THE Supreme Court has upheld the decision of the Integrated Bar of the Philippines dismissing the administrative complaint filed against lawyer Manases Carpio, husband of Vice President and Education Secretary Sara Duterte, and another lawyer.
In a resolution dated June 14 but only made public yesterday, the High Court’s First Division cleared Carpio and Edgar Dennis Padernal in the complaint filed by couple Alfredo Honegger, a Swiss, and his Filipina wife Lumenaria Honegger.
In their complaint filed before the IBP’s Commission on Bar Discipline, the Honegger couple accused Carpio and Padernal of violating the Lawyer’s Code when they assisted in the filing of “frivolous and baseless” cases against them.
Records showed that between 2018 to 2018, the Honeggers became defendants in a number of legal actions before the local courts.
These include a collection case before the Manila Regional Trial Court where the couple and the Cebu People’s Express Corporation were ordered to pay P6.2 million, an estafa case before the Manila RTC, a cyber libel case that was dismissed, and three cases for violations of the Retail Trade Liberalization (RTL) Act and or the Anti-Dummy Law.
Alfredo was also the subject of a deportation case before the Bureau of Immigration.
Carpio was the lawyer of the complainant against the Honeggers in the RTL Act and or the Anti-Dummy Law, while Padernal was the counsel of complainant Bernhard Anton Burch in the collection, estafa, and cyber libel cases.
Padernal also represented a certain Roberto Abad in the deportation case.
The Honeggers claimed the numerous cases against them have no basis and were only filed to harass them after they refused the “illegal favor” requested by Burch. They did not elaborate.
They said Carpio and Padernal violated the lawyer’s code when they deliberately assisted in the filing and prosecution of the cases.
However, the SC sided with and affirmed the IBP’s findings.
“We find — like the IBP Commission on Bar Discipline and the IBP Board of Governors — that the records are devoid of anything that proves the above key assumption. Alfredo and Lumenaria failed to adduce any evidence to support their claim that the cases filed against them were merely intended to vex and harass,” the SC said.
