PALE Midterm Transcript (2016)

November 12, 2016
Ethics
 In general: Discipline of determining what is good vs. bad or right vs. wrong
 We consider something as RIGHT or GOOD if:
o It conforms with what he/she ought to do
 what you ought to do presupposes, a standard of conduct.
 Ethics: conduct of behavior expected from a certain class of individuals
Legal Ethics
 Science treating what an attorney what to do in relation to the: (4-fold duty of the lawyer)
a) Court;
b) Client;
c) Colleagues; and
d) The Public
Judicial Ethics
 Branch of moral science which treats of the right and proper conduct to be observed by Judges in administering
justice.
 Legal and moral mechanism that keeps and maintains the trust and confidence of the people in the judicial
system
 legal ethics ensure that people trust lawyers while judicial ethics ensure that people will trust the court
Purpose of Code of Ethics in Judicial Ethics
 to uphold and maintain public confidence in the judiciary
o In the new code, appearance is just as important as to the actual attribute itself.
o Judges must not only be impartial but must appear to be impartial.
Importance of Judicial Ethics to Lawyers
Q: Can the courts function without lawyers?
A: No. Under the present set- up of the Rules of Court, who can appear before the courts – are lawyers.
Q: Why are judicial ethics important to lawyers?
 Lawyers should know code of conduct of judicial ethics because the administration of justice is a joint
responsibility of the judge and lawyer.
 In the same way, Judges expect from lawyers the most ethical discharge of duties. The lawyer can also demand
from judges the same standard of conduct.
 The judge expects the lawyer to properly perform his role In the same manner that the lawyer expects a judge
to do his part. Their relation must be based on mutual respect and on a deep appreciation by one of the duties
of the other. Only in this manner can each of them minimize occasions for delinquency and help attain the ends
of judges.
 its is a form of checks and balance. If judges can check the conduct of lawyers, then lawyers must also not be
afrain in exposing the unethical conduct of judges.
*No matter how hard you worked on the case, all your efforts will just be in vain if the judge is corrupt, incompetent, or
not updated with law and jurisprudence.
Pelaez2016[Alga, Gagno, Jadulco, Leyson, Meneses] Page 1
There are two codes:
1. The Code of Judicial Conduct
2. The New Code of Judicial Conduct for the Philippine Judiciary
New Code of Judicial Conduct for the Philippine Judiciary, AM No. 03-05-01, June 1, 2004
 The New Code did not repeal the old code. There is nothing inconsistent between the two. While we apply the
new code, the old code has a suppletory effect. The old and new code have substantially the same provisions.
However, there are new provisions in the New Code which are not found in the old code.
 The New Code adopts Universal Declaration for Ethical Conduct of Judges embodied in the Bangalore Draft as
revised in the Round Table Conference of Chief Justices held at The Hague, November 25-26, 2002.
 Philippine Supreme Court was then represented by former Chief Justice Davide and Senior State Justice Puno
who also later on became a Chief Justice.
 The Philippines being a signatory thereto saw a need to promulgate a New Code for the Philippine Judiciary. The
Code of Judicial Conduct is the old code.
 Philippines is a signatory to the Bangalore Draft which contains the Universal Declaration of Judicial Ethics
 Countries who are signatories must adhere to the Universal Declaration of Judicial Ethics
 To emphasize that we are signatories to the Bangalore Draft, the Philippine SC promulgated the New Code of
Judicial Conduct for the Philippine Judiciary
 The Bangalore Draft looks very much like our New Code.
T.N: The New code compared to the old code has around only 5 new provisions and 1 new canon (The Canon of
Equality).
CODE OF JUDICIAL CONDUCT (1989)

PREAMBLE
An honorable competent and independent judiciary exists to administer justice and thus promote the unity of the
country, the stability of government, and the well-being of the people.
 All of these attributes must be observed not only by the judiciary as an institution but also by individual judges
and justices.
NEW CODE OF JUDICIAL CONDUCT FOR THE PHILIPPINE JUDICIARY

PREAMBLE
WHEREAS, the Bangalore Draft, as amended, is intended to be the Universal Declaration of Judicial Standards
applicable in all judiciaries;|
WHEREAS, the Bangalore Draft is founded upon a universal recognition that a competent, independent and impartial
judiciary is essential if the courts are to fulfill their role in upholding constitutionalism and the rule of law; that public
confidence in the judicial system and in the moral authority and integrity of the judiciary is of utmost importance in
a modem democratic society; and, that it is essential that judges, individually and collectively, respect and honor
judicial office as a public trust and strive to enhance and maintain confidence in the judicial system; WHEREAS, the
adoption of the universal declaration of standards for ethical conduct of judges embodied in the Bangalore Draft as

revised at the Round Table Conference of Chief Justices at The Hague is imperative not only to update and correlate
the code of Judicial Conduct and the Canons of Judicial Ethics adopted for the Philippines, but also to stress the
Philippines’ solidarity with the universal clamor for a universal code of judicial ethics.
 updates and correlates the Code of Judicial Conduct and the Canons of Judicial Ethics
 Canons of Judicial Ethics: older code before the old code
 until now, the Canons of Judicial Ethics are cited by the SC in its jurisprudence. It has not been abolished,
repealed, or superceded.
 The creation of the New Code is to stress Philippine solidarity for the universal clamor for a universal code of
judicial ethics
Seven Cardinal Values in the Judiciary (incorporated in 5 Canons in the New Code):
1. Independence
2. Integrity
3. Impartiality
4. Propriety
5. Equality
6. Competence
7. Diligence
 A code of ethics does not necessarily translate to ethical judges. Just because there is a code of ethics, it does
not transform judges into saints and angels and ethical beings.
 Justice Ameurfina Melencio-Herrera, a retired justice, referring to the New Code, said: A Code of Judicial
Conduct no matter how wisely crafted does not necessary translate into ethical conduct on the part of the
magistrates and the officers of the Law. It is however certain that without a Code of Conduct, a judge will find it
difficult to navigate ethically through the mine waters of professional conduct and even in their everyday life as
a judge. Prudence is certainly a necessary virtue but the grey areas are many and questions may raise difficult.
The Supreme Court has done its job, it has promulgated the New Code of Judicial Conduct for the Philippine
Judiciary. What remains to be done is the important thing. To make the Code a living reality in the honorable,
decent, respectable and inspiring conduct of our judges, justices and judicial officials. No code can ever achieve
the disposition and the decision to conduct oneself ethically. But the direction one must go, the guide post when
one chooses to conduct oneself with honor and to hold oneself out to the public as the Republic’s credible agent
for the administration of justice is what the code of Conduct fundamentally is.
 The code will not automatically transform the judges into ethical judges but it is a guidepost.
 Ethics will help your job, Ethics will help you keep your livelihood.
November 19, 2015

Canon 1 – INDEPENDENCE
Judicial independence is a pre-requisite to the Rule of Law and a fundamental guarantee of a fair trial. A judge shall,
therefore, uphold and exemplify judicial independence in both its individual and institutional aspects.
“individual and institutional aspects” – independence in two things:
 individual independence- the judge as a person must be independent
 institutional independence –judiciary as institution must be independent from other branch of
government/connection.
Individual judicial independence focuses on each particular judge and seeks to ensure his ability to decide cases with
autonomy. Institutional judicial independence focuses on independence of judiciary as a branch of government and
protects the judges as a class. (SC decided case)

SECTION 1. Judges shall exercise the judicial function independently on the basis of their assessment of the facts and
in accordance with a conscientious understanding of the law, free of any extraneous influence, inducement, pressure,
threat or interference, direct or indirect, from any quarter or for any reason.
Possible sources of influence:

 Internal – biases, prejudice, preconceived notions
Ex: A judge who has prejudice against muslims, he must not decide the case on basis of such but of facts and law.
 External – political, social, familial
Ex: Governor, Mayor has been instrumental to the appointment of the judge to the judiciary, and they go the
judge, ‘tabangi mi ani.’
Ramirez vs. Corpus-Macandog

A judge acted improperly when he rendered rulings based on directives of a government official. Admitted such, but
contented on defense that it was a revolutionary government, and so the directive must be followed because of the
peculiar nature of the government at that time. The Supreme Court renounced that the judge’s act was a patent
betrayal of public trust and a revelation of her weak moral character.
Libaros vs. Dabalos

The judge granted the motion for bail dispensing the requirement on hearing. He reasoned that outside his courtroom
there was a rally conducted by the supporters.
A judge is expected to diligently ascertain the facts and applicable law, unswayed by partisan or personal interests.
SECTION 2. In performing judicial duties, judges shall be independent from judicial colleagues in respect of decisions
which the judge is obliged to make independently.
Regardless of good relations, camaraderie and companerismo among judges, they shall not be influenced by their fellow
judges.
Individual independence from judicial colleagues is a must, even in collegiate courts.
SECTION 3. Judges shall refrain from influencing in any manner the outcome of litigation or dispute pending before
another court or administrative agency.
The provision in Sec. 2 is extended by the prohibition to wield influence upon other quasi-judicial and administrative
agencies.
Example (bar exam question):

The judge wrote to the NLRC Commissioners to tell them that his wife’s allegations are untrue, his wife being a party to a
proceeding before the NLRC. The judge defended himself by saying, “I just want the truth to prevail, the letter was with
the noble intention or ripping out the truth and guiding the NLRC in their decision-making.
Suggested answer:
Regardless of the noble intentions of the judge, the fact of writing a letter to the NLRC is already a form, of influencing a
quasi-judicial tribunal, a violation of Sec. 3.
OCA vs. Judge Floro

A judge entered his appearance in a court case, representing himself. He signed a pleading wherein he indicated that he
is the presiding judge of RTC Branch Malabon City and appending to the pleading a copy of his oath with a picture of his
oath-taking.
SC said, it is clearly trying to influence or put pressure on a fellow judge.

SECTION 4. Judges shall not allow family, social or other relationships to influence judicial conduct or judgment. The
prestige of judicial office shall not be used or lent to advance the private interests of others, nor convey or permit
others to convey the impression that they are in a special position to influence the judge.
Example (just a vague example, this may had happened, maybe not ):
In Court of Appeals, (this happened a long time ago) they have a ponente and two other judges who will sign the
decision. After the decision has already been signed, there could be other people who have seen the decision. These
people called the lawyer of the ‘winning party’, saying that ‘si Judge kailangan money, gamay na lng para madaog ka’.
Sadly, the judge doesn’t know nga gibaligya na siya. Who are these people? Those that are close to the judge.
Definition of Family under the New Code

-those related by blood or marriage within the 6th civil degree, as well as persons who are companions or employees of
the judge who lived in the judge’s household.
Yaya of the judge? Family  under the 2nd part of the definition
Stay-in driver of the judge? Family  Live-in partner of the judge? Family 
This section is to discourage and avoid influence peddling by members of the judge’s inner circle.
In some U.S. states, e.g. Denver and Florida, judges were advised to drop lawyers from their friends on social networking
sites.
Judges should brace themselves knowing that by their assumption to judicial office, people close to them might in the
future seek favors or intend to influence them. Judges should be prepared to handle these situations and must already
be ready to maintain their independence in the midst of all these external influences.
SECTION 5. Judges shall not only be free from inappropriate connections with, and influence by, the executive and
legislative branches of government, but must also appear to be free therefrom to a reasonable observer.
“must also appear to be free therefrom to reasonable observer” –appearance is just as important. Judges must not only
be independent, but must also appear to be independent. Appearance of lack of independence, is already actionable.
Considering that the appointments, promotion and movements of judges are subject to executive approval and that the
organization, budget and resources of the judiciary are matters that requires legislative phase. Judges should uphold
their duty to render justice freely without any obligation to reciprocate whatever beneficence that might have been
bestowed on them by 2 other branches.
Allowance from LGUs? Yes, judges receive allowances from LGUs. Rationale: Job of the judges are not easy. If we just rely
on SC’s allowance, it is not enough to commensurate them for what they do.
Wrong practices:
Case: Judge who makes it a point to invite sanggunian members to his chambers for a quick chat.
Case: Judge referred the matter of transfer of court employees to vice mayor.
SECTION 6. Judges shall be independent in relation to society in general and in relation to the particular to a dispute
which he or she has to adjudicate.
SECTION 7. Judges shall encourage and uphold safeguards for the discharge of judicial duties in order to maintain and
enhance the institutional and operational independence of the Judiciary.
SECTION 8. Judges shall exhibit and promote high standards of judicial conduct in order to reinforce public confidence
in the Judiciary, which is fundamental to the maintenance of judicial independence.
Conduct of judge in or out of court should be beyond reproach as they are the visible representation of the law and of
the judiciary.

CANON 2 – INTEGRITY
Integrity is essential not only to the proper discharge of the judicial office, but also to the personal demeanor of
judges.
Are judges obliged to disclose to JBC (an appointing authority) disciplinary, criminal, civil cases against them? – YES.
So if you apply for judgeship, in your application. Judges are mandated to disclose all cases pending before the judge. Or
if the case is already terminated, to disclose the result of the case.
SECTION 1. Judges shall ensure that not only is their conduct above reproach, but that it is perceived to be so in the
view of a reasonable observer.
Judges have been disciplined for lack of good moral character, both in their public and private capacities.
Example: accepting bribes; going to cockpits, casinos, race tracks to bet on horses; patronizing the litigants and their
lawyers; delay in rendering decisions; and ignorance of the law.
These examples could relate to the judge in his professional or personal capacity, but at any rate the judge is held liable.
Ignorance of the law

-is a mark of incompetence, and where the law is involved is elementary, ignorance thereof is considered and indicium
of lack of integrity
-the judge is either too incompetent and undeserving of the title he holds; or he is too viscous that the oversight was
deliberately done resulting to a travesty of justice.
SECTION 2. The behavior and conduct of judges must reaffirm the people's faith in the integrity of the Judiciary.
Justice must not merely be done, but must also be seen to be done.
Judges must not only render just, correct decisions but must do so free of any manner as to their fairness, impartiality
and integrity.
Justice must not only be done, but must also be seen to be done.
For instance, the judge render a fair decision. To the best of the judge’s knowledge and expertise, he rendered the
decision based on fact and in law. But before he penned the decision and during the court proceedings of the case, for
one reason or another sapoton siya sa nawng sa lawyer sa defendant but with all smiles to the lawyer sa petitioner, or
behavior like that. But, the decision is fair. Still, just is not seen to be done. The entire proceedings must also appear to be
fair.
The judge must not only be a good judge but must also appear to be a good person.
Upon his assumption to office, a judge ceases to be an ordinary mortal. He becomes the visible representation of the
law and justice. He must be the embodiment of competence, integrity and independence. (OCA vs. Gines)
A magistrate of the law must comport himself at all times, in such manner that his conduct, official or otherwise, can
bear the most searching scrutiny of the public that looks up to him as the epitome of integrity and justice. (Lachica vs.
Flordeliza)
Cases:
 Judge forcibly kissed court employees.
 Habitually gambling and frequent in casinos and cockpits.
 Punching a fellow judge in the face after a disagreement over the use of office table.
 Having sexual intercourse with a 15-year old.
SECTION 3. Judges should take or initiate appropriate disciplinary measures against lawyers or court personnel for
unprofessional conduct of which the judge may have become aware.

