzuareguis
    engaged the legal services of Attys. Roxas and Pastor. A partial Decision was rendered fixing the just
    compensation to be paid to the Zuzuarreguis at P30 per sq. meter. The NHA moved for reconsideration of
    the previous judgment and a new one be made, to lower the amount of just compensation. The
    Zuzuarreguis and their attorneys executed a letter-agreement stating that they will accept a total of P17
    per sq. meter for their land (P30,400,000 for 179 hectares) and in excess of that, would be used as
    payment for the legal services of Attys. Roxas and Pastor. The NHA issued a resolution stating that the
    aforementioned property would be acquired at P19.50 per sq. meter. The NHA, through Atty. Pedrosa,
    released to Atty. Roxas, in behalf of the Zuzuarreguis, P20,000,000 in bonds as partial payment for the
    land, and later, Atty. Roxas delivered only P15,000,000 to the Zuzuarreguis. The second payment was
    again given to Atty. Roxas amounting to P34,500,000. The total amount released to Atty. Roxas was
    54,500,000 and the amount given by the Atty, Roxas to the Zuzuarreguis was only P30,520,000.
    AtP19.50 per sq. meter, the 179 hectare land was expropriated for P34,916,122. The total amount
    relseased by the NHA was P54,500,000. The difference of 19,583,878 is the yield in bonds. The
    Zuzuarreguis demanded that the yield on the NHA bonds be turned over to them. The RTC ruled in
    favour of the defendants (the Attys.), which was later reversed and set aside by the CA stating that
    P4,476,426.275 (P2.50 per sq. meter) was commensurate to the services rendered by the defendant-
    appellees (the Attys.). Hence this petition.
    ISSUE:
    Whether the letter-agreement between the Zuzuarreguis and their Attys., fixing the exact amount that
    must got to the former, should stand as law between the parties.
    RULING:
    YES. The decision of the CA is AFFIRMED but with MODIFICATION that Attys. Roxas and Pastor
    return to the Zuzuarregis the amount of P17,073,224.84.
    RATIONALE:
    In relation to the case at bar, the contract between the Zuzuarreguis and their Attys. Possessed the
    3 requisites in giving rise to a binding contract (Art. 1318 of the Civil Code). There was consent, an
    object certain subject matter, and an established cause of obligation. There was no evidence to show that
    anybody was forced into entering the letter-agreement. It is basic that a contract is the law between
    parties, unless the stipulations found within it are contrary to law, morals, good customs, public order or
    public policy, which are all not found within the letter-agreement. Contingent fees are not prohibited by
    law. However, contingent fees while sanctioned by law, should be reasonable under all the circumstances
    of the case, and should always be under the supervision of a court, as to its reasonableness. Attorney’s
    fees are unconscionable if they affront one’s sense of justice, decency or reasonableness. Attys. Roxas
    and Pastor received 44% of the just compensation paid by the NHA to the Zuzuarreguis. In the case at
    bar, there was never really a full blown hearing in the expropriation case, as it ended in a Compromise
    Agreement. The 44% received by the Attys. Is unconscionable and excessive under the circumstances and
    its reduction is in order.

    You might also like