LEGAL AND

JUDICIAL ETHICS
BAR Questions & Answers
(1987-2018)

Submitted by:

BULAN, REGINE
BULAYUNGAN , ROBERT JR. V.
IDEA, DENNIE D.P
ISIDORO, JUSTIN JERIC
MANGAWANG, MARNEAH JEANE D.
MANODON, KRISTIANA MARIE P.
MANZANO, ED

LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS BAR Q & A (1987-2018) Page 1

 LEGAL ETHICS
Q: What do you understand by Legal
Ethics?
Discuss its importance and state its
sources.
A: Legal ethics is that branch of moral
science which treats of the duties that an
attorney owes to the court, to his client, to
his colleagues, in the profession, and to
society.
The sources of legal ethics are the
Constitution, the Rules of Court, some
particular provisions of statutes, the Code of
Professional Responsibility and Judicial
decisions.
Legal ethics is important in order to maintain
a high moral standard for the lawyer in
performing his duties as an officer of the
court, his duties to his client, to the
members of the legal profession as well as
to society. Lawyers wield so much power
and influence in society. Unless their acts
are regulated by high norms of ethical
conduct they are likely to abuse them.
PRACTICE OF LAW (RULE 138)
Definition of the practice of law
Q: Atty. Yabang was suspended as a
member of the Bar for period of one (1)
year. During the period of suspension,
he was permitted by his law firm to
continue working in their office, drafting
and preparing pleadings and other legal
documents, but was not allowed to come
into direct contact with the firms’ clients.
Atty. Yabang was subsequently sued for
illegal practice of law. Would the case
prosper? Explain. (2005 Bar)
A: The Supreme Court has defined the
practice of law as any activity in or out of
court, which requires the application of law,
legal principle, practice or procedure and
calls for legal knowledge, training and
experience (Cayetano vs. Monsod, 201
SCRA 210 [1991]). Based on this definition,
the acts of Atty. Yabang of preparing
pleadings and other legal documents would
constitute practice of law. More so, if his
activities are for the benefit of his law firm,
because the employment of a law firm is the
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS BAR Q & A (1987-2018)
employment of all the members thereof. The
case against him will prosper.
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
The traditional concept of practice of law
requires the existence of a lawyer-client
relationship as a requisite. Pursuant to this
concept, inasmuch as Atty. Yabang was not
allowed by his law firm to come into direct
contact with the firm’s clients during the
period of his suspension, he cannot be
considered as having engaged in illegal
practice of law. .The case against him will
not prosper.
Q. Atty. Cornelio Carbon, 36 years of
age, had always dreamed of becoming a
judge, and eventually, a justice, but his
legal career took a different turn. Upon
graduation, he joined a government-
owned financial institution where he
worked in the Loans and Claims
Division. He also taught Negotiable
Instruments Law in a nearby law school
at night. He has been active in his IBP
Chapter and other law organizations.
However, in his 12 years of practice, he
has never done trial or litigation work.
(a) Is Atty. Carbon engaged in the
"practice of law"?
(b) Is Atty. Carbon qualified to become a
Regional Trial Court Judge? (2018 Bar)s
A.s a) Yes, he is. According to the law,
the practice of law is not limited to the
conduct of cases or litigation in court; it
embraces the preparation of pleadings and
other papers incident to actions and special
proceedings, the management of such
actions and proceedings on behalf of clients
before judges and courts, and in addition,
conveyancing.
b) Yes, he is. According to the law,
no person shall be appointed Judge of the
Regional Trial Court unless he is at least
thirty-five years of age, and, for at least ten
years, has been engaged in the practice of
law in the Philippines or has held a public
office in the Philippines requiring admission
to the practice of law as an indispensable
requisite. Since he complied with the said
requirements then he is qualified to become
a Regional Trial Court judge.
Practice of law is a privilege, not a right
Page 2
Q: Is the practice oflaw a right or a
privilege? Discuss fully. (1995 Bar)
A: The practice of law is basically a
privilege because it is limited to persons of
good moral character with special
qualifications duly ascertained and certified
(5 Am. Jur. 270). Thus, only those persons
are allowed to practice law, who by reason
of attainments previously acquired through
education and study, have been recognized
by the courts as possessing profound
knowledge of legal science. Attorneys are
the court’s constituency - to aid it in the
administration of justice (Dodge v. State, 38
NE 745).
Law as a profession, not a business or
trade
Q: Why is law a profession and not a
trade? (2006 Bar)
A:Law is a profession and not a trade
because its basic ideal is to render public
service and secure justice for those who
seek its aid. The gaining of a livelihood is
only a secondary consideration.
Q: You are the managing partner of a law
firm. A new foreign airline company,
recently granted rights by the Civil
Aeronautics Board at the NAIA, is
scouting for a law firm which could
handle its cases in the Philippines and
provide legal services to the company
and its personnel. After discussing with
you the extent of the legal services your
law firm is prepared to render, the
general manager gives you a letter-
proposal from another law firm in which
its time-billing rates and professional
fees for various legal services are
indicated. You are asked to submit a
similar letter-proposal stating your firm's
proposed fees. The airline company's
general manager also tells you that, if
your proposed fees would at least be 25
per cent lower than those proposed by
the other firm, you will get the
company's legal business. How would
you react to the suggestion? (1997 Bar)
A:I will emphasize to the General Manager
that the practice of law is a profession and
not a trade. Consequently, I will not propose
a lower fee just for the sake of competing
with another firm. Because such practice
smacks of commercialism. Moreover, Rule
2. 04 of the Code of Professional
Responsibility provides that a lawyer shall
not charge rates lower than those
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS BAR Q & A (1987-2018)
customarily prescribed unless the
circumstances so warrant. I will charge fees
that will be reasonable under the
circumstances.
Q: As a new lawyer, Attorney Novato
started with a practice limited to small
claims cases, legal counseling, and
notarization of documents. He put up a
solo practice law office and was assisted
by his wife who served as his
secretary/helper. He used a makeshift
hut in a vacant lot near the local courts
and a local transport regulatory agency.
With this strategic location, he enjoyed
heavy patronage assisting walk-in
clients in the preparation and filing of
pleadings and in the preparation and
notarization of contracts and documents,
and charges a reasonable fee for the
service. He draws electric power from an
extension wire connected to an adjoining
small restaurant. He put up a shingle that
reads: “Atty. Novato, Specialist in Small
Claims, Fastest in Notarization; the Be
stand Cheapest in Copier Services.”
Is Atty. Novato’s manner of carrying out
his professional practice –i.e., mixing
business with the practice of law,
announcing his activities via a shingle
and locating his office as above-
described – in keeping with appropriate
ethical and professional practice? (2013
Bar)
No. Atty. Novato’s manner of carrying out
his professional practice is not in keeping
with appropriate ethical and professional
practice. He has degraded the law
profession, which
may result to loss of respect to
lawyers as a whole.
The use of a makeshift hut standing
alone would create the impression that
the lawyer does not have a permanent
address which is required to be stated
in all pleadings he signs as well as
required to be shown in documents he
notarizes.
His shingle shows that he has
considered the law profession as a
business. He should have a separate
shingle for his copier services
business.
When he included in his shingle the
phrases “Specialist in Small Claims”
and “Fastest in Notarization,”he has
transgressed the rule that a lawyer in
Page 3
making known his legal services shall
use only dignified information or
statement of facts (Code of
Professional Responsibility, Canon 3).
So also the norm that a lawyer shall
not use or permit the use of any
misleading, undignified, self-laudatory
or unfair statement or claim regarding
his qualifications or legal services
(Ibid., Canon 3, Rule 3.01).
The use of the phrases “Specialist in
Small Claims”and “Fastest in
Notarization”is misleading
advertisement because they are likely
to create an unjustified expectation
about the results the lawyer can
achieve or implies that the lawyer can
achieve results by improper means
(ABA Model Rule 7.1.b).
Q: Cite some of the characteristics
of the legal profession which
distinguish it from business. (2015
Bar)
A: The primary characteristics which
distinguish the legal profession from a
business are:
1. a duty of public service of which
emolument is a by-product and in
which one may attain the highest
eminence without making much
money;
2. a relation as officer of the court to
the administration of justice
involving thorough sincerity,
integrity and reliability;
3. a relation to client in the highest
degree fiduciary;
4. A relation to colleagues
characterized by candor, fairness
and unwillingness to resort to
current business methods of
advertising and encroachment on
their, or dealing directly with their
clients (In Re Sycip, 92 SCRA 1).
Qualifications for admission to the Bar
Q: Upon learning from newspaper
reports that bar candidate Vic Pugote
passed the bar examinations. Miss
Adorable immediately lodged a (Tak Ng v. Republic, G.R. No. L-13017, 106
complaint with the Supreme Court,
praying that Vic Pugote be disallowed
from taking the oath as a member of the
Philippine Bar because he was
maintaining illicit sexual relations with
several women other than his lawfully
wedded spouse. However, from
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS BAR Q & A (1987-2018)
unexplained reasons, he succeeded to
take his oath as a lawyer. Later, when
confronted with Miss Adorable’s
complaint formally, Pugote moved for its
dismissal on the ground that it is already
moot and academic.
Should Miss Adorable’s complaint be
dismissed or not? Explain briefly. (2004
Bar)
A. It should not be dismissed. Her charge
involves a matter of good moral character
which is not only a requisite for admission to
the Bar, but also a continuing condition for
remaining a member of the Bar. As such,
the admission of Vic Pugote to the Bar does
not render the question moot and academic.
Q: Miguel Jactar, a fourth year law
student, drove his vehicle recklessly and
hit the rear bumper of
SimplicioMedroso’s vehicle. Instead of
stopping, Jactar accelerated and sped
away. Medroso pursued Jactar and
caught up with him at an intersection.
In their confrontation, Jactar dared
Medroso to sue, bragged about his
connections with the courts, and even
uttered veiled threats against Medroso.
During the police investigation that
followed, Medroso learned that Jactar
was reviewing for the Bar examinations.
Under these facts, list and justify the
potential objections that can be made
against Jactar’s admission to the
practice of law. (2013 Bar)
A. The potential objection that can be made
against Jactar’s admission to the practice of
law is the absence of good moral character
(Rules of Court, Rule 138, Sec. 2).
Jactar’s bragging about his connection with
the courts and uttering veiled threats
against Medroso are indications of his lack
of good moral character. His acts are
contrary to justice, honesty, modesty or
good morals (In Re Basa, 41 Phil. 276). He
has acted in a manner that has violated the
private and social duties which a man owes
to his fellowmen, or to society in general,
contrary to the accepted and customary rule
of right and duty between man and man
Phil. 730, December 23, 1959).
NOTE: Any answer which explains the
nature of absence of good moral character
should be given full credit.
Page 4
The following additional objection should
not result to a deduction nor should an
absence of the additional objection also
result to a deduction.
a. If light threats would be filed against
him, then another potential objection
would be the pendency of charges
against him, involving moral turpitude
(Rules of Court, Rule 138, Sec. 2).
b. The question states, “Under these facts,
list and justify the potential objections
that can be made against Jactar’s
admission to the practice of law.”
c. The question requires that an
assumption be made that Jactar has
passed the Bar Examination and is
about to take his oath as an attorney. It
is suggested that the better question
should have been: “Under these facts,
list and justify the potential objections
that can be made against
Jactar’s being admitted to take the Bar
Examination.”
Q: Prior to his admission to the freshman
year in a reputable law school, bar
examinee A was charged before the
Municipal Trial Court with damage to
property through reckless imprudence
for accidentally sideswiping a parked
jeepney. The case was amicably settled
with A agreeing to pay the claim of the
jeepney owner for P1,000.00. In his
application to take the 1997 Bar
Examinations, A did not disclose the
above incident. Is he qualified to take the
Bar Examinations? (1997, 2005 Bar)
A: Rule 7.01 of the Code of Professional
Responsibility provides that “a lawyer shall
be answerable for knowingly making a false
statement or suppressing a material fact in
connection with his application for
admission to the bar”. In the case of In Re:
Ramon Galang, 66 SCRA 245, the
respondent repeatedly omitted to make
mention of the fact that there was a pending
criminal case for slight physical injuries
against him in all four (4) applications for
admission to take the bar examinations. He
was found to have fraudulently concealed
and withheld such fact from the Supreme
Court and committed perjury. The Supreme
Court cited the rule that “the concealment of
an attorney in his application to take the bar
examinations of the fact that he had been
charged with, or indicted for, an alleged
crime, is a ground for revocation of his
license to practice law.”
A’s failure to disclose that he had been
charged with damage to property through
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS BAR Q & A (1987-2018)
reckless imprudence in his application for
admission to the bar examinations
disqualifies him. It does not matter that the
offense charged does not involve moral
turpitude or has been amicably settled.
When the applicant concealed a charge of a
crime against him but which crime does not
involve moral turpitude, this concealment
nevertheless will be taken against him. It is
the fact of concealment and not the
commission of the crime itself that makes
him morally unfit to become a lawyer (In Re:
Ramon Galang, A.C. No. 1163, August 29,
1975).
Q: Does the legislature have the power
to regulate admission to the bar and the
practice of law? Discuss fully. (1995 Bar)
A: Congress under the 1987 Constitution
has no power to regulate admission to the
Bar and the practice of law. Unlike the 1935
and 1973 Constitutions, the 1987
Constitution no longer provides for the
power of the legislature to repeal, alter and
supplement the rules promulgated by the
Supreme Court. Under the 1935
Constitution, the legislature had the power
to repeal, alter the rules promulgated by the
Supreme Court although the power and the
responsibility to admit members of the bar
resides in the Supreme Court (In Re:
Cunanan, 50 OG 1602). Under the 1987
Constitution however, the Supreme Court
has the exclusive power to promulgate rules
concerning the enforcement of rights,
pleadings and practice and procedures of all
courts and the admission to the practice of
law (See Art. 8. Section 5, subpar. 3-5).
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
Agpalo has pointed out that the legislature,
in the exercise of police power, may enact
laws regulating the practice of law to protect
the public and promote public welfare, but it
may not pass a law that will control the
Supreme Court in the performance of its
function to decide who may be admitted into
the practice of law (Agpalo, Legal Ethics,
5th Edition, p. 5). Constitutional
Commissioner Joaquin C. Bemas also
submits that the matter stays as if the 1935
and 1973 provisions had been re-enacted
(Bernas, The Constitution of the Republic of
the Philippines. 1992 ed., Vol. II. p. 293).
