You are on page 1of 24


INTRODUCTION a. To maintain allegiance to the Republic of the

Philippines and to support the Constitution and
DEFINITION OF TERMS obey the laws of the Philippines;
b. To observe and maintain the respect due to
a. Ethics – how one ought to act or not act; in the courts of justice and judicial officers;
conformity with society; commonly accepted c. To counsel or maintain such actions or
principles. proceedings only as appear to him to be just,
b. Legal Ethics – is the embodiment of all and such defenses only as he believes to be
principles of morality and refinement that honestly debatable under the law;
should govern the conduct of every member of d. To employ, for the purpose of maintaining the
the bar. causes confided to him, such means only as
c. Counsel de parte – retained by a party litigant, are consistent with truth and honor, and never
usually for a fee, to prosecute or defend his seek to mislead the judge or any judicial
cause in court (ex. hourly, project). officer by an artifice or false statement of fact
d. Counsel de officio – pro-bono; appointed by or law;
court; to defend an indigent defendant. e. To maintain inviolate the confidence, and at
e. Attorney of record – name appears in the every peril to himself, to preserve the secrets
record of the case as the designated counsel of his client, and to accept no compensation in
of the party litigant (how? Render your connection with his client's business except
appearance). from him or with his knowledge and approval;
f. Amicus curiae – “friends of the court”; an f. To abstain from all offensive personality and to
experienced and impartial lawyer invited by advance no fact prejudicial to the honor or
the court to appear and help in the disposition reputation of a party or witness, unless
of issues submitted on it. required by the justice of the cause with which
g. Bar – lawyers he is charged;
h. Bench – judges/justices g. Not to encourage either the commencement or
i. Attorney in fact – not necessary a lawyer; the continuance of an action or proceeding, or
authority is limited by the instrument delay any man's cause, from any corrupt
appointing him as agent (G.P.A. / S.P.A.) motive or interest;
j. Bar association – an association of members h. Never to reject, for any consideration personal
of the legal profession (IBP – mandatory; PBA to himself, the cause of the defenseless or
– voluntary). oppressed;
k. House counsel – acts attorney for business i. In the defense of a person accused of crime,
though carried as an employee of that by all fair and honorable means, regardless of
business and not as an independent lawyer; his personal opinion as to the guilt of the
retained counsel of corporations or individuals. accused, to present every defense that the law
l. Lead counsel – counsel who is in charged permits, to the end that no person may be
with the principal management and direction of deprived of life or liberty, but by due process
a party’s case. of law.
m. Pro Se – person who lawyers for himself.
n. Other Terms – Lawyer, Attorney, Attorney-At- FOUR-FOLD DUTIES OF A LAWYER (S-L-C-C)
Law, Practicing Lawyer, Trial Lawyer,
Advocate, Barrister, Counsel or Counselor, a. To Society
Proctor, Solicitor, Abogado (Spanish), b. To the Legal Profession
Manananggol (Filipino). c. To the Court
d. To the Client
The Practice of Law is a Profession and Not a
It is the duty of an attorney: Business.

AUF-SOL | 2016 | JDC.RYS



STATE REGULATION Cayetano vs Monsod

SC – Art. VIII, Sec. 5 (5), 1987 Constitution:  Defined practice of law, as:
o “any activity, in or out of court, which
“The Supreme Court shall have the following requires the application of law, legal
powers: procedure, knowledge, training and
(5) Promulgate rules concerning the protection and  J.Padilla, dissent: 4 Factors in determining
enforcement of constitutional rights, pleading, practice of law: a.) Habituality – not isolated
practice, and procedure in all courts, the admission case; b.) Compensation; c.) Application of
to the practice of law, the integrated bar, and legal Law; d.) Attorney-Client relationship.
assistance to the under-privileged. Such rules shall
provide a simplified and inexpensive procedure for Ruthie Lim-Santiago vs Atty. Sagucio
the speedy disposition of cases, shall be uniform for
 Prosecutor engaged in private practice
all courts of the same grade, and shall not diminish,
 Respondent’s admission that he received from
increase, or modify substantive rights. Rules of
Taggat fees for legal services while serving as
procedure of special courts and quasi-judicial
a government prosecutor is an unlawful
bodies shall remain effective unless disapproved by
conduct, which constitutes a violation of Rule
the Supreme Court.” 1.01
Congress – Art. XII, Sec. 14(2), 1987 Constitution: People vs Villanueva
“Sec.14(2). The practice of all professions in the  Contention: City Attorney Fule in appearing as
Philippines shall be limited to Filipino citizens, save private prosecutor, to represent complainant
in cases prescribed by law.” who is a relative, was engaged in the practice
of law.
Art. XVIII, Sec. 10, Constitution:
o SC – No. Practice is more than an
isolated appearance, it must be
“Sec.10. All courts existing at the time of the
ratification of this Constitution shall continue to
exercise their jurisdiction, until otherwise provided
by law. The provisions of the existing Rules of Court,
judiciary acts, and procedural laws not inconsistent ESSENTIAL CRITERIA DETERMINATIVE OF
with this Constitution shall remain operative unless ENGAGING IN THE PRACTICE OF LAW
amended or repealed by the Supreme Court or the
Congress.” 1. Habituality
2. Compensation
*NOTE: 3. Application of law, legal principle, practice, or
procedure which calls for legal knowledge,
Judicial Control: training and experience
4. Attorney-Client relationship
a. Admission to practice is a judicial function
b. Legislative power to repeal, alter, or
c. Executive power in relation to practice
d. Supreme Court incidental powers

AUF-SOL | 2016 | JDC.RYS


REQUIREMENTS FOR ADMISSION TO THE Aguirre vs Rana – Unauthorized practice of law

One day before respondent Edwin Rana participated
LEGAL EDUCATION the oath-taking of successful bar examinees as
member of the Philippine bar, complainant Donna
EDUCATIONAL QUALIFICATIONS Marie Aguirre filed against respondent a Petition for
Denial of Admission to the Bar on the ground of
Pre-Law – Rule 138, Sec. 6, Rules of Court unauthorized practice of law, grave misconduct,
violation of law, and grave misrepresentation. Aguirre
Law Proper – Rule 138, Sec. 5, Rules of Court
claims that he already appeared as counsel for and in
CITIZENSHIP behalf of Vice Mayoralty Candidate of Mandaon before
he could even take his oath and sign in the Roll of
Constitution, Art. XII, Sec. 14(2)  Filipino Attorneys; the same is substantiated by his signature
appearing in a pleading.
Respondent‘s contention: Not as a lawyer but a
Rules of Court 138, Sec. 7 – 16: Procedure for person who knows the law. The respondent only
Admission: signed in the pleading but not as a lawyer

 Sec. 7 – filing shall be at least 15 day before Whether the respondent should be denied admission
the beginning of the examination. to the Philippine Bar

 Sec. 8 – notice of admission shall be Mere passing a bar doesn’t make one a lawyer; the
published 10 days before the exam same must, after passing the bar, take his oath and
sign in the Roll of Attorneys.
 Sec. 9 – subjects: 1.)Civil Law; 2.)Labor; The fact that respondent passed the bar is immaterial
3.)Mercantile Law; 4.)Criminal Law; 5.)Political as he had not yet taken his oath and signed in the Roll
Law; 6.)International Law; 7.)Taxation; 8.) of Attorneys. Therefore, the respondent’s act of
Remedial Law; 9.)Legal Ethics; and appearing as a counsel for another constitutes an
10.)Practical Exercises unauthorized practice of law. DENIED ADMINISSION
 Sec. 10 – bar examination, by questions and
answers, and in writing

 Sec. 11 – BE shall be held annually in Manila GOOD MORAL CHARACTER

for 4 days
Father Aquino vs Atty. Pascua
 Sec. 12 – Committee of examiners: Chairman 2 documents were notarized by Atty. Pascua.
(SC Justice) + 8 members of the bar
Atty. Pascua admitted having notarized the two
 Sec. 13 – disciplinary measures documents on December 10, 1998, but they were not
entered in his Notarial Register due to the oversight of
 Sec. 14 – Passing average: 75% in all his legal secretary
subjects, but not falling below 50% in any
subject A member of the legal fraternity should refrain from
doing any act which might lessen in any degree the
 Sec. 15 – Results: not later than Feb 15, or as confidence and trust reposed by the public in the
soon as may be practicable fidelity, honesty and integrity of the legal profession.

