- Statute
- Civil Code
- Article
- Art. 2208
- Topic
- Actual or Compensatory Damages
- Status
- In force
- Book
- BOOK IV Obligations and Contracts
- Title
- TITLE XVIII DAMAGES
- Chapter
- CHAPTER 2 Actual or Compensatory Damages
- Year
- 1949
- Cited by
- Multiple Supreme Court decisions
The provision
In the absence of stipulation, attorney's fees and expenses of litigation, other than judicial costs, cannot be recovered, except: (1) When exemplary damages are awarded; (2) When the defendant's act or omission has compelled the plaintiff to litigate with third persons or to incur expenses to protect his interest; (3) In criminal cases of malicious prosecution against the plaintiff; (4) In case of a clearly unfounded civil action or proceeding against the plaintiff; (5) Where the defendant acted in gross and evident bad faith in refusing to satisfy the plaintiff's plainly valid, just and demandable claim; (6) In actions for legal support; (7) In actions for the recovery of wages of household helpers, laborers and skilled workers; (8) In actions for indemnity under workmen's compensation and employer's liability laws; (9) In a separate civil action to recover civil liability arising from a crime; (10) When at least double judicial costs are awarded; (11) In any other case where the court deems it just and equitable that attorney's fees and expenses of litigation should be recovered. In all cases, the attorney's fees and expenses of litigation must be reasonable.
Intellegal Wiki · In plain terms
Without a stipulation providing for them, attorney's fees and litigation expenses (other than court costs) generally cannot be recovered. The article lists eleven exceptions where a court may award them, such as when exemplary damages are given, in malicious prosecution or clearly unfounded suits, where the defendant acted in gross bad faith, or when the court finds it just and equitable, and any award must be reasonable.
An editorially maintained plain-language explanation of this provision — not legal advice.
Intellegal Wiki · How the courts apply it
In Development Bank of the Philippines v. Ben P. Medrano, the Supreme Court held: Affirmed that, despite no perfected contract of sale, DBP's 30-year retention of the shares without payment constituted unjust enrichment under Civil Code Article 22, sustaining the attorney's fees award under Article 2208.
One leading Supreme Court case applying this provision.
Cases applying this article
- Joyce v. Ardiente
- Land Bank of the Philippines v. Alfredo Ong
- Rosalina Ricafuente v. Oriental Construction
- Coca-Cola Bottlers Phils. v. Ernani Guingona Meñez
- Doris U. Sunbanun v. Aurora B. Go
- Cornelio Lampesa v. Dr. Juan de Vera, Jr.
- Rodolfo Morales v. Court of Appeals (Former Seventeenth Division)
- Far East Bank v. The Honorable Court of Appeals
Other Supreme Court decisions also apply this article.