APPEARANCE OF NON-LAWYERS
Law student practice rule (Rule 18-A)
Page 5
Q: Enumerate the instances when a law
student may appear in court as counsel
for a litigant. (2006 Bar)
A:
Under the Student Practice Rule, a
law student who has successfully
completed his third year of the
regular four-year prescribed law
curriculum and is enrolled in a
recognized law school’s clinical
legal education program approved
by the Supreme court, may appear
without compensation in any civil,
criminal or administrative case
before any trial court, tribunal,
board or officer, to represent
indigent clients accepted by the
legal clinic of the law school, under
the direct supervision and control
of a member of the Integrated Bar
of the Philippines if he appears in
a Regional Trial Court, and without
such supervision if he appears in
an inferior court (Bar Matter 730,
June 10, 1997);
b. When he appears as an agent or
friend of a litigant in an inferior
court (Sec. 34, Rule 138, Revised
Rules of Court);
c. When he is authorized by law to
appear for the Government of the
Philippines (Sec. 33, Rule 138,
Revised Rules of Court);
d. In remote municipalities where
members of the bar are not
available, the judge of an inferior
court may appoint a non-lawyer
who is a resident the province and
of good repute for probity and
ability, to aid the defendant in his
defense (Sec. 4, Rule 116,
Revised Rules of Court);
e. A law student may appear before
the National Labor Relations
Commission or any Labor Arbiter if
(a) he represents himself, as a
party to the case, (b) he
represents an organization or its
members with written authorization
from them, or
(c) he is a duly-accredited member
of any legal aid office duly
recognized by the Department of
Justice or the Integrated Bar of the
Philippines in cases referred to by
the latter (Art. 222, Labor
Code;Kanlaon Construction
Enterprises Co., Inc. v. NLRC, 279
SCRA 337 [1997]); and
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS BAR Q & A (1987-2018)
f. Under the Cadastral Act, a non-
lawyer may represent a claimant
before the Cadastral Court (Sec.
8, Act No.2250).
Q: What is the student practice
rule? (2009 Bar)
A: The Student Practice Rule (Rule
138-A) is the Rule authorizing a law
student who has successfully
completed his 3rd year of the regular
four-year prescribed law curriculum
and is enrolled in a recognized law
school’s clinical legal education
program approved by the Supreme
Court, to appear without
compensation in any civil, criminal or
administrative case before any trial
court, tribunal or board or officer, to
represent indigent clients accepted by
the legal clinic of the law school,
under the direct supervision and
control of a member of the IBP
accredited by the law school.
Non-lawyers in courts
Q: Generally, only those who are
members of the bar can appear in
court. Are there exceptions to this
rule? Explain (1996 Bar)
A: The exceptions to the rule that only
those who are members of the bar can
appear in court are the following:
a. In the municipal trial court, a party
may conduct his litigation in
person or with the aid of an agent
or friend (Sec. 34. Rule 138).
b. In any other court, a party may
conduct his litigation personally
(Id.)
c. In criminal proceedings before a
municipal trial court in a locality
where a duly licensed member of
the bar is not available, the court
may in its discretion admit or
assign a person, resident of the
province and of good repute for
probity and ability, to aid the
defendant in his defense, although
the person so assigned is not a
duly authorized member of the bar
(Sec. 4. Rule 116).
d. Any official or other person
appointed or designated in
accordance with law to appear for
the Government of the Philippines
shall have all the rights of a duly
authorized member of the bar to
appear in any case in which said
Page 6
 government has an interest direct
or indirect (Sec. 33. Rule 138).
e. A senior law student who is
enrolled in a recognized law
school’s clinical education program
approved by the Supreme Court
may appear before any court
without compensation to represent
indigent clients accepted by the
Legal Clinic of the law school
(Rule 138-A).
f. Non-lawyers may appear before
the NLRC or any Labor Arbiter if
they represent themselves or their
labor organization or members
thereof (Art. 222, Labor Code).
g. Under the Cadastral Act, a non-
lawyer can rep-resent a claimant
before the Cadastral Court (Sec.
9. Act. 2259).
Q: A, a mere high school graduate, with
the aid of a friend who is a college
undergraduate, filed a complaint for
recovery of a sum of money in the
amount of Four Thousand (P4, 000.00)
Pesos in the Metropolitan Trial Court of
his town. The Clerk of Court told A that
his complaint might be dismissed for
insufficiency as to form because neither
he nor his friend who is assisting him is
a lawyer. Is the Clerk of Court correct?
(1999 Bar)
A. The Clerk of Court is not correct. In the
Justice of the Peace courts (now known as
Municipal Trial Court or Municipal Circuit
Trial Courts or Metropolitan Trial Court), 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 (Sec. 34, Rule 138, Rules of
Court).
Q. A, a law graduate but has not passed
the bar examination, filed a Complaint in
the Regional Trial Court for recovery of
Fifty Thousand (P50, 000.00) Pesos owed
him by B. At the hearing of the case after
Answer was filed, A appeared by himself
alone and without counsel to prosecute
his case. The defendant pointed out to
the Court that A was not a member of the
bar and suggested that for his own
protection, A should engage the services
of a counsel duly accredited as a
member of the Bar. The Judge intimated
his willingness to reset the hearing of
the case to another day to enable
plaintiff to engage the services of
counsel. Plaintiff replied he could
manage to prosecute his own case, it
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS BAR Q & A (1987-2018)
being but a simple case for collection of
sum of money. If you were the Judge,
will you allow A to continue prosecuting
his case by himself alone? (1999 Bar)
A: Section 34, Rule 138 of the Rules of
Court provides that in a Regional Trial
Court, a party may conduct his litigation
personally or by aid of an attorney, and his
appearance must be either personal or by a
duly authorized member of the bar. Hence,
if I were the Judge, I will allow A to continue
prosecuting his case alone, but I will warn
him about the risks involved in his doing so
because of his lack of knowledge of law and
legal procedure.
ALTERNATIVE ANSWERS:
a. If I were the Judge, I will not allow A to
prosecute his case. Although he is a law
graduate, it does not appear that he is
familiar with procedural law, having filed
the case with the RTC which has no
jurisdiction over the case in view of the
amount involved. The judge is duty
bound to see to it that there is no
miscarriage of justice.
b. No. I shall dismiss the case for lack of
jurisdiction because the amount of
P50.000.00 is within the jurisdictional
ambit of the Municipal Trial Court.
Consequently, A could not continue
prosecuting the case.
Non-lawyers in administrative tribunals
Q: 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 Labor Arbiter in a case for
illegal dismissal, unpaid wages and
overtime pay. Counsel for the Company
objected to Raul’s appearance and
moved for his disqualification on the
ground that he is not a lawyer. If you
were the Labor Arbiter, how would you
resolve the motion? Why? (2002 Bar)
A: I will deny the motion to disqualify Raul.
Article 222 of the Labor Code authorizes
non-lawyers to appear before the National
Labor Relations Commission or any Labor
Arbiter in representation of their
organization or members thereof.
SANCTIONS FOR PRACTICE OR
APPEARANCE WITHOUT AUTHORITY
Page 7
Lawyers without authority
Q:
A. The Supreme Court suspended
indefinitely Atty. Fernandez from the
practice of law for gross immorality.
He asked the Municipal Circuit Trial
Court Judge of his town if he can be
appointed counsel de officio for
Tony, a childhood friend who is
accused of theft. The judge refused
because Atty. Fernandez’s name
appears in the Supreme Court’s List
of Suspended Lawyers. Atty.
Fernandez then inquired if he can
appear as a friend for Tony to defend
him. If you were the judge, will you
authorize him to appear in your court
as a friend for Tony?
B. Supposing Tony is a defendant in a
civil case for collection of sum of
money before the same court, can
Atty. Fernandez appear for him to
conduct his litigation? (2006 Bar)
A:
A. I will not authorize him to appear as a
friend of Tony. The accused in a
criminal case is entitled to be
represented by legal counsel, and only
a lawyer can be appointed as counsel
de officio. Although a municipal trial
court may appoint a person of good
refute to aid the accused as counsel de
officio in his defense, this is applicable
only where members of the bar are not
present (Sec. 4, Rule 116, Revised
Rules of Court). Necessarily, the friend
referred to one who is not a lawyer. Atty.
Fernandez is a lawyer but under
indefinite suspension. He should not be
allowed to practice law even as a
counsel de officio.
B. Even if Tony is a defendant in a civil
case, Atty. Fernandez cannot be
allowed to appear for him to conduct his
litigation; otherwise, the judge will be
violating Canon 9 of the Code of
Professional Responsibility which
provides that "a lawyer shall not, directly
or indirectly, assist in the unauthorized
practice of law.
ALTERNATIVE ANSWERSTO 1 AND 2:
Yes, if Atty. Fernandez was appointed by
Tony. Even if Atty. Fernandez was
suspended indefinitely, he may appear as
an. agent or friend of Tony, the party litigant
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS BAR Q & A (1987-2018)
in the Municipal Trial Court, if Tony appoints
him to conduct his case (Sec. 34, Rule 138,
Revised Rules of Court, Cantimbuhan v.
Cruz, Jr., 126 SCRA 190 [1983]).
Q: Atty. E entered his appearance as
counsel for defendant F in a case
pending before the
Regional Trial Court. F later
complained that he did not
authorize Atty. E to appear for him.
F moved that the court suspend
Atty. E from the practice of law. May
the judge grant the motion?
Explain. (2000 Bar)
A: The judge may grant the motion.
Unauthorized appearance is a ground
for suspension or disbarment (Sec.
27, Rule 138, Rules of Court).
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
It depends. A lawyer’s appearance for
a party without the authority of the
latter must be willful, corrupt or
contumacious in order that he may be
held administratively liable therefor.
But if he has acted in good faith, the
complaint for suspension will fail
(Garrido v. Qutsumbing, 28 SCRA 614
[1969]).
PUBLIC OFFICIALS AND THE
PRACTICE OF
LAW
Prohibition or disqualification of
former government attorneys
Q: Atty. Herminio de Pano is a
former Prosecutor of the City of
Manila who established his own law
office after taking advantage of the
Early Retirement Law. He was
approached by Estrella Cabigao to
act as private prosecutor in an
estafa case in which she is the
complainant. It appears that said
estafa case was investigated by
Atty. de Panowhen he was still a
Prosecutor. Should Atty. de Pano
accept employment as private
prosecutor in said estafa case?
Explain. (1992 Bar)
A:Atty. de Pano should not accept the
employment as private prosecutor as
he will be violating Canon 6, Rule 6.03
of the Code of Professional
Responsibility which provides that a
lawyer shall not, after leaving
government service, accept
employment in connection with any
Page 8
matter in which he had intervened
while in said service.
Q: Lawyer U, a retired Tanodbayan
prosecutor, now in the private
practice of law entered his
appearance for and in behalf of an
accused in a case before the
Sandiganbayan. The prosecution
moved for his disqualification on
the ground that he had earlier
appeared for the prosecution in the
case and is knowledgeable about
the prosecution's evidence, both
documentary and testimonial. U
contended that he merely appeared
at the arraignment on behalf of the
prosecutor assigned to the case
who was absent at the time. Decide.
(1991 Bar)
A: Lawyer U should be disqualified
from entering his appearance in this
case even only for arraignment of the
accused. His appearance is deemed
to be appearing for conflicting interest.
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
Canon 36 provides that a lawyer, having
once held public office or having been in
public employ, should not, after his
retirement, accept employment in
connection with any matter he has
investigated or passed upon while in such
office or employ. The contention of U that
he merely appeared at the arraignment on
behalf of the absent prosecutor, is not
enough. As a former Tanod-bayan
prosecutor, he certainly had occasion to
obtain knowledge about the prosecution’s
evidence.
Public officials who cannot practice law
or can practice law with restrictions
Q:A town mayor was indicted for
homicide through reckless imprudence
arising from a vehicular accident. May
his father-in-law who is a lawyer and a
Sangguniang Panlalawigan member
represent him in court? Reason. (2000
Bar)
A. Yes, his father-in-law may represent him
in court. Under the Local Government Code
(R.A. 7160), members of the Sanggunian
may engage in the practice of law, except in
the following:
(1) they shall not appear as counsel
before any court in any civil case
wherein a local government unit or any
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS BAR Q & A (1987-2018)
office, agency or instrumentality of the
government is the adverse party;
(2) they shall not 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) they shall not collect any fee for
their appearance in administrative
proceedings including the local
government unit of which he is an
official; and
(4) they shall not use property and
personnel of the Government except
when the Sanggunian member
concerned is defending the interests of
the government. In this case, the town
mayor was indicted for homicide
through reckless imprudence, an
offense that is not related to his office.
Q:In a civil case before the Regional Trial
Court between Mercy Sanchez and Cora
Delano, Sanchez engaged the services of
the Reyes Cruz & Santos Law Offices.
Delano moved for the disqualification of
the Reyes Cruz & Santos Law Offices on
the ground that Atty. Cruz is an
incumbent senator. Rule on the motion
with reasons. (1990 Bar)
A:As a judge, I will require that the name of
Atty. Cruz, an incumbent Senator, be
dropped from any pleading filed in court or
from any oral appearance for the law firm by
any other member of the law firm, and
should the law firm refuse, I will disqualify
the law firm. My reasons are as follows:
Article VI, Sec. 14 of the 1987 Constitution
provides that “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." What is prohibited is personal
appearance of the Senator Atty. Cruz, and
for as long as the Senator does not
personally appear in court for Mercy
Sanchez, the prohibition does not apply.
Personal appearance includes not only
arguing or attending a hearing of a case in
court but also the signing of a pleading and
filing it in court. Hence, the Senator should
not allow his name to appear in pleadings
filed in court by itself or as part of a law firm
name, such as Reyes Cruz and Santos Law
Offices, under the signature of another
lawyer in the law firm, nor should he allow
Page 9
the firm name with his name therein to
appear as counsel through another lawyer,
without indirectly violating the constitutional
restriction, because the signature of an
agent amounts to a signing by the Senator
through another lawyer is in effect his
appearance, the office of attorney being
originally one of agency, and because the
Senator cannot do indirectly what the
Constitution prohibits directly. The lawyer
actually appearing for Mercy Sanchez
should drop the name of Atty. Cruz from
any pleading or from any oral appearance in
court, otherwise the law firm could be
disqualified. Moreover, Rule 6.02 of the
Code of Professional Responsibility
prohibits a lawyer in government from using
his public position to promote or advance
his private interests, and the Senator’s
name appearing in pleadings or in
appearances by other lawyers in the law
firm may be misconstrued as indirectly
influencing the judge to decide the case in
favor of the law firm’s client, which can only
be avoided by dropping the name of the
Senator from the firm name whenever it
appears in court.
ALTERNATIVE ANSWERS:
a. The motion to disqualify the Reyes Cruz
and Santos Law Offices may not
prosper as Article VI, Section 14 of the
Constitution prohibits a Senator or
Member of the House of
Representatives to personally appear as
counsel in any court of justice. If
Attorney Cruz who is a Senator
personally appears, he may be
disqualified.
b. I will deny the motion. The Constitution
prohibits personal appearance by a
member of Congress before the Courts
but does not totally prohibit law practice.
As long as the Senator does not
personally or physically appear in court,
there is no disqualification.
Lawyers who are authorized to represent
government
Q: From the viewpoint of legal ethics,
why should it be mandatory that the
public prosecutor be present at the trial
of a criminal case despite the presence
of a private prosecutor? (2001 Bar)
A: The public prosecutor must be present at
the trial of the criminal case despite the
presence of a private prosecutor in order to
see to it that the interest of the State is well-
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS BAR Q & A (1987-2018)
guarded and protected, should the private
prosecutor be found lacking in competence
in prosecuting the case. Moreover, the
primary duty of a public prosecutor is not to
convict but to see to it that justice is done
(Rule 6.01, Code of Professional
Responsibility). A private prosecutor would
be naturally interested only in the conviction
of the accused.
Q: Prosecutor Coronel entered his
appearance on behalf of the State before
a Family Court in a case for declaration
of nullity of marriage, but he failed to
appear in all the subsequent
proceedings. When required by the
Department of Justice to explain, he
argued that the parties in the case were
ably represented by their respective
counsels and that his time would be
better employed in more substantial
prosecutorial functions, such as
investigations, inquests and
appearances in court hearings. Is Atty.