Atty. Pascua is mandated to subscribe to the sacred

 Sec. 16 – 3 Fail-Rule duties appertaining to his office, such duties being

AUF-SOL | 2016 | JDC.RYS


dictated by public policy and impressed with public the conduct required of court personnel, from the
interest. He should make sure that he complies with presiding judge to the lowliest clerk of court, must
his duty as a notary public always be beyond reproach and circumscribed with
the heavy burden of responsibility as to let them be
The Court has invariably imposed a penalty for free from any suspicion that may taint the Judiciary.
notaries public who were found guilty of dishonesty or We condemn, and will never countenance any
misconduct in the performance of their duties. conduct, act or omission on the part of all those
involved in the administration of justice, which would
Misconduct generally means wrongful, improper or
violate the norm of public accountability and diminish
unlawful conduct motivated by a premeditated,
or even just tend to diminish the faith of the people in
obstinate or intentional purpose. The term, however,
the Judiciary.”
does not necessarily imply corruption or criminal
intent. Bernardo vs Atty. Mejia
3 month suspension. Atty Meija was found guilty of misappropriating and
converting to his personal use sums of money
In re: Judge Quitain – Grave misconduct
entrusted to him for payment of real estate taxes on
While serving as Assistant Regional Direction criminal property belonging to Bernardo; Falsification of certain
and administrative cases were filed against Quitain as documents; issuing a check knowing that he was
a result of which he was dismissed from service. without any funds.

The personal Data Sheet Quitain submitted to JBC HE WAS DISBARED BY THE SC.
only disclosed the 5 criminal cases filed against him in
Now, Atty. Meija is asking for the clemency – that his
Sandiganbayan but were dismissed. He did not
name be added in the roll of attorneys.
disclose the fact that he was dismissed from his
service as Assistant Regional Director because of an The applicant must, like a candidate for admission to
administrative case the bar, satisfy the Court that he is a person of good
moral character, a fit and proper person to practice law.
It is clear that Judge Quitain deliberately misled the
The Court will take into consideration the applicants
JBC in his bid to gain an exalted position in the
character and standing prior to the disbarment, the
nature and character of the charge/s for which he was
The important consideration is that he had a duty disbarred, his conduct subsequent to the disbarment,
to inform the appointing authority and this Court and the time that has elapsed between the disbarment
of the pending criminal charges against him to and the application for reinstatement
enable them to determine on the basis of his
In short, a disbarred lawyer must prove that he’s
record, eligibility for the position he was seeking.
already a changed man.
He did not discharge that duty. His record did not
contain the important information in question because Meija’s application was granted because:
he deliberately withheld and thus effectively hid it. His
lack of candor is as obvious as his reason for the 15 years had already lapsed since he had been
suppression of such a vital fact, which he knew disbarred; He’s already of advanced age; He has
would have been taken into account against him if shown remorse; The Court took notice of Meija’s
it had been disclosed rehabilitation (Published a journal containing religious
and social writing. He also organized a religious
SC: “We cannot overemphasize the need for honesty organization); No other transgression has been
and integrity on the part of all those who are in the attributed to him since he was disbarred.
service of the Judiciary.1 We have often stressed that

AUF-SOL | 2016 | JDC.RYS


Velez vs Atty De Vera of student practice may be a ground for disciplinary

The act of Atty. de Vera in holding on to his client’s
money without the latter’s acquiescence is conduct
indicative of lack of integrity and propriety. It is clear
that Atty. de Vera, by depositing the check in his own Cruz vs Mina
account and using the same for his own benefit is
Sec. 34, Rule 138, ROC – By whom litigation
guilty of deceit, malpractice, gross misconduct and
conducted. - In the court of a justice of the peace a
unethical behavior. He caused dishonor, not only to
party may conduct his litigation in person, with the aid
himself but to the noble profession to which he
of an agent or friend appointed by him for that purpose,
belongs. For, it cannot be denied that the respect of
or with the aid of an attorney. In any other court, a
litigants to the profession is inexorably diminished
party may conduct his litigation personally or by aid of
whenever a member of the profession betrays their
an attorney, and his appearance must be either
trust and confidence. Respondent violated his oath to
personal or by a duly authorized member of the bar.
conduct himself with all good fidelity to his client.


I, _________, do solemnly swear that I will maintain
Rule 138-A, Rules of Court
allegiance to the Republic of the Philippines; I will
Section 1. Conditions for student practice. — A law support the Constitution and obey the laws as well as
student who has successfully completed his 3rd year the legal orders of the duly constituted authorities
of the regular four-year prescribed law curriculum and therein;
is enrolled in a recognized law school's clinical legal
I will do no falsehood, nor consent to the doing of any
education program approved by the Supreme Court,
in court; I will not wittingly or willingly promote or sue
may appear without compensation in any civil, criminal
any groundless, false or unlawful suit, or give aid nor
or administrative case before any trial court, tribunal,
consent to the same;
board or officer, to represent indigent clients accepted
by the legal clinic of the law school. I will delay no man for money or malice, and will
conduct myself as a lawyer according to the best of my
Section 2. Appearance. — The appearance of the law
knowledge and discretion, with all good fidelity as well
student authorized by this rule, shall be under the
to the courts as to my clients; and I impose upon
direct supervision and control of a member of the
myself these voluntary obligations without any mental
Integrated Bar of the Philippines duly accredited by the
reservation or purpose of evasion. So help me God.
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. MEMBERSHIP IN THE IBP

Section 3. Privileged communications. — The Rules In re: Atty. Edillion

safeguarding privileged communications between
attorney and client shall apply to similar The name of Atty Edillion was striken out of the Roll of
communications made to or received by the law Attorney’s because of his stubborn refusal to pay his
student, acting for the legal clinic. membership dues.

Section 4. Standards of conduct and supervision. — Respondent’s arguments:

The law student shall comply with the standards of
professional conduct governing members of the Bar. 1) Invasion of his constitutional right as he is
Failure of an attorney to provide adequate supervision being compelled to join IBP as a necessary
precondition to his status as a lawyer

AUF-SOL | 2016 | JDC.RYS


2) Deprivation of his liberty and property – being arbitrary. (COMMON SENSE!!!!!: IF THERE’S
compelled to be part of an organization he NO PUNISHMENT THAT COULD BE
feels antagonistic of and as a consequence, IMPOSED AS A RESULT OF NON-
SC: An "Integrated Bar" is a State-organized Bar, to
which every lawyer must belong, as distinguished from
bar associations organized by individual lawyers CODE OF PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY
themselves, membership in which is voluntary.
Integration of the Bar is essentially a process by which A. DUTIES TO SOCIETY:
every member of the Bar is afforded an opportunity to
do his share in carrying out the objectives of the Bar CANON 1 – A lawyer shall uphold the constitution,
as well as obliged to bear his portion of its obey the laws of the land and promote respect for law
responsibilities. Organized by or under the direction of and legal process.
the State, an integrated Bar is an official national body
 Rule 1.01 – a lawyer shall not engage in
of which all lawyers are required to be members. They
unlawful, dishonest, immoral or deceitful
are, therefore, subject to all the rules prescribed for the
governance of the Bar, including the requirement of
 Rule 1.02 – a lawyer shall not counsel of abet
payment of a reasonable annual fee for the effective
activities aimed at defiance of the law or at
discharge of the purposes of the Bar, and adherence
lessening confidence in the legal profession.
to a code of professional ethics or professional
 Rule 1.03 – a lawyer shall not, for any corrupt
responsibility breach of which constitutes sufficient
motive or interest, encourage any suit or delay
reason for investigation by the Bar and, upon proper
any man’s cause.
cause appearing, a recommendation for discipline or
disbarment of the offending member.  Rule 1.04 – a lawyer shall encourage his
clients to avoid, end, or settle a controversy if
Since practice of law is clothed with public interest it it will admit of a fair settlement.
must be subject to regulation. Public welfare is the
supreme law

1) Integration does not make a lawyer a member CASES:

of any group of which he is not already a
Zaldivar vs Gonzales – Contemptuous language
member. He became a member of the Bar
when he passed the Bar examinations. 7 All Atty. Gonzales: “rich and influential persons get
that integration actually does is to provide an favorable actions from the Supreme Court, [while] it is
official national organization for the well- difficult for an ordinary litigant to get his petition to be
defined but unorganized and incohesive group given due course”.
of which every lawyer is a ready a member.
2) Sec. 5 Article 10 of the Constitution grants the The statements made by respondent Gonzalez clearly
SC the power to promulgate rules regarding constitute contempt and call for the exercise of the
admission to bar. Requiring payment of a disciplinary authority of the Supreme Court. His
reasonable amount for the IBP is not statements necessarily imply that the justices of the
unconstitutional – the payment being for the Supreme Court betrayed their oath of office. Such
purpose of defraying the expenses incurred by statements constitute the grossest kind of disrespect
IBP and, of course, for any other expenses it for the Supreme Court. Such statements very clearly
incurs because of its operation debase and degrade the Supreme Court and, through
3) if the power to impose the fee as a regulatory the Court, the entire system of administration of justice
measure is recognized, then a penalty in the country.
designed to enforce its payment, which
penalty may be avoided altogether by The responsibility of Gonzalez to uphold the dignity
payment, is not void as unreasonable or and authority of the Supreme Court and not to promote