Judges are administrators and protectors of the administration of justice. They must not be afraid to expose unethical
conduct by court personnel, lawyers. They must initiate proper proceedings, if necessary.
CANON 3 – IMPARTIALITY
Impartiality is essential to the proper discharge of the judicial office. It applies not only to the decision itself but also
to the process by which the decision is made.
A judge should not only render a just, correct and impartial decision but should do so in such a manner as to be free
from any suspicion to his fairness, impartiality and as to his integrity
Extrajudicial Source Rule
-to sustain a claim of bias or prejudice, it must be proved that the resulting opinion of the court is based on extrajudicial
source, that is some influences other than the facts and law presented in the court.
SECTION 1. Judges shall perform their judicial duties without favor, bias or prejudice.
What is required of judges is OBJECTIVITY. An independent judiciary does not mean that judges can resolve specific
disputes entirely as they please. There are limits to judges’ adjudication. They cannot innovate at pleasure. A judge is not
a mic errant roaming at pursuit of his beauty or goodness. He is not to yield to spasmodic sentiments, to vague and
unregulated benevolence. And although, a speedy determination of an action implies a speedy trial, speed is not the
chief objective of the trial. (State Prosecutors vs. Moro)
SECTION 2. Judges shall ensure that his or her conduct, both in and out of court, maintains and enhances the
confidence of the public, the legal profession and litigants in the impartiality of the judge and of the Judiciary.
Examples:
 having lunch with a litigant
 standing as sponsor to a litigant son’s wedding
 using the car of a litigant as a service vehicle
 accepting gifts from litigants
 Undue interference in the direct and cross-examination of witnesses
Can judges question witnesses?- YES. As long as it is clarificatory in nature. Judges cannot go further than that.
Demeanor in social functions

-A judges inebriated demeanor and in coherent behavior during festivities is reprehensible. A judge who yields to the
strength of the spirits and acts like an unhibited drunkard in a public place demeans his public office, strips himself of
dignities as a man and disrobes the court of the respect it deserves.
SECTION 3. Judges shall, so far as is reasonable, so conduct themselves as to minimize the occasions on which it will
be necessary for them to be disqualified from hearing or deciding cases.
Judges should regulate their business, social and extrajudicial activities to avoid possible disqualification from hearing
cases.
Ex: An MCTC judge, who is also a real-estate broker, sold real properties within his jurisdiction. Consequently, there could
be actions arising from contract of sale in which he has intervened as real-estate broker, afterwards, those cases goes to
him as judge. Under the rules, that is a ground for mandatory disqualification. He must disqualify himself from hearing
the case because of his personal knowledge of the transaction. But since he is the sole judge in the place, how can he be
disqualified? The judge’s defense is that his real-estate business is a material source of his family’s income. But SC
reminded…
Judges shall, so far as reasonable, conduct themselves on occasions on which are necessary for them to be disqualified
from them on hearing cases.

A judge should abstain from making personal investments in enterprises which are aptly involve in litigations in his
court. After accession to the bench, he should not retain such investments previously made, longer than a period
sufficient to enable him to dispose of them without serious loss. (Dionisio vs. Escano)
Sec. 9, R.A. 6713 – if there is conflict of interest:

(R.A. 6713 is applicable to all public officials, including judges)
 Resign from position in any private enterprise within 30 days from assumption of office.
 Divest from shareholdings within 60 days from assumption to office.
A.M. No. MTJ-02-1452. April 6, 2005.
“By allowing himself to act as agent in the sale of the subject property, respondent judge has increased the possibility of
his disqualification to acts as an impartial judge, in the event that the dispute involving that said contract of sale arises.
Also the possibility that the parties to the sale might plead before his court is not remote. His business dealings with
them might not only create suspicion as to his fairness but also to his ability to render it in a manner that is free from
any suspicion as to its fairness and impartiality and also as to the judge’s integrity.”
The judge lends money at an unconscionable interests and files suits for collection at the place where he is the judge to
enable him to take advantage of his position. – Reprimanded. (Juvier vs. Deguzman)
SECTION 4. Judges shall not knowingly, while a proceeding is before or could come before them, make any comment
that might reasonably be expected to affect the outcome of such proceeding or impair the manifest fairness of the
process. Nor shall judges make any comment in public or otherwise that might affect the fair trial of any person or
issue.
BAR question:
A judge would advise the accused to enter into plea bargaining agreements or a party in a civil case to settle. In giving
the advice, the judge will do it by saying that the case is not in the accused or defendant’s favor. -Because of the
comments, it becomes unethical. The judge’s comment makes it appear that he has a prejudgment; giving opinion prior
to trial.
In every litigation the manner an attitude of a judge are crucial to everyone concerned. He should in the performance of
his functions avoid side-remarks, hasty conclusions, loose statements, or gratuitous utterances that could form the basis
for erroneous impressions in the mind of those who hear them and who may conclude that he is prejudging the case or
the issues that come before him. (Castillo vs. Juan)
November 26, 2015

SECTION 5. Judges shall disqualify themselves from participating in any proceedings in which they are unable to
decide the matter impartially or in which it may appear to a reasonable observer that they are unable to decide
the matter impartially. Such proceedings include, but are not limited to instances where:
(a) The judge has actual bias or prejudice concerning a party or personal knowledge of disputed evidentiary
facts concerning the proceedings;
(b) The judge previously served as a lawyer or was a material witness in the matter in controversy;
(c) The judge or a member of his or her family, has an economic interest in the outcome of the matter in
controversy;
(d) The judge served as executor, administrator, guardian, trustee or lawyer in the case or matter in
controversy, or a former associate of the judge served as counsel during their association, or the judge or
lawyer was a material witness therein;
(e) The judge's ruling in a lower court is the subject of review;
(f) The judge is related by consanguinity or affinity to a party litigant within the sixth civil degree or to

counsel within the fourth civil degree; or
(g) The judge knows that his or her spouse or child has a financial interest, as heir, legatee, creditor,
fiduciary, or otherwise, in the subject matter in controversy or in a party to the proceeding, or any other
interest that could be substantially affected by the outcome of the proceedings.
Just to simplify, this section talks about Mandatory Disqualification. If the instances cited in this section exist then the
judge must disqualify himself because it is mandatory disqualification, it says "shall disqualify themselves." So there is no
room for discretion.
(a) The judge has actual bias or prejudice concerning a party or personal knowledge of disputed evidentiary facts
concerning the proceedings;
 the judge has personal knowledge, let's say the judge is a very, very close personal friend of the spouses and in the
case of the declaration of nullity of the spouses was raffled to the judge, and the judge has personal knowledge of
what transpired between the two. In fact, in many cases the judge has been the shoulder to cry on by the parties, he
has advised the parties as a friend so the judge must disqualify. This is because it will cloud the fairness of the judge,
and judges must decide based on facts and law. Facts are based on the evidence presented by the parties. It might
create partiality from the judge as for example a spouse was found to be a psychopath and the medical record was
presented in court, the judge may have difficulty in deciding the case because now he would have to decide the
disputed evidentiary facts and will have to relate it with what he knows. To relieve the judge from all those
difficulties then it is made a ground for mandatory disqualification.
(b) The judge previously served as a lawyer or was a material witness in the matter in controversy;
 this is because he used to be involved in the case and so it is not expected of him to be impartial.
(c) The judge or a member of his or her family, has an economic interest in the outcome of the matter in controversy;
 self – explanatory
(d) The judge served as executor, administrator, guardian, trustee or lawyer in the case or matter in controversy, or
a former associate of the judge served as counsel during their association, or the judge or lawyer was a material
witness therein;
 for instance, we have a lawyer who is a senior partner in a law firm and he, just recently, was appointed as RTC
judge, can he still practice law? Not anymore because he is already an RTC judge, so he left the law firm and his
name was stricken from the law firm name. In case where his ex-partner or former associate appears before him in
court as a counsel, he must disqualify himself if the ex-partner or former associate was already the lawyer to the
case filed in his court during their association in the law firm but if the ex-partner or former associate was not yet
the lawyer in that case during their association then no need to disqualify.
(e) The judge's ruling in a lower court is the subject of review;

 for instance, an RTC judge was promoted as a CA judge and raffled to him for review was an appealed case of his
own decision when he was still an RTC judge, then he must disqualify himself.
(f) The judge is related by consanguinity or affinity to a party litigant within the sixth civil degree or to counsel
within the fourth civil degree; or
 to party or litigant - within sixth civil degree; counsel - within the fourth civil degree
(g) The judge knows that his or her spouse or child has a financial interest, as heir, legatee, creditor, fiduciary, or
otherwise, in the subject matter in controversy or in a party to the proceeding, or any other interest that could be
substantially affected by the outcome of the proceedings.
RULE 137 - RULES OF COURT

DISQUALIFICATION OF JUDICIAL OFFICERS

Section 1. Disqualification of judges. — No judge or judicial officer shall sit in any case in which he, or his wife or
child, is pecuniarily interested as heir, legatee, creditor or otherwise, or in which he is related to either party within
the sixth degree of consanguinity or affinity, or to counsel within the fourth degree, computed according to the rules
of the civil law, or in which he has been executor, administrator, guardian, trustee or counsel, or in which he has been
presided in any inferior court when his ruling or decision is the subject of review, without the written consent of all
parties in interest, signed by them and entered upon the record.
A judge may, in the exercise of his sound discretion, disqualify himself from sitting in a case, for just or valid reasons
other than those mentioned above.
 Par. 1 is similar with Section 5 but Par. 2 says "may", thus this talks about voluntary inhibition. Grounds are: for just
or valid reasons as provide by the ROC. Voluntary inhibition is strictly a matter of conscience. The judge must ask
himself whether he can really decide the case freely and impartially.
 The standard to be followed by the judge is whether a losing party could entertain a reasonable belief that a judge is
partial to the prevailing parties, it is not whether the judge is actually partial or not but take note that the judge
must consider if he will appear to unfair. The judges need not actually be unfair but if there is an appearance that he
is unfair then it is a cause for voluntary inhibition. Ex. 1.) Utang na loob, for instance, the judge is indebted to the
lawyer appearing before him because the lawyer was very instrumental in his appointment to the judiciary or
because the counsel supported his legal education. 2.) Counsel appearing before him is also the counsel of the judge
in a separate and personal case of the judge.
 Grounds cited by the Supreme Court to be invalid grounds for voluntary inhibition:
1. The counsel for a party filed an administrative case against the judge.
 According to SC, absent concrete evidence that the judge actually avenged for him or that the judge is
unfair, this cannot be a ground for voluntary inhibition. This is because a contrary rule might be abused by
lawyers by simply filing an administrative case against unpleasant judges.
2. Mere friendship
 Judges are not expected to be hermit and it is also not a surprise that judges will have friends within the
legal circle. So friendship per se is not a ground for voluntary inhibition.
 GR: Voluntary Inhibition cannot be compelled by mandamus. This is because it is a ministerial duty and a
discretionary act.
 Disadvantages of the rule of inhibition: It can be used by a judge to extricate himself to a case. Any creative judge
can invent just and valid reasons as the rules provide that ground for voluntary inhibition is merely just or valid
reasons, such as when the case has become too hot to handle or if the case gets boring.
 To prevent these disadvantages, we have to rely on the guidance of the SC:
- Mere suspicion is not enough, there should be enough evidence to prove it showing bias and partiality. Issuance
of erroneous order that pertains to the judges function may not be a proper consideration to charge a judge of
bias except where the orders taken not singly but collectively shows that the judge has lost neutrality of an
impartial magistrate.
- Exception to the GR that voluntary inhibition cannot be compelled by mandamus - if there is grave abuse of
discretion, manifest injustice or palpable extent of authority equivalent to denial of a settled right to which
petitioner is entitled, and when there is no other plain and adequate remedy. This recognizes that a judge's
decision to refuse to recognize on account of disqualification is not conclusive, and his competency may be
determined upon application for mandamus to compel him to act.
Case 1: PAGODA CASE

 That the judge's rights must be weighed against their duty to decide cases without fear of repression. The inhibition
must be for just and valid reasons, the mere implication of bias or partiality is not enough grounds for them to
inhibit especially when the charge is without basis. The judge here issued an injunction and an order of dismissal,
these were questioned by one of the parties but it was later on reversed and the thing has to go on, so the other
party said that the judge must inhibit because he already dismissed the case and even granted an injunctive writ,
and it already showed the judgment of the judge regarding the case and that they no longer see the judge as

impartial. The judge however, explained and has satisfactorily established the reason for his orders but inhibited
himself nonetheless, to avoid any suspicion that he is impartial. According to the SC, what the judge has done was to
uphold the integrity of the judiciary as an institution worthy of public trust and confidence, when he inhibited
himself after satisfactorily explaining himself but to affirm his order of inhibition would open the floodgates to a
form of forum shopping in which litigants will be allowed to shop for a judge more sympathetic to their cause and
such action would be antithetical to the speedy and fair administration of justice. Thus, the SC reversed the
inhibition and demanded the judge to continue hearing the case.
Case 2
 Petitioner aside from his bear allegation has not showed that the judge has been biased against a particular party.
The judge even acknowledge in his inhibitory order that the motion of disqualification contained no statement of
specific acts or act that would show her partiality or bias. But the judge nonetheless, inhibited for purposes of
casting away any doubt or perception of bias on the part of the petitioner. SC said, clearly there is no just and valid
reason to support the inhibition of the judge.
Case 3: Webb vs People

 The fact that judge Padilla wrote adversely against petitioner is not enough reason absent any extrinsic evidence of
bias or bad faith to conclude that the judge is bias and partial against petitioner. The court has emphasized that the
remedy of erroneous interlocutory ruling in the part of the trial is not outright disqualification of a judge for there is
yet to come a judge for the omniscient to issue rulings that are always infallible.
Case 4
 There is motion for inhibition but the judge refuse to inhibit. The case for trial was a case for murder and the
principal accused was at large and subjected to trial was only the accessory. The trial judge ruled that the accused
was innocent and the evidence points to the principal accused who is at large and so he acquitted the accessory and
discussed in his decision that the principal was the one guilty. Later, the principal was apprehended and a case was
filed against him. The case was raffled to the same judge and thus, the principal accused filed for a motion to inhibit
the judge citing the previous decision of the judge but the judge refused, he said that his previous decision will not
affect his fairness and partiality because whe he penned his previous decision, he wrote it with reference to the
evidence presented to that trial and so if the accused will present evidence to the contraty then it will not affect his
fairness and impartiality, and will rule the matter based on fact and law. The SC said, the respondent judge who
acquitted the accused and adjudged petitioner-principal accusedas guilty, who was then at large and subsequently
petitioner was apprehended and tried before respondent judge, it was held that the judge's previous statement
could not be free from suspicion that in deciding petitioner's case he will be biased or prejudiced. Under such
circumstances, prohibition is available to enjoin him from deciding the case and petitionr is entitled to have this case
decided by another judge. So the writ of prohibition was issued.
SECTION 6. A judge disqualified as stated above may, instead of withdrawing from the proceeding, disclose on the
records the basis of disqualification. If, based on such disclosure, the parties and lawyers, independently of the
judge's participation, all agree in writing that the reason for inhibition is immaterial or unsubstantial, the judge may
then participate in the proceeding. The agreement, signed by all parties and lawyers, shall be incorporated in the
record of the proceedings.
 One of the favorite topics in the bar!!

