NATIONAL POWER CORPORATION

DRIVERS AND MECHANICS ASSOCIATION

(NPC DAMA), ET AL.

VERSUS

NATIONAL POWER CORPORATION

(NAPOCOR), NATIONAL POWER BOARD
OF DIRECTORS (NPB), ET AL.

G.R. No. 156208, 17 SEP 2008

Chico-Nazario, J. – First Division
REPUBLIC ACT 9316
What is R.A. 9316?

The Electric Power Industry Reform Act of 2001 (EPIRA Law)

provides a framework for privatization of NAPOCOR assets and the
transition to a more competitive structure by lowering consumer
payment rates.
R.A. 9316 (EPIRA)
New National Power Board
DOE created the Energy Restructuring Steering
Committee
NPB passed Resolutions No. 2002-124 and 125
Chairman: DOF Secretary
Members: Secretaries of DOE, DBM, DOA, DENR,
DILG, DTI; NEDA Secretary-General; NAPOCOR
President
The Restructuring Committee would manage the
privatization and restructuring of the NAPOCOR,
TRANSCO, and PSALM
The resolutions provided for the legal termination
of all NAPOCOR personnel, which entitled them to
separation benefits, as well as the creation of a
Transition Team.
NPB RESOLUTIONS 124 &
125
• Petitioners filed a special civil action for Injunction in 2002
• Terminated the employment of the petitioners in 2003
• Declared VOID and WITHOUT LEGAL EFFECT in 2006
• The Court held that there was undue delegation as the Legislative
already delegated the tasks to the members of the NPB
• Petitioners are entitled to back wages for illegal termination, may
be entitled to separation pay if reinstatement is not possible
(Doctrine of Operative Fact applied)
 MOTION FOR APPROVAL OF
CHARGING ATTORNEY’S LIEN
Charging (Attorney’s) Lien: ”A charging or special lien is an attorney’s specific
lien on the fund or judgment which he has recovered by means of his
professional services for his client in a particular case.”
Atty. Cornelio Aldon and Atty. Victoriano Orocio allege that they are entitled to
charge their lien for services rendered to Zol Medina and similarly situated
NAPOCOR personnel following their legal retainer agreement:
1. No acceptance fee;
2. Miscellaneous/out-of-pocket expenses (P25,000);
3. Twenty five percent (25%) of whatever amounts/money recovered on the
success of the case
 SECTION 37, RULE 138
RULES OF COURT
An attorney shall have a lien upon the funds, documents and papers of his client which
have lawfully come into his possession and may retain the same until his lawful fees
and disbursements have been paid, and may apply such funds to the satisfaction
thereof.  
He shall also have a lien to the same extent upon all judgments for the payment of
money, and executions issued in pursuance of such judgments, which he has secured
in a litigation of his client, from and after the time when he shall have caused a
statement of his claim of such lien to be entered upon the records of the court
rendering such judgment, or issuing such execution, and shall have caused written
notice thereof to be delivered to his client and to the adverse party; and he shall have
the same right and power over such judgments and executions as his client would
have to enforce his lien and secure the payment of his just fees and disbursements.
SECTION 24, RULE 138
RULES OF COURT
A written contract for services shall control
the amount to be paid therefor unless found
by the court to be unconscionable or
unreasonable.
PETITIONER’S ARGUMENTS

1. Atty. Aldon’s services were already terminated in a 2007 letter

2. Atty. Orocio was directed to refrain from acting as their lawyer
as he or his law firm was never authorized to represent them in
another 2007 letter
3. Petitioners were already represented by “collaborating counsel”
4. Atty. Aldon failed to secure a TRO
OUTCOME
For illegal dismissal cases, the Labor Code provides the maximum at
10% of the recovered amount for attorney’s fees, which Atty. Aldon
and Orocio are entitled to.

”The practice of law is a profession and not a commercial enterprise.”