AUF-SOL | 2016 | JDC.RYS


distrust in the administration of justice is heavier than Also, the moment that Atty. Bonifacio discovered that
that of a private practicing lawyer Mr. Ui’s true civil status she immediately parted ways
with him which belies the alleged moral indifference
Note: Gonzales here is both a practicing private lawyer which could be a ground for disbarment.
and a special prosecutor.
Figueroa vs Barranco – Another “buntisan” case.
Sps Santuyo vs Hidalgo
Barranco was still a law student when he had a
Serious misconduct and dishonesty for wholly relationship with Figueroa and during their relationship,
entrusting the preparation and other mechanics of the a son was born on Dec 11 1964. Barranco promised
notarization to the office secretaries. Figueroa that he’d marry her after he passed the bar
exam. Barranco however left Figueroa and married
Atty. Hidalgo was negligent because as a lawyer he
another woman.
should not have entrusted solely to the office
secretaries the notarization of documents. Whether engaging in premarital sexual relations with
Figueroa and promises to marry constitutes a grossly
The responsibilities attached to a notary public is
immoral conduct
sensitive and respondent should have been more
discreet and cautious Grossly immoral conduct which has been defined as a
conduct which is willful, flagrant, or shameless, and
Sicat vs Ariola
which shows a moral indifference to the opinion of the
Atty Ariola violated Rule 1.01 for engaging into good and respectable members of the community.
deceitful, dishonest, unlawful or immoral conduct.
Engaging in premarital sexual relations and the
The undisputed facts showed that Benitez died on promise to marry does not constitute a grossly immoral
October 25, 2000. The notarial acknowledgement of conduct, if any, it merely suggest a doubtful moral
the respondent acknowledged that Benitez appeared character on his part.
before him and acknowledged that the instrument was
Also the premarital sexual relations was both with
his clear and voluntary act when in fact, Benitez had
Figueroa and Barranco’s consent.
already died – The date of the SPA being Jan 4, 2001,
it was impossible for Benitez to have appeared before the ruling in Arciga v. Maniwang, quite relevant
Atty Arriola. because mere intimacy between a man and a woman,
both of whom possess no impediment to marry,
Ui vs Bonifacio
voluntarily carried on and devoid of any deceit on the
Ui filed a disbarment case against Atty. Bonifacio on part of respondent, is neither so corrupt nor so
the ground of immorality for allegedly carrying a unprincipled as to warrant the imposition of disciplinary
relationship with the former’s husband. sanction against him, even if as a result of such
relationship a child was born out of wedlock
A lawyer may be disbarred by grossly immoral conduct
which has been defined as a conduct which is willful, Barrios vs Martines
flagrant, or shameless, and which shows a moral
Martinez was convicted of a violation of BP 22
indifference to the opinion of the good and respectable
members of the community. Lawyers are burdened IBP Report: Respondent’s conviction of a crime
with a higher degree of social responsibility and thus involving moral turpitude clearly shows his unfitness to
must handle their affairs with great caution. protect the administration of justice and therefore
justified the imposition of sanctions against him
Certainly, Atty. Bonifacio was imprudent in managing
her personal affairs. However, it must be noted that IBP recommendation : The respondent be disbarred
Atty. Bonifacio believed in good faith that Mr. Ui was and his name bee stricken out from the Roll of
single and that both got married as evidenced by a Attorneys
certificate of marriage presented by Atty. Bonifacio.

AUF-SOL | 2016 | JDC.RYS


Whether the crime respondent was convicted of is one exemplar. He should not have exposed himself even
involving moral turpitude to the slightest risk of committing a property violation
nor any action which would endanger the Bar's
Yes – Moral turpitude includes everything which is reputation. Verily, members of the Bar are expected at
done contrary to justice, honesty, modesty or good all times to uphold the integrity and dignity of the legal
morals. It involves an act of baseness, vileness or profession and refrain from any act or omission which
depravity in the private duties which a man owes his might lessen the trust and confidence reposed by the
fellow men or to society in general, contrary to the public in the fidelity, honesty, and integrity of the legal
accepted and customary rule of right and duty profession.By no insignificant measure, respondent
between man and woman, or conduct contrary to blemished not only his integrity as a member of the
justice, honesty, modesty, or good morals. Bar, but also that of the legal profession. In other
words, his conduct fell short of the exacting standards
Practice of law is a privilege…. What is the purpose of
expected of him as a guardian of law and justice.
disbarment? To protect the administration of justice by
Although to a lesser extent as compared to what has
requiring that those who exercise this important
been ascribed by the IBP, the Court still holds
function shall be competent, honorable and reliable;
respondent guilty of violating Rule 1. 01, Canon 1
men in whom courts and clients may repose
of the Code. Considering that this is his first offense
as well as the peculiar circumstances of this case, the
Penalty of disbarment was determined based on Court believes that a fine of P15,000.00 would suffice.
previous decided cases holding that DISBARMENT IS
Yupangco-Nakpil vs Atty. Roberto Uy
Donton vs Dr. Tansingco
Atty. Robert UY committed some form of misconduct
Stier a U.S citizen was disqualified to own real
by mortgaging the subject property in this case
property in the Philippines. Atty. Tansingco prepared
notwithstanding the fact that there was an apparent
several documents to aid Stier to circumvent the
dispute over the same.
constitutional prohibition against foreign ownership of
The subject property was subject to a trust agreement lands by preparing said documents.
between respondent and petitioner. Despite this, the
Rule 1.01 – Unlawful act
respondent mortgaged it even without securing the
consent of the petitioner. The respondent in this case used his knowledge of the
law to achieve an unlawful end; As a lawyer he was
IBP : Serious miscounduct
also supposed to uphold the Constitution and not
SC: A reading of the case would reveal that the circumvent it. – SUSPENDED. ( MALPRACTICE )
dispute was merely internal in nature as evinced by
In re Terell
the fact that petitioner Rebecca withdrew the
allegations she made in a complaint filed against Atty Terell in this case assisted the organization ‘ Centrol
Uy stating that the same were made because of Bellas Artes “ Club even after he had been notified that
misapprehension of facts …… such was established for the purpose of evading the
law – He acted as an attorney for the org.
Nevertheless, the Court finds that respondent
committed some form of misconduct by, as admitted, He was suspended by the court after reviewing ‘ US vs
mortgaging the subject property, notwithstanding the Terrel “ where he was charged with estafa and after
apparent dispute over the same. Regardless of the finding out that the charges were true.
merits of his own claim, respondent should have
exhibited prudent restraint becoming of a legal Whether the suspension was justified.

AUF-SOL | 2016 | JDC.RYS


The promoting of organizations, with knowledge of tend to arouse public opinion for or against a party.
their objects, for the purpose of violating or evading Regrettably, Atty. Paguia has persisted in ignoring the
the laws against crime constitutes such misconduct on Court’s well-meant admonition. The Court has already
the part of an attorney, an officer of the court, as warned Atty. Paguia, on pain of disciplinary sanction,
amounts to malpractice or gross misconduct in his to become mindful of his grave responsibilities as a
office, and for which he may be removed or lawyer and as an officer of the Court. Apparently, he
suspended. has chosen not to at all take heed.

The assisting of a client in a scheme which the Saburnido vs Madrono

attorney knows to be dishonest, or the conniving at a
violation of law, are acts which justify disbarment. Madrono was a judge but was dismissed because of
an administrative case filed by the spouses saburnido.
HOWEVER, Terrel was acquitted in US vs. Terrel on
the charge of estafa. While unprofessional, is not In retaliation due to his disbarment, Madrono started
criminal in nature. Hence, Terrel is suspended for one harassing the spouses by filing multiple complaints
year (as opposed to permanent suspension). against them which were unsubstantiated.

Estrada vs Sandiganbayan The spouses’ children had to stop school as they had
to use their funds to cover litigation expenses.
Crux of the case – Whether Atty Paguia should be
suspended because of his obstinate display of IBP: concluded that complainants submitted
defiance, his repeated claim of partisanship against convincing proof that respondent indeed committed
the members of the Court which as alleged by him was acts constituting gross misconduct that warrant the
a violation of Rule 5.10 of Code of Judicial Conduct imposition of administrative sanction. The IBP
and his continuous making of public statements about recommends that respondent be suspended from the
Estrada’s case after being ordered not to practice of law for one year.