 The GR is mandatory disqualification if the instances in sec. 5 are present. Sec. 6 is exception to the rule of
mandatory disqualification. This is called the REMITTAL OF DISQUALIFICATION.
 Here the parties waive the cause for disqualification except if the judge invalidly continue with the proceedings
 Requisites:
1. The parties and their lawyers must agree independently of their decision. Thus, the judge must not interfere
and the parties must be given opportunity to confer among themselves.
2. The reason for inhibition is immaterial or unsubstantial. This means that the parties agree in this particular

circumstance that the reason for inhibition is immaterial or unsubstantial. It must also be stated in the
agreement that there is a ground for disqualification and that they agreed to consider it as immaterial and
unsubstantial.
3. Their agreement must be reduced in writing signed by all parties and lawyers and entered upon the records of
the case.
 Ex. 1.) Counsel of one of the parties is the judge's son and the judge announced that the former is his son but such
fact will not affect his decisions thereafter asked permission from the other counsel and party to allow such
disqualification and continue with the trial. The 3 requisites are not present thus, it is not a valid remittal of
disqualification. The parties did not agree independently because the judge participated, not considered immaterial
or unsubstantial by the parties, and finally they did not reduce it in writing.
 Ex. 2.) Same facts as no. 1 but the judge asked for the decision of the parties on the next hearing day. The parties are
then given the opportunity to confer among themselves independent of the judge’s decision and so the parties
accompanied by their lawyers met in a coffee shop, and there the judge’s son divulge that his father disowned him
and disinherited him from his last will and testament. The other lawyer agreed and even mentioned that he knows
for a fact that the said lawyer/judge’s son has for many times lost his case tried in his father’s sala. After which, they
agreed that the reason for inhibition is immaterial and unsubstantial and reduced it in writing signed by the parties
and their lawyers. Is it a valid remittal of disqualification? Yes, it is already valid as all the requisites are satisfied.
CANON 4
PROPRIETY
Propriety and the appearance of propriety are essential to the performance of all the activities of a judge.
SECTION 1. Judges shall avoid impropriety and the appearance of impropriety in all of their activities.
 In this modern age, proper is no longer hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil, it also now includes POST no evil :P
 Take note: APPEARANCE; Judges must appear to be proper because the appearance of impropriety is already
actionable.
 Ex. 1.) There are photos of a judge and his subordinate coming out of the hotel. The judge contended that the
pictures do not prove anything. The Court said that you do not have to prove that because actual impropriety is not
necessary, appearance of impropriety is already actionable.
 Ex. 2.) The judge heard a motion while on vacation, he conducted the hearing in his room and he is just wearing a
jacket. – IMPROPER
 Ex. 3.) The judge privately met a litigant in a resort. – IMPROPER
 Ex. 4.) The judge conducted office and hearings in his residence. – IMPROPER
 Ex. 5.) The judge held the hand of his interpreter and kiss by her lips. – IMPROPER
 Ex. 6.) A case re: a judge held to be improper due to her picture posted in Friendster wearing an off shoulder
suggestive dress.
SECTION 2. As a subject of constant public scrutiny, judges must accept personal restrictions that might be viewed as
burdensome by the ordinary citizen and should do so freely and willingly. In particular, judges shall conduct
themselves in a way that is consistent with the dignity of the judicial office.
 So there are restrictions that judges must voluntarily embrace because their conduct must always be in keeping with
the dignity of their office.
 Ex. Use of foul language
 Ex. Being drunk in a party
 Ex. A judge who confronted her former boyfriend and the latter’s female companion in a restaurant.
 There are many restrictions because they are the visible representation of the law.

 A judge should regulate his activities so as it may not conflict with his judicial duties. (Canon 5 of the Old Code
Judicial Conduct is more detailed relative to this.)
 A judge is permitted to have extrajudicial activities but of course, judicial functions should prevail over judicial
activities.
 Extrajudicial activities:
1. Vocational, Civic and Charitable Activities – a judge can write, lecture, teach, speak on non-legal subjects
(legal subject also of course!). Must not conflict or degrade judicial functions.
 All these must be in keeping with the dignity of judicial functions.
 A judge being an actress or singer – it will conflict with the judicial functions as she may use her
time memorizing her script :P
 A judge being an acrobat performer or a model in a nude painting :P Remember: Must not conflict
or degrade judicial functions.
2. The judge can engage in art and other recreational activities.
3. They can be an officer, director, trustee or non-legal adviser of non-profit, non-political, education,
religious, charitable, fraternal, civic organizations.
4. Financial Activities – allowed to enter into a business but he must refrain from business dealings that will
affect partiality or interfere with the performance of judicial functions or increase involvement with persons
that will likely come to court. Ex. Surety Bonding Company is not allowed as it increases involvement with
lawyers or persons that will likely come to court.
5. A judge should not serve as officer, director, manager, adviser, or employee of any business. So if the
organization is for profit then it cannot be, except as a director of family business. He cannot be a manager
in the family business because he has to be in the business for the most part of his time and it will now be in
conflict with his judicial functions.
6. Should not lose judicial information or data.
7. Should not acquire property or right in litigation.
8. Must make full financial disclosure through SALN. It includes to that of the members of his family.
9. Fiduciary Activities – a judge MAY serve as executor, administrator, trustee, guardian or other fiduciary only
for the estate, trust or person of a member of the immediate family. (Spouse and relatives within the 2nd
civil degree of consanguinity) Only if such service do not interfere with the proper performance of judicial
duties. Ex. Judge named as executor of his spouse’s estate which consists of properties all over the world
and the judge has to travel and he already exhausted all his leave credits. This is not allowed as it already
conflicts with his judicial functions.
10. Practice of Law and other profession – No private practice of law (absolutely prohibited); other profession –
they can unless prohibited by the Constitution or law provided that it will not conflict with his judicial
function.
11. Ex-officio - Engage in notarization of documents connected with the exercise of their official functions
except in far flung municipalities where there are no notaries public or no lawyers an MTC Judge can
perform any act within the competent of a regular notary public as long as notarial fees shall be for the
government and turned over to the municipal treasurer and there is a certification made to the notarized
document attesting to the lack of lawyer or notary public. (more academic than real because lawyers are
everywhere)
12. Non-judicial appointment – judges cannot accept any appointment or designation to any agency performing
quasi-judicial or administrative function. But other appointments are allowed such as a President of the
Home Owners Association, Chairman of the Sinulog Committee or judge in a beauty pageant.
13. Judges should not make political speeches, contribute to partisans, publicly endorse candidates or political
office, or participate in other partisan political activities. Judges can only vote or opt not to vote. That is
their only political right. Of course, they can entertain their own opinion but cannot make political
speeches. Ex. The judge’s brother served as watcher because his brother ran for Mayor. He filed for a leave
of absence on the day of the election. Proper? This is not proper as it is engaging in partisan political
activities.

SECTION 3. Judges shall, in their personal relations with individual members of the legal profession who practice
regularly in their court, avoid situations which might reasonably give rise to the suspicion or appearance of favoritism
or partiality.
 So the judge should make sure that his action does not give rise to suspicion of any impartiality.
 Ex. the judge who had coffee with councilors who appeared before his sala; asking for aircons and tables from
lawyers
SECTION 4. Judges shall not participate in the determination of a case in which any member of their family represents
a litigant or is associated in any manner with the case.
SECTION 5. Judges shall not allow the use of their residence by any member of the legal profession to receive clients of
the latter or of other members of the legal profession.
 What if the lawyer is the son of the judge and the client goes to the house? Sec.5 is very clear, judges shall not allow
the use of their residence by ANY member…
SECTION 6. Judges, like any other citizen, are entitled to freedom of expression, belief, association and assembly, but
in exercising such rights, they shall always conduct themselves in such a manner as to preserve the dignity of the
judicial office and the impartiality and independence of the Judiciary.
 Ex. in his order, the judge wrote respondent is a self-ordained public violent with a contaminated mind and
assuming a profession of a crocodile. Proper order? Judges, claim freedom of expression. SC said that it must be
regulated in a way that it is keeping to the dignity of the legal profession and in keeping of impartiality of the judicial
office. It already paints a picture regarding the opinion of the judge towards the respondent and it may give the
appearance of partiality.
 So judges should maintain objectivity at all times and in exercising their freedom of expression, it must always be in
keeping of the judicial office.
 Judges picketing before the SC for increase of their salary. They cannot do that for it is not in keeping with the
dignity of judicial office.
SECTION 7. Judges shall inform themselves about their personal fiduciary and financial interests and shall make
reasonable efforts to be informed about the financial interests of members of their family.
 Saln
SECTION 8. Judges shall not use or lend the prestige of the judicial office to advance their private interests, or those of
a member of their family or of anyone else, nor shall they convey or permit others to convey the impression that
anyone is in a special position improperly to influence them in the performance of judicial duties.
 Ex. the judge filed a case for estafa in his own sala, so in his own case he is the private offended party and he issued
a warrant of arrest – taking advantage of the judicial office to advance his own private interest.
 Ex. the judge posted advertisement for restaurant personnel in his court room and does his interview in his office –
SC said that it is impropriety for promotion of business activities moreover, the ones who will be able to read the
advertisements are the lawyers and litigants, and so he is increasing the possibility of involvement of litigants,
lawyers and other persons who are likely to come to court.
Dec. 03, 2015

Sec. 9.Confidential information acquired by judges in their judicial capacity shall not be used or disclosed for any
other purpose related to their judicial duties.
Very common violation is the release or leaking of draft decisions prior to the official promulgation of the court.
Somebody commanded by the judge has already leaked the decision. So this is not allowed.
What could be the reason for the judge to release/leak his decision draft decision? No valid reason. You could only think
of illegal reasons. Why should you release it beforehand? So that you can collect preliminary payment?
In a case, a Supreme Court justice who was already retired was filed an administrative case. Although SC justices are
impeachable, there is no longer point for impeaching him because at that time he was no longer a justice. The
administrative case was filed against him for the reason that he leaked a decision of the Supreme Court. And what did
the SC say, it is a violation. And what is the penalty? A fine of 500,000 to be deducted from his retirement benefits. Not
to mention perpetual disqualification from any government office.
Sec. 10. Subject to the proper performance of judicial duties, judges may
A. Write, lecture, teach and participate in activities concerning the law, the legal system, the administration of
justice or related matters;
B. Appear at a public hearing before an official body concerned with matters relating to the law, the legal system,
the administration of justice or related matters;
C. Engage in other activities if such activities do not detract from the dignity of the judicial office or otherwise
interfere with the performance of judicial duties.
(self-explanatory)
Sec. 11. Judges shall not practice law whilst the holder of judicial office.
We know that judges cannot practice law.
Sec. 12. Judges may form or join associations of judges or participate in other organizations representing the interests
of judges.
Judges, under Sec. 12, have the freedom of association. Ofcourse they can always form or join association of judges.
Sec. 13. Judges and members of their families shall neither ask for, nor accept, any gift, bequest, loan or favor in
relation to anything done or to be done or omitted to be dine by him or her in connection with the performance of
judicial duties.
Is it familiar? Very similar to the provisions on bribery. Direct bribery, Indirect bribery, and in special laws, under RA
3019 or The Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act there is also a parallel provision. As well as in RA 6713. For RA 6713,
there is both criminal and administrative component of the liability. So you must be able to correlate. What is the
consequence of this? If all the elements under the RPC, then the judge can be criminally indicted for bribery. Can you
also be charged under RA 3019? Yes. Because RA 3019 is a special law. And particularly, it provides that the offenses in
3019 are in addition to other offenses under other laws. If found criminally liable, there is also a civil liability. All those
are in addition to the administrative liability also.
Not all gifts are prohibited. You invited a judge to be a speaker. What could be an allowable gift? Token of appreciation,
mug, whine. So those are appropriate to the occasion in which it was given. So you always have to view it under the
circumstances. It is the judge’s birthday. Can you give a gift? Question: Do you know the judge personally so that you

can give him a bday gift. Are you the judge’s friend, or relative, or family? Or is your relation to the judge is that of being
purely a litigant in his court. Let’s say: Yes you can give him a gift because you’ve been bestfriends since law school. Can
you give him a car? So you should look at the kind of gift. Is it appropriate? Can you give him a bday cake? So you always
have to ask whether it is appropriate to give the gift on the occasion in which it was made. Or will it be perceived as
intended to influence the judge? Or will it give rise to the appearance of partiality. So muhatag ka kay bestfriends mu
since lawschool. Imung gihatag kay picture frame with a picture nga kamung duha. With the demand that the judge will
hang it in the court room. HAHAHA. Again, that will give rise to the appearance of partiality.
There are corollary provisions regarding the giving of gifts. So you just read the particular provisions in RA 6713.
So example in a case: The judge accepted the free use of a car. And avail for free battery recharging services of the shop
of a litigant who has a pending case before him. - IMPROPER
Canon 5
EQUALITY
Sec. 1. Judges shall be aware of and understand diversity in society and differences arising from various sources,
including, but not limited to, race, color, sex, religion, national origin, caste, disability, age, marital status, sexual
orientation, social and economic status, and other like causes.
Canon 5 is on equality. But take note that t the very first section, it talks about differences. What does this mean?
Equality but there are differences. What is equality? General rule is that we have to treat everyone and everything
equally. Except if there is a valid cause for different treatment. You cannot be just always so naive and say na equal ra
gyud tanan. But what if there is a cause to differentiate. Whatif there is legitimate cause arising from various sources?
Should you still give equal treatment? There is no prohibition against differentiation. What is prohibited is
differentiation on improper or irrelevant grounds. Like on the right to vote, should it matter if you are a male or female?
No. Male and female must be treated equally, because there is no reason for different treatment. What about right to
education? It shouldn’t matter. What about the maternity leave and paternity leave under the law? How many days do
we have for maternity leave under the law? It’s 60 days. Paternity leave how many days? 7 days are you sure? So
between 60 days and 7 days is there an unequal treatment? Ofcourse there is! Kadako ug difference. There is unequal
treatment. But is there a reason for the different treatment? Yes! SO that is what we mean by the provision that the
judge should be aware of the legitimate causes for diversity.
How about differentiation based on religion. Let’s say flag raising. Can we compel everyone to attend the flag raising and
lowering ceremonies. Equal treatment so everybody attend! NO. Which religion are we talking about? Jehova’s
Witnesses. They may not participate in flag raising and lowering ceremony because it is against their religion. Is it a valid
cause for different treatment? Muana ang uban employees, unfair. There is unequal treatment, yes. But there is a cause
for the unequal treatment.
Solo parent’s leave how many days? Can the “double parents” (for the lack of a better term) say unfair? There is unequal
treatment? Yes. But is it fair? Yes. Because their is a just cause for the diversity.
Juvenile Justice Act. Under this law, it is difficult to imprison minors. There are 3 accused in a case. X (20 yrs old), Y and Z
are 8 yrs. Old. And then, X says, nganung ako ra man gi filan ug kaso? And to think my job there is just to drive them to
the house. Sila ra man jud tu ang nangawat. Wala ko kahibaw sa ilang gibuhat didto sa sulod. Why am I the only accused
in the case? There is unequal treatment but there is a reason for such. It is the minority.
Under Magna Carta Act for Disabled Persons, disabled persons have privileges and rights. Senior Citizens Act, the senior
citizens have discounts. They can watch movies for free. The differentiation is based on age.
YRASUEGUI vs PAL

Obesity according to him is a disability or a disease and so he is terminated because of his disease. But can the employer
terminate? Yes. Because as the main function of the flight attendant is flight safety. So flight safety is crucial in the
airline business. Cabin attendants must maintain agility at all times to inspire passenger confidence.
Other professions where body size can be a cause to differentiate? What about policeman? They also have ideal
waistline and weight. It depends on who the chief is and if the chief is strict in implementing the rules. But they should
be healthy, they should not be obese or something. For firemen, what I know is that they do not have similar rules as
policemen, but if they maintain their fitness, they have incentives, e.g health insurance. So can the other firemen
complain and say its unfair? NO because the nature of the job requires a certain degree of fitness.
Same thing with the flight attendant. SC said passenger safety goes to the core of the job of a cabin attendant. On board
an aircraft, the body weight and size of the cabin attendant are important factors to consider in case of emergency. The
biggest problem with an overweight cabin attendant is the possibility of impeding passengers from evacuating the
aircraft should the occasion call for it. Being overweight necessarily impedes mobility. Indeed in an emergency situation
seconds are what cabin attendants are dealing with, not minutes. Three lost seconds can translate into three lost lives.
Evacuation might slow down just because a wide cabin attendant is blocking the narrow aisle.
So these are the very words of the Supreme Court.
Sec. 2. Judges shall not, in the performance of judicial duties, by words or conduct, manifest bias or prejudice towards
any person or group on irrelevant grounds.
But if there is relevant ground, for a different treatment, then again we know that it is allowed.
Sec. 3. Judges shall carry out judicial duties with appropriate consideration for all persons, such as the parties,
witnesses, lawyers, court staff and judicial colleagues, without differentiation on any irrelevant ground, immaterial to
the proper performance of such duties.
So treat everyone fairly again unless if there is cause. Like different treatment for child witnesses. Is it allowed? Yes. Can
you question hostile witnesses differently. Yes. If there is a ground for different treatment then there could be different
treatment.
Are judges allowed to treat new lawyers differently? Let’s have canon 10 of the Old Code.
Judges should be courteous to counsel especially to those who are young and inexperienced. A judge should be
patient, attentive, and courteous especially to the new and inexperienced.
So judges should be more considerate to the new lawyers. Because veteran lawyers commit mistakes so how much
more the new lawyers. Judges should be courteous to the new and inexperienced lawyers. But do not abuse this also.
There are stories of judges nga magbagutbot. So it also depends on what the lawyer did. Kung pwede ba sya ma consider
or dili ba ma consider sa judge.
It doesn’t say how many years. So I cannot also say say how many years is considered young and inexperienced.
Sec. 4. Judges shall not knowingly permit court staff or others subject to his or her influence, direction or control to
differentiate between persons concerned, in a matter before the judge, on any irrelevant ground.
If the judge cannot differentiate on irrelevant grounds, the same is true for his subordinates. And for lawyers also.

SEC. 5. Judges shall require lawyers in proceedings before the court to refrain from manifesting, by words or conduct,
bias or prejudice based on irrelevant grounds, except such as are legally relevant to an issue in proceedings and may
be the subject of legitimate advocacy.
The provisions in Canon 5 are all new provisions. You cannot see these provisions in the old code.
CANON 6. COMPETENCE AND DILIGENCE
Sec. 1. The judicial duties of a judge take precedence over all other activities.
Sec. 2 Judges shall devote their professional activity to judicial duties, which include not only the performance of
judicial functions and responsibilities in court and the making of decisions, but also other tasks relevant to the judicial
office or the court’s operations.
Simply put, the duty of the judge is not just rendering decisions. What is the other job? As administrator of his court. As
the manager of his court.
Judges have been disciplined for court case records or missing documents. And the judge cannot just put the blame to
the court personnel. Because as manager, as administrator of his own court room, he should have exerted supervision
and control over his court employees. So there are administrative function of the judge. The judge should be on top in
record and file keeping and supervision of court personnel.
If the judge notices a court personnel nga maldita kaayo ug tanan members of the public singhagan. It is the judge’s duty
to properly train such court personnel as to the proper treatment of clients.
Sec. 3. Judges shall take reasonable steps to maintain and enhance their knowledge, skills and personal qualities
necessary for the proper performance of judicial duties, taking advantage for this purpose the training and other
facilities which should be made available, under judicial control, to judges.
Like lawyers they should keep themselves updated with law and jurisprudence. The pressure is all the more so for
judges. Are judges compelled to attend MCLE? Mandatory Continuing Legal Education. Are judges compelled to attend?
Under the bar matter in MCLE, judges are among the persons exempted from attending MCLE. Why are they exempted?
Because they have their own counterpart in the judiciary. They also have their continuing legal education.
In deciding cases, it is the judge’s duty to follow the doctrines and rulings of the Supreme Court. Any deviation may have
detrimental consequences beyond the immediate controversy.
So the judge is handling a case for declaration of nullity of marriage. And the judge is a devout catholic. His religion tells
him that he should not break up a marriage. But the evidence in the case tells him that there is psychological incapacity
thus the marriage should be declared void. What should the judge do? He should follow the facts and the law. Therefore
declare the marriage null and void. So he should follow the doctrines and rulings. Thus if he feels that a doctrine
enunciated by the Supreme Court is against his conscience, he may state his personal opinion on the matter but should
decide the case in accordance with the law or doctrine and not his personal beliefs.
So judges should not allow their personal belief and convictions to prevail over a settled jurisprudence.
Case:
The judge rendered decisions pursuant to the directives of dwarves. He admitted all of these. He rendered decisions
pursuant to the directions of dwarves. And the dwarves have names: Luis, Arman, and Anghel. He also would have
healing sessions in his court room. He also admitted to having rendered decisions while in a trance. And he would change
the colors of his robes to recharge his psychic powers.

The judge was dismissed from the judiciary. SC said you must decide based on the law and jurisprudence.
Ignorance of the law

- is the main spring of injustice and as well as corruption.
Ignorance of the law. Correlate this with the pertinent revised penal code provisions such as: knowingly rendering an
unjust judgment, judgment rendered through negligence, unjust interlocutory order,and malicious delay in the
administration of justice. You review what are the elements of these felonies.
Doctrine of Judicial Immunity
A judge is not disciplined for a mere error. To be liable the error must constitute gross ignorance of the law, bad faith,
dishonesty, hatred or some other like motives. So erroneous decisions. Is it actionable? Can you file an administrative
case against the judge for an erroneous decision? No. What is the proper remedy? You can have appeal, motion for
reconsideration, certiorari, petition for review and all those remedies under the rule of court. That is why we have these
remedies because there is an acknowledgment that judges commit mistakes along the way.
Sec. 4 Judges shall keep themselves informed about relevant developments of international law, including
international conventions and other instruments establishing human rights norms.
Why do judges have to keep themselves informed about the international law? Because according to the constitution,
internal law and principles form part of our legal system.
Sec. 5 Judges shall perform all judicial duties, including the delivery of reserved decisions, efficiently, fairly, and with
reasonable promptness.
This is to expedite proceedings. This section frown upon delays. This includes utilization of pre-trial and discovery
procedures. It also includes alternative dispute resolution. In the constitution, the period within which to render
decisions is provided. For Supreme Court, the time-frame is 24 months. Lower collegiate courts 12 months. Other lower
courts 3 months.
And the constitution says judges “shall”. Shall signifies mandatory. Does this mean that the constitutional provision is
mandatory? Let’s review. If a mandatory law is violated, what is the effect? The act is void. The proceedings are void. So
if we give it mandatory construction, can you imagine the consequences? What happens if the judge is late in rendering
his decision. Does this mean that the decision is void? The proceedings will be void? So that could not have been the
intent of the constitution. Because if that were the case, ang pilidihunon nga party, mag ampo na lang nga unta ma late
na lang si judge para ang proceedings ma void. So despite the mandatory language, this should be given a directory
effect. What is the effect if there is a violation of a directory law? Is the act void? No it is valid. Are the proceedings void?
No proceedings are still valid. But it could render the responsible officer to administrative liability.
If for some valid reason the judge cannot decide a case for a certain period he must request the Supreme Court for an
extension of time to resolve it.
Certificate of Service
Judges do not have biometrics. They only execute a certificate of service that they work for all the working days of the
month. And they also say in their certificate that they have no pending case which has not been resolved after 90 days
for RTC judges). This is a pre-requisite for receiving their salary.
A judge who fails to decide cases within the required period of time and continues to collect his salaries upon his
certification that he has no pending matter to resolve beyond the required period transgresses the constitutional right
of the people to a speedy disposition of cases. The usual defenses of good faith and lack of malicious intent kay pro

forma man gud na ang certificate of service.SC said it does not completely free a judge from liability. So the penalties
could range depending on how the supreme court will view the gravity of the offense. Penalties range from reprimand
to dismissal. Most of the dismissals were the result of gross and inexcusable negligence or because of the use of the
falsified certificate of service to camouflage the delay.
What excuses for delay are not given credit?

- clogged dockets (dili pwede kay himuon na lang ni nga pirmi palusot pirmi)
- delay in the transcription of stenographic notes (judges are even discouraged from depending on stenographic notes)
- inefficiency or mismanagement of court personnel
Character of the decision: It must express clearly and distinctly the facts and the laws on which it is based. Reason: to
show that the judge fully understood the case. To avoid suspicion. To promote confidence in the judge’s intellectual
integrity. And to contribute useful precedent to the growth of the law.
Sec. 6. Judges shall maintain order and decorum in all proceedings before the court and be patient, dignified and
courteous in relation to litigants, witnesses, lawyers and others with whom the judge deals in an official capacity.
Judges shall require similar conduct of legal representatives, court staff and others subject to their influence, direction
or control.
Judges should maintain decorum and order in his court because judicial proceedings are not a joke. It is not a circus. In
maintaining order and decorum, judges should not resort to violent or tempestuous means. Example: a judge wields his
firearm to the people in his court. Or the judge compels the witness to swallow chewing gum. Shouting at parties and
litigants.
So a judge before he insists proper conduct on others, he should be first an example of proper conduct.
Sec. 7 Judges shall not engage in conduct incompatible with the diligent discharge of judicial duties.
Examples:
The judge lives far away from his court (Paranaque- Bataan). So because of that, the judge held his hearings on Mondays
to Wednesdays and goes home the rest of the week. The judge was disciplined because his conduct is incompatible with
diligence.
The judge declared Wednesday as his midweek pause. So no hearing for this day. Chill day. Disciplined also because it is
incompatible with the diligent discharge of judicial duties.
Administrative Liability of judges (Consequences if judges violate their ethical duties)
Supreme Court justices:
Sec. 2 Art. 11 Grounds for impeachment

- Culpable violation of the constitution
- Treason
- Bribery
- Graft and Corruption
- other high crimes
- Betrayal of public trust
Corona Impeachment.

He was impeached because of his failure to disclose in his SALN the true extent of his assets.
Administrative Offenses, Administrative Liabilities of Judges

Read Rule 140 of Rules of Court
The administrative cases against a judge are classified into three:
A. Serious
B. Less serious
C. Slight
Why do we have such classification? Because the imposable penalty will differ.
SEC. 7. Classification of charges. – Administrative charges are classified as serious, less serious, or light.cralaw
SEC. 8. Serious charges. – Serious charges include:chanrobles virtual law library
1. Bribery, direct or indirect;
2. Dishonesty and violations of the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Law (R.A. No. 3019);
3. Gross misconduct constituting violations of the Code of Judicial Conduct;
4. Knowingly rendering an unjust judgment or order as determined by a competent court in an appropriate
proceeding;
5. Conviction of a crime involving moral turpitude;
6. Willful failure to pay a just debt;
7. Borrowing money or property from lawyers and litigants in a case pending before the court;
8. Immorality;
9. Gross ignorance of the law or procedure;
10. Partisan political activities; and cralaw
11. Alcoholism and/or vicious habits.cralaw
SEC. 9. Less Serious Charges. – Less serious charges include:chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
1. Undue delay in rendering a decision or order, or in transmitting the records of a case;
2. Frequently and unjustified absences without leave or habitual tardiness;
3. Unauthorized practice of law;
4. Violation of Supreme Court rules, directives, and circulars;
5. Receiving additional or double compensation unless specifically authorized by law;
6. Untruthful statements in the certificate of service; and cralaw
7. Simple Misconduct.cralaw
SEC. 10. Light Charges. – Light charges include:chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
1. Vulgar and unbecoming conduct;
2. Gambling in public;
3. Fraternizing with lawyers and litigants with pending case/cases in his court; and cralaw
4. Undue delay in the submission of monthly reports.
Examples:
Bribery - the judge was caught in an entrapment receiving a bribe money. Dismissed.
Dishonesty - False testimony by a judge where he was a witness in a judicial proceeding
False statement in application to the judiciary that he has no pending case (concealment)
Concealment in the biodata form required by the JBC of his previous dismissal as assistant city fiscal
* Take note in the last two examples, these acts pertain to acts before he was a judge. But it was a reason for his
dismissal from the judiciary. Acts prior to admission can be a ground for removal or discipline of a judge.
Unjust judgment or order - (Criminal Law) There must be a prior finding or determination before the apellate court that
the judge has indeed committed the proscribed act in an appeal from the judgment or a special civil action challenging
the order. Before you find the judge guilty, there must have been a prior order or judgment declaring that the judgment
was wrong. It is premature to file an administrative case when the appeal or special civil action is still pending.
Gross misconduct - the misconduct must be serious that is weighty, momentous. There must be reliable evidence
showing that the judicial acts complained of were corrupt or were intended to violate the law.
December 10, 2015
In re: Inting
Can the CA justice participate in the affairs of her homeowners association?
-Yes.
Facts:
The complaint was: as Justice of the CA, she should have desisted from joining the elections for the officers and
members of the Board of Trustees of her homeowners association and gotten embroiled in the issues that animated the
two groups which shared the powers of the association, thus getting drawn into a bitter litigation.
Ruling:
Joining the judiciary does not mean that a judge should live the life of a hermit. The Code of Judicial Ethics does not bar
him from joining associations or institutions that promote the common good. To be sure, no social or moral
considerations prevent him from taking active part in organizations that aim to promote the welfare of his family or
community, like a homeowners association.
A.M. No. MTJ-09-1738

The judge delayed in rendering decision. The judge failed to decide within 30-day period required under the Rule on
Summary Procedure. In addition to this present charge, he was already found guilty for other administrative offenses. In
fact, the SC already decided has already dismissed the judge for gross inefficiency, gross ignorance of the law, dereliction
of duty and violation of the Code of Judicial Conduct.
Is the case moot and academic?

