a.

LAW STUDENT PRACTICE (RULE 138-A)

RULE 138-A
Law Student Practice Rule
Section 1. Conditions for student practice. A law student who
has successfully completed his 3rd year of the regular four-year
prescribed law curriculum and is enrolled in a recognized law
school's clinical legal education program approved by the Supreme
Court, may appear WITHOUT COMPENSATION in any civil, criminal or
administrative case before any trial court, tribunal, board or
officer, to represent indigent clients accepted by the legal
clinic of the law school.
Section 2. Appearance. The appearance of the law student
authorized by this rule, shall be under the direct supervision
and control of a member of the Integrated Bar of the Philippines
duly accredited by the law school. Any and all pleadings,
motions, briefs, memoranda or other papers to be filed, must be
signed by the supervising attorney for and in behalf of the
legal clinic.
Section 3.
privileged
to similar
acting for

Privileged communications. The Rules safeguarding

communications between attorney and client shall apply
communications made to or received by the law student,
the legal clinic.

Section 4. Standards of conduct and supervision. The law

student shall comply with the standards of professional conduct
governing members of the Bar. Failure of an attorney to provide
adequate supervision of student practice may be a ground for
disciplinary action. (Circular No. 19, dated December 19, 1986).

BAR MATTER NO. 730

June 13, 1997

Gentlemen:
Quoted hereunder, for your information, is a resolution of the
Court En Banc dated June 10, 1997.

IN RE: NEED THAT LAW STUDENT PRACTICING UNDER RULE 138-A BE

ACTUALLY SUPERVISED DURING TRIAL (BAR MATTER NO. 730).
The issue in this Consulta is whether a law student who appears
before the court under the Law Student Practice Rule (Rule 138-A)
should be accompanied by a member of the bar during the trial.
This issue was raised by retired Supreme Court Justice Antonio P.
Barredo, counsel for the defendant in Civil Case No. BCV-92-11
entitled Irene A. Caliwara v. Roger T. Catbagan filed before the
Regional Trial Court of Bacoor, Cavite.
The records show that the plaintiff in civil Case No. BCV-92-11
was represented by Mr. Cornelio Carmona, Jr., an intern at the
Office of Legal Aid, UP-College of Law (UP-OLA). Mr. Carmona
conducted hearings and completed the presentation of the
plaintiff's
evidence-in-chief
without
the
presence
of
a
supervising lawyer. Justice Barredo questioned the appearance of
Mr. Carmona during the hearing because the latter was not
accompanied by a duly accredited lawyer. On December 15, 1994,
Presiding Judge Edelwina Pastoral issued an Order requiring Mr.
Carmona to be accompanied by a supervising lawyer on the next
hearing. In compliance with said Order, UP-OLA and the Secretary
of Justice executed a Memorandum of Agreement directing Atty.
Catubao and Atty. Legayada of the Public Attorney's Office to
supervise Mr. Carmona during the subsequent hearings.
Justice Barredo asserts that a law student appearing before the
trial court under Rule 138-A should be accompanied by a
supervising lawyer. 1 On the other hand, UP-OLA, through its
Director, Atty. Alfredo F. Tadiar, submits that "the matter of
allowing a law intern to appear unaccompanied by a duly
accredited supervising lawyer should be . . . left to the sound
discretion of the court after having made at least one supervised
appearance." 2
For the guidance of the bench and bar, we hold that a law student
appearing before the Regional Trial Court under Rule 138-A should
at all times be accompanied by a supervising lawyer. Section 2 of
Rule 138-A provides.
Section 2.
Appearance. The appearance of the law student
authorized by this rule, shall be under the direct supervision
and control of a member of the Integrated Bar of the Philippines
duly accredited by the law school. Any and all pleadings,
motions, briefs, memoranda or other papers to be filed, must be
signed the by supervising attorney for and in behalf of the legal
clinic.

The phrase "direct supervision and control" requires no less than

the physical presence of the supervising lawyer during the
hearing. This is in accordance with the threefold rationale
behind the Law Student Practice Rule, to wit: 3
1.
to ensure that there will be no miscarriage of justice as a
result of incompetence or inexperience of law students, who, not
having as yet passed the test of professional competence, are
presumably not fully equipped to act a counsels on their own;
2.
to provide a mechanism by which the accredited law school
clinic may be able to protect itself from any potential vicarious
liability arising from some culpable action by their law
students; and
3.
to ensure consistency with the fundamental principle that no
person is allowed to practice a particular profession without
possessing the qualifications, particularly a license, as
required by law.
The matter of allowing a law student to appear before the court
unaccompanied by a supervising lawyer cannot be left to the
discretion of the presiding judge. The rule clearly states that
the appearance of the law student shall be under the direct
control and supervision of a member of the Integrated Bar of the
Philippines duly accredited by law schools. The rule must be
strictly construed because public policy demands that legal work
should
be
entrusted
only
to
those
who
possess
tested
qualifications, are sworn to observe the rules and ethics of the
legal profession and subject to judicial disciplinary control. 4
We said in Bulacan v. Torcino: 5
Court procedures are often technical and may prove like snares to
the ignorant or the unwary. In the past, our law has allowed nonlawyers to appear for party litigants in places where duly
authorized members of the bar are not available (U.S. vs.
Bacansas, 6 Phil. 539). For relatively simple litigation before
municipal courts, the Rules still allow a more educated or
capable person in behalf of a litigant who cannot get a lawyer.
But for the protection of the parties and in the interest of
justice, the requirement for appearances in regional trial courts
and higher courts is more stringent.
The Law Student Practice Rule is only an exception to the rule.
Hence, the presiding judge should see to it that the law student