YES. SC: respondents act of filing multiple complaints

against herein complainants reflects on his fitness to
-Canon 11 of the Code of Professional Responsibility be a member of the legal profession. His act evinces
mandates that the lawyer should observe and maintain vindictiveness, a decidedly undesirable trait whether in
the respect due to the courts and judicial officers and, a lawyer or another individual, as complainants were
indeed, should insist on similar conduct by others. In instrumental in respondents dismissal from the
liberally imputing sinister and devious motives and judiciary. We see in respondents tenacity in pursuing
questioning the impartiality, integrity, and authority of several cases against complainants not the
the members of the Court, Atty. Paguia has only persistence of one who has been grievously wronged
succeeded in seeking to impede, obstruct and pervert but the obstinacy of one who is trying to exact revenge.
the dispensation of justice.
Respondent’s action erodes rather than enhances
The Supreme Court does not claim infallibility; it will public perception of the legal profession – violation of
not denounce criticism made by anyone against the Rule 1.02 (engaging in acts which tend to lessen
Court for, if well-founded, can truly have constructive confidence in the legal profession )
effects in the task of the Court, but it will not
countenance any wrongdoing nor allow the erosion of Linsangan vs Atty. Tolentino – Solicitation of clients
the people’s faith in the judicial system, let alone, by
Disbarment case
those who have been privileged by it to practice law in
the Philippines. Atty. Tolentiono with the help of his paralegal
convinced Linsangan’s clients to transfer to Tolentino
The attention of Atty. Paguia has also been called to
and promised them financial assistance and
the mandate of Rule 13.02 of the Code of Professional
expeditious collection on their claims. TOLENTINO
Responsibility prohibiting a member of the bar from
making such public statements on a case that may

AUF-SOL | 2016 | JDC.RYS


CLIENTS A CALLING CARD which visibly states that Resort to the courts could have been avoided had the
his law office rendered financial assistance to clients in lawyers of both sides tried to look for other ways to
maritime cases for seafarers settle the problem between the father and the son;
their problem could have been easily resolved if they
The Supreme Court ruled that Atty. Tolentino had took steps to reconcile them.
encroached complanant’s professional practice and
constituted violations of ethical rules. , lawyers are
reminded that the practice of law is a profession and *NOTE:
not a business; lawyers should not advertise their
talents as merchants advertise their wares.To allow a See 2004 Rules on Notarial Practice
lawyer to advertise his talent or skill is to
commercialize the practice of law, degrade the
profession in the public’s estimation and impair its CANON 2 – A lawyer shall make his legal services
ability to efficiently render that high character of available in an efficient and convenient manner
service to which every member of the bar is called. compatible with the dependence, integrity and
Rule 2.03 of the CPR provides that a lawyer shall effectiveness of the profession.
not do or permit to be done any act designed
primarily to solicit legal business.  Rule 2.01 – a lawyer shall not reject, except
for valid reasons, the cause of the defenseless
Hence, lawyers are prohibited from soliciting cases for or the oppressed.
the purpose of gain. Such actuation constitutes  Rule 2.02 – in such cases, even if the lawyer
malpractice, a ground for disbarment does not accept a case, he shall not refuse to
render legal advice to the person concerned if
A lawyer’s best advertisement is a well-merited
only to the extend necessary to safeguard the
reputation for professional capacity and fidelity to
latter’s rights.
trust based on his character and conduct. For this
reason, lawyers are only allowed to announce their  Rule 2.03 – a lawyer shall not do or permit to
services by publication in reputable law lists or use be done any act designed to primarily solicit
of simple professional cards. legal business.
 Rule 2.04 – a lawyer shall not charge rates
This crass commercialism degraded the integrity of the lower than those customarily prescribed
bar and deserved no place in the legal profession. unless the circumstances so warrant.

Rule 1.03 – a lawyer shall not for any corrupt motive or

interest, encourage any suit or proceeding or delay
any man’s cause. CASES:

Rule 2.03 must be read with rule 1.03 Santiago vs Atty Rafanan

Take note of the terms: Champerty and Barratry Atty Rafanan made an affidavit in favor of his client
and offered the same as evidence in the case wherein
Ysasi III vs NLRC – Inconsiderate father he was actively representing his client.

Father employed Son as farm administrator of his Is the act of Rafanan a violation of the code of
hacienda. While working, Son suffered various professional responsibility?
ailments for which he was hospitalized. The medical
expenses were taken care of by the father. As a As to the affidavit executed by Rafanan in favor of his
consequence of which, father ceased to pay son’s client, the SC says that this is in violation of Rule 12.08
salary. Court ruled in favor of the son with an obiter of Canon 12, which says that a lawyer should avoid
however that the lawyer of the son should have testifying in behalf of his own client. The SC explained
observed the application of the rule stated in RULE that appearing both as counsel and witness of a client
1.04. will provoke unkind criticism and leave many people to
suspect the truthfulness of the lawyer because they

AUF-SOL | 2016 | JDC.RYS


cannot believe the lawyer as disinterested. Obviously,  Rule 3.03 – where a partner accepts public
if a lawyer appears as client and counsel, people office, he shall withdraw from the firm and his
would automatically think that his testimony as a name shall be dropped from the firm name
witness is biased in favor of his client. unless the law allows him to practice law
Despite of this, Rafanan cannot be made  Rule 3.04 – a lawyer shall not pay or give
administratively liable. First, the SC considered that it anything of value to representatives of the
is the duty of a lawyer to assert every remedy and mass media in anticipation of, or in return for,
defense for the benefit of the client. Thus, in defense publicity to attract legal business.
of his client, Rafanan is supposed to do everything in
his power. Since, he is a witness to the crime, his
affidavit is essential to the defense of his client. What
he should have done though was to exempt himself CASES:
from being counsel. This would ensure his credibility
Khan vs Simbillo – Annulment of marriage
as a witness.
SPECIALIST ( edi wow )
Note: Apply Rule 2.0: This case is one valid ground to
Atty Simbillo caused the publication of his legal
reject rendering legal services to another – When
services in a paid advertisement which employed the
there’s a possibility that the lawyer would have to
testify for that person in the future.
Violation of the ff:
Linsangan vs Atty Tolentino (supra)
Rule 2.03 – solicitation of legal services
Rule 3.01 – a lawyer shall not use or permit the use of
IBP Handbook, Guidelines Governing Establishment
any false, fraudulent, misleading, deceptive,
and Operation of Legal Aid Office, Art. 1, Sec. 1
undignified, self-laudatory, or unfair statement or claim
GR: Rule 2.02 regarding his qualifications or legal services.

 XPN: Canon 14, Rule 14.01 and Rule 14.02 Atty Simbillio was suspended from the law practice
o XPN to the XPN: Canon 14, Rule
Why? The law practice is not a business. It is a
profession in which duty to public service, not
Rule 138, Sec 27, Rules of Court monetary benefit is the primary consideration.

The following elements distinguish legal profession

from business:
CANON 3 – A lawyer in making known his legal
services shall use only true, honest, fair, dignified and  A duty of public service
objective information or statement of facts.  A relation as an “officer of the court” to the
administration of justice involving thorough
 Rule 3.01 – a lawyer shall not use or permit sincerity, integrity and reliability
the use of any false, fraudulent, misleading,  A relation to clients in the highest degree of
deceptive, undignified, self-laudatory, or unfair fiduciary
statement or claim regarding his qualifications  A relation to colleagues at the bar
or legal services. characterized by candor, fairness, and
 Rule 3.02 – in the choice of a firm name, no unwillingness to resort to current business
false, misleading or assumed name shall be methods of advertising and encroachment on
used. The continued use of the name of a their practice, or dealing directly with their
deceased partner is permissible provided that clients.
the firm indicates in all its communications that
said partner is deceased.

AUF-SOL | 2016 | JDC.RYS


Respondent advertised himself as an “Annulment obtained by Filipino spouse could be validly

Specialist,” and by this he undermined the stability and acknowledged in the Philippines) Also, the fact that
sanctity of marriage—encouraging people who might legal fees are indicated can’t constitute a valid
have otherwise been disinclined and would have advertisement. ( Secret marriage? 560 for valid
refrained form dissolving their marriage bonds, to do marriage )
Always go back to the fundamental postulate – THE
Solicitation of legal business is not altogether PRACTICE OF LAW IS NOT A BUSINESS.
proscribed, however, for solicitation to be proper, it
must be compatible with the dignity of the legal In Re: Tagorda
profession – only that which is true and permitted by
law. Luis Tagorda, a practicing lawyer and a member of the
Provincial Board of Isabela admits that the previous
Ulep vs Legal Clinic – Legal clinic v law firms election he used a card which states what he can do
for the people as a lawyer and a notary public
Legal Clinic admits the facts of publication of the
advertisement that claims that it is not engaged in the Tagorda even wrote a letter to a lieutenant barrio
practice of law but only in the rendering of legal asking him to inform the people that despite being
support services through paralegals with the use of elected as a member of the board, he will still exercise
modern computers and electronic machine. his profession as a lawyer and even goes as far as
granting a discount for registration of lands.
Violation of :
Another case of solicitation of services.
Canon 1, Rule 1.02 – Counseling illegal activities
Violation of :
Canon 3, Rule 3.01 – Misleading, fraudulent,
deceptive statements employed in the advertisement Canon 2, rule 2.03 – Solicitation of services

Canon 3, Rule 3.04 – giving something of value to Canon 3, Rule 3.01 – Self laudatory and undignified
members of mass media for publicity to attract legal statement contained in the ‘ card ‘ issued by him.
Canon 27 and 28.
Regarding the issue on the validity of the questioned
advertisements, the Code of Profession Responsibility Dacanay vs Baker and McKenzie
provides that a lawyer, in making known his legal
Dacanay seeks to enjoin Torres and 9 other lawyers
services shall use only true, honest, fair, and objective
from practicing law under Baker & McKenzie (a law
information or statement of facts. The proscription
firm organized in Illinois, USA). Torres used the
against advertising of legal services rests on the
letterhead of Baker & McKenzie on a letter to Rosie
fundamental postulate that the practice of law is a
Clurman that asks her to release 87 shares of Cathay
Products Int’l. Inc. to HE Gabriel (a client). Dacanay
Exceptions: denied any liability of Clurman and asked whether she
is being represented by Baker & McKenzie as counsel
Publication in reputable law lists, in a manner as well as the purpose of the letterhead. No reply
consistent with the standards of conduct imposed by coming from Clurman thus this Administrative Case.
the canon
Whether the lawyers could be enjoined in using
Ordinary, simple professional card. The card may ‘ Baker and Mckenzie ‘ as their firm name
contain only the statement of his name, the law firm,
address and branch of law practiced. Yes.