SC: It is not moot and academic.
 GUILTY of the less serious charge of undue delay in resolving Civil Case No. 20191, for which she is FINED the
amount of P20,000, to be deducted from her accrued leave credits, since she had already been dismissed from the
service.
 Judgment without prejudice to be outcome of her other remaining and/or pending administrative cases.
The incorporators of Mindanao Institute Inc. et. al. vs. UCCP et. al, G.R. No. 171765. March 21, 2012
 Law Firm of Judge’s Son entered appearance as collaborating counsel in a case before the Judge.
 Judge Dayan should have immediately inhibited himself from the case upon learning of the entry of appearance
of his son’s law firm. Where the disqualifying fact in indubitable and the parties to the case make no waiver of
such disqualification, as in the case at bench, Section 1, Rule 137 of the Rules of Court forthwith completely
strips the judge of authority to proceed.
Judges: Gross Incompetence and gross inefficiency

Respondent judge failed to decide 102 criminal cases and 43 civil cases in violation of the Code of Judicial Conduct. He
cannot take refuge behind the common excuse of heavy caseload to justify his failure to decide and resolve case

promptly. He could have asked the Court for a reasonable period of extension to dispose of the cases but did not. His
inefficiency caused not only unnecessary financial strain but also physical and emotional anxiety to litigants.
 Judge was fined P50,000 to be deducted from his retirement benefits. (A.M. No. RTJ-09-2198, January 18,2011)
Judges: Gross ignorance of the law

Judge reversed and modified a final and executor order of the Acting Judge not upon the instance of any of the parties in
Civil Case No. 3383-R but motu prorio in violation of settled jurisprudence. Respondent failed to meet the exacting
standards of judicial conduct and integrity. He has shown himself unworthy of judicial robe and place of honor reserved
form guardians of justice.
 Judge was dismissed from the service. (A.M. No. RTJ-07-062. January 18, 2011)
Judges: Gross misconduct

Judge procured form complainant the building materials he needed for the construction of his house. He compromised
his position as a judge. He compromised his position as a judge. xxx In such a case his business and financial dealings
with the complainant would create a doubt about his fairness and impartiality. In deciding the case and would tend to
corrode the respect and dignity of the court.
 Dismissed form the service with forfeiture of all benefits and with prejudice to his re-employment in the
government service including GOCC’s (A.M. No. RTJ-09-2189, January 18, 2011)
Judges: Impropriety
Using the letterhead of the court:
Judge sent a letter, in his official letterhead, to complaint to discuss a matter pending before his own court.
 For committing acts of impropriety in violation of the Code of Judicial Conduct, respondent judge was fined
P5,000. (A.M. No. RTJ-11-2267, January 9, 2011)
Judges: Gross misconduct for violating the Code of Judicial Conduct

Judge violated specifically Rule 3.02 of said Canon 3 when he ordered the implementation of the Order placing the
receivers of the insolvent corporation in possession of the properties thereof including those of complainants issued by
his retire predecessor which Order was declared null and void by the Court of Appeals and affirmed by the Supreme
Court. He should have read and studied personally the records of the case page by page before issuing said order.
 For gross misconduct, respondent was fined P25,000. (A.M. No. RTJ-07-2069, December 14, 2011)
Judge: Gross misconduct

Judge (1) talked to a prospective litigant in his court, (2) recommended the counsel to handle the case, and (3) prepared
the Motion to Withdraw as Counsel of the lawyer he recommended which pleading was filed in his court and was acted
upon by him.
Not allowed, this is gross misconduct.
 Fined P25,000 to be deducted from his retirement benefits. (A.M. No. MTJ-09-1734, January 19, 2011)
Judges: Impropriety and Gross misconduct

 Judge embraced, kissed and sucked complainant’s breast, touched her private parts, against complainant’s will.
 (The judge already retired in this case, prior to this case)
Held respondent not retired, his misconduct would have merited his dismissal from service. However, he was
fined P40,000 to be deducted from his retirement benefits. (A.M. No. RTJ-08-2136, September 21, 2010)

Judges: Violation of Section 1, Canon 4, of the New Code of Judicial Conduct
Respondent judges failed to live up to the standard of propriety entrenched in the Code of Judicial Conduct. Shouting at
each other in the workplace and during office hours is discourtesy and disrespect not only towards co-workers, but also
to the court as well. The behaviour of both respondents are totally unbecoming of members of the judicial service. What
is more detestable is the fact that their squabble arose out of a mere allowance coming from the local government
 Both respondent judges were fined P11,000 each. (A.M. No. RTC-08-2124 and A.M. No. RTC-08-2125, August 27,
2009)
Judges: Dishonesty and falsification of an official document

Judge’s act of making an obviously false statement in his PDS (personal data sheet) was not mere inadvertence. He
answered “no” to the simple question posed in the PDS. He answered “no” to the question “have you ever been charged
formally with any infraction?”, but the truth was he has been charged with an infraction.
 Dismissed from the service with forfeiture of all benefits with prejudice to reemployment in the government
service including GOCC’s. Respondent was also disbarred for violation of Canons 1 and 2 and Rules 1.01 and
10.01 of the Code of Professional Responsibility. (A.M. No. RTJ-08-2138, August 25, 2009)
Remember automatic conversion?
Can the judge be subjected to disciplinary proceedings, as a judge and as lawyer at the same time?
-Yes. That’s what happened here.
Judges: Violation of Canon 2 of the Code of Judicial Ethic and Rule 2.03 of the Code of Judicial Conduct
The court’s heading of letterhead, as per Report of the Court Administrator, serves as a primary indentifier of the office.
When correspondence bearing the court’s heading gives the impression that it has the imprimatur of the court, and that
the signatory carries such representation. Considering this important implication, scrupulous use of the court’s heading
must be observed at all times.
Respondent used court’s heading in his personal letter, and unwillingly dragged the name of the court into his private
affairs, giving the appearance that there is an implied consent of the court, to his case.
Admonished: (A.M. No. MTJ-08-1712, August 20, 2008)
Gross Ignorance of the Law/Procedure

The MTC judge denied a Motion to Quash the Information for lack of jurisdiction despite the fact that the salary grade of
the accused employee is 28 and the allegation that the offense was committed in relation to office thus falling under the
executive jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan. (A.M. No. RTJ-04-1857, Nov. 23,2004)
Regular courts- 26 and below

Sandiganbayan- 27 and above, except those included by the law despite having 26 and below salary grade.
Gross Ignorance
Crime charged is reckless imprudence resulting in homicide and the judge ordered:
1. The impounding of the bus involved with directive that it be released only upon posting of P50,000 cash bond;
2. Increased the bond of the accused from P60,000 to P350,000 to be posted cash.
Gross ignorance of the excessive bail imposed on the accused. The order of impounding is considered as an error of
judgment because there was no SC ruling yet.
Gross ignorance of the Law

The judge issued a warrant of arrest against the lawyer of the accused for his failure to attend the promulgation of
judgment and directed that said lawyer to remain in jail until the judgment is promulgated.
Gross Ignorance of the Law

The judge failed to require the presence of the accused during the promulgation of judgment. There are on two (2)
instances when the presence of the accused is not required: (a) when the judgment is for a light offense, In which case,
the counsel of the accused or a representative may stand for him; and (b) in cases where despite due notice the accused
or his bondsman or warden and counsel, the accused failed to appear. (A.M. no. RTJ-04-1875, nov. 9,2005)
Gross Ignorance of the Law/Procedure

The judge cited the complainant for direct contempt and issued a warrant of arrest against him recommending no bail.
He stayed in detention for days. Further, the judge also cited the complainant’s counsel in direct contempt for attaching
to a Motion for Inhibition, the complainant’s affidavit exected to support his complaint against the judge and assessed a
fine of P3,000.
Sec. 1 Rule 71 provides that if imprisonment is imposed by the RTC or a court of equivalent rank the maximum period is
10 days. The order did not only fail to specify the period, worse the complainant was detained beyond the maximum
period allowed.
Further, if fine is imposed the maximum amount is P2,000. He imposed an amount beyond the maximum.
Gross inefficiency
A.M. no. RTJ-05-1950, Feb. 13, 2006
Additional court assignments or designations imposed upon a judge do not make him less liable for any delay in
the resolution of pending cases.
So, the judge could be assigned to many courts but it is not an excuse for delaying the resolution of pending cases.
Impartiality
A.M. No. RTJ-02-14452, April 4, 2005
The judge acted as broker together with the complainant in the sale of lots to the Church of Jesus Christ of
Latter Day Saints Inc.
“By allowing himself to act as agent in the sale of the subject property, respondent judge has increased the
possibility of his disqualification to act as an impartial judge in the event that a dispute involving the said contract of sale
arises.
Also the possibility that the parties to the sale might plead before his court is not remote and his business
dealings with them might not only create suspicion as to his fairness but also to his ability to render it in a manner that is
free from any suspicion as to its fairness and impartiality and also as to the judge’s integrity.”
Impropriety
A.M. No. MTJ-04-1453, Aug. 25, 2005
Respondent judge issued 4 checks to complainant as reimbursement for the down payment to the latter paid the former
relative to the aborted sale of the judge’s apartment to her. The checks bounced for insufficiency of accounts or closure
of account. The judge did not deny said facts and even added in his comment that “to end this problem” he has
conveyed to complainant parcels of land hence prayed that the complainant be considered closed and terminated.
“A magistrate of the law must comport himself at all times in such a manner that his conduct, official or otherwise, can
bear the most searching scrutiny of the public that looks up to him as the epitome of integrity and justice”

“The conveyance of several pieces of realty does not close and terminate the case. Disciplinary proceedings involve not
only private interest. They are undertaken to maintain the faith and confidence of the people in the government. To
allow the parties to dictate the course of disciplinary investigations would render hollow the Courts power of
supervision over court officials and employees and prejudice public service.
A.M. No. RTJ-09-1460 March 31, 2006

Finding:
1. For Simple Misconduct
The judge circulated calling cards bearing the following : his name as the Presiding judge of RTC Br. 73 Malabon
City; indicating that he is a “bar exams top notcher (87.55) and with “full second honors” from Ateneo de Manila
University, AB and LLB.
Before he starts his court session he is introduced as a private law practitioner, a graduate of Ateneo de Manila
University with second honors, and a bar top notcher during the 1983 Bar examinations with an average of
87.55%.
Then a reading of the Holy Bible, particularly the Book of Revelation according to St. John follows. Then he gives
the people in the court room the opportunity to ask questions on the matter read. If no question is asked the
session starts.
There is a violation of Canon 2, Rule 2.02 of the Code of Judicial Conduct which states that a judge should not
seek publicity for personal vainglory.
2. Gross ignorance because of 3 fundamental errors:

a. He ordered the release of accused on recognizance without the presence of the prosecutor, thus, depriving
the latter of any opportunity to oppose the reading;
b. He ordered the release without first requiring the probation officer to render a cases study and investigation
report;
c. The order granting the release of the accused on recognizance was not reduced in writing, insisting that
orders made in open court need not be reduced into writing
3. Unbecoming conduct for partiality in criminal cases because he relayed to the members of the audit team that
in criminal cases he is always “pro accused” particularly concerning detention prisoners and bonded accused
who have to continually pay for the premiums on their bonds during the pendency of their cases.
4. Unbecoming conduct for signing a pleading in his personal case despite the fact that he had a lawyer, indicating
therein that he is presiding judge of RTC Br. 73 Malabon City and appending to the pleading a copy of his oath
with a picture of his oath-taking.
“The only logical explanation is that he was obviously trying to influence or put pressure on a fellow judge by
emphasizing that he himself is a judge and is thus in the right.”
5. Unbecoming conduct for openly criticizing the Rules of Court and the Philippine justice system and for using
highly improper and intemperate language during court proceedings.
Penalty imposed: Fine of P40,000 after taking into consideration the fact that he was new in the job (relative
inexperience) when he slammed with the charge and considering further that there was no allegations or proof
that he acted in bad faith or with corrupt motives.

Who can remove judges?
 G.R: Supreme Court En Banc – penalty to be imposed is the dismissal of a judge, or suspension of one year or
more or a fine not exceeding P10,000, or both.
 Exc: Supreme Court Division
IBP has no administrative and investigative jurisdiction over judges.

Can IBP investigate judges?
 In Pamatong vs. Davide (A.C. No. 7197, January 23, 2007), the Court, by Resolution dated Sept. 5, 2006,
approved in principle the amendment of SC Circular No. 3-89 such that the IBP is henceforth required to forward
the SC for appropriate disposition all complainants for disbarment and discipline filed with the IBP against all
justices and judges, sitting or retired.
 Otherwise stated, IBP has no jurisdiction, but only to forward the case to the SC.
Rule 140, ROC

When it comes to procedure against judges, we have Rule 140 of ROC
Like any other cases, it is initiated by a complaint
Who can file a complaint? (Sec.1)

1. The SC motu proprio
2. Anybody as long as it is verified complaint - Supported by affidavits of person who have personal knowledge of
the facts alleged therein or by documents which may substantiate said allegations.
3. Anonymous complaint - supported by public records of indubitable integrity
Ex: the judge who was always wrong in applying ISLAW. Attached in the complaint is a compilation of his
decisions in criminal cases. And when you look at the dispositive part, wrong application of ISLAW, will this
complaint prosper? –Yes, it will be entertained because it is supported by public records of indubitable integrity
(Section 2)
 If the complaint is not sufficient in form and substance – outright dismissal
 If the complaint is sufficient in form and substance - a copy thereof shall be served upon the respondent, and he
shall be required to comment within ten (10) days from the date of service.
(Section 3)
Upon the filing of the respondent’s comment, or upon the expiration of the time for filing the same , the SC will:
1. refer the matter to the Office of the Court Administrator for evaluation, report, and recommendation; or
2. assign the case for investigation, report, and recommendation to:
o a retired member of the Supreme Court- if the respondent is a Justice of the Court of Appeals and the
Sandiganbayan
o a Justice of the Court of Appeals- if the respondent is a Judge of a Regional Trial Court or of a special
court of equivalent rank
o a Judge of the Regional Trial Court- if the respondent is a Judge of an inferior court.
(Section 4)-Hearing
 conducted by the OCA or the SC or CA or RTC judge, as the case may be.
 must be confidential, only the decision is made public (sec. 5)
(so if the RTC judge calls a case for hearing, the lawyer of the judge must object to the hearing of the judge in public.)
 may be done ex parte - If, after due notice, the respondent fails to appear
 terminated within 90 days from commencement of hearing or within such extension as the Supreme Court may
grant.
(Section 5)- Report

Within thirty (30) days from the termination of the investigation, the investigating Justice or Judge shall submit to the
Supreme Court a report containing findings of fact and recommendation.
(Section 6)- Action

The Court shall take such action on the report as the facts and the law may warrant.
January 14, 2016
What is Legal Ethics?

