Republic of the Philippines

Supreme Court
Manila
GERALD BARUC

Complainant,
-versus-

JIMMY BERLUTI,
Respondent,
x- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - --x

POSITION PAPER

Respondent, Jimmy Berluti through his undersigned counsel

and unto this Honorable Court most respectfully submits this
Position Paper and avers the following to wit:

THE PARTIES

The complainant isa Filipino citizen, of legal age, single and a

resident of Brgy. Sambag-1 Urgello St. , Cebu City, where he may be
served with the processes of this HonorableCourt.

Respondent isa practising lawyer at Robert Donnell and

Associates law firm with principal office address at Villa Aznar,
Urgello St., Cebu City where they may be served with the legal
processes of this Honorable Court.

STATEMENT OF FACTS/CASE

The respondent is a lawyer that works in an insurance

company where he was assigned in a civil case to settle the claim of a
10 year old child accident whom to be the victim of this case, that was
occurred sometime in February 2017. During the trial, evidences
showed thatthe child in the accident produced traumatic effectsand
suffered major injuries.

As a defense attorney, the opposing counsel seeking for a

favourable judgment must prove that those injuries sustained by the
child were not worse, slight or not caused by their client.
 Before the day of the settlement, the physician of the insurance
company showed up and informed the lawyers who were handling
the case including the respondent that such child suffered a brain
aneurysm that may rupture anytime and releasing blood into the
skull causing stroke and death. As such, the lead counsel informed
his subordinates including the respondent that it was the intention of
their client not to disclose such information to their opposing counsel
because such information if leaked will result into a multi-million
dollar suit against their client.

Despite the instruction and order from the client, the

respondent without consent, went to the opposing party and
revealed the information without the client’s authorization and in
contrary to the client’s request.

ISSUE

WHETHER OR NOT THE RESPONDENT WAS GUILTY

OF REVEALING THE CLIENT’S CONFIDENCES AND
SECRETS IN VIOLATION OF RULE 15.02 AND RULE
21.01 OF LEGAL ETHICS

DISCUSSION/ARGUMENTS

I respectfully submit that the respondent did not violate Canon

21, Rule 21.01 for revealing the client’s confidences and secrets
without the client’s consent. Thus, Canon 21, Rule 21.01 provides
that:

A lawyer shall not reveal the confidences and secrets of his client
except:

a) When authorized by the client after acquainting him of the

consequences of the disclosure;
b) When required by law;
c) When necessary to collect his fees or to defend himself, his
employees or associates or by judicial action.
 When the respondent disclosed such information to the
opposing party without the client’s consent as it was expressly
instructed by the client not to divulge such information since by
revealing such information it would produce a detrimental effect
against them, it would have amounted to a criminal act of concealing
information that is required by law which is an exception to this rule.

As a lawyer and a counsel, his obligation is to preserve his

client’s confidences and secrets even after their attorney-client
relationship is terminated. Primarily, it is the function of a lawyer to
protect and defend his client and not the contrary unless such
disclosure has been consented and authorized by the client.
However, this contention is only applicable when the information
would not be contrary to law.

The act of the respondent exposing the client’s secrets

perniciously put the client’s case at great risk and possibly losing the
case but it was what the law prescribes since the life of an innocent
child is at stake.

PRAYER

WHEREOF, premises considered, we respectfully prayed from this

Honorable Court that judgment for suspension, disciplinary actions
and a possible disbarment may be imposed against the respondent
for violating the Code of Ethics.

City of Cebu, Philippines, February 15, 2017.

[PLEASE INSERT OUR LAW FIRM HERE]

[ADDRESS]

BY:
NINOTCHKA N. TRIA II

VERIFICATION
 I, (insert name), after having duly sworn to in accordance with
law, hereby depose and state:

1. That I am the complainant in the above-entitled case;

2. That I caused the preparation of the foregoing Position Paper;

3. That all the allegations therein contained are true and correct to
the best of my knowledge.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto affixed my signature in

this 15th day of February, 2017 at the City of Cebu, Philippines.

(insert name)
Affiant