In here the words employed in the advertisement were Rule 3.02 – Use of misleading firm name is
clearly deceptive and fraudulent. (Divorce decree prohibited.

AUF-SOL | 2016 | JDC.RYS


The continued use of Baker and Mckenzie by the disseminating information regarding law and
lawyers practicing in the Philippines would give an jurisprudence.
impression that they are a notch higher than other law
firms when it comes to international legal issues – This *NOTE:
definitely gives them advantage over other law firms
See BM 850 – MCLE
and is of course misleading as they really are not
specializing in international law.

Samonte Gatdula CANON 6 – These Canons shall apply to lawyers in

government service in the discharge of their official
Gatdula is charged with grave misconduct for
engaging in private practice which is in conflict with his
official functions as Branch Clerk of Court  Rule 6.01 – the primary duty of a lawyer in
public prosecution is not convict but to see
Gatdula gave a calling card to petitioner and directed
that justice is done. The suppression of facts
her to visit ‘ Baligod, Gatdula, Tacardon, Diumalig and
or the concealment of witnesses capable of
Celera “ law office if she wanted to secure a decision
establishing the innocence of the accused is
favorable to her.
highly reprehensible and is cause for
Is there a violation of CPR? disciplinary action.
 Rule 6.02 – a lawyer in government service
Yes. shall not use his public position to promote or
Rule 3.03 – The name of the partner who accepts a advance his private interests, nor allow the
public office shall immediately be dropped from the latter to interfere with his public duties.
firm name unless, by law, he/she is permitted to  Rule 6.03 – a lawyer shall not, after leaving
privately practice law. (NOT VERBATIM!!!!) government service, accept engagement or
employment in connection with any matter in
Inclusion/retention of his name in the professional card
which he had intervened while in said service.
constitutes an act of solicitation which violates Section
7, sub-par. (b)(2) of RA 6713 (Code of Conduct and
Ethical Standards for Public Officials and Employees)
which declares it unlawful for a public official or CASES:
employees to, among others:
Collantes vs Renomeron - Disbarment case
“(2) Engage in the private practice of their
profession unless authorized by the Constituion or law, Renomeron is in charge of approving registrations of
provided that such practice will not conflict with official Deeds of Absolute Sale. Despite repeated demands
functions.” made by Collantes, Renomeron kept on being remiss
to comply with his duties and to make matters worse,
he even asked for additional requirements to approve
the Deed of absolute sale which Collantes was able to
CANON 4 – A lawyer shall participate in the comply with. Renomeron, again, suspended the
development of the legal system by initiating or registration of document and tried to first extort money
supporting efforts in law reform and in the from Collantes to ‘ SPEED UP ‘ the processing – In
improvement of the administration of justice. short, the very reason why he kept on delaying the
approval of the registration was because he wanted to
CANON 5 – A lawyer shall keep abreast of legal
receive something from Collantes. This is a clear case
developments, participate in continuing legal
of extortion
educational programs, support efforts to achieve
highest standards in law schools as well as in the SC – DISBARED
practical training of law students and assist in

AUF-SOL | 2016 | JDC.RYS


Will the claim that Renomeron should not be disbarred Rule 6.02 – Using public position to advance his
for the reason that his personality as a lawyer and as a private interest – AS A PAO LAWYER, HE SHOULD
public officer is different prosper? NOT CHARGE AND ACCEPT ANYTHING FROM HIS
NO! Yes, the administrative complaint has to do with
his position in public service. The disbarment case (Not so impt – already beyond the coverage )
has to do with his status as member of the Integrated
Bar. Rule 16.01. A lawyer shall account for all money or
property collected or received for or from a client. –
Filing of an administrative complaint against THE SPURIOUS RECEIPT. (5K ONLY – WHEN IT
Renomeron in his capacity as a public officer does not SHOULD HAVE BEEN 8K)
serve as a bar to filing a disbarment case.
Rule 18.01. A lawyer should not undertake a legal
Violation of: service which he knows or should know that he is not
qualified to render. However, he may render such
RULE 1.01 – Unlawful deceitful conduct service if, with the consent of his client, he can obtain
as collaborating counsel a lawyer who is competent on
Rule 6.02 – Using public position to promote private
interest – EXACTION definitely clothed with private
Ramos vs Atty Imbang – PAO lawyer
Cuenca vs CA – Plea for new trial
Ramos sought the assistance of Atty Imbang to file a
Sol Gen: Ordinarily, it’s already too late to ask for a
civil and criminal action against certain persons.
new trial after the lapse of many years. However, the
Ramos paid Atty Imbang the amount of 8 thousand
‘PEOPLE ‘is inclined to allow the petitioner to establish
pesos for his services. During the hearing, Atty.
the genuineness and due execution of his brother’s
Imbang would always ask Ramos to stay outside and
wait and after several hours Atty Imbang would come
out and say that the trial was suspended and Rule 6.01 – the primary duty of a lawyer in public
rescheduled. As Ramos was already getting prosecution is not convict but to see that justice is
suspicious, she inquired about the status of her case done. The suppression of facts or the concealment of
in court only to find out that no case was ever filed by witnesses capable of establishing the innocence of the
Atty Imbang – a PAO lawyer. accused is highly reprehensible and is cause for
disciplinary action.
SC – Suspension for 3 years.
SC commended the SOL GEN for brushing aside
Violation of :
technicalities by allowing herein petitioner to request
Canon 1 – Lawyer should uphold the constitution, for a new trial based on newly found evidence which
obey the laws of the land and promote respect for the would have been impossible with his opposition.
law and legal processes. - Section 14(3), Chapter 5,
Ali vs Atty Bubong – Indiscriminate issuance of
Title III, Book V of the Revised Administrative Code
provides: The PAO shall be the principal law office of
the Gov’t in extending FREE LEGAL SERVICES to Respondents grave misconduct, as established by the
indigent persons in criminal civil labor administrative Office of the President and subsequently affirmed by
and quasi judicial cases. – In accepting 8 thousand this Court, deals with his qualification as a lawyer. By
from the petitioner, the respondent blatantly violated taking advantage of his office as the Register of Deeds
the law. of Marawi City and employing his knowledge of the
rules governing land registration for the benefit of his
Rule 1.01 – Dishonest, deceitful conduct
relatives, respondent had clearly demonstrated his
unfitness not only to perform the functions of a civil

AUF-SOL | 2016 | JDC.RYS


servant but also to retain his membership in the bar. PCGG vs Sandiganbayan
Rule 6.02 of the Code of Professional Responsibility is
explicit on this matter. ( Just familiarize yourself with the facts of the case. )

A case of suspension or disbarment may proceed The problem which the Supreme Court sought to
regardless of interest or lack of interest of the resolve is whether or not Rule 6.03 applies to Estelito
complainant. What matters is whether, on the basis of Mendoza. – He had a participation in the liquidation as
the facts borne out by the record, the charge of deceit a SOL GEN
and grossly immoral conduct has been duly proven.
No, it does not apply to Mendoza. Sandiganbayan
This rule is premised on the nature of disciplinary
decision is affirmed.
proceedings. A proceeding for suspension or
disbarment is not in any sense a civil action where the The matter (see 3rd note), or the act of Mendoza as
complainant is a plaintiff and the respondent lawyer is Solicitor General is advising the Central Bank on how
a defendant. Disciplinary proceedings involve no to proceed with the liquidation of Genbank. This is not
private interest and afford no redress for private the “matter” contemplated by Rule 6.03 of the Code of
Professional Responsibility.
grievance. They are undertaken and prosecuted solely
for the public welfare. They are undertaken for the The matter involved in the liquidation of Genbank is
purpose of preserving courts of justice from the official entirely different from the matter involved in the PCGG
ministration of persons unfit to practice in them. The case against the Lucio Tan group.
attorney is called to answer to the court for his conduct
as an officer of the court. The complainant or the Matter – any discrete, isolatable act as well as
person who called the attention of the court to the indentifiable transaction or conduct involving a
attorneys alleged misconduct is in no sense a party, particular situation and specific party
and has generally no interest in the outcome except as
all good citizens may have in the proper administrative
of justice. ( This might be asked by Atty. Canlas ) The intervention contemplated in Rule 6.03 should be
substantial and important. The role of Mendoza in
Whether respondent may be disbarred for grave the liquidation of Genbank is considered
misconduct committed while he was in the employ insubstantial.
of the government. – SC in the affirmative
SC is even questioning why PCGG took such a long
time to revive the motion to disqualify Mendoza.
The Code of Professional Responsibility does not
Apparently, PCGG already lost a lot of cases against
cease to apply to a lawyer simply because he has Mendoza. PCGG was getting desperate.
joined the government service. In fact, by the express
provision of Canon 6 thereof, the rules governing the Something to think about: SC is somehow of the
conduct of lawyers shall apply to lawyers in opinion that Rule 6.03 will make it harder for the
government service in the discharge of their official government to get good lawyers in the future to work
for them because of the prohibition of accepting cases
tasks. Thus, where a lawyer’s misconduct as a
in the future that were related to one’s work as a
government official is of such nature as to affect government counsel.
his qualification as a lawyer or to show moral
delinquency, then he may be disciplined as a
member of the bar on such ground. Although the Huyssen vs Atty. Gutierrez
general rule is that a lawyer who holds a government
office may not be disciplined as a member of the bar Respondent’s act of asking money from complainant in
for infractions he committed as a government official, consideration of the latter’s pending application for
he may, however, be disciplined as a lawyer if his visas is violative of Rule 1.01 of the Code of
misconduct constitutes a violation of his oath a Professional Responsibility, which prohibits members
member of the legal profession (Another possible of the Bar from engaging or participating in any
question. This was propounded to us by Atty. Canlas unlawful, dishonest, or deceitful acts. Moreover, said
during discussion) acts constitute a breach of Rule 6.02 of the Code
which bars lawyers in government service from

