May attorney's fees and costs be awarded in ejectment suits?


Yes. Sec. 17, Rule 70, Rules of Court provides: "If after trial court finds that the allegations of the complaint are true, it shall render judgment in favor of the plaintiff for the restitution of the premises, the sum justly due as arrears of rent or as reasonable compensation for the use and occupation of the premises, attorney's fees and costs."


What is the maximum amount of the attorney's fees that the MTC can award in ejectment case?

The MTC can award attorney's fees up to P20,000.00 only. Section 1 of the Rules on Summary Procedure states:
Sec. 1. All cases of forcible entry and unlawful detainer, irrespective of the amount of damages and unpaid rentals sought to be recovered. Where attorney’s fees are awarded, the same shall not exceed 20,000.00. 

Does the ceiling of P20,000.00 apply to the RTC? Can the RTC award attorney's fees in excess of P20,000.00?

The ceiling of P20,000.00 applies only in the MTC where the Rules on Summary Procedure are applied. On appeal to the RTC, the RTC may affirm, modify or even reverse the decision of the MTC; as such, the RTC may increase the award for attorneys fees in excess of P20,000.00 if there is factual basis therefor. 

The Rule on Summary Procedure applies only in cases filed before the Metropolitan Trial Court and Municipal Trial Courts pursuant to Section 36 of Batas Pambansa Blg. 129. x x x Hence, when the respondents appealed the decision of the Municipal Trial Court to the Regional Trial Court, the applicable rules are those of the latter court.

There is no question that a court may, whenever it deems just and equitable, allow the recovery by the prevailing party of attorneys fees. In determining the reasonableness of such fees, this Court in a number of cases has provided various criteria which, for convenient guidance, we might collate, thusly: a) the quantity and character of the services rendered; b) the labor, time and trouble involved; c) the nature and importance of the litigation; d) the amount of money or the value of the property affected by the controversy; e) the novelty and difficulty of questions involved; f) the responsibility imposed on counsel; g) the skill and experience called for in the performance of the service; h) the professional character and social standing of the lawyer; i) the customary charges of the bar for similar services; j) the character of employment, whether casual or for established client; k) whether the fee is absolute or contingent (it being the rule that an attorney may properly charge a higher fee when it is contingent than when it is absolute; and l) the results secured. Dela Rosa vs. Roldan, G.R. No. 133882,  September 5, 2006