Coronel’s explanation tenable? (2017,
2006 Bar)
A:Atty. Coronel’s explanation is not tenable.
The role of the State’s lawyer in nullification
of marriage cases is that of protector of the
institution of marriage (Art 48, Family Code).
“The task of protecting marriage as an
inviolable social institution requires vigilant
and zealous participation and not mere pro
forma compliance" (Malcampo-Sin v. Sin,
355 SCRA 285 [2001]). This role could not
be left to the- private counsels who have
been engaged to protect the private
interests of the parties.
LAWYER’S OATH
Q: The Lawyer’s Oath is a source of
obligation and its violation is a ground
for suspension, disbarment, or other
disciplinary action. State in substance
the Lawyer’s Oath. (2018, 2015, 2009
Bar)
A, I, (NAME), do solemnly swear that I will
maintain allegiance to the Republic of the
Philippines, I will support the Constitution
and obey the laws as well as the legal
orders of the duly constituted authorities
therein; I will do no falsehood, nor consent
to the doing of any in court; I will not
wittingly or willingly promote or sue any
groundless, false or unlawful suit, or give
aid nor consent to the same; I will delay no
man for money or malice, and will conduct
myself as a lawyer according to the best of
Page 10
my knowledge and discretion, with all good 7. Not to encourage either the
fidelity as well to the courts as to my clients; commencement or the
and I impose upon myself these voluntary continuance of an action or
obligations without any mental reservation proceeding or delay any man’s
or purpose of evasion. So help me God.” cause, from any corrupt motive or
interest;
8. Never to reject, for any
Q: What is the significance of
consideration personal to himself,
lawyer's oath? (1996, 2003 Bar)
the cause of the defenseless or
oppressed; and
A: “The significance of the oath is that it not
9. In the defense of a person
only impresses upon the attorney his
responsibilities but it also stamps him as an accused of crime, by all fair and
officer of the court with rights, powers and honorable means, regardless of
duties as important as those of the judge his personal opinion as to the guilt
themselves. The oath of a lawyer is a of the accused, to present every
condensed code of legal ethics. It is a defense that the law permits, to
source of his obligation and its violation is a the end that no person may be
ground for his suspension, disbarment or deprived of life or liberty, but by
other disciplinary action" (Agpalo, Legal due process of law.
Ethics, 5th ed., p.59).
Q:State the duties of a lawyer
Q: Section 20, Rule 138 of the Rules of imposed by the Lawyer’s oath
Court enumerates nine (9) duties of (2016 Bar)
attorneys. Give at least three (3) of them.
(2000, 2007 Bar) A: The following are the duties of a
lawyer imposed by the lawyer’s oath:
A: Under Section 20, Rule 138, it is the
1. To maintain allegiance to the
duty of an attorney:
Republic of the Philippines;
2. To support its Constitution;
1. To maintain allegiance to the
3. To obey the laws as well as the
Republic of the Philippines;
legal orders of the duly constituted
2. To maintain the respect due to the
authorities;
courts of justice and judicial
4. To do no falsehood nor consent to
officers;
3. To counsel or maintain such the doing of the same in any court;
5. Not to wittingly or willingly promote
actions or proceedings only as
appear to him to be just, and such or sue any groundless, false or
defenses only as he believes to be unlawful suit nor to give nor to
honestly debatable under the law; consent to the doing of the same;
4. To employ, for the purpose of 6. To delay no man for money or
maintaining the causes confided to malice;
7. To conduct himself as a lawyer
him such means only as are
according to the best of his
consistent with truth and honor,
knowledge and discretion, with all
and never seek to mislead the
good fidelity to the courts as to his
judge or any Judicial officer by an
clients; and
artifice or false statement of fact or
8. To impose upon himself that
law;
voluntary obligation without any
5. To maintain inviolate the
mental reservation or purpose of
confidence, and at every peril to
evasion.
himself, to preserve the secret of
his client, and to accept no
--------------------------------------------------------
compensation in connection with
The Code of Professional Responsibility
his client’s business except from
-------------------------------------------------------
him with his knowledge and
approval;
TO SOCIETY (CANONS 1-6)
6. To abstain from all offensive
personality, and to advance no fact
Respect for law and legal
prejudicial to the honor or
processes
reputation of a party or witness,
unless required by the justice of
Q: Atty. Doblar represents Eva in a
the cause with which he is
contract suit against Olga. He is
charged;
also defending Marla in a

LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS BAR Q & A (1987-2018) Page 11

 substantially identical contract suit
filed by Emma. In behalf of Eva,
Atty. Doblar claims that the statute
of limitations runs from the time of
the breach of the contract. In the
action against Marla, Atty. Doblar
now argues the reverse position –
i.e. that the statute of limitation
does not run until one year after
discovery of the breach.
Both cases are assigned to Judge
Elrey. Although not the sole issue
in the two cases, the statute of
limitations issue is critical in both.
Is there an ethical/professional
responsibility problem in this situation?
If a problem exists, what are its
implications or potential consequences?
(2013 Bar)
A: Yes. There is an
ethical/professional responsibility problem
that results from the actuation of Atty.
Doblar in arguing the reverse positions.
The signatures of Atty. Doblar on the
pleadings for Eva and for Marla, constitute a
certificate by him that he has read the
pleadings; that to the best of his knowledge,
information and belief there is good ground
to support them; and that the pleadings
were not interposed for delay (Rules of
Court, Rule 7, Sec. 3, 2nd par.). Atty.
Doblar could not claim he has complied with
the foregoing requirement because he could
not take a stand for Eva that is contrary to
that taken for Marla. His theory for Eva
clearly contradicts his theory for Marla. He
has violated his professional responsibility
mandated under the Rules of Court.
He has likewise violated the ethical
responsibility that his appearance in court
should be deemed equivalent to an
assertion on his honor that in his opinion his
client’s case is one proper for judicial
determination (Canons of Professional
Ethics, Canon 30, 2nd par., last sentence).
In counseling on the contradictory positions,
Atty. Doblar has likewise counseled or
abetted activities aimed at defiance of the
law or at lessening confidence in the legal
system (Code of Professional
Responsibility, Canon 1, Rule 1.02)
because conflicting opinions may result
arising from an interpretation of the same
law.
Atty. Doblar could not seek refuge under the
umbrella that what he has done was in
protection of his clients. This is so because
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS BAR Q & A (1987-2018)
a lawyer’s duty is not to his client but to the
administration of justice. To that end, his
client’s success is wholly subordinate. His
conduct ought to and must always be
scrupulously observant of the law and
ethics (Ernesto Pineda, LEGAL AND
JUDICIAL ETHICS, 211 [1999], citing
Maglasang v. People, G.R. No. 90083,
October 4, 1990).
Any means, not honorable, fair and honest,
which is resorted to by the lawyer, even in
the pursuit of his devotion to his client’s
cause, is condemnable and unethical (Ibid.).
Q: Atty. Asilo, a lawyer and a notary
public, notarized a document already
prepared by spouses Roger and Luisa
when they approached him. It is stated in
the document to Roger and Luisa
formally agreed to live separately from
each other and either one can have a
live-in partner with full consent of the
other. What is the liability of Atty. Asilo,
if any? (1998 Bar)
Atty. Asilo may be held administratively
liable for violating Rule 1.02 of the Code of
Professional Responsibility - a lawyer shall
not counsel or abet activities aimed
defiance of the law or at lessening
confidence in the leg system. An agreement
between two spouses to live separately
from each other and either one could have a
live-in partner with full consent of the other,
is contrary to law and morals. The
ratification by a notary public who is a
lawyer of in illegal or immoral contract or
document constitutes malpractice or gross
misconduct in office. He should at least
refrain from its consummation (In Re
Santiago, 70 Phil. 661 Panganiban v.
Borromeo; 58 Phil. 367, In re Bucana, 72
SCRA 14).
Q: Atty. XX rented a house of his cousin
JJ on
a month-to-months basis. He left for a 6-
month study in Japan without paying his
rentals and electric bills while he was
away despite JJ’s repeated demands.
Upon his return to the Philippines, Atty.
XX still failed to settle his rental
arrearages and electric bills, drawing JJ
to file an administrative complaint
against Atty. XX.
Atty. XX contended that his non
-payment rentals and bills to his cousin
is a personal matter which has no
bearing on his profession as a lawyer
and, therefore, he did not violate the
Page 12
Code of Professional Responsibility.Is
Atty. XX’s contention in order? Explain.
(2010 Bar)
A: No. In a case involving the same facts,
the Supreme Court held that having
incurred just debts, a lawyer has a moral
duty and legal responsibility to settle them
when they become due. “Verily, lawyers
must at all times faithfully perform their
duties to society, to the bar, to the court and
to their clients. As part of their duties, they
must promptly pay their financial
obligations” (Wilson Cham v. Atty. Eva
Pata-Moya, 556 SCRA 1 [2008]).
True, honest, fair, dignified and objective
information on legal services
Q: A lone law practitioner Bartolome D.
Carton, who inherited the law office from
his deceased father Antonio C. Carton,
carries these names: “Carton& Carton
Law Office.” Is that permissible or
objectionable? Explain. (2001, 1996, 1994
Bar)
A: Rule 3.02 of the Code of Professional
Responsibility provides as follows: “In the
choice of a firm name, no false, misleading
or assumed name shall be used; the
continued use of the name of deceased
partner is permissible provided that the firm
indicates in all its communications that the
partner is deceased.” Since Atty. Antonio C.
Carton is a solo practitioner, it is improper
for him to use the firm name “Carton &
Carton Law Office”, which indicates that he
is and/or was in partnership with his father.
Even if he indicates in all his communication
that his father is already dead, the use of
the firm name is still misleading because his
father was never his partner before. A
lawyer is not authorized to use in his
practice of profession a name other than the
one inscribed in the Roll of Attorneys.
Q: Facing disciplinary charges for
advertising as a lawyer, Atty. A argues
that although the calling card of his
businessman friend indicates his law
office and his legal specialty, the law
office is located in his friend’s store.
Decide. (2001 Bar)
A: This appears to be a circumvention of the
prohibition on improper advertising. There is
no valid reason why the lawyer’s
businessman friend should be handling out
calling cards which contains the lawyer’s
law office and legal specialty, even if his
office is located in his friend’s store. What
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS BAR Q & A (1987-2018)
makes it more objectionable is the
statement of his supposed legal specialty. It
is highly unethical for an attorney to
advertise his talents or skill as a merchant.
Q: A Justice of the Supreme Court, while
reading a newspaper one weekend, saw
the following advertisement:
ANNULMENT OF MARRIAGE
Competent Lawyer
Reasonable Fee
Call 221-2221
The following session day, the Justice
called the attention of his colleagues and
the Bar Confidant was directed to verify
the advertisement. It turned out that the
number belongs to Attorney X, who was
then directed to explain to the court why
he should not be disciplinarily dealt with
for the improper advertisement. Attorney
X, in his answer, averred that (1) the
advertisement was not improper
because his name was not mentioned in
the ad; and
(2) he could not be subjected to
disciplinary action because there was no
complaint against him. Rule on Attorney
X’s contention. (2017, 2003, 1998 Bar)
A: The advertisement is improper because it
is a solicitation of legal business and is
tantamount to self-praise by claiming to be a
“competent lawyer”. The fact that his name
is not mentioned does not make the
advertisement proper. His identity can be
easily determined by calling the telephone
number stated. In the case of Ulep v. Legal
Clinic, Inc., 223 SCRA 378, the Supreme
Court found a similar advertisement to be
improper is spite of the fact that the name of
a lawyer was also not mentioned.
A complaint is not necessary to initiate
disciplinary action against a lawyer. In Sec.
1, Rule 139-B of the Rules of Court,
disciplinary action against a lawyer may be
initiated by the Supreme Court motu
proprio.
Q: Determine whether the following
advertisements by an attorney are
ethical or unethical. Write “Ethical” or
“Unethical”, as the case may be,
opposite each letter and explain.
a. A calling card, 2x2 in size,
bearing his name in bold print,
office, residence and e-mail
Page 13
 address, telephone and
facsimile numbers.
b. A business card, 3’’x4’’ in size,
indicating the aforementioned
data with his photo, 1’’x1’’ in
size.
c. A pictorial press release in a
broadsheet newspaper made by
the attorney showing him being
congratulated by the president
of a client corporation for
winning a multi-million damage
suit against the company in the
Supreme Court.
d. The same press release made in
a tabloid by the attorney’s
client.
e. A small announcement that the
attorney is giving free legal
advice on November 30, 2017
published in Balita, a tabloid in
Filipino. (2017, 2002 Bar)
A:
a. Ethical – A lawyer, in making
known his legal services shall use
only true, honest, fair, dignified
and objective information or
statement of facts (Code of
Professional Responsibility,
Canon 3). For solicitation to be
proper, it must be compatible with
the dignity of the legal profession.
If made in a modest and decorous
manner, it would bring no injury to
the lawyer or to the bar (Warvelle,
Legal Ethics, p.55).
b. Unethical – The size of the card
and the inclusion of the lawyer’s
photo in it smacks of
commercialism. It is highly
unethical for an attorney to
advertise his talents or skill as a
merchant.
c. Unethical – A lawyer shall not pay
or give anything of value to
representatives of the mass media
in anticipation of, or in return for,
publicity to attract legal business
(Code of Professional
Responsibility, Rule 3.04). A
lawyer should not resort to indirect
advertisements such as a pictorial
press release in a newspaper to
attract legal business.
d. Ethical – A lawyer cannot be held
liable for the action of his client,
provided he had no knowledge of
the client’s act. However, it would
be unethical if the lawyer knew of
the client’s intention to publish but
nonetheless failed to prevent it.
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS BAR Q & A (1987-2018)
Ethical– The proffer of free legal services to
the indigent, even when broadcast over the
radio or tendered through circulation
of printed matter to the general public,
offends no ethical rule. The rule
prescribing advertising or solicitation of
business is aimed at commercialization
of the profession and has to do with the
effort to obtain remunerative business. It
was never aimed at a situation in which
a group of lawyers announce that they
are willing to devote some of their time
and energy to the interests of indigent
citizens (Agpalo, Legal and Judicial
Ethics, 8th Ed., p. 123).
Q: A sign was posted at the building
where the law office of Atty.
RedentorWalang-Talo is located. The
sign reads:
Atty. Redentor A. Walang-Talo
Chairman, IBP Legal Aid Committee
Makati City IBP Chapter
Free conciliation, mediation and court
representation
Suite 210, Galaxy Building, J.P. Rizal
Street,
Makati City
a. Does the posting constitute
solicitation?
A: There is nothing wrong with the
advertisement. The statement that he is the
chairman of the IBP Legal Aid Committee is
factual and true. Canon 27 of the Code of
Professional Ethics states that
“memberships and offices in bar
associations and committees thereof” may
be included in a lawyer’s advertisement.
The statement that he gives free
consultation, mediation and court
representation services is for the purpose of
promoting the IBP Legal Aid Committee.
b. Suppose the sign reads:
Atty. Redentor A. Walang-Talo
Attorney and Counsel-at-Law
General Practitioner
(Accepts pro bono cases pursuant to the
IBP
Legal Aid Program)
Does the posting constitute solicitation?
