Q: What is the difference between “Adverse-Interest Conflict” and “Congruen tInterest
Conflict?” ANS: Adverse-interest conflict exists where the maBer in which the former
government lawyer represents a client in private pracGce is substanGally related to a maBer that
the lawyer dealt with while employed by the government and the interests of the current and
former are adverse. On the other hand, congruent-interest representaGon conflict is unique to
government lawyers and apply primarily to former government lawyers (PCGG v.
Sandiganbayan, G.R. Nos. 151809-12, April 12, 2005).
In congruent-interest representaGon conflict, the disqualificaGon does not really involve a
conflict at all, because it prohibits the lawyer from represenGng a private client even if the
interests of the former government client and the new client are enGrely parallel (DissenGng
Opinion of JusGce Callejo Sr., PCGG v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. Nos. 151809- 12, April 12, 2005).
ANS: Other statutory grounds for disbarment include: 1. AcquisiGon of an interest in the subject
maBer of the liGgaGon, either through purchase or assignment (CIVIL CODE, Art. 1491 ); 2.
Breach of professional duty, inexcusable negligence, or ignorance, or for the revelaGon of the
client's secrets (REVISED PENAL CODE, Art. 208); and 3. RepresenGng conflicGng interests
(REVISED PENAL CODE, Art. 209).
Q: What are 3 tests to determine whether conflicGng interests exist? ANS: The 3 tests to
determine whether conflicGng interest exists are as follows: (PCS)
1. Use of Prior knowledge obtained- whether the lawyer would be called upon in the new
relaGon to use against a former client any confidenGal informaGon acquired through their
connecGon or previous employment (Gonzales v. Cabucana, A.C. No. 6836 (ResoluGon), January
23, 2006).
2. ConflicGng DuGes - whether a lawyer is duty-bound to fight for an issue or claim in behalf of
one client and, at the same Gme, to oppose that claim ior the other client (Afiion v. Sabitsana,
Jr., A.C. No. 5098, April 11, 2012); and
3. InvitaGon of Suspicion - whether the acceptance of a new relaGon wou'd prevent the full
aischarge of the lawyer's duty of undivided fidelity and loyalty to the client or invite suspicion of
unfaithfulness or double-dealing in the performance of that duty (Santos, Sr., v. Beltran, A.C. No.
5858, December 11, 2003);
Q: DifferenGate “retaining lien” from “charging lien” (2016 Bar) A: A retaining lien gives the
lawyer the right to retain the funds, documents and papers of the client which have lawfully
come into his possession, unGl his lawful fees and disbursements have been paid. A charging
lien is a lien upon all judgments for payment of sum of money and execuGons thereof, to ensure
payment of his fees and disbursements in the said case.
A retaining lien is a passive lien; the lawyer is not required to perform any act except to hold on
to the client’s funds, documents and papers, unGl his fees and disbursements are paid. A
charging lien is an acGve lien; the lawyer is required to file a moGon in court, with copy served
on the adverse party, to have a statement of his claim to such fees and disbursements charged
or aBached to the decision in such case and execuGons thereof.
A retaining lien is general lien; it may be resorted to in order to secure payment of the lawyer’s
fees in all the cases he has handled and services he has rendered to the client. A charging lien is
a special lien; it can be uGlized for the purpose of collecGng only the unpaid fees and
disbursements of the lawyer in the case where the judgment for a sum of money may be
secured.
==
Q: What are the requisites for enforceability of a charging lien?
ANS: The following requisites must be present in order for a charging lien to be enforceable:
(RS-MCR)
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Existence of an aBorney-client RelaGonship;
The aBorney has rendered Services;
Favorable Money judgment secured by the counsel for his client; T
he aBorney has a Claim for aBorney's fees or advances; and
A statement of the claim has been duly Recorded in the case with noGce thereof served
upon the client and the adverse party (AGPALO, Legzl and Judicial Ethics, supra at 452).
Q: What are the requisites of retaining lien? ANS: The following are the requisites of a
retaining lien: (RUP)
1. ABorney-client RelaGonship;
2. UnsaGsfied claim for aBorney's fees or disbursements; and
3. Lawful Possession by the lawyer of the client's funds, documents, and papers in his,
professional capacity (AGPALO, Legal and Judicial! Ethics, supra at 447).
Q: May a charging lien be assigned? ANS: As a general rule, a charging lien may be assigned or
transferred without preference thereof being exGnguished except when the assignment will
result in a breach of the aBorney's duty to preserve his client's confidence (AGPALO, Legal and
Judicial Ethics, supre at 459).
Q: What is a retaining lien? ANS: A retaining lien is a right merely to retain the funds,
documents, and papers against the client unGl the aBorney is fully paid his fees (AGPALO, Legal
and Judicial Ethics, supra at 446).