A.C. No. 11668 - JOY T. SAMONTE, COMPLAINANT, VS. ATTY. VIVENCIO V. JUMAMIL.R E S O L U T I O N - Supreme Court E-Library

Ruling

accordingly, recommended that he be suspended from the practice of law for a period of one (1) year. Essentially, the IBP-CBD found respondent guilty of violating Rule 10.01, Canon 10, and Rule 18.03, Canon 18 of the Code of Professional Responsibility (CPR), as well as the 2004 Rules on Notarial Practice. [15] In a Resolution [16] dated December 13, 2014, the IBP Board of Governors adopted and approved the aforesaid Report and Recommendation, finding the same to be fully supported by the evidence on record and the applicable laws and rules. The Issue Before the Court The sole issue in this case is whether or not respondent should be held administratively liable. The Court's Ruling The Court concurs with and affirms the findings of the IBP, with modification, however, as to the penalty in order to account for his breach of the rules on notarial practice. The relationship between a lawyer and his client is one imbued with utmost trust and confidence. In this regard, clients are led to expect that lawyers would be ever-mindful of their cause, and accordingly, exercise the required degree of diligence in handling their affairs. Accordingly, lawyers are required to maintain, at all times, a high standard of legal proficiency, and to devote their full attention, skill, and competence to their cases, regardless of their importance, and whether they accept them for a fee or for free. [17] To this end, lawyers are enjoined to employ only fair and honest means to attain lawful objectives. [18] These principles are embodied in Rule 10.01 of Canon 10 and Rule 18.03 of Canon 18 of the CPR, which respectively read as follows: CANON 10 A LAWYER OWES CANDOR, FAIRNESS AND GOOD FAITH TO THE COURT. Rule 10.01 A lawyer shall not do any falsehood, nor consent to the doing of any in court; nor shall he mislead, or allow the Court to be misled by any artifice. CANON 18 A LAWYER SHALL SERVE HIS CLIENT WITH COMPETENCE AND DILIGENCE. Rule 18.03 A lawyer shall not neglect a legal matter entrusted to him, and his negligence in connection therewith shall render him liable. In this case, it is undisputed that a lawyer-client relationship was forged between complainant and respondent when the latter agreed to file a position paper on her behalf before the NLRC and, in connection therewith, received the amount of P8,000.00 from complainant as payment for his services. Case law instructs that a lawyer-client relationship commences when a lawyer signifies his agreement to handle a client's case and accepts money representing legal fees from the latter, [19] as in this case. From then on, as the CPR provides, a lawyer is duty-bound to "serve his client with competence and diligence," and in such regard, "not neglect a legal matter entrusted to him." However, it is fairly apparent that respondent breached this duty when he admittedly failed to file the necessary position paper before the NLRC, which had, in fact, resulted into an adverse ruling against his client, i.e., he