(2016 Bar)
A:On the other hand, this advertisement is
for the benefit of the lawyer alone and
constitutes solicitation.
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
Page 14

This does not constitute solicitation. The
lawyer does not claim to be a specialist, but
only a “general practitioner.” The statement
that he accepts pro bono cases is not for
the purpose of promoting his “business’’, as
”pro bono” means “for free.”
TO THE LEGAL PROFESSION
INTEGRATED BAR OF THE PHILIPPINES
(RULE 139-A)
Membership and dues
Q: Not paying the annual IBP dues. (2008
Bar)
A:It is the duty of every lawyer to support
the activities of the Integrated Bar of the
Philippines (Canon 7, CPR). Default in
payment of IBP dues for six months shall
warrant suspension of membership to the
Integrated Bar, and default to make such
payment for one year shall be a ground for
the removal of the delinquent member from
the Roll of Attorneys (In Re Atty. Marcial
Edillon, 84 SCRA 554 [1978]).
Q. In a complaint filed before the
Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP)
against Atty. Cirilo Celis, a senior citizen,
it was shown that: a) he failed to pay his
IBP dues for six (6) years; b) he indicated
uniformly in his pleadings for three (3)
consecutive years "IBP Muntinlupa OR
No. 12345" as proof of payment of his
IBP fees; and c) he did not indicate any
Professional Tax Receipt number to
prove payment of his professional dues.
In his defense, Atty. Celis alleged
that he is only engaged in a "limited" law
practice, and his principal occupation, as
disclosed in his income tax return, is
that of a farmer of a 30-hectare orchard
and pineapple farm in Camarines Sur. He
also claimed that he believed in good
faith that, as a senior citizen, he was
exempt from payment of taxes, such as
income tax, under Republic Act No. 7432
which grants senior citizens "exemption
from the payment of individual income
taxes provided that their annual taxable
income does not exceed the poverty
level as determined by the NEDA for that
year."
As a member of the IBP Board of
Governors, decide on the following:
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS BAR Q & A (1987-2018)
(a) the validity of his claim that, being
engaged in a limited practice of law and
being a senior citizen who is exempt
from the payment of taxes, he is not
required to pay his IBP and professional
dues;
(b) the obligations, if any, under the
Rules of Court and the Code of
Professional Responsibility that Atty.
Celis may have violated. (2018 Bar)
A.: a) Not exempt. Rule 139-A requires that
every member of the Integrated Bar shall
pay annual dues and default thereof for six
months shall warrant suspension of
membership and if non-payment covers a
period of 1-year, default shall be a ground
for removal of the delinquent’s name from
the Roll of Attorneys. It does not matter
whether or not respondent is only engaged
in “limited” practice of law. Moreover, the
exemption invoked by respondent does not
include exemption from payment of
membership or association dues. (Santos,
Jr. vs Llamas, A.C No. 4749. January 20,
2000)
b) By indicating “IBP Muntinlupa OR No.
12345” in his pleadings and thereby
misprepresenting to the public and the
courts that he had paid his IBP dues to the
Muntinlupa Chapter, respondent is guilty of
violating the Code of Professional
Responsibility which provides: Rule 1.01 –
A lawyer shall not engage in unlawful,
dishonest, immoral or deceitful conduct. His
act is also a violation of Rule 10.01 which
provides that: A lawyer shall not do any
falsehood, nor consent to the doing of any
in court; nor mislead or allow the court to be
misled by any artifice. (Santos, Jr. vs
Llamas, A.C No. 4749. January 20, 2000)
Upholding the dignity and integrity of
the profession
Q:Atty. Kuripot was one of Town Bank's
valued clients. In recognition of his
loyalty to the bank, he was issued a gold
credit card with a credit limit of
P250,000.00. After two months, Atty.
Kuripot exceeded his credit limit, and
refused to pay the monthly charges as
they fell due. Aside from a collection
suit, Town Bank also filed a disbarment
case against Atty. Kuripot.
In his comment on the disbarment case,
Atty. Kuripot insisted that he did not
violate the Code of Professional
Responsibility, since his obligation to
Page 15
the bank was personal in nature and had
no relation to his being a lawyer.Is Atty.
Kuripot correct? Explain your answer.
(2017, 2005 Bar)
A: No. Atty. Kuripot is not correct. A lawyer
should act according to the standards of the
legal profession even in his personal acts. A
lawyer shall not engage in conduct that
adversely affects his fitness to practice law,
nor shall he, whether in public or private life,
behave in a scandalous manner to the
discredit of the legal profession (Code of
Professional Responsibility, Rule 7.03).
Q: Sonia, who is engaged in the
lending business, extended to Atty.
Roberto a loan of P50, 000.00 with
interest of P25, 000.00 to be paid not
later than May 20, 2016. To secure the
loan, Atty. Roberto signed a promissory
note and issued a postdated check.
Before the due date, Atty. Roberto
requested Sonia to defer the deposit of
the check. When Atty. Roberto still
failed to pay, Sonia deposited the check
which was dishonored. Atty. Roberto
ignored the notice of dishonor and
refused to pay.
a. Did Roberto commit any violation of
the CPR? Explain.
b. Can he be held civilly liable to Sonia
in an administrative case for
suspension or disbarment? (2016
Bar)
A.
a. Atty. Roberto committed a violation
of Canon 1 Rule 1.01, Canon 7
and Rule 7.03 in issuing a
bouncing check. He should very
well know that the issuance of a
bouncing check is an unlawful act,
a crime involving moral turpitude.
(Co v. Bernardino, A.C. No. 3919,
January 28, 1998)
b. No. The sole issue in an
administrative case is the
determination of whether or not a
lawyers is still fit to continue being
a lawyer. The Supreme Court will
not order the return of money
which is not intimately related to a
lawyer-client relationship (Wong v.
Moya, A.C. 6972, October 17,
2008; Sps. Concepcion v. Atty. De
La Rosa, A.C. No. 10681, Feb. 3,
2015).
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS BAR Q & A (1987-2018)
Courtesy, fairness and candor towards
professional colleagues
Q: You are the counsel of K in his action
for specific performance against DEV.
Inc., a subdivision developer which is
represented by Atty. L. Your client
believes that the president of DEV, Inc.,
would be willing to consider an
amicable settlement and your client
urges you to discuss the matter with
DEV. Inc., without the presence of Atty.
L whom he considered to be an
impediment to an early compromise.
Would it be all right for you to negotiate
the terms of the compromise as so
suggested above by your client? (1997
Bar)
A:No. Rule 8.02, Canon 8 of the Code of
Professional Responsibility provides that "a
lawyer shall not directly or indirectly,
encroach upon the professional
employment of another lawyer." Canon 9 of
the Code of Professional Ethics is more
particular, "a lawyer should not in any way
communicate upon the subject of the
controversy with a party represented by
counsel, much less should he undertake to
negotiate or compromise the matter with
him but should deal only with his counsel."
In the case of Likong vs. Liin, 235 SCRA
414, a lawyer was suspended for
negotiating a compromise agreement
directly with the adverse party without the
presence and participation of her counsels.
Q: After the pre-trial Atty. Hans Hilado,
counsel for plaintiff Jennifer Ng,
persuaded defendant Doris Dy to enter
into a compromise agreement with the
plaintiff without the knowledge and
participation of defendant’s counsel,
Atty. Jess de Jose. Doris acceded and
executed the agreement. Therein Doris
admitted her obligation in full and bound
herself to pay her obligation to Jennifer
at 40% interest per annum in ten (10)
equal monthly installments. The
compromise agreement was approved
by the court.
Realizing that she was prejudiced, Doris
Dy filed an administrative complaint
against Atty. Hilado alleging that the
latter prevented her from consulting her
lawyer Atty. de Jose when she entered
into the compromise agreement, thereby
violating the rules of professional
conduct. Atty. Hilado countered that
Doris Dy freely and voluntarily entered
Page 16
into the compromise agreement which in
fact was approved by the court.
Was it proper for the judge to approve
the compromise agreement since the
terms thereof were just and fair even if
counsel for one of the parties was not
consulted or did not participate therein?
Explain. (1995 Bar)
A: It was not proper for the Judge to
approve the compromise agreement without
the participation of the lawyer of one of the
parties, even if the agreement was Just and
fair. Even if a client has exclusive control of
the cause of action and may compromise
the same, such right is not absolute. He
may not, for example, enter into a
compromise to defeat the lawyer’s right to a
just compensation. Such right is entitled to
protection from the court.
Q: Gretel’s residence in Makati village
was foreclosed by Joli Bank. Armed with
a writ of possession issued by the lower
court, the sheriff and Joli Bank’s lawyers
evicted Gretel and padlocked the house.
A restraining order issued by the Court
of Appeals which Gretel showed the
sheriff was disregarded. Gretel
requested Hansel, an attorney who lives
in the same village, to assist her in
explaining the restraining order, since
Gretel’s counsel of record was out of
town. The discussion on the restraining
order was conducted on the sidewalk
along Gretel’s house. The village
security guards were attracted by the
commotion brought about by the
discussion, so they called the Makati
Police and the CAPCOM who responded
immediately. The CAPCOM colonel, who
arrived at the scene with his troop took it
upon himself to open the house and
declare Gretel as the rightful possessor.
The colonel invited Gretel and Hansel to
enter the house. Five days later, Hansel
was made a co-respondent (together
with Gretel) in a complaint for trespass
to dwelling filed by Joli Bank’s lawyers
before the Makati Fiscal’s office.
Discuss the propriety of the act of Joli
Bank’s lawyers, considering that all
lawyers are mandated to conduct
themselves with courtesy, fairness and
candor toward their professional
colleagues and to avoid harassing
tactics against opposing counsel. (1989
Bar)
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS BAR Q & A (1987-2018)
A: Considering that there was a restraining
order issued by the Court of Appeals, it was
proper for Gretel to take steps to maintain
possession of his residence with the
assistance of Hansel as lawyer.
It was not proper for the Joli Bank’s lawyers
to file an action of trespass to dwelling
against Gretel and lawyer Hansel. Canon 8
of the Code of Professional Responsibility
provides that a lawyer shall conduct himself
with fairness and candor towards his
professional colleagues and shall avoid
harassing tactics against opposing counsel.
No assistance in unauthorized practice
of law
Q: You had just taken your oath as a
lawyer. The secretary to the president of
a big university offered to get you as the
official notary public of the school. She
explained that a lot of students lose their
Identification Cards and are required to
secure an affidavit of loss before they
can be issued a new one. She claimed
that this would be very lucrative for you,
as more than 30 students lose their
Identification Cards every month.
However, the secretary wants you to
give her one -half of your earnings
therefrom.Will you agree to the
arrangement? Explain. (2017, 2005 Bar)
A:No, I will not agree. Rule 9.02 of the
Code of
Professional Responsibility provides that “a
lawyer shall not divide or stipulate to divide
a fee for legal service with persons not
licensed to practice law". The secretary, not
being a lawyer, is not licensed to practice
law and not entitled to a share of the fees
for legal services rendered, particularly in
notarizing affidavits.
Q: Atty. Monica Santos-Cruz registered
the firm name “Santos-Cruz Law Office”
with the Department of Trade and
Industry as a single proprietorship. In
her stationery, she printed the names of
her husband and a friend who are both
non-lawyers as her senior partners in
light of their investments in the firm. She
allowed her husband to give out calling
cards bearing his name as senior partner
of the firm and to appear in courts to
move for postponements. Did Atty.
Santos-Cruz violated the Code of
Professional Responsibility? Why? (2010
Bar)
A: Yes, she did. In the case of Cambaliza v.
Cristobal-Tenorio (434 SCRA 288 [2004]),
Page 17
which involves the same facts, the Supreme
Court held that a lawyer who allows a non-
member of the Bar to misrepresent himself
as a lawyer and to practice law, is guilty of
violating Canon 9 and Rule 9.01 of the
Code of Professional Responsibility which
provide as follows:
“Canon 9. A lawyer shall not directly or
indirectly assist in the unauthorized practice
of law.”
“Rule 9.01. A lawyer shall not delegate to
any unauthorized person the performance
of any task which by law may only be
performed by a member of the bar in good
standing.”
TO THE COURTS
Candor, fairness and good faith towards
the courts
Q: In a pending labor case, Atty. A filed a
Position Paper on behalf of his client,
citing a Supreme Court case and quoting
a portion of the decision therein which
he stated reflected the ratio decidendi.
However, what he quoted was not
actually the Supreme Court ruling but
the argument of one of the parties to the
case. May Atty. A be faulted
administratively? Explain. (2000 Bar)
A: Yes, he may be faulted administratively.
A lawyer owes candor, fairness and good
faith to the court. Rule 10.02 of the Code of
Professional Conduct expressly provides
that a lawyer shall not knowingly misquote
or misrepresent the contents of a paper, the
language or the argument of opposing
counsel, or the text of a decision or
authority, or knowingly cite as law a
provision already rendered inoperative by
repeal or amendment, or assert as a fact
that which has not has been proved. To cite
an argument of one of the parties as a ratio
decidendiof a Supreme Court decision
shows, at least, lack of diligence on the part
of Atty. A (Commission on Election v.
Noynay, 292 SCRA 254).
Q: Atty. Billy, a young associate in a
medium-sized law firm, was in a rush to
meet the deadline for filing his
appellant’s brief. He used the internet for
legal research by typing keywords on his
favorite search engine, which led him to
many websites containing text of
Philippine jurisprudence. None of these
sites was owned or maintained by the
Supreme Court. He found a case
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS BAR Q & A (1987-2018)
believed to be directly applicable to his
client’s cause, so he copied the text of
the decision from the blog of another law
firm, and pasted the text to the document
he was working on. The formatting of the
text he had copied was lost when he
pasted it to the document, and he could
not distinguish anymore, which portions
were the actual findings or rulings of the
Supreme Court, and which were quoted
portions from the other sources that
were used in the body of the decision.
Since his deadline was fast approaching,
he decided to just make it appear as if
every word he quoted was part of the
ruling of the Court, thinking that it would
not be discovered. Atty. Billy’s
opponent, Atty. Ally, a very
conscientious former editor of her
school’s law journal, noticed many
discrepancies in Atty. Billy’s supposed
quotations from the Supreme Court
decision when she read the text of the
case from her copy of the Philippine
Reports. Atty. Billy failed to reproduce
the punctuation marks and font sizes
used by the Court. Worse, he quoted the
arguments of one party as presented in
the case, which arguments happened to
be favorable to his position, and not the
ruling or reasoning of the Court, but this
distinction was not apparent in his brief.
Appalled, she filed a complaint against
him.
a. Did Atty. Billy fail in his duty as a
lawyer? What rules did he violate, if
any?
b. How should lawyer quote a
Supreme Court decision? (2015,
1994 Bar)
A. Atty. Billy has violated Canon 10, Rules
10.01 and 10.02 of the Code of Professional
Responsibility (CPR) which provide as
follows:
CANON 10. A LAWYER OWES CANDOR,
FAIRNESS AND GOOD FAITH TO THE
COURT.
Rule 10.01. A lawyer shall not do any
falsehood, nor consent to the doing of any
in court; nor shall he mislead or allow the
Court to be misled by any artifice.
