Text of the provision
Art. 2208. 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.
Civil Code of the Philippines, Republic Act No. 386, approved June 18, 1949, effective August 30, 1950. Reproduced in full; verified verbatim against the LawPhil and ChanRobles official-text renderings.
What this article means
In the absence of stipulation, attorney's fees cannot be recovered except in eleven enumerated instances — including exemplary damages, the defendant's bad faith in refusing a plainly valid claim, malicious prosecution, recovery of wages, and where the court deems it just and equitable. In all cases the fees awarded must be reasonable.
Questions about this provision
Related provisions
- Article 2207 — Insurance and Subrogation.
- Article 2209 — Interest on Money Obligations.
Cases citing this article
- Philippine National Construction Corporation vs. Apac Marketing Corporation, represented by Cesar M. Ong, Jr, G.R. No. 190957, June 5, 2013 — read the decision on LawPhil →
- Atty. Melita Go and Wayne Go vs. Saint Jude Catholic School Manila, Inc. et al, G.R. No. 257761, April 22, 2025 — read the decision on LawPhil →
- Sps. Bernabe Mercade, Jr., et al. vs. Sps. Jesus Bardillas and Letecia Gabuya Bardillas, G.R. No. 163157, June 27, 2016 — read the decision on LawPhil →
- CCC Insurance Corporation vs. Kawasaki Steel Corporation, et al, G.R. No. 156162, June 22, 2015 — read the decision on LawPhil →
- Pacific Ocean Manning, Inc. vs. Nicolas F. Bobiles, G.R. No. 259982, October 28, 2024 — read the decision on LawPhil →
Compiled automatically from Supreme Court decisions published on LawPhil that expressly cite this article, most frequently cited first. A listing means the decision cites the provision — it is not a statement that the case is the leading authority, and it does not show whether a ruling has since been modified or abandoned. Always read the decision itself.