AUF-SOL | 2016 | JDC.RYS


promoting their private interest. Promotion of private lawyer represents conflicting interests when, in
interest includes soliciting gifts or anything of monetary behalf of one client, it is his duty to contend for
value in any transaction requiring the approval of his that which duty to another client requires him to
office or which may be affected by the functions of his oppose.
office. Respondent’s conduct in office betrays the
integrity and good moral character required from all Also there was a showing that he had an active
lawyers, especially from one occupying a high public participation in the case which is something that can
office. A lawyer in public office is expected not only to be considered normal as they both worked in the same
refrain from any act or omission which might tend to law firm.
lessen the trust and confidence of the citizenry in
government; he must also uphold the dignity of the
legal profession at all times and observe a high See RA 6713, Sec. 4, RA 6713, Sec 7 (b), RA 3019,
standard of honesty and fair dealing. Otherwise said, a Sec 3 (d)
lawyer in government service is a keeper of the public
faith and is burdened with high degree of social
responsibility, perhaps higher than his brethren in
private practice.

PNB vs Cedo

During Cedo’s stint with PNB, he became involved in 2

transactions: 1.) sale of steel sheets to Ms. Ong and
2.) intervened in the handling of a loan of spouses
Almeda. When a civil action arose because of #1,
Cedo, after leaving the bank appeared as one of the
counsel of Ms. Ong. Also, when #2 was involved in a
civil action, the Almedas were represented by the law
firm Cedo, Ferrer, Maynigo & Associates of which
Cedo was a Senior Partner.

Cedo claims that he did not participate in the litigation

of Ms. Ong’s case. He also claims that even if it was
his law firm handling the Almeda case, the case was
being handled by Atty. Ferrer.

SC: There was a violation of RULE 6.02

In the complexity of what is said in the course of

dealings between the atty. and the client, inquiry of the
nature suggested would lead to the revelation, in
advance of the trial, of other matters that might only
further prejudice the complainant cause. Whatever
may be said as to within the atty. utilized against his
former client information given to him in a professional
capacity, the mere fact of their previous relationship
should have precluded him from appearing as counsel
for the other side.

It is unprofessional to represent conflicting

interests, except by express consent of all the
parties concerned after the disclosure of facts. A

AUF-SOL | 2016 | JDC.RYS



 Canon 1 – Promote And Respect The CANON 7 – a lawyer shall at all times uphold the
Law And Legal Process integrity and dignity of the legal profession and support
o 1.01 – No Unlawful, Dishonest, the activities of the integrated bar.
Immoral, Deceitful Conduct
 Rule 7.01 – a lawyer shall be answerable for
o 1.02 – No Counseling to Defy
knowingly making a false statement or
suppressing a material fact in connection with
o 1.03 – Not to Encourage Lawsuit
his application for admission to the bar.
or Proceedings
 Rule 7.02 – a lawyer shall not support the
o 1.04 – Encourage Client to Avoid
application for admission to the bar of any
person known by him to be unqualified in
respect to character, education, or other
 Canon 2 – Provide Efficient And
relevant attribute.
Convenient Legal Services
 Rule 7.03 – a lawyer shall not engage in
o 2.01 – Not to Reject The Cause
conduct that adversely reflects on his fitness
of the Defenseless or Oppressed
to practice law, nor shall he, whether in public
o 2.02 – Not to Refuse to Give
or private life, behave in a scandalous manner
Legal Advice
to the discredit of the legal profession.
o 2.03 – No Solicitation
o 2.04 – No Rates Lower Than
Customarily Charged
 Canon 3 – Information On Legal
Services That Is True, Honest, Fair, And In re 1989 Elections of the IBP – Canon 7
 Attorneys Nereo Paculdo, Ramon Nisce, and
o 3.01 – No False or Unfair Claim
Violeta Drilon were candidates for the position
re: Qualifications
of IBP President in 1989. Drilon won the
o 3.02 – No False or Misleading
elections. However, there were allegations
Firm Name
that the candidates solicited votes by giving
o 3.03 – Partners Assuming Public
free hotel accommodations, foods, drinks,
entertainment to delegates, using of
o 3.04 – Not Use Media to Attract
government planes, intervention of certain
Legal Business
public officials to influence the voting, and
many other allegations, all of which were done
 Canon 4 – Support For Legal Reforms
in violation of the IBP By-Laws. Candidates
And Administration Of Justice
not only violated the IBP By-Laws but also the
ethics of the legal profession which imposes
 Canon 5 – Participate In Legal Education
the obligation and duty to “promote respect for
law and legal processes.” The bribing or
being bribed to vote did not uphold the honor
 Canon 6 – Canons Applies To Lawyers of the profession, nor elevate it in the public’s
In Government Service esteem.
o 6.01 – Primary Duty: That Justice
is Done Santos vs Llamas – Canon 7
o 6.02 – Not to Use Public Position
for Private Interest  Atty. Llamas is guilty of misrepresentation and
o 6.03 – Not to Accept non-payment of bar membership dues. For at
Employment After Government least 3 years he has been using the same IBP
Service number in his pleadings, thereby

AUF-SOL | 2016 | JDC.RYS


misrepresenting to the public and the courts or the type of practice, the member is engaged
that he had paid his IBP dues. Suspended for in.
only 1 year or until he has paid his IBP dues
(mitigated due to his advanced age and Zaguirre vs Castillo – Rule 7.03
express willingness to pay his dues).
 Carmelita Zaguirre and Atty. Alfredo Castillo
Re: 2003 Bar Examinations – Canon 7 were officemates at the NBI. Respondent
courted complainant and promised to marry
 Reported leakage in the Mercantile Exam. her. During this time, Atty Castillo was
 A committee was created in order to preparing for the bar examinations to which he
investigate the incident. The Committee found passed. It was only after that Carmelita
that the leaked test question in Mercantile Law learned about Castillo being married, when the
were the questions which the examinee, Atty latter’s wife went to her office and confronted
Balgos had prepared and submitted to Justice her about her relationship with him.
Jose Vitug, who was the Chairman of the 2003 Respondent however contends that what
Bar Examinations Committee. And that the transpired between them was nothing but
leaked questions were downloaded from the mutual lust and desire, and that he never
computer of Atty Balgos without his knowledge represented himself as single since it was
by Atty Danilo De Guzman, the former’s legal known in the NBI that he was already married.
assistant. De Guzman confessed that he  Respondent repeatedly engaged in sexual
faxed the questions to his frat brods in Beta congress with a woman not his wife and now
Sigma Lambda. refuses to recognize and support a child whom
 Violation of Canon 1, Rule 1.01 and Canon 7 he previously recognized and promised to
 SC – disbarred support.
 Violation of Rule 1.01, Canon 7, and Rule 7.03.
Letter of Atty. Cecilio Arevalo – Canon 7  The practice of law is not a right but a privilege
burdened with conditions. The rigid standards
 Request for exemption from payment of IBP
of mental fitness, maintenance of the highest
dues in the amount of P12,035 as alleged
degree of morality and faithful compliance with
unpaid accountability for the years 1977-2005.
the rules of the legal profession are the
 He maintains that he cannot be assessed IBP
conditions required for remaining a member of
dues for the years that he was working in the
good standing of the bar and for the enjoying
Civil Service, since the law prohibits the
such privilege.
practice of ones profession while in
 SC – guilty of gross immoral conduct =
government service, and neither can he be
indefinite suspension
assessed for the years when he was working
in the USA. NOTES:
 An Integrated Bar is an official national body of
which all lawyers are required to be members. Rule 7.03:
The integration of the Philippine Bar means
the official unification of the entire population. Acts which adversely reflect on the lawyer’s fitness to
The Court has the power to regulate the Bar, practice law, which justify suspension:
therefore, it may impose a membership fee for
A. Gross immorality
that purpose. A membership fee is an exaction
a.) One that is so corrupt and false as to
for regulation, unlike that of a tax, which its
constitute a criminal act.
purpose is revenue.
b.) Unprincipled or disgraceful as to be
 The payment of dues is a necessary reprehensible to a high degree.
consequence of membership in the IBP, of Acts:
which no one is exempt. The payment of dues o Living an adulterous life with a married
subsists as long as one’s membership in the woman.
IBP remains regardless of the lack of practice,

