Dacanay vs Baker n McKenzie

FACTS:

Lawyers under the law firm of Guerrero & Torres in the Philippines, who are also under the Baker &
McKenzie law firm in Illinois, sent a letter to Clurman to pay her liability to Gabriel. The letterhead used
was Baker & McKenzie. Atty. Dacanay denied the demand letter and asked on whether Gabriels lawyer
is Baker & McKenzie, however, no answer was given. He then filed a complaint.

ISSUE:

Can the law firm Baker & McKenzie practice law in the Philippines?

DECISION:

No, because Baker & McKenzie is not authorized to practice law in the Philippines since it was only
organized in Illinois. Even if the lawyers are member of the Philippine Bar, and are under the Guerrero &
Torres law firm; using Baker & McKenzie is unethical, even if they are members or associates of such law
firm.

Angeles vs. Ibaez

FACTS:

Complainants filed disbarment against Atty. Ibaez for notarizing the Extrajudicial Partition with Absolute
Sale in the absence of the parties; and also by notarizing without any notarial commission.

ISSUE:

Will Atty. Ibaez be suspended for notarizing without any notarial commission, and also for notarizing in
the absence of the parties?

DECISION:

Yes, because it is stated in the Rules of Notarial Practice of 2004 that a person shall only notarize if the
signatory is personally present at the time of notarization since their presence shows the genuineness of
their signatures, and also their free act and deed.

Wherefore, the Courts declared Atty. Ibaez guilty and was suspended from practice of law for one year,
and, if any, revokes his notarial commission, and also prohibits him from being commissioned as a
notary public for one year.
In The Matter Of The Integration Of The Bar Of The Philippines

FACTS: