AYSON, JEMELA MARI L.

HEADNOTES ON PROBLEM AREAS IN LEGAL ETHICS

A. Practice of Law
1. Concept

[A.C. No. 11156. March 19, 2018.]

[Formerly CBD Case No. 12-3680]
MICHELLE YAP, complainant, vs. ATTY. GRACE C. BURI, respondent.
PERALTA, J

The Court has repeatedly emphasized that the practice of law is imbued with public
interest and that a lawyer owes substantial duties, not only to his client, but also to his brethren
in the profession, to the courts, and to the public, and takes part in the administration of justice,
one of the most important functions of the State, as an officer of the court.

Time and again, the Court has stressed the settled principle that the practice of law is not
a right but a privilege bestowed by the State on those who show that they possess, and continue
to possess, the qualifications required by law for the conferment of such privilege.

[A.C. No. 11246. June 14, 2016.]

ARNOLD PACAO, complainant, vs. ATTY. SINAMAR LIMOS, respondent.
PER CURIAM

"[T]he practice of law is not a right but a privilege bestowed by the State upon those who
show that they possess, and continue to possess, the qualifications required by law for the
conferment of such privilege. Membership in the bar is a privilege burdened with conditions." "Of
all classes and professions, the lawyer is most sacredly bound to uphold the laws. He is their
sworn servant; and for him, of all men in the world, to repudiate and override the laws, to trample
them underfoot and to ignore the very bonds of society, argues recreancy to his position and
office, and sets a pernicious example to the insubordinate and dangerous elements of the body
politic."

[A.C. No. 10164. March 10, 2014.]

STEPHAN BRUNET and VIRGINIA ROMANILLOS BRUNET, complainants, vs. ATTY.
RONALD L. GUAREN, respondent.
MENDOZA, J

The practice of law is not a business. It is a profession in which duty to public service, not
money, is the primary consideration. Lawyering is not primarily meant to be a money-making
venture, and law advocacy is not a capital that necessarily yields profits. The gaining of a
livelihood should be a secondary consideration. The duty to public service and to the
administration of justice should be the primary consideration of lawyers, who must subordinate
their personal interests or what they owe to themselves.

[G.R. No. 100113. September 3, 1991.]

RENATO L. CAYETANO, petitioner, vs. CHRISTIAN MONSOD, HON. JOVITO R.
SALONGA, COMMISSION ON APPOINTMENTS, and HON. GUILLERMO CARAGUE in
his capacity as Secretary of Budget and Management, respondents.
PARAS, J

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 law is to
give notice or render any kind of service, which device or service requires the use in any degree
of legal knowledge or skill

[A.C. No. 11494. July 24, 2017.]

HEIRS OF JUAN DE DIOS E. CARLOS, namely, JENNIFER N. CARLOS, JOCELYN N.
CARLOS, JACQUELINE CARLOS-DOMINGUEZ, JO-ANN CARLOS-TABUTON, JIMMY N.
CARLOS, LORNA A. CARLOS, JERUSHA ANN A. CARLOS and JAN JOSHUA A. CARLOS,
complainants, vs. ATTY. JAIME S. LINSANGAN, respondent.
TIJAM, J

The lawyer's oath is a source of obligations and its violation is a ground for suspension,
disbarment or other disciplinary action.

2. Qualifications for admission to the Bar (Bar Matter No.1153)

[A.C. No. 9608. November 27, 2012.]

MARIA VICTORIA B. VENTURA, complainant, vs. ATTY. DANILO S. SAMSON,
respondent.
PER CURIAM

As we explained in Zaguirre v. Castillo, the possession of good moral character is both a

condition precedent and a continuing requirement to warrant admission to the bar and to retain
membership in the legal profession. It is the bounden duty of members of the bar to observe the
highest degree of morality in order to safeguard the integrity of the Bar. Consequently, any
errant behavior on the part of a lawyer, be it in the lawyer's public or private activities, which
tends to show said lawyer deficient in moral character, honesty, probity or good demeanor, is
sufficient to warrant suspension or disbarment.

[A.C. No. 5095. November 28, 2007.]

Father RANHILIO C. AQUINO, LINA M. GARAN, ESTRELLA C. LOZADA, POLICARPIO
L. MABBORANG, DEXTER R. MUNAR, MONICO U. TENEDRO, ANDY R. QUEBRAL,
NESTOR T. RIVERA, EDUARDO C. RICAMORA, ARTHUR G. IBAÑEZ, AURELIO C.
CALDEZ and DENU A. AGATEP, complainants, vs. Atty. EDWIN PASCUA, respondent.
SANDOVAL-GUTIERREZ, J

A member of the Bar may be disciplined or disbarred for any misconduct in his professional
or private capacity. The Court has invariably imposed a penalty for notaries public who were
found guilty of dishonesty or misconduct in the performance of their duties.

[A.C. No. 10179. March 4, 2014.]

(Formerly CBD 11-2985)
BENJAMIN Q. ONG, complainant, vs. ATTY. WILLIAM F. DELOS SANTOS, respondent.
BERSAMIN, J

A lawyer's issuance of a worthless check renders him in breach of his oath to obey the
laws. To accord with the canon of professional responsibility that requires him to uphold the
Constitution, obey the laws of the land, and promote respect for the law and legal processes, he
thereby becomes administratively liable for gross misconduct.

[A.C. No. 11078. July 19, 2016.]

VERLITA V. MERCULLO and RAYMOND VEDANO, complainants, vs. ATTY. MARIE
FRANCES E. RAMON, respondent.
BERSAMIN, J

The Lawyer's Oath is a source of the obligations and duties of every lawyer. Any violation
of the oath may be punished with either disbarment, or suspension from the practice of law, or
other commensurate disciplinary action. Every lawyer must at no time be wanting in probity and
moral fiber which are not only conditions precedent to his admission to the Bar, but are also
essential for his continued membership in the Law Profession. Any conduct unbecoming of a
lawyer constitutes a violation of his oath.

[A.C. No. 11064. September 27, 2016.]

BIENVENIDA FLOR SUAREZ, complainant, vs. ATTY. ELEONOR A. MARAVILLA-ONA,
respondent.
PER CURIAM

Membership in the legal profession is a privilege, and whenever it is made to appear that
an attorney is no longer worthy of the trust and confidence of her clients and the public, it
becomes not only the right but also the duty of the Court to withdraw the same.

3.Continuing requirements for membership in the bar

[A.C. No. 12156. June 20, 2018.]

PAULINO LIM, complainant, vs. ATTY. SOCRATES R. RIVERA, respondent.
PERLAS-BERNABE, J

Good character is an essential qualification for the admission to and continued practice of
law. Thus, any wrongdoing, whether professional or non-professional, indicating unfitness for the
profession justifies disciplinary action, as in this case.

[A.C. No. 10245. August 16, 2017.]

ELIBENA A. CABILES, complainant, vs. ATTY. LEANDRO S. CEDO, respondent.
DEL CASTILLO, J

Bar Matter 850 mandates continuing legal education for IBP members as an additional
requirement to enable them to practice law. This is "to ensure that throughout their career, they
keep abreast with law and jurisprudence, maintain the ethics of the profession and enhance the
standards of the practice of law." 20 Non-compliance with the MCLE requirement subjects the
lawyer to be listed as a delinquent IBP member.

4. Appearance of Non-Lawyers
a. New Law Student Practice Rule (A.M. No. 19-03-24-SC)

[G.R. No. 154207. April 27, 2007.]

FERDINAND A. CRUZ, petitioner, vs. ALBERTO MINA, HON. ELEUTERIO F. GUERRERO
and HON. ZENAIDA LAGUILLES, respondents.
AUSTRIA-MARTINEZ, J

The rule, however, is different if the law student appears before an inferior court, where
the issues and procedure are relatively simple. In inferior courts, a law student may appear in his
personal capacity without the supervision of a lawyer.

c. Proceedings where lawyers are prohibited from appearing as counsels

[A.C. No. 9018. April 20, 2016.]