Rule 10.02. A lawyer shall not knowingly
misquote or misrepresent the contents of a
paper, the language or the argument of the
opposing counsel, or the text of a decision
or authority, or knowingly cite a law a
provision already rendered inoperative by
Page 18
repeal or amendment, or assert as a fact
that which has not been proved.
B.They should be verbatim reproductions of
the Supreme Court’s decisions, down to the
last word and punctuation mark (Insular Life
Assurance Co., Ltd., Employees
Association v. Insular Life Assurance Co.,
Ltd., G.R. No. L-25291, January 30, 1971,
37 SCRA 244).
Q: Atty. X was retained by E in a case for
violation of BP 22 filed by B before the
scheduled hearing, Atty. X assured B
that E would pay the value of the
dishonored check. Elated at the prospect
of being paid, B wined and dined Atty. X
several times. Atty. X convinced B not to
appear at the scheduled hearings. Due to
non-appearance of B, the estafa case
was dismissed for failure to prosecute.
B, however, was never paid. Thus, she
filed a case for disbarment against Atty.
X. Does the conduct of Atty. X constitute
malpractice? Explain. (1996 Bar)
A: Yes, the conduct of Atty. S constitutes
malpractice. A lawyer owes candor, fairness
and good faith to the court. He shall not do
any falsehood or shall be mislead or allow
the court to be misled by any artifice. He
owes loyalty to his client. In a case involving
similar facts, the Supreme Court found that
the lawyer concerned obstructed the
administration of justice and suspended him
for two years (Cantome v. Ducusin, 57 Phil.
20)
Respect for the courts and judicial
officers
Q: Atty. Luna Tek maintains an account
in the social media network called
Twitter and has 1,000 followers there,
including fellow lawyers and some
clients. Her Twitter account is public so
even her non-followers could see and
read her posts, which are called tweets.
She oftentimes takes to Twitter to vent
about her daily sources of stress like
traffic or to comment about current
events. She also tweets her
disagreement and disgust with the
decisions of the Supreme Court by
insulting and blatantly cursing the
individual Justices and the Court as an
institution.
a. Does Atty. Luna Tek act in a
manner consistent with the
Code of Professional
Responsibility? Explain the
reasons for your answer.
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS BAR Q & A (1987-2018)
b. Describe the relationship
between a lawyer and the
courts. (2015 Bar)
A:
a. Atty. Luna did not act in a manner
consistent with the Code of
Professional Responsibility (CPR).
Canon 11 of the Code provides
that “a lawyer shall observe and
maintain the respect due to the
courts and to judicial officers and
should insist on similar conduct
with others.” As an officer of the
court, a lawyer should set the
example in maintaining a
respectful attitude towards the
court. Moreover, he should abstain
from offensive language in
criticizing the courts. Atty. Luna
Tek violated this rule in insulting
and blatantly cursing the individual
Justices and the Supreme Court in
her tweets. Lawyers are expected
to carry their ethical
responsibilities with them in
cyberspace (Lorenzana v. Judge
Ma. Cecilia L. Austria, A.M. No.
RTJ-09-2200, April 2, 2014).
b. A lawyer is an officer of the court.
As such, he is much a part of the
machinery of justice as a judge is.
The judge depends on the lawyer
for the proper performance of his
judicial duties. Thus, Canon 10
enjoins a lawyer to be candid with
the courts; Canon 11 requires him
to show respect to judicial officers;
and Canon 12 urges him to exert
every effort and consider it his duty
to assist in the speedy and
efficient administration of justice.
Q. Cacai, a law student, filed an
administrative complaint against RTC
Judge Casimiro Conde, her professor in
law school, based on the following
allegations:
(a) In a school convocation where Judge
Conde was the guest speaker, Judge
Conde openly disagreed and criticized a
recently-decided Supreme Court
decision and even stressed that the
decision of the Supreme Court in that
case was a serious violation of the
Constitution.
(b) In his class discussions, Judge
Conde named Cacai's mother, an MTC
judge, as one of the judges involved in a
marriage scam. At that time, the case
Page 19
against her mother was still pending.
Judge Conde also included in his class
discussion Cacai's brother whom he
referred to as a "court-noted drug
addict."
Cacai asserted that the acts of
Judge Conde were open displays of
insensitivity, impropriety, and lack
of delicadeza bordering on oppressive
and abusive conduct. She also alleged
that Judge Conde acted with absolute
disrespect for the Court and violated the
"sub judice rule" when he discussed the
marriage scam involving her mother
because, at that time, the case was still
pending.
In his defense, Judge Conde argued that
the case he discussed in the school
convocation was already of public
knowledge and had been published after
it had become final. He also said it was
part of his academic freedom to openly
discuss and criticize a decision of the
Court since it was already decided with
finality, was patently erroneous, and
clearly a violation of the Constitution.
With respect to discussions in class
about Cacai's mother, he said that the
marriage scam where her mother was
charged scandalized the Judiciary and
became public knowledge when the
Office of the Court Administrator held a
press conference on the matter and, that
as a citizen, he could comment thereon
in the exercise of his rights to freedom of
speech and expression. He also asserted
that his discussions in both fora could
not be the subject of an administrative
complaint because they were not done in
the performance of his judicial duties.
Rule on each of the charges raised by
Cacai, and the corresponding defenses
raised by Judge Conde. (2018 Bar)
A. Judge Conde is guilty of misconduct in
both charges.
As to the first charge, Judge Conde is guilty
of violating Canon 2 of the Code of Judicial
Ethics which states that: “A judge should
avoid impropriety and the appearance of
impropriety in all activities.” Also, under
Rule 2.01, it was stated that: “A judge
should so behave at all times as to promote
public confidence in the integrity and
impartiality of the judiciary” while Rule 2.02
states that: A judge should not seek
publicity for personal vainglory.
As for the second charge, Judge Conde is
guilty of violating Canon 3, Rule 3.07 of the
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS BAR Q & A (1987-2018)
Code of Judicial Ethics which states that: “A
judge should abstain from making public
comments on any pending or impending
case and should require similar restraint on
the part of court personnel.”
Q: Atty. Y, in his Motion for
Reconsideration of the Decision
rendered by the National Labor Relations
Commission (NLRC), alleged that there
was connivance of the NLRC
Commissioners with Atty. X for monetary
considerations in arriving at the
questioned Decision. He insulted the
Commissioners for their ineptness in
appreciating the facts as borne by the
evidence presented.
Atty. X files an administrative complaint
against Atty. Y for using abusive
language.
Atty. Y posits that as lawyer for the
down-trodden laborers, he is entitled to
express his righteous anger against the
Commissioners for having cheated
them; that his allegations in the Motion
for Reconsideration are absolutely
privileged; and that proscription against
the use of abusive language does not
cover pleadings filed with the NLRC, as it
is not a court, nor are any of its
Commissioners Justice or Judges.
Is Atty. Y administratively liable under
the Code of Professional Responsibility?
Explain. (2010 Bar)
A:Atty. Y “has clearly violated Canons 8 and
11 of the Code of Professional
Responsibility and is administratively liable.
A lawyer shall not in his professional
dealings, use language which is abusive,
offense or otherwise improper”
(Rule 8.01, CPR). A lawyer shall abstain
from scandalous, offensive or menacing
language or behavior before the courts
(Rule 11.03, CPR).
In the case of Johnny Ng v. Atty. Benjamin
C. Alar (507 SCRA 465 [2006] ), which
involves the same facts, the Supreme Court
held that the argument that the NLRC is not
a court, is unavailing. The lawyers remains
a member of the Ba r, an “oath- bound
servant of the law, whose first duty is not to
his client but to the administration of justice
and whose conduct ought to be and must
be scrupulously observant of the law and
ethics.”
The Supreme Court also held that the
argument that labor practitioners are
Page 20
entitled to some latitude of righteous anger
is unavailing. It does not deter the Court
from exercising its supervisory authority
over lawyers who misbehave or fail to live
up to that standard expected of them as
members of the bar.
Q: Having lost in the Regional Trial Court
and then in the Court of Appeals, Atty.
Mercado appealed to the Supreme Court.
In a minute resolution, the Supreme
Court denied his petition for review for
lack of merit. He filed a motion for
reconsideration which was also denied.
After the judgment had become final and
executory, Atty. Mercado publicly
criticized the Supreme Court for having
rendered what he called an unjust
judgment, even as he ridiculed the
members of the Court by direct insults
and vituperative innuendoes. Asked to
explain why he should not be punished
for his clearly contemptuous statements,
Atty. Mercado sets up the defense that
his statements were uttered after the
litigation had been finally terminated and
that he is entitled to criticize Judicial
actuations. Is Atty. Mercado's contention
tenable? Explain. (1993 Bar)
A: Atty. Mercado’s contention is not tenable.
While he is free to criticize the decision
itself, he is not at liberty to call said
judgment an unjust judgment and to ridicule
the members of the court. It is one thing to
analyze and criticize the decision itself,
which is proper, and it is another thing to
ridicule the members of the court, which is
wrong. The right of a lawyer to comment on
or criticize the decision of a judge or his
actuations is not unlimited. It is the cardinal
condition of all such criticism that it shall be
bona fide, and shall not spill over the walls
of decency and propriety. A wide chasm
exists between fair criticism, on the one
hand, and abuse and slander of courts and
judges on the other. A publication in or
outside the court tending to impede,
obstruct, embarrass or influence the courts
in administering Justice in a pending suit, or
to degrade the courts, destroy public
confidence in them or bring them in any way
into disrepute, whether or not there is a
pending litigation, transcends the limits of
fair comment. Such publication or
intemperate and unfair criticism is a gross
violation of the lawyer’s duty to respect the
courts. It is a misconduct that subjects him
to disciplinary action.
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS BAR Q & A (1987-2018)
Q:Atty. Harold wrote in the Philippine
Star his view that the decision of the
Supreme Court in a big land case is
incorrect and should be re-examined.
The decision is not yet final. Atty.
Alfonso, the counsel for the winning
party in that case, filed a complaint for
disbarment against Atty. Harold for
violation of sub judice rule and Canon 11
of the CPR that a lawyer shall observe
and maintain respect due to the courts.
Explain the sub judice rule and rule on
the disbarment case. (2016 Bar)
A: The sub judice rule restricts comments
and disclosures pertaining to pending
judicial proceedings, not only by participants
in the pending case, members of the bar
and bench, litigants and witnesses, but also
to the public in general, which necessarily
includes the media, in order to avoid
prejudging the issue, influencing the court,
or obstructing the administration of justice.
A violation of this rule may render one liable
for indirect contempt under Sec. 3(d), Rule
71 of the Rules of Court. The specific
rationale for the sub judice rule is that
courts, in the decision of issues of fact and
law should be immune from every
extraneous influence; that facts should be
decided upon evidence produced in court;
and that the determination of such facts
should be uninfluenced by bias, prejudice or
sympathies. (Marantan v. Diokno, 716
SCRA 164, Feb. 12, 2014) After a case is
decided, however, the decision is open to
criticism, subject only to the condition that
all such criticism shall be bona fide, and
shall not spill over the walls of decency and
propriety.
A wide chasm exists between fair criticism,
on the one hand, and abuse and slander of
courts and the judges thereof, on the other.
Intemperate and unfair criticism is a gross
violation of the duty of respect to courts. It is
such a misconduct that subjects a lawyer to
disciplinary action (In Re Almace, G.R. L-
27654, February 18, 1970).
In this case, the published comment of Atty.
Harold was made after the decision of the
Supreme Court was rendered, but the same
was not yet final. The case was still
pending. Hence, the publication of such
comment was inappropriate, and Atty.
Harold may be penalized for indirect
contempt of court.
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
Page 21
Although the comment of Atty. Harold was
made while the case was technically
pending, it was made after a decision was
rendered, and the comment made is within
the grounds of decency and propriety.
Hence, the lawyer does not deserve
punishment for the same.
Q: The Code of Professional
Responsibility is to lawyers, as the Code
of Judicial Conduct is to members of the
bench. How would you characterize the
relationship between the Judge and a
lawyer? Explain. (1996 Bar)
A: The Code of Professional Responsibility
requires lawyers to observe and maintain
respect for judicial officers (Canon 11). On
the other hand, the Code of
JudicialConduct requires judge to be
patient, attentive and courteous to lawyers
(Rule 3). In a word, lawyers and judges
owe each other mutual respect and
courtesy.
ALTERNATIVE ANSWERS:
a. The relationship between a judge and a
lawyer must be based on
independence and self-respect. He
must neither be a mindless fawning
slave of the judge, nor must he take an
attitude of hostility towards the Judge.
The lawyer must maintain toward the
court a respectful attitude and to uphold
and protect the dignity of the court.
b. Being an officer of the court, the first and
foremost duty of the lawyer is to the
court. He is bound to obey lawful orders
and decisions of the court. Like the court
itself, the lawyer is an instrument to
advance the ends of justice. Should
there be a conflict between the duty to
his client and that of the court, he should
resolve the conflict against his client and
obey the lawful orders of the court. On
the other hand, judges should be
courteous and impartial to counsel. To
maintain impartiality, the judge should
not associate too much with lawyers.
Assistance in the speedy and efficient
administration of justice
Q: The Supreme Court issued a
resolution in a case pending before it,
requiring the petitioner to file, within ten
(10) days from notice, a reply to the
respondent's comment. Attorney A,
representing the petitioner, failed to file
the reply despite the lapse of thirty (30)
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS BAR Q & A (1987-2018)
days from receipt of the Court’s
resolution. The Supreme Court
dismissed the petition for non-
compliance with its resolution. Attorney
A timely moved for the reconsideration
of the dismissal of the petition, claiming
that his secretary, who was quite new in
the office, failed to remind him of the
deadline within which to file a reply.
Resolve Attorney A's motion. (2003 Bar)
A. Attorney A’s motion is not meritorious.
He has violated Rule 12.03 of the Code of
Professional Responsibility which provides
that “a lawyer shall not, after obtaining
extensions of time to file pleadings,
memoranda or briefs, let the period lapse
without submitting the same or offering an
explanation for his failure to do so”. His
claim that it was the fault of his secretary is
not sufficient. He cannot take refuge behind
the inefficiency of his secretary because the
latter is not a guardian of the lawyer’s
responsibilities (Nidua v. Lazaro, 174 SCRA
581 [1989]).
Q: Atty. Cua wins a case involving a
donation mortis causa. Afterwards, she
discovers, and is convinced, that the
Deed of Donation was falsified, and that
it was her client who did the falsification.
If you were Atty. Cuawhat would you do?
Explain. (1993 Bar)
A. If I were Atty. Cua., I would resign as his
lawyer. The question as to whether the
attorney should disclose the falsification to
the court or to the prosecuting attorney
involves a balancing of loyalties. One ethical
rule states that “counsel upon the trial of a
cause in which perjury has been committed
owes it to the profession and the public to
bring the matter to the knowledge of the
prosecuting authorities".
Another ethical rule provides that when “a
lawyer discovers that some fraud or
deception has been practiced, which is
unjustly imposed upon the court or a party,
he should endeavor to rectify it; at first by
advising his client, and if his client refuses
to forego the advantage thus unjustly
gained,he should promptly inform the
injured person or his counsel, so that they
may take appropriate steps". A literal
application of these ethical injunctions
requires the disclosure of the falsification.