 Branch of moral science which treats of the duties which an attorney owes to the court, to his client, to his
colleagues in the profession and to the public as embodied in the constitution, rules of court, code of
professional responsibility, canons of professional ethics, moral law and special laws
 first part of definition talks about 4-fold duty of an attorney
 last part of definition talks about the sources of legal ethics:
1. Code of Professional Responsibility: usual source
2. Constitution
3. Rules of Court
4. Special Laws
5. Jurisprudence
Duties of an attorney, those which he/she owes to the:

1. public
2. court
3. bar
4. client
Section 20. Rule 138 ROC. Duties of attorneys.
1. To maintain allegiance to the Republic of the Philippines and to support the Constitution and obey the laws of
the Philippines.
2. To observe and maintain the respect due to the courts of justice and judicial officers;
3. To counsel or maintain such actions or proceedings only as appear to him to be just, and such defenses only as
he believes to be honestly debatable under the law.
4. To employ, for the purpose of maintaining the causes confided to him, such means only as are consistent with
truth and honor, and never seek to mislead the judge or any judicial officer by an artifice or false statement of
fact or law;
5. To maintain inviolate the confidence, and at every peril to himself, to preserve the secrets of his client, and to
accept no compensation in connection with his client's business except from him or with his knowledge and
approval;
6. To abstain from all offensive personality and to advance no fact prejudicial to the honor or reputation of a party
or witness, unless required by the justice of the cause with which he is charged;
7. Not to encourage either the commencement or the continuance of an action or proceeding, or delay any man's
cause, from any corrupt motive or interest;

8. Never to reject, for any consideration personal to himself, the cause of the defenseless or oppressed;
9. In the defense of a person accused of crime, by all fair and honorable means, regardless of his personal opinion
as to the guilt of the accused, to present every defense that the law permits, to the end that no person may be
deprived of life or liberty, but by due process of law.
Privileges of Attorney
 first grade civil service eligibility for any position in the classified service in the government the duties of which
require knowledge of law
 second grade civil service eligibility for any other government position which does not prescribe proficient in law
qualification.
Importance of legal ethics

 The highest moral and ethical standards should be maintained so that the people will continue to repose their
trust in lawyers and in the role they play in the administration of justice. Consequently the continued existence
of the legal profession is ensured.
 If lawyers are bound by a set of rules, the primary purpose of which is to ensure that lawyers are trustworthy
people, then society will maintain its trust and confidence in the justice system and the legal profession.
 If the public will not trust lawyers anymore, then the legal profession will die a natural death. Nobody will go to
lawyers anymore and perhaps will just take the law into their own hands.
Can legal ethics make you rich? What is the danger if the lawyer forgets the rules of legal ethics?
 A lawyer may get rich but he may get disbarred. Observance of the rules of legal ethics is essential for self-
preservation and preservation of one’s career. It is not as if that legal ethics will make you poor, far from that,
many lawyers reach the pinnacle of success even while completely observant of legal ethics.
The legal profession is not a money making trade.

Primary characteristics which distinguish the legal profession from a business:
1. duty of public service, of which emolument is a by-product
 this tells us that the primary purpose of the legal profession is the duty of public service and emolument
is merely a by-product
 example: A business without profit after 10 or 20 years is considered a failure because it makes no
money. However, a lawyer who is not very rich but is one of the most respected is not considered a
failure. It is not the emolument that defines a lawyers, rather it is the quality of his work.
2. lawyer is an officer of the court
3. fiduciary relation to client
 fiduciary: based on trust and confidence
 fiduciary relationship not always present in business.
 example: Even if one does not trust the airline, he has no choice but to ride it. But if a client
hires a lawyer, then it means the client trusts the lawyer.
4. candor, fairness to colleagues in the bar
 courtesy towards fellow lawyers in observed in the legal profession
example: it is unethical for lawyers to steal the clients of other lawyers
 in business, the aim is to monopolize the market, to get all the clients in order to maximize profits.
Can corporations practice law?

 No. Practice of law is reserved only to natural persons who are lawyers such as solo practitioners or in
partnership with other lawyers.
 Corporation law: corporation is an entity which is distinct and separate from its individual stockholders

 If corporations are allowed to practice law, it could become an avenue for unscrupulous lawyers to evade
liability by hiding behind the veil of corporate fiction. This is totally inconsistent with the principle that the legal
profession demands personal responsibility and accountability from the lawyer.
 Besides, the corporation did not go to law school or take the bar. The nature of the legal profession is such that
it can only be exercised in the flesh and blood of a real natural person.
 Law firms are allowed. A law partnership does not qualify as a partnership under the contemplation of the civil
code. It is called partnership in the loose sense.
 A partnership in the practice of law is a mere relationship or association for such particular purpose. It is not a
legal entity, it is not a partnership formed for the purpose of carrying on a trade or business or of holding
property. It is an association or relationship for the purpose of practicing law.
Tan vs del Rosario

 A professional law partnership even if registered with the SEC is not even a taxpayer. And any lawyer practicing
law under a law partnership is considered a solo practitioner who is the taxpayer and not the law partnership.
 The law, in fact, prohibits a business or commercial partnership or juridical entity to engage in the practice of
law, the reason being that a commercial partnership or juridical entity, by the very nature of the practice of law,
cannot possess nor comply with the qualifications and requirements of a lawyer.
Sec. 1, rule 138, ROC

Who may practice law?
Any person (natural 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.
Sources of legal ethics

I. Constitution as a source of legal ethics
Sec. 5[5], art. VIII, 1987 constitution
The SC shall promulgate rules concerning:
1. the protection and enforcement of constitutional rights,
2. pleading, practice, and procedure in all courts,
3. the admission to the practice of law,
 If the SC can admit a person to the practice of law, it can also disbar the person. Aside from
promulgating Rules of Court pertaining to the admission to the bar, the SC also has rules regarding
discipline and disbarment of lawyers.
4. the Integrated Bar
 The SC, under the ROC, mandates the integration of the Bar
5. legal assistance to the underprivileged.
Can these persons practice law concurrent with their public posts?
1. President, vice-president,members of the cabinet, and their deputies or assistants
 No. The Constitution provides that the pres, VP, members of the cabinet, and their deputies and
assistants, shall not, during their tenure, practice any other profession.
2. Senators, members of house of representatives
 Yes but with restrictions on personal appearaance.
 Sec. 14, art. VI, 1987 constitution
o No Senator or Member of the House of Representatives may personally appear as counsel
before:
1. any court of justice
2. Electoral Tribunals
3. quasi-judicial and other administrative bodies.
3. Members of constitutional commission

 No. Prohibited by the Constitution.
4. Ombudsman and deputies
 No. Prohibited by the Constitution.
5. Judges and justices
 No.
6. Retired judges and justices
 Yes but with restrictions found on legislation.
7. Governors, city mayors, and municipal mayors.
 No as found in the Local Government Code
8. Baranggay Captains and Sanggunian Members
 Yes because not included in the enumeration of officials prohibited from practicing law.
 Numbers 1 to 4 above are examples of the Constitution being a source of legal ethics.
 Numbers 5 to 8 above are examples of Legislation being a source of legal ethics.
Puyat vs. De guzman, Jr. (113 scra 31)

A member of congress cannot indirectly fail to follow the constitutional prohibition of not appearing personally as
counsel before the SEC by buying a no. of share in the corporation after his appearance as counsel therein was
contested.
II. Rules of court as a source of legal ethics

Sec. 7, rule 85
When the executors or administrator is an attorney, he shall not charge against the estate any professional fees for legal
services rendered by him.
Reason: to avoid temptation on the part of the executor/administrator. As executor/administrator, the lawyer makes
major decisions like who to hire as lawyer and how much to pay the lawyer. This prohibition disallows the lawyer-
administrator/executor from hiring himself and paying himself an exorbitant amount of attorney’s fees.
Sec. 24[B], rule 13

An attorney cannot, without the consent of his client, be examined as to any communication made by the client to him,
or his advice given thereon in the course of, or with a view to, professional employment.
Rule 138 – Attorneys and Admission to the Bar

Rule 138-A – Law Student Practice Rule
Rule 139-A - Integrated Bar of the Philippines
Rule 138-B – Grievance Procedure Against Lawyers
III. Legislation as a source of legal ethics

Art. 1491[5], Civil Code
The following persons cannot acquire by purchase, even at a public or judicial auction, either in person or through the
mediation of another: [5]Justices, judges, prosecuting attorneys, clerks of superior and inferior courts, and other officers
and employees connected with the administration of justice, the property and rights in litigation or levied upon an
execution before the court within whose jurisdiction or territory they exercise their respective functions; this prohibition
includes the act of acquiring by assignment and shall apply to lawyers, with respect to the property and rights which
may be the object of any litigation in which they may take part by virtue of their profession.
Arts. 203, 222, Labor Code

 Attorney's fees should not exceed 10% of the amount of wages recovered
Art. 209, RPC
 Betrayal of Trust by an Attorney (review the elements)
 Aside from criminal liability, the lawyer can also be administratively and civilly liable
Section 90, Title III, BOOK 1, RA 7160 LGC

Practice of Profession. - (a) All governors, city and municipal mayors are prohibited from practicing their profession or
engaging in any occupation other than the exercise of their functions as local chief executives.
 if the governor is also a movie star, can he make a movie while in office?
o He cannot. But some get away with it because nobody complained.
 Baranggay members are not mentioned so not restricted
Public officials with restrictions in the practice of Law

 No Senator or Member of the House of Representatives may personally appear as counsel before any court of
justice or before the Electoral Tribunals, or quasi-judicial and other administrative bodies.
Sec. 90, RA 7160

That sanggunian members who are also members of the Bar shall not:
1. Appear as counsel before any court in any civil case wherein a local government unit or any
office, agency, or instrumentality of the government is the adverse party;
2. Appear as counsel in any criminal case wherein an officer or employee of the national or local
government is accused of an offense committed in relation to his office.
3. Collect any fee for their appearance in administrative proceedings involving the local
government unit of which he is an official; and
4. Use property and personnel of the government except when the sanggunian member concerned
is defending the interest of the government.
Retired Judges and Justices

RA 910:
 no retiring Justice during the time that he is receiving said pension shall appear as counsel before any court in
any civil case wherein the Government or any subdivision or instrumentality thereof is the adverse party, or in
any criminal case wherein and officer or employee of the Government is accused of an offense committed in
relation to his office, or collect any fee for his appearance in any administrative proceedings to maintain an
interest adverse to the Government, insular, provincial or municipal, or to any of its legally constituted officers
 restrictions are similar to the first two restrictions for sangguniang members
Can a civil service employee engage in the private practice of law?

 A civil service officer or employee whose duty or responsibility does not require his entire time to be at the
disposal of the government may not engage in private practice of law without the written permit from the head
of the department concerned. However, government officials who by express mandate of the law are prohibited
from practicing law may not, even with the consent of the department head, engage in the practice of law. If so
authorized by the department head, he may, in an isolated case, act as counsel for a relative or close family
friend. A government official forbidden to practice law may be held criminally liable for doing so. An officer or
employee of the civil service who, as a lawyer, engages in the private practice of law without a written permit
from the department head concerned may be held administratively liable therefor.
 So if his duty does not require him to devote his entire time to the government, then he can practice law with
the condition that he should get a written permit from the head of the department concerned.
 However, if a government official is expressly prohibited from practicing law, no amount of consent or authority
from a department head can allow him to practice law.
 A baranggay captain is allowed to practice law but he must get consent from the department head (DILG head)

Other sources of legal ethics
 Code of Professional Responsibility
 Canons of professional Ethics
 Court decisions, treatises, and other sources
Are ethics and morality the same?

 It is ideal that they are the same but they are not necessarily the same.
Relation of ethics and morality

 Morals define personal character, while ethics stresses a social system in which those morals are applied. In
other words, ethics point to standards or codes of behavior expected by the group to which the individual
belongs.
 example: a criminal defense lawyer
o though the lawyer’s personal moral code likely finds murder immoral and reprehensible, ethics demand
that the accused client be defended as vigorously as possible even when the lawyer knows the party is
guilty and that a free defendant will potentially lead to more crime. Legal ethics must override personal
morals for the greater good of upholding a justice system in which the accused is given a fair trial and
the prosecution must prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
Why should ethics override the personal moral code of a lawyer?

