This case has been cited 2 times or more.
|
2009-01-19 |
CHICO-NAZARIO, J. |
||||
| Jurisprudence instructs that in awarding attorney's fees, the trial court must state the factual, legal or equitable justification for awarding the same.[42] In the case under consideration, the RTC stated in its Decision that the award of attorney's fees equivalent to 25% of the amount paid as interest by respondent to petitioner is reasonable and moderate considering the extent of work rendered by respondent's lawyer in the instant case and the fact that it dragged on for several years.[43] Further, respondent testified that she agreed to compensate her lawyer handling the instant case such amount.[44] The award, therefore, of attorney's fees and its amount equivalent to 25% of the amount paid as interest by respondent to petitioner is proper. | |||||
|
2008-09-22 |
CHICO-NAZARIO, J. |
||||
| Current jurisprudence[24] instructs that in awarding attorney's fees, the trial court must state the factual, legal, or equitable justification for awarding the same, bearing in mind that the award of attorney's fees is the exception, not the general rule, and it is not sound public policy to place a penalty on the right to litigate; nor should attorney's fees be awarded every time a party wins a lawsuit. The matter of attorney's fees cannot be dealt with only in the dispositive portion of the decision. The text of the decision must state the reason behind the award of attorney's fees. Otherwise, its award is totally unjustified.[25] | |||||