On the other hand, the attorney’s duty to
keep i nviolate the client's confidence
demands that he refrain from revealing the
client’s wrong-doing, the same being a past
Page 22
offense. Resigning as a lawyer will enable
the lawyer to observe such loyalties. If the
decision is already final, as a lawyer, I
would advise my client to withdraw any
claim on the donation mortis causa and
have the property be given to the rightful
owner of the property the subject matter of
the donation.
This action is in compliance with my duty as
a lawyer to assist in the administration of
justice and in compliance of my oath: “I will
do no falsehood, nor consent to the doing of
any in court; that I will not wittingly or
willingly promote or sue any groundless,
false and or unlawful suit, nor give aid nor
consent to the same”.
Reliance on merits of his cause and
avoidance of any impropriety which
tends to influence or gives the
appearance of influence upon the courts
Q: Atty. Hermano requested his fraternity
brother, Judge Patron, to introduce him
to Judge Apestado, before whom he has
a case that had been pending for
sometime.
Judge Patron, a close friend of Judge
Apestado, acceded to the request, telling
the latter that Atty. Hermano is his
fraternity “brod” and that Atty. Hermano
simply wanted to ask for advice on how
to expedite the resolution of his case.
They met, as arranged, in the fine dining
restaurant of a five-star hotel. Atty.
Hermano hosted the dinner.
Did Atty. Hermano, Judge Patron and
Judge
Apestado commit any
ethical/administrative violation for which
they can be held liable? (2013 Bar)
A: Yes, the three (3) of them committed
ethical/administrative violations for which
they can be held liable.
For hosting the dinner, Atty. Hermano acted
in contravention of ethical standards. A
lawyer should refrain from any impropriety
which tends to influence or give the
appearance of influencing the court (Code
of Professional Responsibility, Canon 13,
Rule 13.01). A lawyer
shall not extend extraordinary attention or
hospitality to, nor seek opportunity for
cultivating familiarity with judges (Ibid.,
Canon 13, Rule 13.01). Marked attention
and unusual hospitality on the part of a
lawyer to a judge, uncalled for by the
personal relations on the parties, subject
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS BAR Q & A (1987-2018)
both the judge and the lawyer to
misconstruction of motive and should be
avoided (Canons of Professional Ethics,
canon 3, 2nd par., 1st sentence). Even if the
purpose of the meeting was merely to “ask
advice on how to expedite the resolution of
his case,” Atty. Hermano still acted outside
of the bounds of ethical conduct. This is so
because a lawyer deserves rebuke and
denunciation for any device or attempt to
gain from a judge a special personal
consideration or favor (Ibid., Canon 3, 2nd
par., 2nd sentence).
Both judge patron and Judge Apestado may
be held liable for having the dinner meeting
with Atty. Hermano. 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 (New
Code of Conduct for the Philippine
Judiciary, Canon 2, Sec.1). Judges shall
avoid impropriety and the appearance of
impropriety in all of their activities (Ibid.,
Canon 4, Sec. 1). Their having dinner with
Atty. Hermano, a practicing lawyer, could be
construed as appearance of impropriety.
Judge Patron for having allowed himself to
be used as a “bridge” by Atty. Hermano, his
fraternity “brod”, to meet with Judge
Apestado exhibited judicial misconduct in
the following manner: Judges shall refrain
from influencing in any manner the outcome
of litigation or dispute pending before
another court (Ibid., Canon 1, Sec. 3).
Furthermore, in allowing Atty. Hermano to
take advantage of his fraternity bond, Judge
Patron allowed the prestige of judicial office
to advance the private interests of others,
conveyed or permitted hos fraternity “brod”
to convey the impression that he is in a
special position to influence the judge (Ibid.,
Canon 1, Sec 4, 2nd sentence).
The specific violations of Judge Apestado
were committed when he allowed himself to
be convinced by Judge Patron to have the
dinner meeting with Atty. Hermano to
discuss how the case may be expedited. In
performing judicial duties, judges shall be
independent form judicial colleagues in
respect of decisions which the judge is
obliged to make independently (Ibid.,
Canon 1, Sec. 2). Finally, in having dinner
meeting with Atty. Hermano who has a
pending case with his sala, Judge Apestado
has exhibited an appearance of impropriety
in his activities (Ibid., Canon 4, Sec 1).
Q: Atty. J requested Judge K to be a
principal sponsor at the wedding of his
Page 23
son. Atty. J met Judge K a month before
during the IBP-sponsored reception to
welcome Judge K into the community,
and having learned that Judge K takes
his breakfast at a coffee shop near his
(Judge K's) boarding house, Atty. J
made it a point to be at the coffee shop
at about the time that Judge K takes his
breakfast. Comment on Atty. J's acts. Do
they violate the Code of Professional
Responsibility? (2000 Bar)
A. Yes, his actions violate the Code of
Professional Responsibility. Canon 13 of the
said Code provides that a lawyer shall rely
upon the merits of his cause and refrain
from any impropriety which tends to
influence, or gives the appearance of
influencing the court. Rule 13.01 of the
same Code provides that a lawyer shall not
extend extraordinary attention or hospitality
to, nor seek opportunity for, cultivating
familiarity with Judges. Atty. J obviously
sought opportunity for cultivating familiarity
with Judge K by being at the coffee shop
where the latter takes his breakfast, and is
extending extraordinary attention to the
judge by inviting him to be a principal
sponsor at the wedding of his son.
Q: After a study of the records and
deciding that plaintiff was entitled to a
favorable Judgment, Judge Reyes
requested Atty. Sta. Ana, counsel for the
plaintiff, to prepare the draft of the
decision. Judge Reyes then reviewed the
draft prepared by Atty. Sta. Ana and
adopted it as his decision for plaintiff.
Judge Reyes saw nothing unethical in
this procedure as he would ask the other
party to do the same if it were the
prevailing party.
Please comment on whether Judge
Reyes' approach to decision-writing is
ethical and proper. (1994 Bar)
A. :This procedure of Judge Reyes is
unethical because the judge is duty bound
to study the case himself; he must
personally and directly prepare his
decisions and not delegate it to another
person especially a lawyer in the case
(Section 1. Rule 36, Rules of Court).
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
In the case of Lantoria vs. Bunyi, 209 SCRA
528, a lawyer was suspended for preparing
drafts of decisions for a judge. The
Supreme Court held that this violated
Canon No. 13 and Rule 13.01 of the Code
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS BAR Q & A (1987-2018)
of Professional Responsibility which provide
that:
“CANON 13. – A lawyer shall rely upon the
merits of his case and refrain from any
impropriety which tends to influence, or
gives the appearance of influencing the
court."
“Rule 13.01 – A lawyer should not extend
extraordinary attention or hospitality to nor
seek opportunity for cultivating familiarity
with the judge."
Conversely, therefore, a judge should not
ask lawyers of parties to a case before him
to draft his decisions. “A judge should so
behave at all times as to promote public
confidence in the integrity and impartiality of
the judiciary." (Rule 2.01, Code of Judicial
Conduct)
Q: Atty. A is offered professional
engagement to appear before Judge B
who is A’s relative, compadre and former
office colleague. Is A ethically compelled
to refuse the engagement? Why? (2001
Bar)
A. There is no ethical constraint against a
lawyer appearing before a judge who is a
relative, compadre or former office
colleague as long as the lawyer avoids
giving the impression that he can influence
the judge. On the other hand, the judge is
required by the Code of Judicial Conductnot
to take part in any proceeding where his
impartiality may be reasonably questioned
(Code of Judicial Conduct, Rule 3.12).
Among the grounds for mandatory
disqualification of the judge is if any of the
lawyers is a relative by consanguinity or
affinity within the fourth degree.
Q: Rico, an amiable, sociable lawyer,
owns a share in Marina Golf Club, easily
one of the more posh golf courses. He
relishes hosting parties for government
officials and members of the bench.
One day, he had a chance meeting with a
judge in the Intramuros golf course. The
two readily got along well and had since
been regularly playing golf together at
the Marina Golf Club.
a. If Atty. Rico does not discuss
cases with members of the
bench during parties and golf
games, is he violating the Code
of Professional Responsibility?
Explain.
Page 24
 b. How about the members of the
bench who grace the parties of
Rico, are they violating the Code
of Judicial Conduct? Explain.
(2010 Bar)
A:
a. Yes. A lawyer shall not extend
extraordinary attention or
hospitality to, nor seek opportunity
for cultivating familiarity with
judges (Code of Professional
Responsibility, Rule 13.01).
Moreover, he should refrain from
any impropriety which gives the
appearance of influencing the
court (CPR, Canon 13). In
regularly playing golf with judges,
Atty. Rico will certainly raise the
suspicion that they discuss cases
during the game, although they
actually do not. However, if Rico is
known to be a non-practicing
lawyer, there is not much of an
ethical problem.
b. Members of the bench who grace
the parties of Atty. Rico would be
guilty of violating Sec. 3, Canon 4
of the New Code of Judicial
Conduct for the Philippine
Judiciary which provides that
“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”. It has been
held that “if a judge is seen eating
and drinking in public places with a
lawyer who has cases pending in
his or her sala, public suspicion
may be aroused, thus tending to
erode the trust of litigants in the
impartiality of the judge” (Padilla v.
Zantua, 237 SCRA 670). But if
Atty. Rico is not a practicing
lawyer, such suspicion may not be
aroused.
TO THE CLIENTS
AVAILABILITY OF SERVICE WITHOUT
DISCRIMINATION
Services regardless of a person’s status
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS BAR Q & A (1987-2018)
Q: M was criminally charged with
violation of a special law. He tried to
engage the service of Atty. N. Atty. N
believed, however, that M is guilty on
account of which he declined. Would it
be ethical for Atty. N to decline? Explain.
(2000, 1996 Bar)
A:It would not be ethical for Atty. N to
decline. Rule 14.01 of the Code of
Professional
Responsibility provides that’ a lawyer shall
not decline to represent a person solely on
account of the latter’s race, sex, creed or
status of life, or because of his own opinion
regarding the guilt of said person. It is for
the judge, not the lawyer, to decide the guilt
of the accused, who is presumed to be
innocent until his guilt is proved beyond
reasonable doubt by procedure recognized
by law.
Q: Atty. DD’s services were engaged by
Mr.
BB as defense counsel in a lawsuit. In
the course of the proceedings, Atty. DD
discovered that Mr. BB was an agnostic
and a homosexual. By reason thereof,
Atty. DD filed a motion to withdraw as
counsel without Mr. BB’s express
consent. Is Atty. DD’s motion legally
tenable? Reason briefly.
(2004 Bar)
A:No. Atty. DD’s motion is not legally
tenable.
He has no valid cause to terminate his
services. His client, Mr. BB, being an
agnostic and homosexual, should not be
deprived of his counsel’s representation
solely for that reason.
A lawyer shall not decline to represent a
person solely on account of the latter’s race,
sex, creed or status of life or because of his
own opinion regarding the guilt of said
person (Code of Professional
Responsibility, Canon 14, Rule 14.01).
Q: Your services as a lawyer are
engaged by
John Dizon to defend him from the
charge of malversation of public funds
before the Sandiganbayan. John
confessed to you that he actually
misappropriated the amount charged but
he said it was out of extreme necessity
to pay for the emergency operation of
his wife.
Will you agree to defend him? State your
reason. (1990 Bar)
Page 25
A:I will agree to defend him,
notwithstanding his confession to me that
he actually misappropriated the amount.
Rule 14.01 of the Code of Professional
Responsibility provides that a lawyer shall
not decline to represent a person because
of his own opinion regarding the guilt of the
person. One of the duties of an attorney is
that he should, in the defense of a person
accused of a crime, by all fair and honorable
means regardless of his personal opinion as
to guilt of the accused, present every
defense that the law permits, to the end that
no person may be deprived of life liberty but
by due process of law. The burden of proof
lies with the prosecution and if the
prosecution fails to discharge such burden,
the lawyer can always invoke the
presumption of innocence for the acquittal
of his client. If the prosecution proves the
guilt of the accused beyond reasonable
doubt, the lawyer can strive to lower the
penalty by presenting mitigating
circumstances, for he is not necessarily
expected to sustain the client’s innocence.
A lawyer is an advocate, not a judge, and if
he has rendered effective legal assistance
to his client as allowed by law, he can
rightfully say that he has faithfully
discharged his duties as a lawyer, even if
the accused is found guilty by the court.
Services as counsel de officio
Q: May a lawyer decline an appointment
by the court as counsel de oficio for an
accused because he believes, and is
fully convinced that the accused is guilty
of the crime charged? (1991 Bar)
A: A lawyer may not decline an
appointment as counsel de oficio even if he
is convinced that the accused is guilty. It is
his obligation to at least protect his rights.
He might even have him acquitted or at
least reduce his penalty depending on the
evidence presented during the trial.
Q: In a homicide case, Atty. M was
appointed by the Court as counsel de
oficio for F, the accused. After trial, F
was acquitted. Atty. M sent F a bill for
attorney’s fees.
a. Can F be compelled to pay? Explain.
b. Can F employ a counsel de
parte to collaborate with Atty. M,
his counsel de oficio? Explain.
(1996 Bar)
A:
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS BAR Q & A (1987-2018)
a. No, F may not be compelled to
pay attorney’s fees. A counsel de
officio is a lawyer appointed to
render professional services in
favor of an indigent client. In the
absence of a law allowing
compensation, he cannot charge
the indigent litigant for his
professional services. One of the
obligations which the lawyer
assumed when he took his oath as
a lawyer is to render free legal
services when required by the law
to do so. The Rules of Court
provides a token compensation for
an attorney de officio to be paid by
the state.
b. He may do so, but if he can afford
to employ a counsel de parte, then
he is no longer indigent and will
not need a counsel de officio. The
latter can withdraw as his counsel
if he chooses to.
Q: Atty. Aguirre, as counsel de
oficio for Boy Batongbakal, was
able to win an acquittal for Boy who
was charged with robbery in band.
A year later, Atty. Aguirre
discovered that Boy in fact had a lot
of money which he had been
bragging was part of the loot in the
crime for which he was acquitted.
Knowing that Boy could no longer
be prosecuted on the ground of
double jeopardy, Atty. Aguirre sent
him a bill for his services as his
counsel de oficio.
Please give your reasoned
comments on the ethical
considerations involved, if any, in
the above case. (1994 Bar)
A:A counsel de oficio is a lawyer
appointed by the court to defend an
indigent defendant in a criminal case.
The lawyer designated as counsel de
officio cannot charge the indigent
litigant for his professional services. In
a sense, there is no contract for legal
services between him and the
defendant. In the absence of an
express or implied contract, there is no
obligation to compensate. Suing his
client for attorney’s fees might also
involve a violation of the confidential
nature of a lawyer-client relationship.
Q: Atty. Vidal, a semi-retired Metro
Manila law practitioner, has a cattle
ranch in the remote municipality of
Caranglan, Neuva Ecija. He attends to
Page 26
his law office in Manila on Mondays,
Tuesdays and Wednesdays, and spends
the rest of the week in his cattle ranch
riding horses and castrating bulls. In a
criminal case pending before the
Municipal Trial Court of Caranglan, the
only other licensed member of the Bar is
representing the private complainant.
The accused is a detention prisoner. The
judge wants to expedite proceedings.
a. What must the judge do to
expedite proceedings?
b. If Attorney Vidal is appointed to
act as counsel de oficio for the
accused, could he refuse by
saying that in the province, he
does not want to do anything
except ride horses and castrate
bulls? Explain. (1993 Bar)
A:
a. The judge may appoint Atty. Vidal
as counsel de oficio in order to
expedite the proceedings. This is
especially because the accused is
a detention prisoner who is
presumed to be indigent and
cannot retain a paid counsel.
b. Atty. Vidal cannot validly refuse
the appointment as counsel de
oficio. While it is true that he stays
in the province to rest during the
latter part of the week as lawyer he
must comply with his oath to assist
in the administration of justice.
Precisely one of the objectives of
the Integrated Bar is to compel all
lawyers in the active practice of
law to comply with their obligation
to assist the courts in the
administration of justice.
Valid grounds for refusal to serve
Q: When may refusal of a counsel to act
as counsel de oficio be justified on
grounds aside from reasons of health,
extensive travel abroad, or similar
reasons of urgency? Support your
answer. (2001 Bar)
A. Other justified grounds for refusal to act
as counsel de oficio are:
a. Too many de oficio cases
assigned to the lawyer (People v.
Daeng, 49 SCRA 222);
b. Conflict of interest (Rule 14.03,
CPR);
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS BAR Q & A (1987-2018)
c. Lawyer is not in a position to carry
out the work effectively or
competently (supra);
d. Lawyer is prohibited from
practicing law by reason of his
public office which prohibits
appearances in court; and
e. Lawyer is preoccupied with too
many cases which will spell
prejudice to the new clients.
Q. A is accused of robbery in a
complaint filed by B. A sought free legal
assistance from the Public Attorney’s
Office (PAO) and
Atty. C was assigned to handle his case.
After reviewing the facts as stated in the
complaint and as narrated by A, Atty. C
is convinced that A is guilty.
a. May Atty. C refuse to handle the
defense of A and ask to be
relieved? Explain fully.
b. In problem (a), if the lawyer is
counsel de parte for the accused and
he learns later after accepting the
case and while trial is ongoing that
his client was indeed the perpetrator
of the crime, may the lawyer
withdraw his appearance from the
case? Why or why not? (2014 Bar)
A:
a. Rule 14.04 of the Code of Professional
Responsibility provides that a lawyer
shall not decline to represent a person
solely on account of his own opinion
regarding the guilt of the said person. It
is not the duty of a lawyer to determine
whether the accused is guilty or not, but
the judge’s.
Besides, in a criminal case, the accused
is presumed innocent, and he is entitled
to an acquittal unless his guilt is proven
beyond reasonable doubt. The role of
the lawyer is to see to it that his
constitutional right to due process is
observed.
b. He may withdraw his appearance but in
accordance with procedure in Sec. 26,
Rule 138 of the Rules of Court.
Moreover, Rule 19.02 of the Code of
Professional Responsibility provides that
“a lawyer who has received information
that his client has, in the course of the
representation, perpetuated a fraud
upon a person or tribunal, shall promptly
call upon the client to rectify the same,
and failing which, he shall terminate the
relationship with such client in
accordance with the Rules of
Page 27
 Court.”
CANDOR, FAIRNESS AND LOYALTY TO
CLIENTS
Privileged communications
Q: A, who is charged in Court with estafa
for misappropriating funds entrusted to
him by B, consulted Atty. C about the
case with the intention of engaging his
services as defense counsel. Because A
could not afford to pay the fee that Atty.
C was charging him, A engaged the
services of another counsel, Atty. D. At
the trial of the case for the estafa against
A, the prosecutor announced in open
court that his next witness was Atty. C,
whom he was calling to the witness
stand. Counsel for A, Atty. D, vigorously
opposed the prosecutor’s move on the
ground Atty. C may not be called as
witness for the prosecution as he might
disclose a would-be client’s confidence
and secret. Asked by the presiding
Judge what would be the nature of Atty.
C’s testimony, the prosecutor said it has
something to do with how A obtained
from B the funds that the latter received
from the former but failed to account for.
Thereupon, Atty. A vigorously opposed
the prosecutor’s motion. If you were the
Judge, how would you rule on the
matter? (1999 Bar)
A: If I were the judge, I will not allow Atty. C
to take the witness stand. When A
consulted Atty. C about his case, a lawyer-
client relationship was established between
them. It does not matter that A did not
eventually engage his services because of
his fees; such relationship has already been
created (Hilado v. David,84 Phil 569). A
lawyer shall be bound by the rule on
privileged communication in respect to
matters disclosed to him by a prospective
client (Code of Professional Responsibility,
Rule 15.02). The rule on privileged
communication provides that an attorney
cannot, without the consent of his client, be
examined as to any communication made
by the client to him (Rules of Court, Rule
130, Sec. 21 [b]). The prosecutor has
announced that Atty. C will be asked about
how A obtained from B the funds that he
failed to account for. Atty. C’s knowledge of
such matter could have come only from A.
Q: In the course of a drinking spree with
Atty. Holgado who has always been his
counsel in business deals, Simon
bragged about his recent sexual
adventures with socialites known for
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS BAR Q & A (1987-2018)
their expensive tastes. When Atty.
Holgado asked Simon how he manages
to finance his escapades, the latter
answered that he has been using the
bank deposits of rich clients of Banco
Filipino where he works as manager. Is
Simon’s revelation to Atty. Holgado
covered by the Attorney-client privilege?
(2006 Bar)
A: Simon’s revelation to Atty. Holgado is not
covered by the lawyer-client privilege. In the
first place, it was not made on account of a
lawyer-client relationship, that is, it was not
made for the purpose of seeking legal
advice. In the second place, it was not
made in confidence (Mercado v. Vitriolo,
459 SCRA 1). In the third place, the
attorney-client privilege does not cover
information concerning a crime or a fraud
being committed or proposed to be
committed.
Q: Maria and Atty. Evangeline met each
other and became good friends at zumba
class. One day, Maria approached Atty.
Evangeline for legal advice. It turned out
that Maria, a nurse, previously worked in
the Middle East. So she could more
easily leave for work abroad, she
declared in all her documents that she
was still single. However, Maria was
already married with two children. Maria
again had plans to apply for work abroad
but this time, wished to have all her
papers in order. Atty. Evangeline,
claiming that she was already
overloaded with other cases, referred
Maria’s case to another lawyer. Maria
found it appalling that after Atty.
Evangeline had learned of her secrets,
the latter refused to handle her case.
Maria’s friendship with Atty. Evangeline
permanently turned sour after Maria filed
an administrative case against the latter
for failing to return borrowed jewelry.
Atty. Evangeline, on the other hand,
threatened to charge Maria with a
criminal case for falsification of public
documents, based on the disclosures
Maria had earlier made to Atty.
Evangeline.
Was the consultation of Maria with
Atty. Evangeline considered
privilege? (2015 Bar)
A: The consultation of Maria with Atty.
Evangeline is considered privileged. The
moment the complainant approached the
then receptive respondent to seek legal
Page 28
advice, a veritable lawyer-client relationship
evolved between the two. Such relationship
imposes upon the lawyer certain
restrictions circumscribed by the ethics of
the profession. Among the burdens of the
relationship is that which enjoins the lawyer
to keep inviolate confidential information
acquired or revealed during legal
consultations. The fact that one is, at the
end of the day not inclined to handle the
client’s case is hardly of consequence. Of
little moment too, is the fact that no formal
professional engagement follows
consultation. Nor will it make any
difference, that no contract whatsoever was
executed by the parties to memorialize the
relationship (Hadjula v. Madianda, A.C. No.
6711, July 3, 2007).
Conflict of Interest
Q: St. Ivan’s Hospital, Inc. (St. Ivan’s)
and allied Construction Co. (Allied)
separately retained the legal services of
Tomas and Benedicto Law Offices. St.
Ivan’s engaged the service of Allied for
the construction of a new building but
failed to pay the contract price after the
completion of the works. A complaint for
sum of money was filed by Atty. Budoy,
a former associate of Tomas and
Benedicto Law Offices, on behalf of
Allied against St. Ivan’s. St. Ivans, lost
the case and was held liable to Allied.
Thereafter, St. Ivan’s filed a disbarment
complaint against Atty. Budoy. It
claimed that while Atty. Budo has
established his own law office, an
arrangement was made whereby Tomas
and Benedicto Law Offices assign cases
for him to handle, and that it can be
assumed that Tomas and Benedicto Law
Offices collaborate with Atty. Budo in
the cases referred to him, creating a
conflict of interest. Rule on the
complaint with reasons. (2016 Bar)
A:I will rule in favor of St. Ivan’s and against
Atty. Budoy. St. Ivan’s was a client of
Tomas and Benedicto Law Offices, of which
Atty. Budoy was an associate attorney. As
such, St. Ivan’s was also his client, because
of the principle that when a party hires a law
firm, he hires all the lawyers therein.
Moreover, Atty. Budoy was in a position to
know the information transmitted by St.
Ivan’s to the firm. “There is conflict of
interest if the acceptance of a new retainer
will require the lawyer to perform a act
which will injuriously affect his new client in
any matter in which he represents him, and
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS BAR Q & A (1987-2018)
also whether he will be called upon in his
new relation to use against his first client
any knowledge acquired during their
relation” (Hornilla v. Salunat, 453 Phil. 108,
July 01, 2003).
“As such, a lawyer is prohibited from
representing new clients whose interests
oppose those of a former client in any
manner, whether or not they are parties in
the same action or on totally unrelated
cases. The prohibition is founded on the
principles of public policy and good taste”
(Anglo v. Atty. Valencia, A.C. No. 10567,
Feb. 25, 2015).
Q: Mrs. F, a young matron, was referred
to you for legal advice by your good
friend in connection with the matron’s
jewelry business. She related to you the
facts regarding a sale on consignment of
pieces of jewelry to someone she did not
name or identify. Since she was referred
to you by a close friend, you did not bill
her for the consultation. Neither did she
offer to compensate you. Six months
later, Mrs. G, the wife of the general
manager of a client company of your law
firm, asked you to defend her in a
criminal case for estafa filed by Mrs. F.
Would you agree to handle her case?
(1997 Bar)
A: First, I will inquire if the case for estafa
filed by Mrs. F against the wife of the
general manager is the same matter
concerning which Mrs. F consulted me six
months before. If it is a same matter, I will
not be able to handle the case for the
general manager’s wife, because of a
conflict of interests. When Mrs. F consulted
me and I give her professional advice, a
lawyer-client relationship was created
between us, regardless of the fact that I was
not compensated for it. It would involve a
conflict of interests if I will handle the case
for the opposite party on the same matter
(Hilado v. David, 84 Phil. 571).
Q: Explain your understanding of
“Conflict of Interests” under the Code of
professional Responsibility. (2009, 1997,
1993 Bar)
A. A lawyer is prohibited from
representing conflicting interests. There is
conflict of interests within the context of the
rule when, on behalf of client, it is the
lawyer’s duty to contend for that which his
duty to another client requires him to
oppose. Another test is whether the
Page 29
acceptance of a new lawyer-client relation
will prevent a lawyer from discharging fully
his duty of undivided fidelity and loyalty to
another client or invite suspicion of
unfaithfulness or double-dealing in the
performance thereof.
It is improper for a lawyer to appear as
counsel for one party against his present
client even in a totally unrelated case. With
regard to former client, the traditional rule is
to distinguish between related and
unrelated cases. A lawyer may not
represent a subsequent client against
former client in a controversy that is related,
directly or indirectly, to the subject matter of
the previous litigation in which he appeared
for the former client, otherwise, he may.
However, in the case of Rosacia vs. Atty.B.
Bulalacao, 248 SCRA 665, the Supreme
Court ruled that a lawyer may not accept a
case against a former client, even on an
unrelated matter.
The Court reiterates that an attorney owes
loyalty to his client not in the case in which
he has represented him but also after the
relation of attorney and client has
terminated as it is not good practice to
permit afterwards to defend in another case
other person against his former client under
the pretext that the other case. It behooves
respondent not only to keep inviolate the
client’s confidence but also to avoid the
appearance of treachery and double-dealing
for only then can litigants be encouraged to
entrust their secrets to their attorneys which
is of paramount importance in the
administration of justice.
Q:Atty. Belle Montes is a former partner
in the Rosales Law Office which is
representing Corporation X before the
Securities and Exchange Commission.
Atty. Montes who is now practicing on
his own, entered her appearance as
counsel for Corporation Y in a suit
between said corporation and
Corporation X. Atty. Montes claims that
since she did not personally handle the
case of Corporation X when she was still
with the Rosales Law Office she will not
be representing conflicting interests. Is
such argument valid? Explain. (1992 Bar)
A:
Atty. Belle Montes will be deemed to be
appearing for conflicting interests if she
appears for Corporation Y against
Corporation X.
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS BAR Q & A (1987-2018)
This question is similar to the case of
Philippine Blooming Mills vs. Court of
Appeals. In said case, the Philippine
Blooming Mills was the retainer of the
ACCRA Law Office. Three lawyers of the
ACCRA Law Office separated from said law
firm and established their own law office.
The three lawyers were disqualified from
appearing for a corporation against the
Philippine Blooming Mills.
The rule which prohibits appearing for
conflicting interests applies to law firms. The
employment of one member of a law firm is
considered as an employment of the law
firm and that the employment of a law firm
is equivalent to a retainer of the members
thereof.
Q: R is a retained counsel of ABC Bank-
Ermita Branch. One day, his balik bayan
compadre, B, consulted him about his
unclaimed deposits with the said branch
of ABC Bank, which the bank had
refused to give to him claiming that the
account had become dormant. R agreed
to file a case against the bank with the
Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Manila. B
lost the case, but upon the advice of R,
he no longer appealed the decision. B
later discovered that R was the retained
counsel of ABC Bank-Ermita Branch.
Does B have any remedy? Discuss the
legal and ethical implications of the
problem. (2014 Bar)
A: Atty. R clearly violated the rule against
representing conflicting interests (Rule
15.03, Code of Professional Responsibility).
B may file an action to set aside the
judgment on the theory that if a lawyer is
disqualified from appearing as counsel for a
party on account of conflict of interests, he
is presumed to have impropriety and
prejudicially advised and represented the
party in the conduct of the litigation from
beginning to end. He may also file an action
for damages against Atty. R, aside from an
administrative complaint due to his
misconduct. He was prejudiced by the
adverse decision against him, which he no
longer appealed upon the advice of Atty. R.
Q: In a complaint for disbarment, Connie
alleged that she engaged the services of
Atty. Cesar Corpuz in the preparation
and execution in her favor of a Deed of
Sale over a parcel of land from her
common-law husband. Subsequently,
Atty. Corpuz filed a civil case on behalf
of Constancia, the legal wife of Connie's
Page 30
common-law husband, for the annulment
of the Deed of Sale, impleading Connie
as defendant.
In his defense, Atty. Corpuz asserted
that, with the permission of Constancia,
he wrote a letter to Connie informing the
latter of Constancia's adverse claim and
urging her to settle the same, but Connie
ignored his letter. He also said that
Connie did not object to his handling of
the case on behalf of Constancia;
therefore, he felt free to file the
complaint against her.
