PALE – PROBLEM AREAS IN LEGAL ETHICS

1. Define Legal Ethics

1.1 Explain the importance of Legal Ethics.
1.2 Why is it that it is a branch of Moral Science?
1.3 What is “NON OMNE QUOD LICET HONESTUM EST”?

Problem Area 1 – Take a Position: “Not everything legal is moral”

2. Sources of legal ethics?

2.1 Rule 138 (Revised Rules of Court)
Who May Practice Law?
Requirements for all applicants for admission to the bar.
Can an American Citizen practice law in the Philippines?
When can you consider a person a full pledge lawyer?
Case: Michael A. Medado, B.M. No. 2540, September 24, 2013.

2.2 Rule 138-A Revised by A.M. No. 19-03-24

2.3 Rule 139 Disbarment – Purpose / Nature / Quantum of Evidence/uniqueness/
2.4 1987 Constitution Art. VIII, Sec. 5 (5) – power of the SC
2.5 Art. VI, Sec. 14 – Non-appearance of member of congress to any court / quasi-
judicial/ administrative bodies.
2.6 Art. VII, Sec. 13 – incompatible office / practice of profession – executive branch
2.7 Art. IX-A, Sec. 2 – Members of the constitutional commissions – practice of
profession and engaged in business
2.8 Art. XI, Sec. 8 – in relation to Sec 1 (ombudsman)
2.9 New civil code Art. 1491 (5) (illegal acquisition of property object of litigation )
Cases: Fornilda vs. Br. 164 RTC, GR no. 72306 1989
Valencia vs. Cabanting 196 SCRA 302
Punla vs. Atty. Eleanor Maravilla-Ona GR 11149 2017
2.10 NCC 2208 When Attorney’s fees may be recovered? Gen. Rule?
2.11 Labor code Art. 203 – Application or filing of health benefits 222 – prohibition for
appearances of non-lawyer.
2.12 Revised penal code Art. 209 Betrayal of trust by an attorney or solicitor.
2.13 Is the code of Professional responsibility a Statute?

Problem Area 2: Is contingent fees allowed? is Art. 1491 (5) applicable to contigent
fees?
3. Define Practice of Law.
3.1 Defined by PP v. Villanueva, 121 Phil. 897
3.2 Defined by Cayetano v Monsod, 201 SCRA 210

Problem Area 3-A: Which definition is proper Villanueva or Monsod?

3.3 Characteristics of Practice of Law:

3.3.1 Privilege not a natural or constitutional right.
3.3.2 Not a business but a profession
3.3.3 Profession but no a proprietary right
3.3.4 Lawyers are officers of the court and administrator of justice
3.3.5 A matter of public interest/ social responsibility.
3.3.6 NO dichotomy of personality.

3.3.7 Cases: Bolongalanta v. Castillo, 240 SCRA 310,313

Floran , et al., v. Ediza, A.C. No 5325 2011

Artueza v. Atty. Maderazo, A.C. No. 4354 2002

Aguirre v. Rana, B.M. No. 1036 2003

PP v. Maceda, etc. et at., G.R. 898591-96 2000

Problem Area 3-B: In case of doubt rule against the lawyer, is it proper?”

3-C: Are the following constituting practice of law?

a. Giving Legal advice

b. Giving Tax Advice
c. Authorship / Teaching law subjects in law school

Case: AC no. 5900 Anonymous complaint against Atty. Cresencio P. Co

Untian

4. Prohibited Advertisements: Solicitation is equivalent to malpractice- complete ban –

ROC – Rule 138 Sec. 27, last sentence.

4.1 CPR Canon 2 Rule 2.03

4.2 Canon 3
4.3 Canon 3 rule 3.01
 4.4 Canon 3 rule 3.04

Case: Canlas V. Court of Appeals, et al., 164 SCRA 160

Exceptions:

Act must not injure the legal profession – compatible with dignity made in the modest
and decorous manner.

1. Simple customary professional card

2. Publication on a reputable law list:
What does permitted to be included?
3. Notice of Transfer of Law Office / Its opening

Problem Area 4: A

“Is it permissible to advertise the opening of a law firm in whole page newspaper ad?”

Problem Area 4: B

“Atty. A advertises a small space in a newspaper “FREE Legal Consultation” Date and
Place (his Law Office) and His name as the Lawyer who will provide such free legal services.”

Problem Area 4: C

ABC Church is offering Free Spiritual counseling and also free legal counseling; in the ad
it states the place (at the church) and date of the event but the name of the lawyer was not
indicated? The pastor is also a Practicing Lawyer.

5. Canon 1, Rule 1.03 also known as Barratry.

5.1 Canon 1 rule 1.04 – compromise
5.2 Distinguish Barratry from Ambulance chasing
5.3 Exception on barratry- Canon of Professional Ethics Canon 28 (1st sentence)

Problem Area 5:

“ A and B brother and heirs to their father land, C is there first cousin Lawyer, C
suggested extra judicial partition to equally divide the land B wanted a bigger share and
the said legal advice was not carried. C suggested A to go to court for judicial partition
of property. B filed before the IBP against C improper conduct as a basis, barratry.
 Rule on the said case.

6. No corporate practice of law:

6.1 How about the use of non de plume

Problem Area 6: A group of businessmen organized a corporation “Legal Services Inc.”

services provided are full range of legal services to the public and intended to hire
lawyers and paralegals, the SEC denied registration. Was the SEC correct? Why?

7. Who can conduct litigation? ( conduct litigation not allowed to practice)

7.1 ROC, Rule 138, Sec 1
7.2 Rule 138 Sec. 3
7.3 Rule 138 Sec 4
7.4 Pro se
7.5 Person authorized to appear for the government
7.6 Agent or friend of a party litigant MTC or MCTC
7.7 Person appointed by the court to defend the accused in localities where no
Members of the bar are available.
7.8 Law student practice rule 138-A Sec. 1, Rules of Court
Take note Revised by A.M. No. 19-03-24
7.9 Person representing themselves or their organization or members in a labor cases
before the NLRC or LA.

Problem Area 7: A “X a member of the bar in regular and good standing his services was
engaged by Y in a patent case before the IPO, the commissioner of patent requires X to pass a
qualifying examination to practice in the Quasi-judicial body? Rule on the matter.

Case: Philippine Lawyer’s Association v. Agrava, 105 Phil.73

Problem Area 7:B “X graduate of LLB not a bar passer, but a passer of the special bar
examinations for Shari’a Court. X a Muslim representing Y also a muslim in the said
Shari’a Court in a civil case being heard by the said Shari’a court in its concurrent
jurisdiction as a civil court.

Can X represent Y in the said case?

(Par. 2 Article 143 of PD 1083 (Code of Muslim Personal Laws of the Philippines)
 Problem Area 7:B “ Congress approves a bill lowering the passing rate of the 2019 bar
from 75% to 70% because the subject taxation’s mortality rate was only 10%.

Rule on the matter?

1935 Sec 13.Art. VIII / 1973 Sec. 5 (5) Art. X constitution gives the power to congress to
regulate the admission to the bar.

1987 constitution gave the power to institute rules for admission to the bar exclusively
to the SC.

Problem Area 7: C “Are you in favor of abolishing the bar examinations?”

“Are you in favor of changing the format from essay to MCQ?

Problem Area7: D “Why do you want to become a lawyer?” (1991 bar)

Problem Area 7: E “X a bar candidate in his application, stated the following:

1) Convicted Robbery/extortion = pardon by the President

2) Pending case of falsification of public document

Can he be allowed to take the bar?

Problem Area 7: F “X during his freshman in a reputable law school, charged with
reckless imprudence resulting to damage to property and was settled amicably… the
case was closed based on judgment upon compromised. He applied for the bar after
graduation but did not disclose such case he was involved.

Should he be allowed to take the bar? (CPR, Canon 7, Rule 7.01)

Cases: Cantibuhan v. Cruz, Jr. 126 SCRA 144, 145

Person representing himself (Pro se) or a friend as his agent in the MTC (Civil or
Criminal Case)

MTC RTC CA – in a civil case, a party may appear as his own counsel (Pro se)

Bar question: 2002

 Problem Area 7:G “Raul Catapang, a law graduate and vice-president for labor relations
of XYZ Labor Union, entered his appearance as representative of a member of the union
before the LA for illegal dismissal case. Counsel for the employer Atty. W moved for his
disqualification because he is not a member of the bar. Rule on the matter.

(Labor code Art. 222)

8. Appearances:
8.1 Rule 138, Sec. 21 presumption of appearance
8.2 Can the court motu proprio / or instance of both parties require the presentation of
authorization by the client to legal representation? (Land Bank of the Philippines v.
Amintuan Dev. Co. 510 Phil. 839, 844 (2005)
8.3 Penalty for unauthorized legal representation?
8.4 None-lawyer masquerading as lawyer – liabilities? (ROC Rule 71, Sec. 3 (D) / RPC art.
315 No. 2 / Damages

8.5 Public Officials who may not practice law:

Judges/Court officials or employees of Superior Court.

