FACTS: The DBP filed with the office of the sheriff of Malolos an application for extra-judicial foreclosure of real and personal properties involving several real and or chattel mortgage executed by the Continental Cement Corporation (CCC). The CCC filed a complaint with the RTC to principally sought to enjoin the DPB and sheriff of Malolos, Bulacan from commencing the foreclosure proceedings on CCC’s mortgage. A hearing was scheduled for the sole purpose of examining three of CCC’s witnesses but their counsels were not present. Counsels justified their absence due to the failure of the former counsel to turn over the records of the case despite several demands.
ISSUE: Whether or not the absences of counsels are justified under the circumstances.
HELD: No. The withdrawal of previous counsel in the thick of the proceedings would be a reasonable ground to seek postponement of the hearing. However, such reason necessitates a duty and obligation, on the part of the new counsel to prepare himself for the next scheduled hearing. The excuse that it was due to the former counsel’s failure to turn over the records of the case shows the negligence of the new counsel to actively recover the records of the case. More demands are not sufficient. Counsel should have taken adequate steps to fully protect the interest of his client, rather than pass the blame on the previous counsel. A new counsel who appears in a case in midstream is presumed obliged to acquaint himself with all the antecedent process and proceedings that have transferred prior to his takeover.
0 comments:
Post a Comment