G.R. No.
117438 June 8, 1995 Issue: WON the court acted properly in reducing Sesbrenos
RAUL SESBREO, petitioner,
vs.
HON, COURT OF APPEALS, and PATRICIA GIAN, SOTERO
BRANZUELA, ANDRES C. YPIL, SANTIAGO BACAYO, BRIGIDO
COHITMINGAO, VICTORINO DINOY, GUILLERMO MONTEJO and
EMILIO RETUBADO,respondents.
Facts: Sesbreo replaced Atty Pacquiao as counsel for 52
employees in a case against the Province of Cebu and Governor
Espina for reinstatement to work and backwages. 32 of the
employees agreed that Sesbreno would be paid 30% of the
backwages as attorneys fees and 20% for expenses of litigation.
RTC granted employees petition. CA affirmed. Judgment became
final.
There was a compromise was made between the employees and
the Province of Cebu where said employees waived their right to
reinstatement. Cebu released P2.3M (compromised of representing
back salaries, terminal leave pay, gratuity pay) to Sesbreno for the
employees as Partial Satisfaction of Judgment.
Sometime November and December 1979, 10 employees, herein
private respondents, filed manifestations before the trial court
asserting that they agreed to pay petitioner 40% to be
taken only from their back salaries. Lower court agreed with them
and fixed attorneys fees for Sesbreno at 40% plus the 20%
expenses.
Employees filed an MR asserting that there was inadvertence in
placing 60% where it should only be 50%. This was granted.
Sesbreno was not satisfied by the decision so he went to the CA.
CA deemed the award of 20% of the back salaries as the fair,
equitable, and reasonable amount for attorneys fees. He then
goes to the SC
attorneys fees despite a pre-existing contract between the parties.
Held: Yes
It is a settled rule that what a lawyer may charge and receive as
attorney's fees is always subject to judicial control. 8 A lawyer is
primarily an officer of the court charged with the duty of assisting
the court in administering impartial justice between the parties.
When he takes his oath, he submits himself to the authority of the
court and subjects his professional fees to judicial control. 9
A stipulation on a lawyers compensation in a written contract for
professional services ordinarily controls the amount of fees that the
contracting lawyer may be allowed, unless the court finds such
stipulated amount unreasonable or unconscionable. Though
generally, a much higher compensation is allowed in a contingent
fee agreement in consideration of the risk that the lawyer may get
nothing if the suit fails. But contingent fee contracts are under the
supervision of the court in order that clients may be protected from
unjust charges. Its validity rests largely on the reasonableness of
the stated fees under the circumstances of the case. An attorneys
fee is unconscionable when it is so disproportionate compared to
the value of the services rendered. Nevertheless, the existence of
an unreasonable fee (no matter the degree) does not bar recovery.
It is only that the courts will fix a reasonable amount.
Quantum Meruit which means as much as he deserves is often
the courts basis for determining the amount. The 20% award is
justified.