appearing before the court is properly guided and supervised by a

member of the bar.
The rule, however, is different if the law student appears before
an inferior court, where the issues and procedure are relatively
simple. In inferior courts, a law student may appear in his
personal capacity without the supervision of a lawyer. Section 34
Rule 138 provides;
Section 34.
By whom litigation is conducted. In the court of
a justice of the peace, a party may conduct his litigation in
person, with the aid of an agent or friend appointed by him for
that purpose, or with the aid of an attorney. In any other court,
a party may conduct his litigation personally or by aid of an
attorney, and his appearance must be either personal or by a duly
authorized member of the bar.
Thus, a law student may appear before an inferior court as an
agent or friend of a party without the supervision of a member of
the bar.
IN VIEW WHEREOF, we hold that a law student appearing before the
Regional Trial Court under the authority of Rule 138-A must be
under the direct control and supervision of a member of the
Integrated Bar of the Philippines duly accredited by the law
school and that said law student must be accompanied by a
supervising lawyer in all his appearance.
Padilla and Francisco, J.J., on leave.
Very truly yours,
(Sgd.) LUZVIMINDA D. PUNO
Clerk of court
Footnotes
1

Consulta, p. 2.

Comment, p. 9.

Comment, p. 5.

Agpalo, Legal Ethics (Fourth Edition, 1989), pp. 39-40.

5 134 SCRA 252 (1985).

Bar Matter No. 730

In Re: Need That Law Student Practicing Under Rule 138-A Be
Actually Supervised During Trial
June 10, 1997

In a civil case, the plaintiff was represented by Mr. Cornelio

Carmona, Jr., an intern at the UP Office of Legal Aid. Mr.
Carmona conducted hearings and completed the presentation of the
plaintiffs
evidence-in-chief
without
the
presence
of
a
supervising lawyer, which was questioned by Justice Barredo.

Presiding Judge Edelwina Pastoral issued an Order requiring Mr.

Carmona to be accompanied by a supervising lawyer on the next
hearing. In compliance with said Order, UP-OLA and the Secretary
of Justice executed a Memorandum of Agreement directing Atty.
Catubao and Atty. Legayada of the Public Attorneys Office to
supervise Mr. Carmona during the subsequent hearings.

Justice Barredo asserts that a law student appearing before the

trial court under Rule 138-A should be accompanied by a
supervising lawyer.

UP-OLA, through its Director, Atty. Alfredo F. Tadiar, submits

that the matter of allowing a law intern to appear unaccompanied
by a duly accredited supervising lawyer should be left to the
sound discretion of the court after having made at least one
supervised appearance.

ISSUE:
Whether a law student who appears before the court
under the Law Student Practice Rule should be accompanied by
a member of the bar during the trial.

HELD:

YES.

RATIO:

The phrase "direct supervision and control" under Rule 138-A

requires no less than the physical presence of the supervising
lawyer during the hearing. This is in accordance with the
threefold rationale behind the Law Student Practice Rule, to wit:

1. to ensure that there will be no miscarriage of justice as a

result of incompetence or inexperience of law students, who,
not having as yet passed the test of professional
competence, are presumably not fully equipped to act a
counsels on their own;
2. to provide a mechanism by which the accredited law school
clinic may be able to protect itself from any potential
vicarious liability arising from some culpable action by
their law students; and
3. to ensure consistency with the fundamental principle that
no person is allowed to practice a particular profession
without possessing the qualifications, particularly a
license, as required by law.
The matter of allowing a law student appear before the court
unaccompanied by a supervising lawyer CANNOT be left to the
discretion of the presiding judge. The rule clearly states that
the appearance of the law student shall be under the direct
control and supervision of a member of the Integrated Bar of the
Philippines duly accredited by the law schools. The rule must be
strictly construed because public policy demands that legal work
should
be
entrusted
only
to
those
who
possess
tested
qualifications, are sworn to observe rules and ethics of the
legal profession and subject to judicial disciplinary control.

Court procedures are often technical and may prove like snares to
the ignorant or the unwary. In the past, our law has allowed nonlawyers to appear for party litigants in places where duly
authorized members of the bar are not available. For relatively
simple litigation before municipal courts, the Rules still allow
a more educated or capable person in behalf of a litigant who

cannot get a lawyer. But for the protection of the parties and in
the interest of justice, the requirement for appearances in
regional trial courts and higher courts is more stringent.

