UNIBOX PACKAGING CORPORATION v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE

REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES COURT OFTA.tX APPEALS QUEZON CITY UNIBOX PACKAGING CORPOR<\TION, C. T.A. CASE NO. 5729 Petitioner, -versus- COl\1MISSIONER OF CUSTOl\�1S, Respondent. x------------- ----------------------------------------------~ RESOLUTION In a resolution dated November 23, 1999, the Cout1 (1) dismissed the instant case as a result of the Compromise Settlement by the parties (2) made of record the "Notice of Attomey's Lien" which was filed with this Cout1 by the counsel of herein Petitioner, Atty. Diosdado Jose Allado, and ordered that notice of the same be senred on the adverse pat1y, Nfr. Vicente S. Ottega, President of Unibox Packaging CotlJOration, and (3) ordered the Commissioner of Customs to retum to Petitioner the amount of P4,700,000.00, out of the P5,000,000.00 cash deposit and cancel the surety bond of this case and consigned the balance amount of P300,000.00 to this Court for disposition in connection with the attomey's lien of Petitioner's counsel. Likewise, in the same resolution, the motion of Petitioner's counsel to admit his formal offer of evidence to prove his attomey's lien was acknowledged by the Cout1 and "tvh�. Ottega was given seven (7) days from receipt of such resolution to file his comment thereto. On January 5, 2000, Respondent, Commissioner of Customs notified the Cout1 of its compliance of the aforesaid order.

RESOLUTION - CTA CASE NO. 5729 PAGE 2 On January 18, 2000, the Court admitted all the exhibits of Atty. Allado, consisting of exhibits A to F, inclusive of sub-markings, as "tvfr. Ottega, failed to file his comment thereto within the time given by the Court. On Februaty 7, 2000, the Coutt granted the oral motion of Atty. Allado to consider 1\,1f. Ortega to have waived his right to present his evidence in consideration of his repeated failure to appear for hearing regarding the fmmer' s attomey's lien in the amount ofP300,000.00. Hence, this resolution. It is well settled that a claim for an attomey' s fees maybe assetted either in the very action in which the services of a lawyer had been rendered or in a separate action (Tolentino vs. Escalona, 26 SCRA 613). It is likewise a settled rule in this jurisdiction that a contract has the force of law between the patties, each is bound to fulfill what has been expressly stipulated therein (s ee Barons l\1arketing Corporation vs. Court of Appeals, 286 SCRA 96). Generally speaking, where the employment of an attomey is under an express valid contract fixing the compensation for the attomey, such contract is conclusive as to the amount of compensation (Traders R oyal Bank Employees Union-Independent vs. NLRC, 269 SCRA 733). In the case at bar it was clearly established that "tvk Ottega agreed to pay Atty. Allado a fmal fee of P300,000.00 upon the promulgation of a decision or approval of a compromise agreement in the instant case (Exh. A) and that the same has not yet been complied with by herein Petitioner (Exh. B & C), hence, we see no reason why we would refuse to grant Atty. Allado the fmal attomey ' s fees agreed upon in a wTitten contract of services (Exh. A) in the amount ofP300,000.00.

RESOLUTION - CTA CASE NO. 5729 PAGE3 1\J:oreover, records of the case shows that l\.1r. Ortega seems to have no objection to Atty. Allado's attomey's lien as he did not file any opposition to the same nor did he file any evidence to controvert the evidence adduced by Atty. Allado. Thus, the grant of the relief sought by the latter. ACCORDINGLY, it is hereby ORDERED that the amount ofP300,000.00 earlier deposited to this Comt by the Respondent Commissioner of Customs be released to Atty. Diosdado Jose Allado in satisfaction of his fmal attomey's fees in the instant case. SO ORDERED. ~10� O~ y l- ERNEsTo D. ACOSTA Presiding Judge (on leave) RAMON 0. DE VEYRA Associate Judge