A.C. No. 11774. March 21, 2018. READY FORM INCORPORATED, Complainant, vs. ATTY. EGMEDIO J. CASTILLON, JR., Respondent.
FACTS

Ready Form Incorporated participated in a public bidding conducted by the National Printing Office (NPO). The NPO Bids and Awards Committee later suspended Ready Form for one year after finding it submitted allegedly false Income Tax Returns (ITRs) and financial statements for 2007. Subsequently, Eastland Printink Corporation, represented by its counsel Atty. Egmedio J. Castillon, Jr., filed a Petition for Suspension and Blacklisting against Ready Form before the NPO. The petition alleged, among other violations, that Ready Form had also filed false ITRs for 2006, intentionally under-declaring its net sales to evade taxes. Atty. Castillon signed this petition and attached Ready Form’s 2006 audited financial statements as an exhibit to support the allegations of falsification.
The NPO ultimately issued a Resolution blacklisting Ready Form for five years, finding that its 2006 Financial Statement contained false information. Ready Form then filed an administrative complaint for disbarment against Atty. Castillon before the Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP). It alleged he violated the Code of Professional Responsibility by unlawfully using and divulging its confidential ITR in the petition, arguing such use contravened the confidentiality provisions of the National Internal Revenue Code (NIRC).

ISSUE

Whether or not Atty. Castillon violated the Code of Professional Responsibility by using Ready Form’s financial documents in the Petition for Blacklisting.

RULING

The Court dismissed the complaint and found no violation. The legal logic centers on the nature of the document used and the absence of any unlawful conduct by the lawyer. The Court clarified that Atty. Castillon did not use Ready Form’s Income Tax Return (ITR), which is confidential under the NIRC. Instead, the record, including the petition itself and the transcript of the IBP hearing, conclusively showed he used Ready Form’s audited financial statements submitted to the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). The Court took judicial notice that such audited financial statements, required under the Corporation Code, are publicly available documents from the SEC. Therefore, using a publicly available document to support allegations in a pleading does not constitute a violation of law or professional ethics. The Court emphasized that while it will discipline lawyers for misconduct, it will also protect them from unjust accusations by disgruntled litigants. Since the evidence failed to prove Atty. Castillon used a confidential ITR or otherwise acted unlawfully, no violation of Rules 1.01, 1.02, and 1.03 of Canon 1 of the Code of Professional Responsibility was established.