Facts: Eugenio Puyat and his group were elected as directors of the International Pipe Industries(IPI).

The
election was subsequently questioned by Eustaquio Acero (Puyat’s rival) and filed a case on SEC. Estanislao
Fernandez, who is a member of the interim batasang pambansa, entered his appearance as counsel for
respondent Acero to which the Puyat group objected on constitutional grounds. The prohibition being
clear, Fernandez -the assemblyman, did not continue his appearance for respondent Acero. When SEC
case was called, it turned out that Fernandez had purchased 10 shares of stock of (IPI). Edgardo Reyes
instituted a case before court of first instance against Excelsior including Acero group, and again,
Fernandez appeared as counsel for defendant Excelsior et al. The court ruled that he could not appear as
their counsel in the case. The court finally issued a TRO enjoining SEC from allowing the participation as
an intervenor of Assemblyman Estanislao Fernandez at the SEC proceedings.

Issue: Whether or not Fernandez, acting as a stockholder of IPI, can appear and intervene in the SEC case
without violating the constitutional provision that an assemblyman must not appear as counsel in such
courts or bodies?

Held: No, Fernandez cannot appear before the SEC body under the guise that he is not appearing as a
counsel. Even though he is a stockholder and that he has a legal interest in the matter in litigation he is
still barred from appearing. He bought the stocks before the litigation took place. During the conference
he presented himself as counsel but because it is clearly stated that he cannot do so under the constitution
he instead presented himself as a party of interest – which is clearly a workaround and is clearly an act
after the fact. A mere workaround to get himself involved in the litigation. What could not be done directly
could not likewise be done indirectly.