The Law Student Practice Rule is only an exception to the rule.

Hence, the presiding judge should see to it that the law student
appearing before the court is properly guided and supervised by
a member of the bar.
B. NON-LAWYERS IN COURTS
RULE 138:Attorneys and Admission to Bar
Section 33. Standing in court of person authorized to appear for
Government. Any official or other person appointed or
designated in accordance with law to appear for the Government of
the Philippines shall have all the rights of a duly authorized
member of the bar to appear in any case in which said government
has an interest direct or indirect.
Section 34. By whom litigation conducted. In the court of a
justice of the peace a party may conduct his litigation in
person, with the aid of an agent or friend appointed by him for
the purpose, or with the aid an attorney. In any other court, a
party may conduct his litigation personally or by aid of an
attorney, and his appearance must be either personal or by a duly
authorized member of the bar.
RULE 116 - ARRAIGNMENT AND PLEA
Sec. 7. Appointment of counsel de officio. The court,
considering the gravity of the offense and the difficulty of the
questions that may arise, shall appoint as counsel de officio
such members of the bar in good standing who, by reason of their
experience and ability, can competently defend the accused. But
in localities where such members of the bar are not available,
the court may appoint any person, resident of the province and of
good repute for probity and ability, to defend the accused.
RULE 138
Attorneys and Admission to Bar

Section 1. Who may practice law. Any person heretofore duly

admitted as a member of the bar, or hereafter admitted as such in
accordance with the provisions of this rule, and who is in good
and regular standing, is entitled to practice law.
C. Non-lawyers in administrative tribunals
LABOR CODE
Art. 222. Appearances and Fees.
Non-lawyers may appear before the Commission or any Labor Arbiter
only:
If they represent themselves; or
If they represent their organization or members thereof.
No attorneys fees, negotiation fees or similar charges of any
kind arising from any collective bargaining agreement shall be
imposed on any individual member of the contracting union:
Provided, However, that attorneys fees may be charged against
union funds in an amount to be agreed upon by the parties. Any
contract, agreement or arrangement of any sort to the contrary
shall be null and void. (As amended by Presidential Decree No.
1691, May 1, 1980)

Section 9, Cadastral Act, Act. No. 2259

Sec. 9. Any person claiming any interest in any part of the
lands, whether named in the notice or not, shall appear before
the Court by himself, or by some person in his behalf and shall
file an answer on or before the return day or within such further
time as may be allowed by the Court. The answer shall be signed
and sworn to by the claimant or by some person in his behalf, and
shall state whether the claimant is married or unmarried, and, if
married, the name of the husband or wife and the date of the
marriage, and shall also contain:
(a) The age of the claimant.
(b) The cadastral number of the lot or lots claimed, as appearing
on the plan filed in the case by the Director of Lands, or the
block and lot numbers, as the case may be.

(c) The name of the barrio and municipality, township, or

settlement in which the lots are situated.
(d) The names of the owners of the adjoining lots as far as known
to the claimant.
(e) If the claimant is in possession of the lots claimed and can
show no express grant of the land by the Government to him or to
his predecessors in interest, the answer shall state the length
of time he has held such possession and the manner in which it
has been acquired, and shall also state the length of time, as
far as known, during which his predecessors, if any, held
possession.
(f) If the claimant is not in possession or occupation of the
lands, the answer shall fully set forth the interest claimed by
him and the time and manner of its acquisition.
(g) If the lots have been assessed for taxation, their last
assessed value.
(h) The encumbrance, if any, affecting the lots and the names of
the adverse claimants as far as known.

Rule VIII, Section 1, Department of Agrarian Reform Adjudication

Board (DARAB) Rules of Procedure (2009)
SECTION 1.
Appearance. A lawyer appearing for a party
is presumed to be properly authorized for that purpose. A nonlawyer may appear before the Board or any of its Adjudicators,
if:
a.

He represents himself as a party to the case;

b.

He represents a farmers organization or its members,

provided that he shall present proof of authority from
the organization or its members or such authority duly
signed
by
the
Chief
Executive
Officer
of
the
organization;

c.

He is a law student who has successfully completed his

third year of the regular four-year prescribed law
curriculum and is enrolled in a recognized law schools
clinical legal education program approved by the
Supreme Court. His appearance pursuant to this rule
shall be under the direct supervision and control of a

member of the Integrated Bar of the Philippines dulyaccredited by the law school. Any and all pleadings,
motions, memoranda or other papers to be filed must be
signed by the supervising attorney for and in behalf of
the legal aid clinic.
d.

D.

He is a DAR Legal Officer duly authorized by the

appropriate Head of Office in accordance with the
internal regulations of the Department of Agrarian
Reform. For this purpose, the DAR Legal Officer must
have the prescribed authorization form before he may be
allowed to appear before the Board or any of its
Adjudicators, Provided, that when there are two or more
representatives for any individual or group, such
individual
or
group
should
choose
only
one
representative.
SANCTIONS