TERESITA P. FAJARDO, complainant, vs. ATTY. NICANOR C. ALVAREZ, respondent.
LEONEN, J

There is basic conflict of interest here. Respondent is a public officer, an employee of

government. The Office of the Ombudsman is part of government. By appearing against the
Office of the Ombudsman, respondent is going against the same employer he swore to serve.

6. Public officials and the practice of law; prohibitions and disqualifications

 [A.C. No. 8502. June 27, 2018.]
CHRISTOPHER R. SANTOS, complainant, vs. ATTY. JOSEPH A. ARROJADO,
respondent.
DEL CASTILLO, J

We apply to this case the old and familiar Latin maxim 4xclusion4 unius est 4xclusion
alterius, which means that the express mention of one person, thing, act, or consequence
excludes all others. Stated otherwise, “where the terms are expressly limited to certain matters,
it may not, by interpretation or construction, be stretched or extended to other matters.”

7. The Lawyer’s Oath

[A.C. No. 6273. March 15, 2010.]

ATTY. ILUMINADA M. VAFLOR-FABROA, complainant, vs. ATTY. OSCAR PAGUINTO,
respondent.
CARPIO MORALES, J

When respondent caused the filing of baseless criminal complaints against complainant,
he violated the Lawyer's Oath that a lawyer shall "not wittingly or willingly promote or sue any
groundless, false or unlawful suit, nor give aid or consent to the same."

[A.C. No. 3921. June 11, 2018.]

DELFINA HERNANDEZ SANTIAGO, complainant, vs. ATTY. ZOSIMO SANTIAGO and
ATTY. NICOMEDES TOLENTINO, respondents.
LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J

Although the general rule is that a lawyer who holds a government office may not be
disciplined as a member of the bar for infractions he committed as a government official, he may,
however, be disciplined as a lawyer if his misconduct constitutes a violation of his oath [as] a
member of the legal profession.

B. Duties and responsibilities of a lawyer under the Code of Professional

Responsibility.

1. To society (Canons 1 to 6)

[A.C. No. 7481. April 24, 2012.]

LORENZO D. BRENNISEN, complainant, vs. ATTY. RAMON U. CONTAWI, respondent.
PER CURIAM

In this case, respondent's established acts exhibited his unfitness and plain inability to
discharge the bounden duties of a member of the legal profession. He failed to prove himself
worthy of the privilege to practice law and to live up to the exacting standards demanded of the
members of the bar. It bears to stress that "[t]he practice of law is a privilege given to lawyers
who meet the high standards of legal proficiency and morality. Any violation of these standards
exposes the lawyer to administrative liability."

[A.C. No. 5581. January 14, 2014.]

ROSE BUNAGAN-BANSIG, complainant, vs. ATTY. ROGELIO JUAN A. CELERA,
respondent.
PER CURIAM

In administrative proceedings, the complainant has the burden of proving, by substantial

evidence, the allegations in the complaint. Substantial evidence has been defined as such relevant
evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion. For the Court
to exercise its disciplinary powers, the case against the respondent must be established by clear,
convincing and satisfactory proof. Considering the serious consequence of the disbarment or
suspension of a member of the Bar, this Court has consistently held that clear preponderant
evidence is necessary to justify the imposition of the administrative penalty.

[A.C. No. 8887. November 7, 2017.]

(Formerly CBD Case No. 12-3638)
ROMAN DELA ROSA VERANO, • complainant, vs. ATTY. LUIS FERNAN DIORES, JR.,
respondent.
PER CURIAM

In dealing with clients or other people, lawyers are expected to observe the highest degree
of good faith, fairness and candor, both in their private and professional capacities. Thus, any
form of deception or fraudulent act committed by a lawyer in either capacity is not only disgraceful
and dishonorable, but also severely undermines the trust and confidence of people in the legal
profession, violates Canon 1, Rule 1.01 of the CPR, and puts the lawyer's moral character into
serious doubt as a member of the Bar, rendering him unfit to continue his practice of law.
Moreover, a lawyer has the duty to obey lawful orders of a superior court and the IBP. Willful
disobedience to such orders, especially to those issued by this Court, is a sufficient ground to
disbar a lawyer or suspend him from the practice of law under Section 27, Rule 138 of the Rules
of Court.