AUF-SOL | 2016 | JDC.RYS


o Maintaining illicit relations with a niece. procedures and processes; 2.) Filing of
o Abandonment of his lawful wife to live multiple actions and forum shopping; 3.) Willful,
with another woman. intentional, and deliberate falsehood before
o Contracting marriage while first the courts; 4.) Maligning the name of his fellow
marriage still subsisting. lawyers; 5.) Unauthorized appearances. He
o Seducing a woman to have carnal was also previously suspended for other
knowledge with her on the basis of ethical infractions.
misrepresentation that he is going to  Violation of Canon 8 for imputing wrongdoing
marry her, that he is single, or that to Atty. Catolico without showing any factual
they are already married upon signing basis therefor; he effectively maligned Atty
a mere application for marriage Catolico, who is now dead and unable to
license. defend himself.
o Carnal knowledge with a student by  SC – Disbarred
taking advantage of his position.
 Mere intimacy between man and Camacho vs Pagulayan
woman either of whom possess
 9 students of AMA were expelled for having
no legal impediment to marry is
apparently caused to be published
not corrupt or unprincipled even if
objectionable articles in the school paper.
the relationship results in the
Camacho was hired counsel of the expelled
siring of a child, so long as he
students. While the case was still pending,
admits paternity and agrees to
letters of apology and Re-admission
support the child.
Agreements were separately executed by the
B. Conviction of a crime involving moral turpitude
expelled students without the knowledge of
a.) Anything contrary to justice, honesty,
Camacho. Camacho filed a complaint against
modesty, or good morals
lawyers comprising the Pangulayan and
C. Fraudulent transactions.
Associates law firm (lawyers of AMA) because
without his knowledge, they procured and
CANON 8 – A lawyer shall conduct himself with effected on separate occasions compromise
courtesy, fairness, and candor toward his professional agreements with 4 of his clients which in effect
colleagues, and shall avoid harassing tactics against required them to waive all kinds of claims they
opposing counsel. may have with AMA.
 A lawyers should not in any way communicate
 Rule 8.01 – a lawyer shall not, in professional upon the subject of controversy with a party
dealings, use language which is abusive, represented by counsel, much less should he
offensive or otherwise improper. undertake to negotiate or compromise the
 Rule 8.02 – a lawyer shall not, directly or matter with him but should only deal with his
indirectly, encroached upon the professional counsel. It is incumbent upon the lawyer most
employment of another lawyer; however, it is particularly to avoid everything that may tend
the right of any lawyer, without fear or favor, to to mislead a party not represented by counsel
give proper advice and assistance to those and he should not undertake to advise him as
seeking relief against unfaithful or neglectful to law.
counsel.  SC – Pangulayan suspended for 3 months


Que vs Atty. Revilla Jr.

 Atty Revilla was found to be guilty of the

following violations: 1.) Abuse of court

AUF-SOL | 2016 | JDC.RYS


CANON 9 – A lawyer shall not, directly or indirectly, any business or occupation, or hold office,
assist in the unauthorized practice of law. elective or appointive, while in detention.

 Rule 9.01 – a lawyer shall not delegate to any Zeta vs Malinao

unqualified person the performance of any
task which by law may only be performed by a  Mr. Malinao has been appearing in the
member of the Bar in good standing. municipal court of his town like an attorney
 Rule 9.02 – a lawyer shall not divide or when he in fact he is not one. He also collects
stipulate to divide a fee for legal services with fees from his clients and made it as a means
persons not licensed to practice law, except: of livelihood. Clearly a case of unauthorized
a. There is a pre-existing agreement with practice of law since he was doing it as a
a partner or associate that, upon the regular practice and for a consideration.
latter’s death, money shall be paid
Tan vs Balajadia
over a reasonable period of time to his
estate or to persons specified in the  Balajadia filed a criminal case against Tan. In
agreement; or his complaint-affidavit, he asserted that he is a
b. Where a lawyer undertakes to “practicing lawyer based in Baguio City.”
complete unfinished or legal business However, certifications issued by the OBC and
of a deceased lawyer; or the IBP showed that he was never admitted to
c. Where a lawyer or law firm includes the Bar. Balajadia argued that his allegation
non-lawyer employees in a retirement that he was a practicing lawyer was a honest
plan, even if the plan is based in mistake, since the secretary of Atty Aquino
whole or in part, on profit-sharing prepared the complaint-affidavit patterned
arrangement. after Atty Aquino’s affidavit.
 Not liable for indirect contempt under Sec 3(e),
Rule 71 of the Rules of Court which punishes
unauthorized practice of law by assuming to
Pp vs Hon. Maceda be an attorney and acting as such without
authority. The nature of liability under this rule
 During the pendency of a criminal case, Judge is of criminal contempt since they are an
Maceda issued an order giving custody over affront to the dignity and authority of the court,
Atty Javellana to the Clerk of Court of the and obstruct the orderly administration of
Antique RTC, Atty Del Rosario. Atty Javellana justice. In determining liability for criminal
was not to be allowed liberty to roam around, contempt, intent is a necessary element.
but was later found out that the order was not  The secretary of Atty Aquino attested to the
strictly complied with because Javellana was mistake in the drafting of the complaint-
not detained at the residence of Atty Del affidavit and that there was no intent on the
Rosario. He went about his normal activities part of the respondent to project himself as
as if he was a free man and even engaged in lawyer to the public.
the practice of law.
 When a person indicted for an offense is Aguirre vs Rana
arrested, he is deemed placed under the
 Edwin Rana passed the bar in 2000. However,
custody of the law. He must be detained
one day before the scheduled mass oath-
during the pendency of the case against him,
taking, Aguirre filed a complaint against Rana
unless he is authorized to be released on bail
for unauthorized practice of law and grave
or on recognizance.
misrepresentation, for appearing before the
 All prisoners, whether under preventive
Municipal Board of Election Canvassers as
detention or serving for a final sentence,
counsel for Bunan in the May 2001 elections.
cannot practice their profession nor engage in

AUF-SOL | 2016 | JDC.RYS


 The practice of law means any activity, in or Summary:

out of court, which requires the application of
law, legal procedure, knowledge, training and  Canon 7 – Uphold The Integrity And
experience (Cayetano vs Monsod). Rana was Dignity Of The Legal Profession
engaged in the practice of law when he o 7.01 – No False Statement
appeared in the proceedings and filed various o 7.02 – Not to Support
pleadings, without license to do so. Unqualified Bar Applicant
 A bar candidate does not acquire the right to o 7.03 – No Conduct Adversely
practice law simply by passing the bar Affecting the Profession
examinations. He must take his oath and sign
in the Roll of Attorneys to be a full-pledged  Canon 8 – Courtesy, Fairness, Candor
lawyer. Towards Professional Colleagues
 SC – Rana denied admission to the Philippine o 8.01 – No Abusive and Improper
Bar. Language
o 8.02 – Not to Encroach on
Lijauco vs Atty Terrado – Rule 9.02 Professional Employment
 Luzviminda Lijuaco engaged the services of
 Canon 9 – Unauthorized Practice of Law
Atty Terrado for P70,000 to assist in
o 9.01 – Not to Delegate Work
recovering her deposit from Planters
o 9.02 – Not to Divide Legal Fees
Development Bank in the amount of P180,000
and the release of her foreclosed house and
lot. Atty Terrado failed to appear at the hearing
for the foreclosed property. Atty Terrado
claimed that the P70,000 legal fees he CANON 10 – A lawyer owes candor, fairness and
received is purely for the recovery of the good faith to the Court.
savings account. He also admitted that he
divided the P70,000 to other individuals as  Rule 10.01 – a lawyer shall not do any
commission/referral fees. falsehood, nor consent to the doing of any in
 Violated Rule 1.01 and 9.02 Court, nor shall he mislead or allow the Court
 SC – suspended for 6 months to be misled by an artifice.
 Rule 10.02 – a lawyer shall not knowingly
Plus Builders Inc. vs Atty Revilla Jr. – Rule 9.02 misquote or misrepresent the contents of a
paper, the language or the argument of
 Respondent is a law partner of the KDC Legal
opposing counsel, or the text of a decision or
Services, Law Offices and Associates, and
authority, or knowingly cite as law a provision
was rendering legal services together with
already rendered inoperative by repeal or
persons not licensed to practice law.
amendment, or assert as a fact that which has
 Violation of Canon 9 and Rule 9.01 for
not been proved.
unauthorized practice of law; such
 Rule 10.03 – a lawyer shall observe the rules
engagement results to the salary for non-
of procedure and shall not misuse them to
lawyers, which violates Rule 9.02, wherein
defeat the ends of justice.
legal fees cannot be divided, except for those
enumerated in Rule 9.02.

