Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 40 views

    Roxas V Zuzuarregui JR

    Uploaded by

    Earnswell Pacina Tan
    The Zuzuarreguis hired attorneys Roxas and Pastor to represent them in an expropriation case regarding land owned by the Zuzuarreguis. They agreed the attorneys would receive 30% of compensation over P11 per square meter. A court initially set compensation at P30 per square meter. A compromise was later reached setting compensation at P19.50 per square meter, totaling P34.9 million. However, the NHA paid P54.5 million, with the difference representing bond yields. The attorneys kept 44% of the total payment, which the court found excessive given there was no full legal hearing, instead ending in a compromise agreement. The court ordered the attorneys to return all but 30

    Copyright:

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

    Roxas V Zuzuarregui JR

    Uploaded by

    Earnswell Pacina Tan
    40 views2 pages
    The Zuzuarreguis hired attorneys Roxas and Pastor to represent them in an expropriation case regarding land owned by the Zuzuarreguis. They agreed the attorneys would receive 30% of compensation over P11 per square meter. A court initially set compensation at P30 per square meter. A compromise was later reached setting compensation at P19.50 per square meter, totaling P34.9 million. However, the NHA paid P54.5 million, with the difference representing bond yields. The attorneys kept 44% of the total payment, which the court found excessive given there was no full legal hearing, instead ending in a compromise agreement. The court ordered the attorneys to return all but 30

    Original Description:

    13. Roxas v Zuzuarregui Jr

    Original Title

    13. Roxas v Zuzuarregui Jr

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The Zuzuarreguis hired attorneys Roxas and Pastor to represent them in an expropriation case regarding land owned by the Zuzuarreguis. They agreed the attorneys would receive 30% of compensation over P11 per square meter. A court initially set compensation at P30 per square meter. A compromise was later reached setting compensation at P19.50 per square meter, totaling P34.9 million. However, the NHA paid P54.5 million, with the difference representing bond yields. The attorneys kept 44% of the total payment, which the court found excessive given there was no full legal hearing, instead ending in a compromise agreement. The court ordered the attorneys to return all but 30

    Copyright:

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

    Roxas V Zuzuarregui JR

    Uploaded by

    Earnswell Pacina Tan
    The Zuzuarreguis hired attorneys Roxas and Pastor to represent them in an expropriation case regarding land owned by the Zuzuarreguis. They agreed the attorneys would receive 30% of compensation over P11 per square meter. A court initially set compensation at P30 per square meter. A compromise was later reached setting compensation at P19.50 per square meter, totaling P34.9 million. However, the NHA paid P54.5 million, with the difference representing bond yields. The attorneys kept 44% of the total payment, which the court found excessive given there was no full legal hearing, instead ending in a compromise agreement. The court ordered the attorneys to return all but 30

    Copyright:

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

    ROXAS V DE ZUZUARREGUI, JR.

    FACTS:
    1977, the National Housing Authority (NHA) filed expropriation proceedings against the
    Zuzuarreguis for parcels of land belonging to them situated in Antipolo, Rizal with a total land
    area of 1, 790, 570.36 The Zuzuarreguis engaged the legal services of Attys. Romeo G. Roxas
    and Santiago N. Pastor. They executed a Letter-Agreement dated April 22, 1983 which indicated
    that the contingent fees that the lawyers will receive at P11 or more per square meter is thirty
    percent of the just compensation
    The appropriate proceedings thereafter ensued and on October 29, 1984, a Partial
    Decision was rendered fixing the just compensation to be paid to the Zuzuarreguis at P30 per
    square meter. The NHA filed a Motion for Reconsideration for the lowering of the amount of just
    compensation in accordance with applicable laws. Pending the resolution of the MFR filed by the
    NHA, a joint special power of attorney was executed by the Zuzuarreguis in favor of Attys. Roxas
    and Pastor
    On December 10, 1985, a Letter-Agreement was executed by and between the
    Zuzuarreguis and Attys. Roxas and Pastor which fixed the just compensation due the
    Zuzuarreguis at P17, and anything in excess of that shall be the contingent fees of Attys. Roxas
    and Pastor for their legal services. Resolution No. 1174 dated December 16, 1985, issued by the
    NHA, stated that the property would be acquired at a cost of P19.50 per square meter and that it
    will be paid in NHA Bonds which the yield would be based on the Central Bank rate at the time of
    the payment. As a result of the NHA Resolution, a Compromise Agreement was executed and it
    was approved by the Court in a Decision dated December 20, 1985. Computed at P19.50 per
    square meter, the property of the Zuzuarreguis was expropriated at a total price of P34, 916,
    122. The total amount released by the NHA was P54, 500, 00. The difference of P19, 583, 878
    is, undoubtedly, the yield of the bonds. The amount turned over to the Zuzuarreguis by Atty.
    Roxas amounted to P30, 520, 000 in NHA bonds
    On August 25, 1987, a letter was sent by the Zuzuarreguis new counsel to Attys. Roxas
    and Pastor demanding that the latter deliver to the Zuzuarreguis the yield corresponding to
    bonds paid by the NHA within a period of 10 days from receipt, under pain of administrative, civil
    and/or criminal action
    The RTC dismissed the complaint. The Zuzuarreguis filed a Notice of Appeal. The Court of
    Appeals ordered Attys. Roxas and Pastor to return to the plaintiffs the amount of P12, 596, 425,
    already deducting the reasonable attorneys fees in the amount of P4,4 76,426.275.
    ISSUES:
    Whether or not the contingent fees were reasonable?
    RULING:
    No. Under the contract in question, Attys. Roxas and Pastor are to receive contingent fees for
    their professional services.
    Canon 13 of the Canons of Professional Ethics states:
    a contract for contingent fee, where sanctioned by law, should be reasonable under all the
    circumstances of the case including the risk and uncertainty of the compensation, but should
    always be subject to the supervision of a court, as to its reasonableness
    Indubitably entwined with the lawyers duty to charge only reasonable fees is the power of
    this Court to reduce the amount of attorneys fees if the same is excessive and unconscionable
    (Section 24, Rule 138, Rules of Court). Attorneys fees are unconscionable if they affront ones
    sense of justice, decency or reasonableness.
    Therefore, the power to determine the
    reasonableness of attorneys fees stipulated by the parties is a matter falling within the
    regulatory prerogative of the courts.
    In the instant case, Attys. Roxas and Pastor received an amount which is equal to 44% of the
    just compensation paid by the NHA to the Zuzuarreguis. Considering that there was no full blown

    hearing in the expropriation case, ending as it did in a Compromise Agreement, the 44% is
    undeniably excessive.

    You might also like