FACTS:

Spouses Generosa Buted and Benito Bolisay filed an administrative complaint against Atty. Harold M. Hernando for malpractice, accusing him of abusing professional secrets or information obtained as their counsel. Respondent Hernando filed his answer to the complaint and the Court referred the case to the Solicitor-General for investigation. Complainants later presented a joint affidavit of desistance.

The background facts of the case are as follows: Respondent was the counsel for Luciana Abadilla and Angela Buted in an action for partition involving a parcel of land known as Lot 9439-B. Respondent successfully defended Luciana's claim of exclusive ownership over the lot. After Luciana's death, respondent withdrew from the partition case. Luciana then sold the lot to Benito Bolisay, and a new Transfer Certificate of Title (TCT) was issued to complainant spouses.

In another case for specific performance filed by Luis Sy and Elena Sy against Benito Bolisay, respondent represented Benito without charging any fees. The case involved a contract of lease executed by Enrique Buted over a house on a portion of Lot 9439-B. The Sy's claimed that the lease covered the entire lot, while Benito asserted ownership based on a deed of sale from Luciana. The Sy's were eventually ordered to vacate the house.

On February 23, 1974, without the consent of Luciana's heirs and complainant spouses, respondent filed a petition on behalf of other heirs seeking the cancellation of complainants' TCT. Respondent testified that if the petition was granted, Lot 9439-B would be owned in common by all of Luciana's heirs.

Complainant spouses expressed their disapproval of respondent's appearance in the cadastral proceeding. However, respondent pursued the case until it was dismissed on the ground of prescription.

The main issue in this case is whether respondent had a conflict of interests in representing clients with conflicting interests. The Canons of Professional Ethics define a conflict of interests situation and prohibit representing conflicting interests without express consent and full disclosure of the facts. In the actions for specific performance and the cadastral proceeding, respondent defended Benito's ownership over Lot 9439-B in one case and assailed the same ownership in the other, putting him in a conflict of interest situation.

ISSUES:

1. Whether or not respondent Atty. Harold M. Hernando had a conflict of interests in representing clients with conflicting interests.

RULING:

1. Yes, Atty. Harold M. Hernando had a conflict of interests. The Court held that although there was no conflict of interest in the first and second cases handled by the respondent, a conflict of interest did exist in the action for specific performance and the cadastral proceeding. Atty. Hernando defended the right of ownership over Lot 9439-B of complainant Benito Bolisay in the action for specific performance. However, he later filed a petition for cancellation of complainants' Transfer Certificate of Title over the same lot. Therefore, the respondent was in a conflict of interest situation. The Court cited Canon 6 of the Canons of Professional Ethics, which prohibits lawyers from representing conflicting interests, except with the express consent and after a full disclosure of the facts. Representing conflicting interests involves situations where a lawyer's duty to one client requires him to oppose what is in another client's best interest. The obligation to represent a client with undivided loyalty and to maintain the confidentiality of the client's secrets or confidence also prohibits a lawyer from accepting retainers or employment from others in matters that adversely affect any interest of the client with respect to which confidence has been reposed.

PRINCIPLES:

• Lawyers are prohibited from representing conflicting interests without the express consent of all concerned, given after full disclosure of the facts.

• Conflict of interest arises when a lawyer's duty to one client requires him to oppose what is in the best interest of another client.

• Lawyers have an obligation to represent their clients with undivided fidelity and not to divulge their secrets or confidence.

• Lawyers are also prohibited from accepting retainers or employment from others in matters that adversely affect any interest of a client with respect to which confidence has been reposed.