AUF-SOL | 2016 | JDC.RYS


CASES: detention.” Upon verification with the NBI, Atty

Young (complainant) learned that accused
Maligaya vs Atty Donorilla Jr.- Rule 10.01 only surrendered on Dec 14, 2000 as shown
by the Certificate of Detention.
 Renato Maligaya, a doctor and retired colonel
 Guilty of deliberate falsehood.
of the Armed Forces of the Philippines, filed
 “While a lawyer has the solemn duty to defend
an action for damages against several military
his client’s rights and is expected to display
officers for whom Atty Antonio Doronilla, Jr.
the utmost zeal in defense of his client’s cause,
stood as counsel. At one point during the
his conduct must never be at the expense of
hearing of the case, Atty Doronilla said that
Maligaya entered into an agreement to
 SC – suspended for 6 months
withdraw his lawsuits. Maligaya filed a
complaint against Atty Doronilla in the IBP for Insular Life Employees Co. vs Insular Life Association
“misleading the court through
misrepresentation of facts resulting in  Labor case
obstruction of justice.” The latter admitted that  Misquotation of respondent Judge’s decision
there was no such agreement and that he regarding the case.
explained in his memorandum that his main  How citing should be: word-for-word and
concern was “to settle the case amicably punctuation mark-for-punctuation mark
among comrades in arms without going to trial. (verbatim).
 Violated Rule 10.01 by stating untruthfully in  Art. 8 of the Civil Code states “Judicial
open court that complainant had agreed to decisions applying or interpreting the laws or
withdraw the lawsuit, where in fact there was the Constitution shall form a part of the legal
no agreement. system of the Philippines.” Thus, if not
faithfully and exactly quoted, decisions and
Sebastian vs Atty. Bajar
rulings of the Court may lose their proper and
 Fernando Tanlioco is an agricultural lessee of correct meaning, to the detriment of other
a land owned by Manuel Sebastian’s spouse courts, lawyers, and the public who may
and sister in law (landowners). The thereby be misled.
landowners filed an ejectment case against
CANON 11 – A lawyer shall observe and maintain the
Tanlioco on the basis of a conversion order of
respect due to the courts and judicial officers and
the land use from agricultural to residential.
should insist on similar conduct by others.
Atty Bajar represented Tanlioco. Atty Bajar
failed to comply with the Court’s lawful orders  Rule 11.01 – a lawyer shall appear in court
when: 1.) she was required to file a rejoinder; properly attired.
2.) was required to comment on complainant’s  Rule 11.02 – a lawyer shall punctually appear
manifestation. She also filed cases involving at court hearings.
the same issues despite the finality of the  Rule 11.03 – a lawyer shall abstain from
decision in the Ejectment case, thus, scandalous, offensive or menacing language
constituted to forum-shopping. or behavior before the courts.
 SC – suspended for 3 years  Rule 11.04 – a lawyer shall not attribute to a
Judge motives not supported y the record or
Young vs Batuegas
have no materiality to the case.
 Respondents Atty Batuegas and Atty Llantino,  Rule 11.05 – a lawyer shall submit grievances
as counsel for accused in a criminal case against a Judge to the proper authorities only.
involving murder, filed a Manifestation with
Motion for Bail on Dec. 13, 2000, alleging that
the “accused has voluntarily surrendered to a
person in authority. As such, he is now under

AUF-SOL | 2016 | JDC.RYS


CASES: by saying that, “that justice as administered by

the present members of the Supreme Court is
Atty. Barandon Jr. vs Atty Ferrer Sr. – Rule 11.03 not only blind, but also deaf and dumb.”
 Courts should expect and be given critical
 Atty Barandon filed a complaint with the IBP
evaluation of their performance. Criticism
for the disbarment/suspension of Atty Ferrer
should be in properly respectful terms and
for the latter’s conduct and the words he
through legitimate channels.
uttered before the start of a hearing: “Laban
kung laban, patayan kung patayan, kasama Asean Pacific Planners et al vs City of Urdaneta et al –
ang lahat ng pamilya. Wala na palang Rule 11.04
magaling na abogado sa Camarines Norte,
ang abogado na rito ay mga taga-Camarines  Not really a disciplinary case; court merely
Sur, umuwi na kayo sa Camarines Sur, hindi observed the language of the counsel who
kayo taga-rito.” appeared to be disrespectful.
 Employed language: forceful and emphatic,  Counsel unfairly called the CA a “court of
but dignified and respectful, befitting the technicalities” for validly dismissing their
dignity of the legal profession. defectively prepared petition.
 SC – fine of P2,000
Ng vs Atty Alar – Rule 11.03
Judge Lacurom vs Atty Jacoba – Rule 11.04
 Same doctrine as case above.
 Case of overzealousness of a lawyer.  Jacoba-Velasco-Jacoba Law Firm is counsel
 The motion Atty Alar filed contained insults for Veneracion in a civil case for unlawful
attacking the NLRC, casting doubt on its moral detainer against defendant Barrientos.
and intellectual integrity, implying that the Barrientos appealed the decision rendered by
NLRC can be bought. He used improper and the MTC of Cabanatuan in favor of Veneracion.
offensive language, which cannot be justified. Case was raffled to Branch 30 where Judge
 Enthusiasm, or even excess of it, is not really Lacurom was sitting as pairing judge. Judge
bad. However, it must be circumscribed within reversed the decision. Respondents filed an
the bounds of propriety and with due regard MR, pertinent portions of which used the
for the proper place of courts in our system of words and phrases: abhorrent nullity, legal
government. monstrosity, horrendous mistake, horrible
error, boner, and an insult to the judiciary and
Sangalang vs IAC – Rule 11.03 an anachronism in the judicial process.
 A lawyer has a right, both as an officer of the
 Regarding Ayala case
court and as a citizen, to criticize in properly
 Same doctrine as Ng for overzealousness
respectful terms and through legitimate
 Contention: merely defending the interests of channels the acts of courts and judges.
his clients. A lawyer’s first duty is not to his
 A lawyer’s language may be forceful and
client but to the administration of justice.
emphatic, it should always be dignified and
 Atty Sangco held in contempt for resort to respectful, befitting the dignity of the legal
insulting language amounting to the disrespect profession
toward the Court. Suspended for 3 months.
 Criticism = must be a critical evaluation, not to
In the matter of proceedings for disciplinary action humiliate or disrespect.
against Atty. Almacen – Rule 11.03 and Rule 11.05

 Atty Almacen filed a petition to Surrender of

Lawyer’s Certificate of Title in protest against
the alleged great injustice committed against
his client by the Court. He regarded the Court

AUF-SOL | 2016 | JDC.RYS


CANON 12 – A lawyer shall exert every effort and GR: Civil action is deemed
consider it his duty to assist in the speedy and efficient instituted with the criminal action
administration of justice.
 Rule 12.01 – a lawyer shall not appear for trial
unless he has adequately prepared himself on  Offended party
the law and the facts of his case, the evidence waives the civil action;
he will adduce and the order of its preference.  Reserves the right to
He should also be ready with the original institute it separately;
documents for comparison with the copies.  Institutes the civil
 Rule 12.02 – a lawyer shall not file multiple action prior to the
actions arising from the same cause. criminal action.
 Rule 12.03-.08 – for finals.

 Canon 10 – Observe Candor, Fairness

CASES: and Good Faith
o 10.01 – Truthfulness Towards the
De Espino vs Atty. Presquito – Rule 12.01
o 10.02 – Not to Misquote or
 Respondent requested numerous
Misrepresent Contents of Paper
postponements and resettings, which were
o 10.03 – Observe Rules of
granted, on the ground that he needed more
time to prepare his evidence. After two years –
five resettings, and three orders submitting the
case for resolution – respondent still failed to  Canon 11 – Respect Courts and Judicial
present testimonial or documentary evidence. Officers
His failure is a breach of Rule 12.01, CPR. o 11.01 – Proper Attire
o 11.02 – Punctuality
NOTES: o 11.03 – Proper Language and
 Test to determine forum shopping: o 11.04 – Not to Attribute to Judge
a. Litis pendentia (pending suit), or Motives
b. Res judicata o 11.05 – Grievances Against
i. That there be a decision on Judge
the merits;
ii. By a court of competent  Canon 12 – Assist in Speedy and Efficient
jurisdiction; Administration of Justice
iii. The decision is final; o 12.01 – Adequate Preparation
iv. And the two actions involved o 12.02 – Forum Shopping
identical parties, subject
matter, and causes of action.
c. Were there are identity of parties or
interest, rights asserted, and reliefs
sought in different tribunals
i. XPN: filing of a civil case in
court independently of a
criminal action arising from
the same set of facts on which
the civil action is based.

AUF-SOL | 2016 | JDC.RYS