Official and employees of the office of the Solicitor General
Pres. / VP/ members of the cabinet their deputies and assistants
Members of the constitutional commissions
Ombudsman and his deputies
Governors, City Mayors

Criminal case Gov. employee (national/local) is the accused and the offense committed
in relation to his office.
Cannot collect fees representing local govt. units which they are official – admin
proceedings.
May not use property /personnel except the defending the interest of the govt.

Case: Javellana v. Dept. of Interior 212 SCRA 475

Case: A.M. No. 08-6-352-RTC: Atty. Karen Buffe

8.7 RA 910, Section 1 as amended

Retired Judge receiving pension from the government.

Cannot act as counsel in any civil case if the adverse party is the govt.
Criminal case wherein an officer or employee of the govt. is accused of an offense in
relation to his office.

Problem Area 8: A “X an RTC3 clerk of court, retired, handled a case 9 months after
retirement a case included in the dockets of RTC 3, X also accepted a case 2 months
after retirement a case in RTC 7, also accepted a case in RTC 11, 13 months after
retirement, the said case he appeared as collaborating counsel prior to his employment
with the judiciary. Problem Area 8: A “X an RTC3 clerk of court, retired, handled a case 9
months after retirement a case included in the dockets of RTC 3, X also accepted a case
2 months after retirement a case in RTC 7, also accepted a case in RTC 11, 13 months
after retirement, the said case he appeared as collaborating counsel prior to his
employment with the judiciary.

Problem Area 8: B “X an RTC3 clerk of court, retired, handled a case 9 months after
retirement a case included in the dockets of RTC 3, X also accepted a case 2 months
after retirement a case in RTC 7, also accepted a case in RTC 11, 13 months after
retirement, the said case he appeared as collaborating counsel prior to his employment
with the judiciary, for continuance of the case because the lead counsel is already dead.
X accepted a case after 14 months from retirement included in the dockets of RTC 3.
Ever since his employment with RTC 3 he handles law subjects in the nearby University
full load wherein it demand time that affects his regular working hours with RTC 3.

Which among the cases X can handle?

Problem Area 8:C “

Justice X, a retired CA justice, appeared before the SC for Land Bank, the adverse party’s
lawyer move for his disqualification to appear? Also X appeared to defend Y a
government employee in a criminal case (PB 22) with the MTC 3? Also, X appeared in a
civil case after 1 year of retirement against the PAGIBIG FUND as respondent?

Which among the cases he needs to be relieved?

8.8 Lawyer’s authorized to represent the government:

1. General Rule: Private lawyer cannot represent the government.

Reason: Unnecessary disbursement of public funds and assurance of

 Faithful rendition of service, subject to civil service laws
(misconduct and dereliction of duties.)

Exceptions

a. Written conformity and acquiescence from the SOLGEN

Case: Municipality of Pililia, Rizal, v.CA, et al., 233 SCRA 484, 491

Province of Cebu v. Intermediate Appellate Court, 147 SCRA 447

9. Other issues:

Define:
Attorney-ad-hoc
Assumpsit
Chapertous Contract
Attorney’s retaining lien
Counsel de Oficio
Amicus Curae
Attorney’s lien
Forum-shopping
Quantum meruit
Moral turpitude
Charging lien Lawyer
Good Moral Character

Differentiate:

Ambulance chasing from barratry

Champertous contract from contingent fee

How may a lawyer enforce his claim for attorney’s fee?

Charging lien

Retaining Lien

Suit in assumpsit
Cases: (Benjamin M. Dacanay, B.M. No. 1678 2007)

(Letter of Atty. Estelito Mendoza proposing reforms in the Bar examination –

amends Section 5 of Rule 138)

In the Matter of the Petition for authority to continue use of firm name Ozaeta,
Romulo, etc., 92 SCRA 1 (June 30, 1979)

Young vs. lim G.R. No. 210554 2015 JJ Leonen

Revolving Door Theory:

Case: PCGG vs. Sandigan bayan 2005 GR 151809

Congruent-Interest Conflict Theory: rule 6.03 applicable

DISBARMENT – meaning and characteristics

Effect of dismissal or acquittal of the accused in a criminal case in the disbarment case?

Disbarred outside our jurisdiction effect in Ph. Practice

Regular Standing of a lawyer:

B.M. No. 850 of 2000 Rule 7 Exemptions: 12 items FOR MCLE

Case: Petition for leave to resume practice ofn law, Benjamin M. Dacanay B.M. 678
December 2007 in relation to RA 9225

 Requisites for resumption of practice.

Letter of Atty. Estelito Mendoza proposing reforms in the Bar examination – amends
Section 5 of Rule 138)

 Requisites to take the PH. Bar