 If you do not follow the rules of ethics, you may be vulnerable to administrative penalties.
Why not base it on morality?

 because the personal moral code differs from one person to the next. What is moral for me may not be moral
for you and vice versa. To make ethics dependent on the personal moral codes of a lawyer would create
dangerous consequences because lawyers could just claim that it is ethical because their conscience was not
bothered by it.
 There must be a standard set of ethical rules which lawyers must follow regardless of their individual moral
codes.
Corollary Principles:
 Not everything legal is moral.
 Not everything legal is ethical.
o example: lawyers prohibition against acquiring properties in litigation
 if acquired while case is pending, the contract is void. But if acquired after litigation, the act is
legal but it is not necessarily ethical if it can be shown that the lawyer still has moral ascendancy
over the litigant and took advantage of his client in the acquisition of the property.
Power to admit to the Bar

 vested in the SC
 the authority of the SC over the legal profession is a constituent element of its judicial power. Accordingly, any
legislative or executive judgment substituting that of the SC in matters concerning the admission to the practice
of law, ____, suspension, disbarment, or reinstatement of an attorney infringes upon
 Can the Congress admit to the Bar?

o Bar Flunkers Act: Congress passed a law reducing the passing percentage. Law was struck down as
unconstitutional being an encroachment into the exclusive prerogative of the SC to admit to the bar.
Legislative power to repeal, alter or supplement

1935 and 1973 constitution: The SC shall have the power to “promulgate rules concerning...... the admission to the
practice of law, and the integration of the Bar, which however may be repealed, altered or supplemented by the
Batasang Pambansa.
1987 constitution: deleted the power of the legislature to repeal, alter or supplement SC the rules.
Is Congress prohibited from enacting laws that affect the legal profession?
 No. The power of Congress to legislate is plenary. The only exception are those prohibited by the Constitution.
 example:
o Congress can pass a law limiting the collection of legal fees in labor cases
o Congress can pass a law to criminalize a person who masquerades as a lawyer
 the prohibition is against passing laws that encroach on the exclusive power of the SC to admit to the bar,
integration of the bar.
Basic requirement for admission(Sec. 2, rule 138, rules of court):

1. citizen of the Philippines,
o dual citizen? Yes, can be admitted to the Bar.
2. at least twenty-one years of age,
o Why 21 and not merely 18 (age of majority)?:
1. By reason of impossibility because one still has to take up undergraduate and law degree.
2. The practice of law requires a certain level of maturity. The SC said that it is reasonable to
assume that 21 years old is mature enough to practice law.
3. good moral character,
4. resident of the Philippines;
o should be accessible to the SC
5. must produce before the Supreme Court satisfactory evidence of good moral character, and that no charges
against him, involving moral turpitude, have been filed or are pending in any court in the Philippines.
o The admission to the practice of law is a judicial proceeding and it starts the moment you submit your
petition to take the bar.
o Petition should allege all basic requirements for admission. Like any other judicial proceeding, mere
allegation without proof will not be believed by the SC.
 age and citizenship: proven by birth certificate
 residence: proven by baranggay certification
 good moral character: proven by certification executed by members of the bar in good standing
who know you and know you to be a person of good moral character; at least 3 testimonials are
required
 no charges involving moral turpidude: police clearance, NBI clearance
January 21, 2016

Moral Turpitude
-offends the generally accepted code of mankind; an act of baseness, vileness or depravity in the private and social
duties which a man owes to his fellowmen and society in general; immoral law in itself, regardless of the fact if it is
punishable by law or not; the act itself is inherently immoral regardless the prohibition by law.
Examples: robbery, adultery, bribery, forgery, libel
Moreno vs. Araneta

Facts:
The lawyer issued a bouncing check. Administrative charge was filed against the lawyer. While the case was pending, BP
22 was passed.
Is there a criminal offense?-No, because criminal laws have prospective effect and by the time the check was issued it
was not yet a criminal act.
Ruling:
The act of a person in issuing a check knowing at the time of the issuance that he or she does not have
sufficient funds in, or credit with, the drawee bank for the payment of the check in full upon its presentment, is
also a manifestation of moral turpitude
Can the SC do this? Yes because moral turpitude is considered immoral whether punishable by law or not. Therefore, it
does not preclude the SC from saying that the issuance of the rubber checks involves moral turpitude.
Warranties of the SC in Admitting a Person to the Practice of Law:

1.) Person so admitted has necessary learning and proficiency
“necessary learning and proficiency”- refers to entry level skills of the lawyer
2.) He is of good moral character
In Re Petition to Resume Practice of Law of Benjamin Dacanay

BM No. 1678, December 17, 2007
Facts:
Dacanay is a Filipino lawyer. He migrated to Canada to seek medical attention. To be able to fully avail of medical
benefits in Canada, he had to become a Canadian citizen .Upon return to the Philippines, he wants to resume his
practice of law. He reacquired Filipino citizenship under RA 9255 and before the Philippine embassy in Canada he took
his oath of allegiance to the Philippines.
What should he do to resume practice of law in the Philippines?
Ruling:
Under RA 9255, if a person intends to practice the legal profession in the Philippines and he reacquires his Filipino
citizenship pursuant to its provisions “he shall apply with the proper authority for a license or permit to engage in such
practice.” Stated otherwise, before a lawyer who reacquires Filipino citizenship pursuant to RA 9255 can resume his low
practice, he must first secure from this Court the authority to do so, conditioned on:
a.) The updating and payment in full of the annual IBP membership dues in the IBP
b.) The payment of professional tax;
c.) The completion of at least 36 credit hours of MCLE; this is specially significant to refresh the
applicant/petitioner’s knowledge of Philippine laws and update him of legal developments and
d.) The retaking of the lawyer’s oath which will not only remind him of his duties and responsibilities as a lawyer
and as an officer of the Court, but also renew his pledge to maintain allegiance to the Constitution of the
Philippines.
Modern Concept of Practice of Law

Cayetano vs. Monsod, 201 SCRA 210 (1991)
Practice of Law means any activity, in or out of court, which requires the application of law, legal procedure,
knowledge, training and experience. To engage in the practice of law is to perform those acts which are characteristics
of the profession. Generally, to practice is to give notice or render any kind of service, which device or service required
the use in any degree of legal knowledge or skill not limited to appearing in court, or advising and assisting in the

conduct of litigation, but embraces the preparation of pleadings and other papers incident to actions and special
proceedings, conveyancing, the preparation of legal instruments of all kinds, and the giving of legal advice to clients.
Old concept, Practice of Law

People vs. Villanueva, 14 SCRA 109 (1965)
Criteria Determinative of Practice of Law
1.) Habituality
2.) Compensation
3.) Application of Law, Legal Principle, Practice of Legal Procedure which calls for legal knowledge, competence and
experience
4.) Attorney-Client Relationship
Is Teaching of law Practice of Law?

A law professor does not actually deal with clients whose rights are or may be subject to legal controversies; he
does not hold himself out to the public as a lawyer but as a mentor learned in the law who is qualified, by reason of his
legal training instruct students on legal subject. (Minister of Justice Opinion No. 89 Series of 1986)
Based on this opinion, teaching of law is not a practice of law because a law professor is not acting as a lawyer but as a
teacher. This is 1986 and Cayetano vs. Monsod was decided in 1991. We, therefore, can say that if teaching of law
involves knowledge, experience then it is practice of law. So what to follow? I AM GIVING YOU BOTH! Ex: In one of the
graduate law school in Manila, the Dean is not a lawyer. We have professionals teaching law but are not lawyers. So
there is a bit truth in the pronouncement of the Justice Opinion regardless of Cayetano vs. Monsod.
Practice of Law a Privilege, but also in the nature of a right

 Privilege because lawyers must bow to the inherent regulatory power of the Court to exact compliance with the
lawyer’s public responsibilities.
 Right because the lawyer cannot be prevented from practicing law except for valid reasons (e.g. prohibition on
some public officers)
o Philippine Lawyers’ Association vs. Agrava
 Members of the Philippine Bar should be allowed to practice before the Patent Office (IPO)
without further examination or other qualification.
Do not confuse the Agrava case with the lawyer who wants to be employed. The case talks about appearing before the
Patent Office. But if you want to be employed in the Legal Dept. of Patent Office, it is always the employer’s prerogative
if giving an examination is their means to screen applicants.
Why is the practice of law generally limited to lawyers?

-to protect party litigants because of the complex nature of judicial proceedings
-to protect public interest through assuring that judicial proceedings take place with dispatch without sacrificing justice
and efficiency
Sanctions for Unauthorized Practice of Law:

 Injunction to restrain continuation of unauthorized practice; contempt of court (Sec 3 (e), Rule 71, ROC),
criminal prosecution, damages, denial of right to fees.
 Manangan vs. CFI – one whop masqueraded a lawyer using the name of a deceased lawyer __ found guilty of
continuous fraudulent misrepresentation and highly improper conduct tending directly to impede, obstruct,

degrade and make a mockery of the administration of justice. Consequently, he was adjudged in contempt of
court, severely censured, and sentenced to suffer 3 months imprisonment.
Can you disbar? Of course you cannot disbar a non-lawyer, but there could be unauthorized practice of law by a
disbarred lawyer or by lawyer during the period of his suspension. This suspended lawyer can be disbarred.
Shari’a lawyers who are LLB graduates but not member of the bar are not allowed to practice before regular courts
even if both parties are Muslims.
Par.2 Art 143 of P.D. 1083, The Code of Muslim Personal Laws of the Philippines provides for concurrent jurisdiction
of the Shari’a Court with existing civil courts.
They have to be admitted also to the Philippine Bar. In the same way that if one is admitted to the Philippine Bar but not
to the Shari’a Bar, he cannot appear before the Shari’a courts. Supreme Court gives the Shari’a Bar Exams.
Appearance “In Propria Persona” or “Pro Se” Practice

-appearance in court by a non-lawyer for himself and without the assistance of a member of the Bar.
Basis: Sec. 1(2), Art. III, Constitution (due process clause)
-right to be heard by himself and counsel, except in criminal cases); Sec. 3, Rule 7, ROC Every pleading must be signed by
the party or a counsel representing him..”
If a non-lawyer is a party to the case, he can appear without the assistance of a lawyer. But in doing so, he is still subject
to the same rules of procedure. He cannot claim exemption.
“Sec. 34, Rule 138, ROC – By whom litigation conducted.

-in the court of 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 the aid an attorney, and his appearance may either be personal or by a duly authorized member of the
bar.”
Justice of the peace =MTC. Therefore, Pro Se practice is allowed before ANY COURT.
A non-lawyer in pro se practice is engage in the practice of law? FALSE
In a litigation, parties may personally do everything during its progress –from its commencement to its termination.
When they, however, act as their own attornyes, they are restricted to the same rules of evidence and procedure as
those qualified to practice law; otherwise, ignorance would be unjustifiably rewarded.
Individuals have long been permitted to manage, prosecute and defined their own actions; and when they do so, they
are not considered to be in the practice of law. “One does not practice law by acting for himself any more that he
practices medicine by rendering first aid in himself.
While Pro Se Practice is allowed, it is not advisable. (In Re: Joaquin T. Borromeo, 241 SCRA 405)
“A little learning is a dangerous thing. He who acts as his own lawyer has a fool for a client.”
Non-lawyers who are authorized to appear in court:

 GR: a non-lawyer may represent a party before the MTC
Exc: Criminal case
Exc to exc: in a locality where a licensed member of the Bar is not available
 Senior law student – enrolled in a recognized law school’s clinical education program approved by the SC may
appear before any court, tribunal, agency, office, without compensation, to represent indigent clients accepted
by the Legal Clinic of the school; under direct supervision and control of an IBP member duly accredited by the
law school: civil, criminal , administrative (Sec. 1, Rule 138-A, Rules of Court)
o Before RTC and higher courts – must be accompanied by a supervising lawyer in all h8is appearance.

In all courts you need a supervising lawyer. The only difference is whether you need to be accompanied by a
supervising lawyer.
 Labor Code – 1) when they represent themselves, 2) they represent their organization or members thereof with
written authorization of the latter, 3) duly accredited members of any legal aid office duly recognized by the
DOJ, or the IBP in cases referred to by the latter
 Cadastral Act- a non-lawyer can represent claimant before the cadastral court
 Before the Department of Agrarian Reform Adjudication Board
Proceedings where lawyers are Prohibited to Appear:

1.) Conciliation proceedings under the Katarungang Pamgbarangay Law;
2.) Small Claims cases;
3.) Indigenous System of Settlement (Sec. 10, Rule 4, NCIP ADMINISTRATIVE CIRCULAR NO. 1-03) pursuant to RA
8371, otherwise known as “The Indigenous People Rights Act of 1997”. As a general rule, lawyers are prohibited
to appear any party as counsel, except when such lawyer is appearing in his/her capacity as a member of the
council of elders or due to his/her obligation as member of the IP community or for the purpose of defending or
prosecuting his/her case.
4.) Sec. 5(7) on Settlement of Money Claims, Guidelines on Insurance. Rule XVI of the Omnibus Rules and
Regulations Implementing the Migrant Workers and Overseas Filipino Act -Lawyers for the insurance for the
insurance companies, unless the latter are impleaded shall be prohibited to appear before the NLRC in money
claims cases ---
Let’s start with the CPR

CHAPTER ONE. THE LAWYER & SOCIETY
CANON 1. UPHOLD THE CONSTITUTION, OBEY THE LAWS, PROMOTE RESPECT FOR LAW AND LEGAL PROCESSES
LAWYER’S OATH – contains in capsule from the ethical standards required for lawyers.
1.) Not to unduly delay a case – lawyer was reprimanded when he used his legal expertise to unnecessarily and
unjustly delay a case (Del Mundo vs. CA, 252 SCRA 43)
2.) To delay no man for money or malice – a lawyer should not delay a case just because he may not be paid well
because the legal profession is not a money-making profession. But this does not mean that a lawyer cannot
reject a case the facts of which do not convince him to be meritorious. If a lawyer is deliberately not paid, the
honourable thing for him to do is desist from the case as to allow the client to employ another lawyer.
3.) Do no falsehood – Moreno vs. Araneta
 Bongalonta vs. Castillo , 240 SCRA 310

The lawyer in this case, used the IBP number of another lawyer. His defense is that it is his secretary’s fault for
not paying his IBP dues and for erroneously placing in his pleading the IBP number of his associate. The secretary
executed an affidavit affirming the lawyer’s contention.
Ruling:
As employer of the secretary, the lawyer has the duty to supervise. Secretary is not the guardian of the lawyer’s
responsibility.
 Moreno vs. Araneta, A.C. No. 1109, April 27, 2005
DISCOURAGING LAWSUITS
-Under Rule 1.03 of CPR, a lawyer shall not for any corrupt motive or interest, encourage any suit or proceeding or
delay any man’s cause.

Ratio: Not to clog the court’s docket with cases not deserving of the court’s attention. Clogging of dockets result to
slower administration of justice which translate to poor service to the public by the court.
Crime/Tort of Maintenance- Intermeddling of an uninterested party to encourage a lawsuit.

A lawyer owes to the society and to the court the duty not to stir up litigation. The following are unprofessional acts:
1. Volunteering advice to bring lawsuit except when ties of blood, relationship and trust make it a duty to do so.
2. Hunting up defects in titles or other causes of action; to breed litigation by seeking out claims for personal
injuries
3. Employing agents or runners
4. Paying direct or indirect reward to those who bring or influence the bringing of cases to his office.
5. Searching for unkown heirs and soliciting for their employment.
Barratry –offense of frequently inciting and stirring up quarrels and suits; fomenting suits; then offering his legal services
to one of the parties.
Ambulance Chasing- a lawyer’s act of figuratively chasing the victims of an accident for the purpose of talking to the
victim or the latter’s relatives and offering his legal services for the filing of the cases against the person who cause the
accident.
Recognized evils of ambulance chasing:

1. Fomenting of litigation; burden on courts and society
2. Subornation of perjury
3. Mulcting of innocent persons by judgments, upon manufactured causes of action
4. Defrauding of injured persons having proper causes of action but ignorant of their legal rights and court
procedures by means of contracts which retain exorbitant percentages of recovery and illegal charges for court
cost and expenses and by settlement made for good returns of fees and against the just rights of the injured.
CANON 2. MAKING AVAILABLE EFFICIENT LEGAL SERVICE

Rule 2.01. A lawyer shall not reject, except for valid reasons the cause of the defenceless or the oppressed
 Valid reasons to decline engagement: (Rule 14.03 – not in a position to carry out the work effectively or
competently; he labors under a conflict of interest between him and the prospective client or between a present
client
 Most exercise the same degree or standard of diligence accorded to paying clients; Legal aid is not a charity but
a public service
B.M. No. 2012, February 10, 2009, PROPOSED RULE ON MANDATORY LEGAL AID SERVICE FOR PRATICING LAWYERS
All practicing lawyers are required to render a minimum of sixty (60) hours of free legal aid services to indigent litigants
in a year. Clerks of Court and the IBP Legal Aid Chairperson of IBP Chapter are designated to coordinate with the lawyer
for cases where he may render free legal aid service.
Indigent and pauper litigants are those whose gross income and that of their immediate family do not exceed an amount
double the monthly minimum wage of an employee and those who not own any real property shall be exempt from
payment of docket fee and other legal fees as well as transcripts of stenographic notes.
PENALTIES:
A penalty of P4,000 shall be imposed on the lawyer who fails to meet the require minimum number of hours of legal aid
service each year required by the IBP without satisfactory explanation. The lawyer shall have a “not in good standing”
status and shall not be allowed to appear in court or any quasi-judicial body as counsel for a period of 3 months. A

lawyer who fails to comply with the duties in the Rules for at least 3 consecutive years shall be subject to disciplinary
proceedings and may be suspended from practice of law for 1 year.
Canon 2.03 Solicitation (discussed together with Canon 3)
Canon 2.04. A lawyer shall not charge rates lower than those customarily prescribed unless the circumstances so
warrant.
 Consider the IBP Chapter Local Schedules of Attorney’s Fees
 To avoid demeaning and degrading competition
 Ulep vs. Legal Clinic, Inc., 233 SCRA 378
CANON 3. USE OF TRUE, HONEST, FAIR AND OBJECTIVE INFORMATION IN MAKING KNOWN HIS LEGAL SERVICES
Advertising
GR: A lawyer cannot advertise his talent, as he is a member of an honourable profession the primary purpose of which is
to render public service and secure justice; remuneration is a mere incident.
Exc: (Forms of Permissible Advertisement)

1. Writing legal articles, for legal publication in which he gives information about the laws but he cannot accept
employment from such publication to advise inquirers in respect to individual rights of persons
2. Law lists, but only brief biographical and informative data
3. Ordinary professional cards
4. Notice to other local lawyers and publishing in a legal journal
5. Proffer of free legal services to the indigent even when broadcasted over the radio or tendered through
circulation of printed matter to the general public
6. Simple announcement of the opening of a law firm or of changes in the partnership, associates, firm name or
office address, being the convenience of the profession
7. Listing in a phone directory of his name but not under a designation of special branch of law
Solicitation of cases constitutes malpractice

The law prohibits lawyers from soliciting cases for the purpose of gain, either personally or through paid agents or
brokers (Rule 138, Sec. 27, ROC)
Use of Law Firm Name:

1. In the choice of a firm name, no false, misleading or assumed name shall be used. The continued use of the
name of a deceased partner is permissible provided that the firm indicates in all its communications that said
partner is deceased. This rule abandoned the doctrine in the case of In Re: Sycip, 92 SCRA 1 (1979).
2. Where a partner accepts public office, he shall withdraw from the firm and his name shall be dropped from the
firm name, unless the law allows him to practice concurrently.
Ex: If a partner appointed as Secretary of DENR, should his name be dropped in the name of the law firm? Yes,
because under the Constitution, members of the cabinet are not allowed to practice law.
If appointed as Chairman of Civil Service Commission? – Yes because prohibition under the Constitution.
If elected as City Councillor? No need, because Sangunian members are allowed to practice law.
If elected as Brgy. Captain? No need, because brgy. Captains are allowed practice law. Only mayors and
governors are prohibited. YOU SHOULD KNOW THESE.

3. Filipino lawyers cannot practice law under the name of a foreign law firm, as the latter cannot practice law in
Philippines and the use of a foreign law’s firm name is unethical.
Regardless if such lawyer is accredited by the foreign law firm.
CANON 5. KEEP ABREAST OF LEGAL DEVELOPMENTS AND PARTICIPATE IN CONTINUING LEGAL EDUCATION PROGRAM
BAR MATTER 850: MANDATORY CONTINUING LEGAL EDUCATION , August 8, 2000
Requirements for Completion of MCLE: at least 36 hours of continuing legal education activities per 3 years:
6 hours – legal ethics
4 hours – trial and pretrial skills
5 hours – alternative dispute resolution
9 hours- updates on substantive and procedural laws and jurisprudence
4 hours – writing and oral advocacy
2 hours – international law and international law and international conventions
6 hours – other subjects as may be prescribed by the MCLE Committee
You should follow the breakdown of the 36 hours.
EXEMPTIONS (Rule 7)
SECTION 1. Parties exempted from the MCLE. -- The following members of the Bar are exempt from the MCLE
requirement:
(a) The President and the Vice President of the Philippines, and the Secretaries and Undersecretaries of Executive
Departments;
(b) Senators and Members of the House of Representatives;
(c) The Chief Justice and Associate Justices of the Supreme Court, incumbent and retired members of the judiciary,
incumbent members of the Judicial and Bar Council and incumbent court lawyers covered by the Philippine Judicial
Academy program of continuing judicial education;
(d) The Chief State Counsel, Chief State Prosecutor and Assistant Secretaries of the Department of Justice;
(e) The Solicitor General and the Assistant Solicitors General;
(f) The Government Corporate Counsel, Deputy and Assistant Government Corporate Counsel;
(g) The Chairmen and Members of the Constitutional Commissions;
(h) The Ombudsman, the Overall Deputy Ombudsman, the Deputy Ombudsman and the Special Prosecutor of the Office
of the Ombudsman;
(i) Heads of government agencies exercising quasi-judicial functions;
(j) Incumbent deans, bar reviewers and professors of law who have teaching experience for at least ten (10) years in
accredited law schools;
(k) The Chancellor, Vice-Chancellor and members of the Corps of Professors and Professorial Lecturers of the Philippine
Judicial Academy; and
(l) Governors and Mayors.
SEC. 2. Other parties exempted from the MCLE. The following Members of the Bar are likewise exempt:
(a) Those who are not in law practice, private or public.
(b) Those who have retired from law practice with the approval of the IBP Board of Governors.
Good Causes for Exemption from or Modification of Requirement: (Section 3)

 Verified Request
 Grounds
 Physical disability
 Illness
 Post-graduate study abroad
 Proven expertise in law

In a case, the lawyer indicated in the pleading, instead of putting MCLE compliance certificate number, “MCLE exemption
application pending.” His application was denied and so he filed motion for reconsideration for the denial of his
application for exemption, his pleading now indicates “MCLE exemption application motion for reconsideration pending.“
His ground was proven expertise of experience for being in the practice for 50 years, written published law books and a
legal counsel of well-known politicians in their high-profiled cases, and handled noble cases, long served his province as a
governor and offered a seat in the Supreme Court.
Ruling:
Proven expertise in law, under this rule, refers to academic qualifications.
Consequences for Non-compliance

1. listed as delinquent member by the IBP Board of Governors upon the recommendation of the Committee on
MCLE
The listing as a delinquent member is administrative in nature but shall be made with notice and hearing by the
Committee on MCLE.
BAR MATTER NO. 1922,

June 3, 2008
"Bar Matter No. 1922. – Re: Recommendation of the Mandatory Continuing Legal Education (MCLE) Board to Indicate in
All Pleadings Filed with the Courts the Counsel’s MCLE Certificate of Compliance or Certificate of Exemption. – The Court
Resolved to NOTE the Letter, dated May 2, 2008, of Associate Justice Antonio Eduardo B. Nachura, Chairperson,
Committee on Legal Education and Bar Matters, informing the Court of the diminishing interest of the members of the
Bar in the MCLE requirement program.
The Court further Resolved, upon the recommendation of the Committee on Legal Education and Bar Matters, to
REQUIRE practicing members of the bar to INDICATE in all pleadings filed before the courts or quasi-judicial bodies, the
number and date of issue of their MCLE Certificate of Compliance or Certificate of Exemption, as may be applicable, for
the immediately preceding compliance period. Failure to disclose the required information would cause the dismissal of
the case and the expunction of the pleadings from the records.
The New Rule shall take effect sixty (60) days after its publication in a newspaper of general circulation." Caprio-Morales
Velasco, Jr., Nachura, JJ., on official leave.
Is this applicable? NO. IT HAS ALREADY BEEN CHANGED. THE CONTROLLING RULE IS OCA CIRCULAR NO. 79, 2014.
Instead of dismissal of the case or expunction of the pleadings from the records, the consequence is only fine for
lawyers.
OCA CIRCULAR NO. 79-2014
The following rules for non-disclosure of current MCLE compliance/exemption number in the pleadings:
(i)The lawyer shall be imposed a fine of P2,000.00 for the first offense, P3,000.00 for the second offense and P4,000.00
for the third offense;
(ii) In addition to the fine, counsel may be listed as a delinquent member of the Bar pursuant to Section 2, Rule 13 of Bar
Matter No. 850 and its implementing rules and regulations; and
(iii) The non-compliant lawyer shall be discharged from the case and the client/s shall be allowed to secure the services
of a new counsel with the concomitant right to demand the return of fees already paid to the non-compliant lawyer.
CANON 6. APPLCABILITY OF THE CPR TO LAWYERS IN THE GOVERNMENT SERVICE

 A lawyer does not shed his professional obligations upon assuming public office.

 Lawyers who are incumbent judges governed by the Code of Judicial Conduct. Judges cannot be investigated by
the IBP Commission on Bar Discipline.
Government lawyers are prohibited to engage in private practice unless authorized by the Constitution or law, provided
that such practice will not conflict or tend to conflict with their official functions (Sec. 7 (b-2), RA 6713)
Canon 6.01. Lawyers engaged in public prosecution

 Primary duty is not to convict but to see that justice is done.
 The suppression of facts or concealment of witnesses capable of establishing the innocence of the accused is
highly-reprehensible and is a cause for disciplinary action.
A prosecutor is a quasi-judicial officer.

Thus, he should seek equal and impartial justice. He should be as much concerned with seeing that no innocent man
suffers as seeing that no guilty man escapes.
If a prosecutor finds that there is no sufficient evidence:

 In the preliminary investigation: resolve to the effect that there is no probable cause.
 If case has already been filed: file a motion before the court for the dismissal of the action
 If case on appeal: recommend before the appellate court the acquittal of the accused.
Canon 6.02.
-A lawyer in the public service shall not use his public position to promote or advance his private interests, nor allow
the latter to interfere with his public duties
GR: a lawyer who holds a government office may not be disciplined as a member of the Bar for misconduct in the
discharge of his duties as a government official.
Exc: misconduct is of such character as to affect his qualification as a lawyer or to show moral delinquency, then he may
be disciplined as a member of the Bar.
Canon 6. 03. After leaving government service, a lawyer shall not accept engagement or employment in connection
with any matter in which he had intervened while in said service.
PCGG vs. Sandiganbayan

G.R. No. 151805 (2005)
Read this case
 Adverse-interest conflicts
 Congruent-interest conflicts
Coverage for midterms:

 Introduction of Judicial ethics
 Judicial Ethics
 Both old and new code
 Administrative liability of judges
 Procedure against judges
 Introduction to Legal Ethics
 Canon 1-6 of Legal Ethics


PALE Midterm Transcript (2016)

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

PALE Midterm Transcript (2016)

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

November 12, 2016

Purpose of Code of Ethics in Judicial Ethics

 to uphold and maintain public confidence in the judiciary

Importance of Judicial Ethics to Lawyers

Q: Can the courts function without lawyers?

CODE OF JUDICIAL CONDUCT (1989)

NEW CODE OF JUDICIAL CONDUCT FOR THE PHILIPPINE JUDICIARY

Pelaez2016[Alga, Gagno, Jadulco, Leyson, Meneses] Page 2

November 19, 2015

Pelaez2016[Alga, Gagno, Jadulco, Leyson, Meneses] Page 3

Possible sources of influence:

Ramirez vs. Corpus-Macandog

Libaros vs. Dabalos

Example (bar exam question):

OCA vs. Judge Floro

Pelaez2016[Alga, Gagno, Jadulco, Leyson, Meneses] Page 4

Definition of Family under the New Code

Pelaez2016[Alga, Gagno, Jadulco, Leyson, Meneses] Page 5

Ignorance of the law

Pelaez2016[Alga, Gagno, Jadulco, Leyson, Meneses] Page 6

Demeanor in social functions

Pelaez2016[Alga, Gagno, Jadulco, Leyson, Meneses] Page 7

Sec. 9, R.A. 6713 – if there is conflict of interest:

November 26, 2015

Pelaez2016[Alga, Gagno, Jadulco, Leyson, Meneses] Page 8

(e) The judge's ruling in a lower court is the subject of review;

RULE 137 - RULES OF COURT

Pelaez2016[Alga, Gagno, Jadulco, Leyson, Meneses] Page 9

Case 1: PAGODA CASE

Pelaez2016[Alga, Gagno, Jadulco, Leyson, Meneses] Page 10

Case 3: Webb vs People

 One of the favorite topics in the bar!!

Pelaez2016[Alga, Gagno, Jadulco, Leyson, Meneses] Page 11

Pelaez2016[Alga, Gagno, Jadulco, Leyson, Meneses] Page 12

Pelaez2016[Alga, Gagno, Jadulco, Leyson, Meneses] Page 13

Dec. 03, 2015

Pelaez2016[Alga, Gagno, Jadulco, Leyson, Meneses] Page 14

We know that judges cannot practice law.

Pelaez2016[Alga, Gagno, Jadulco, Leyson, Meneses] Page 15

Pelaez2016[Alga, Gagno, Jadulco, Leyson, Meneses] Page 16

So these are the very words of the Supreme Court.

Pelaez2016[Alga, Gagno, Jadulco, Leyson, Meneses] Page 17

CANON 6. COMPETENCE AND DILIGENCE

Pelaez2016[Alga, Gagno, Jadulco, Leyson, Meneses] Page 18

Ignorance of the law

Doctrine of Judicial Immunity

Pelaez2016[Alga, Gagno, Jadulco, Leyson, Meneses] Page 19

What excuses for delay are not given credit?

Administrative Liability of judges (Consequences if judges violate their ethical duties)

Supreme Court justices:

Sec. 2 Art. 11 Grounds for impeachment

Pelaez2016[Alga, Gagno, Jadulco, Leyson, Meneses] Page 20

Administrative Offenses, Administrative Liabilities of Judges

December 10, 2015

A.M. No. MTJ-09-1738

Is the case moot and academic?

Judges: Gross Incompetence and gross inefficiency

Pelaez2016[Alga, Gagno, Jadulco, Leyson, Meneses] Page 22

Judges: Gross ignorance of the law

Judges: Gross misconduct

Judges: Gross misconduct for violating the Code of Judicial Conduct

Judge: Gross misconduct

Judges: Impropriety and Gross misconduct

Pelaez2016[Alga, Gagno, Jadulco, Leyson, Meneses] Page 23