Is Atty. Corpuz guilty of misconduct for
representing conflicting interests? (2018
Bar)
A: Yes. Under Rule 15.01, a lawyer in
conferring with a prospective client shall
ascertain as soon as practicable whether
the matter would involve a conflict with
another client or his own interest, and if so,
shall forthwith inform the prospective client.
Moreover, under rule 15.03, a lawyer shall
not represent conflicting interests except by
written consent of all concerned given after
a full disclosure of the facts. Atty. Corpuz
clearly had conflicting interest and it is
immaterial that he informed Connie of such
case since he should have not entered as
counsel to both parties.
Q: You are the counsel for the estate of a
deceased person. Your wife is a
practicing Certified Public Accountant.
She was asked by her client to prepare
and submit an itemized claim against the
estate you are representing. She asks
for your advice on the legal propriety of
her client’s claim. What advice would
you give her? Explain. (2003 Bar)
A: I would advise her that it will be improper
for her to handle her client’s claim against
the estate. As a counsel for the estate, it is
my duty to preserve the estate. Her client’s
claim seeks to reduce the said estate. If she
will handle such claim, I can be suspected
of representing conflicting interests. The
interests of the estate and of its creditors
are adverse to each other (Nakpil v. Valdez,
288 SCRA 75). Even if she is a different
person, the fact that she is my wife will still
give rise to the impression that we are
acting as one.
Q: You are the lawyer of Mr.”H”, the
plaintiff, in a civil case for rescission of
contract. The prospects for an amicable
settlement look bright. Impressed by
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS BAR Q & A (1987-2018)
your ability, Mr. “I”, the defendant,
would like very much to retain you as
his defense counsel in a criminal case
for homicide through reckless
imprudence. Mr. “I” wants you to
forthwith enter your appearance, the
arraignment already having been
scheduled. Would you accept the offer?
(1997 Bar)
A: It depends. If the criminal case for
homicide through reckless imprudence is
against Mr. “H”, I cannot accept the same
for that will involve a conflict of interest,
although it is an unrelated case.
But if it will not involve Mr. “H”, I can accept
the same. However, to avoid suspicion and
misunderstanding, it would be better if I
inform Mr. “H” about the offer and secure
his conformity to my handling the same.
Q: Atty. B acted as counsel for C in a civil
case. He also acted as counsel for D
against C in another civil case. When D
lost his case against C, he filed an
administrative complaint against Atty. B
for conflict of interests. Decide. (1991
Bar)
A:If the case of C in the first case is
entirely different and not related with the
case of D against C, there is no conflict of
interests. If the two cases however are
related wherein the attorney has
knowledge of the evidence of C then there
is conflict of interests. Rule 15.01 provides
that: A lawyer in conferring with a
prospective client shall ascertain as soon
as practicable whether the matter would
involve a conflict with another client or his
own interest, and if so, shall forthwith
inform the prospective client. Rule 15.03
further provides that: A lawyer shall not
represent conflicting interests except by
written consent of all concerned given after
a full disclosure of the facts.
Q: The law firm of Sale, Santiago and
Aldeguer has an existing and current
retainership agreement with XYZ
Corporation and ABC Company, both of
which were pharmaceutical firms. XYZ
Corporation discovered that a number of
its patented drugs had been duplicated
and sold in the market under ABC
Company’s brand names. XYZ
Corporation turned to the law firm and
asked it to bring suit against ABC
Company for patent infringement on
several counts. What are the ethical
considerations involved in this case and
Page 31
how are you going to resolve them?
(1994 Bar)
A: A lawyer may refuse to accept the
representation of a client if he labors under
conflict of interests between him and the
prospective client or between a present
client and the prospective client (Code of
Professional Responsibility, Canon 14, Rule
14.03). It is unprofessional for a lawyer to
represent conflicting interests, except by
express consent of all concerned given after
full disclosure of the fact (Canons of
Professional Ethics, Canon 6). A lawyer
cannot accept a case against a present
client either in the same case or in a totally
unrelated case.
Q: Atty. Juan Cruz, a practicing lawyer,
was employed by Pilipinas Bank as its
bank attorney and notary public in three
of its branches in Manila. While thus
employed, Maria del Rio, who was
unaware of Atty. Cruz’s employment in
the bank, engaged Atty. Cruz’s services
as a lawyer in a case that was filed by
Pilipinas Bank for collection of sum of
money involving one of its branches in
Quezon City which Atty. Cruz accepted.
The Quezon City Regional Trial Court,
after due proceeding and hearing,
rendered judgment in favor of Pilipinas
Bank and against Maria del Rio who
wanted to appeal the adverse judgment.
But upon advice of Atty. Cruz, the
adverse judgment was not appealed.
Thereafter, Maria del Rio learned Atty.
Cruz was employed by Pilipinas Bank as
one of its attorneys. She now consults
with you and asks you to take legal steps
against Atty. Cruz for his apparent
misconduct. What do you think of what
Atty. Cruz did? Is there a valid and legal
basis to discipline him? (2006, 1999 Bar)
A: In agreeing to represent Maria del Rio in
a case which Pilipinas Bank filed against
her, Atty. Cruz violated the rule against
representing conflicting interests. Rule
15.03 of the Code of Professional
Responsibility provides that a lawyer shall
not represent conflicting interests except by
written consent of all concerned after a full
disclosure of the facts. It is improper for a
lawyer to appear as counsel for a person
whose interest conflicts with that of his
present or former client, even in an
unrelated case (Philippine National Bank v.
Cedo, 243 SCRA 1). It does not matter that
the Pilipinas Bank branch in Quezon City is
not one of the branches he services in
Manila. The bank itself is his client. This
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS BAR Q & A (1987-2018)
constitutes malpractice for which Atty. Cruz
can be disciplined.
Q: Huey Company and Dewey
Corporation are both retainer clients of
Atty. Anama. He is the Corporate
Secretary of Huey Company. He
represents Dewey Corporation in three
pending litigation cases. Dewey
Corporation wants to file a civil case
against Huey Company and has
requested Atty. Anama to handle the
case. What are the options available to
Atty. Anama? Explain your answer.
(1993 Bar)
A: The options available to Atty. Anama are:
1. To decline to accept the case because to
do so will constitute representing
conflicting interests. It is unethical for a
lawyer to represent a client in a case
against another client in the said case.
2. To accept to file the case against Huey
Company, after full disclosure to both
retained clients and upon their express and
written consent. The written consent may
free him from the charge of representing
conflicting interests, because written
consent amounts to a release by the
clients of the lawyer’s obligation not to
represent conflicting interests.
Q:Atty. Japzon, a former partner of XXX
law firm, is representing Kapuso
Corporation in a civil case against
Kapamilya Corporation whose legal
counsel is XXX law firm. Atty. Japzon
claims that she never handled the case
of Kapamilya Corporation when she was
still with XXX law firm. Is there a conflict
of interests? Explain. (2005 Bar)
A:There is a conflict of interests when a
lawyer represents inconsistent interests.
This rule covers not only cases in which
confidential communications have been
confided, but also those in which no
confidence has been bestowed or will be
used. Also, there is conflict of interests if the
new retainer will require the attorney to
perform an act which will injuriously affect
his first client in any matter in which he
represents him and also whether he will be
called upon in his new relation to use
against his first client any knowledge
acquired through their connection (Santos
vs. Beltran, 418 SCRA 17). Since Atty.
Japzon was a partner of the XXX law firm
which has Kapamilya Corporation as its
client, she cannot handle a case against it
Page 32
as such will involve conflict of interests. The
employment of a law firm is equivalent to
the retainer of the memberstherof. It does
not matter if Atty. Japzon never handled a
case of the Kapamilya Corporation when
she was still with the XXX law firm.
Representation with zeal within legal
bounds
Q: Winnie retained the services of Atty.
Derecho to file a collection case against
Carmen. Winnie paid Atty. Derecho a
sizeable retainer’s fee which the latter
accepted. Later, in the process of
determining the amount of debt to be
collected from Carmen, Atty. Derecho
noticed that of the total claim of 8.5
Million, certain invoices covering 3.5
Million appeared to be irregular. Winnie
while admitting the irregularity assures
her lawyer that there would be no
problem as Carmen was by nature
negligent in keeping her records and
would not notice the mistakes anyway.
Atty. Derecho tried to convince Winnie to
exclude the amount of 3.5 Million but
Winnie refused. As a consequence Atty.
Derecho terminated their relationship
and withdrew from the case. Was Atty.
Derecho right in terminating their
relationship and withdrawing from the
case? How about the fact that he had
already accepted a sizeable retainer’s fee
from his client? Discuss fully. (1995 Bar)
A: Atty. Derecho was right in terminating the
lawyer-client relationship and withdrawing
from the case. Rule 22.01 of the Code of
Professional Responsibility provides that a
lawyer may withdraw his services when the
client pursues an illegal or immoral course
of conduct in connection with the matter he
is handling, or when the client insists that
the lawyer pursue conduct violative of the
canons and rules. Rule 15.07 provides that
a lawyer shall impress upon his client
compliance with the laws and the principles
of fairness. While he owes his client warm
zeal, it should always be within the bounds
of the law (Code of Professional
Responsibility, Canon 19). The fact that
Atty. Derecho had already accepted a
sizeable retainer’s fee should make no
difference on his decision to withdraw.
Moreover, he may retain the fees he has
already received, his withdrawal being
justified (Pineda, Legal & Judicial Ethics,
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS BAR Q & A (1987-2018)
1994 edition, p. 223), unless the same is
unconscionable.
Q: What are the three (3) tests to
determine conflict of interest for
practicing lawyers? Explain each briefly.
(2009 Bar)
A:
1. When in representation of one client, a
lawyer is required to fight for an issue
or claim, but is also duty bound to
oppose it for another client;
2. When the acceptance of the new
retainer will require an attorney to
perform an act that may injuriously
affect the first client or when called
upon in a new relation to use against
the first client any knowledge acquired
through their professional connection;
When the acceptance of a new relation
would prevent the full discharge of an
attorney’s duty to give undivided fidelity and
loyalty to the client or would invite suspicion
of unfaithfulness or double-dealing in the
performance of that duty (Northwestern
University v. Arquillo, 415 SCRA 513
[2005]).
CLIENT’S MONEYS AND
PROPERTIES Fiduciary relationship
Q: A lawyer charged his client P10,
000.00 for filing fees pertaining to the
complaint he filed in court. He actually
spent only P1, 000.00. He did not
account the balance. May his client
charge him for misconduct as a member
of the Philippine bar? Explain your
answer. (1990 Bar)
A: The client may charge his lawyer with
misconduct for not accounting for the
balance on P9, 000.00. It is well-settled that
where the client gives his lawyer money for
a specific purpose, such as to pay the
docket fees for the filing of an action in
court, so much of the money not used for
the purpose belongs to the client and the
lawyer holds in it trust for him. And it is the
lawyer’s duty to promptly account for all
money received from his client. For this
reason, the lawyer’s failure to account for
the balance of the money not spent for filing
fees will render him liable for
misappropriation, which is a ground for
disbarment.
Q: From February to November 2004,
Atty. Calumpang, in fraudulent
Page 33
connivance with brokers, convinced
Corinna to deliver to him advance money
for the titling of a beachfront property in
Caramoan. Six (6) months had elapsed
and Atty. Calumpang had made
absolutely no progress in the titling of
the land. He also could not return the
advance money paid by Corinna because
he had converted the money to his
personal use. After almost a decade, and
the property could still not be titled in
Corinna's name, she filed an action with
the Commission on Bar Discipline (CBD)
in 2014 for deceit, malpractice, and
conduct unbecoming of a member of the
Bar. In his defense, Atty. Calumpang
asserted that, since the acts complained
of took place more than 10 years ago,
the case had already prescribed.
Rule on the defense of Atty. Calumpang.
A: Atty. Calumpang is incorrect. He violates
his oath of office as a lawyer in delaying the
progress of the case because of money.
Good standing in the legal profession is a
continuous duty and obligation of a lawyer.
Hence, crime committed by Atty.
Calumpang for deceit, malpractice and
conduct unbecoming a member of the Bar
does not prescribe.
Client’s moneys and properties; Fidelity
to client’s cause
Q: C engaged the services of attorney D
concerning various mortgage contracts
entered into by her husband from whom
she is separated fearful that her real
estate properties will be foreclosed and
of impending suits for sums of money
against her. Attorney D advised C to
give him her land titles covering her lots
so he could sell them to enable her to
pay her creditors. He then persuaded
her to execute deeds of sale in his favor
without any monetary or valuable
consideration, to which C agreed on
condition that he would sell the lots and
from the proceeds pay her creditors.
Later on, C came to know that attorney
D did not sell her lots but instead paid
her creditors with his own funds and
had her land titles registered in his
name. Did attorney D violate the Code of
Professional Responsibility? Explain.
(2009, 2007 Bar)
A: The decision of the Supreme Court in
the case of Hernandez v. Go (450 SCRA 1)
is squarely applicable to this problem.
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS BAR Q & A (1987-2018)
Under the same set of facts, the Supreme
Court held the lawyer to have violated
Canons 16 and 17 of the Code of
Professional Responsibility, which provide
as follows:
Canon 16. A lawyer shall hold in trust all
moneys and properties of his client hat may
come into his possession.
Canon 17. A lawyer owes fidelity to the
cause of his client and he shall be mindful
of the trust and confidence reposed in him.
The Supreme Court further held that the
lawyer concerned has engaged in deceitful,
dishonest, unlawful and grossly immoral
acts, which might lessen the trust and
confidence reposed by the public in the
fidelity, honesty, and integrity of the legal
profession, consequently, the Court
disbarred him.
Delivery of Funds
Q: D was charged with estafa by C before
the barangay for misappropriating the
proceeds of sale of jewelry on
commission. In settlement of the case, D
turned over to the barangay captain, a
lawyer, the amount of P2,000.00 with the
request that the barangay captain turn
over the money to C. Several months
passed without C being advised of the
status of her complaint. C contacted D
who informed her that she (D) had long
before turned over the amount of P2,
000.00 to the barangay captain who
undertook to give the money to her (C).
C thus filed a case against the barangay
captain who at once remitted the amount
of P2,000.00 to C. May the barangay
captain be faulted administratively?
Explain. (2000 Bar)
A: Yes. The Code of Professional
Responsibility applies to lawyers who are in
the government service. As a general rule, a
lawyer who holds a government office may
not be disciplined as a member of the bar
for misconduct in the discharge of his office
as a government official. However, if that
misconduct as a government official 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 on such ground (Dinsay v. Ctoco,
264 SCRA 703 [1996]). In the case of
Penticostes v. Ibanez, 304 SCRA 281
[1999], a barangay captain who failed to
Page 34
remit for several months the amount given
to him for payment of an obligation, was
found to have violated the Code of
Professional Conduct.
Q: Marlyn, a widow engaged the services
of Atty. Romanito in order to avert the
foreclosure of several parcels of land
mortgaged by her late husband to
several creditors. Atty. Romanito
advised the widow to execute in his
favor deeds of sale over the properties,
so that he could sell them and generate
funds to pay her creditors. The widow
agreed. Atty. Romanito did not sell the
properties, but paid the mortgage
creditors with his own funds, and had
the land titles registered in his name.
Atty. Romanito succeeds in averting the
foreclosure. Is he administratively liable?
Reasons. (2009 Bar)
A: Yes, Atty. Romanito is administratively
liable. The basic facts in this case are the
same as the facts in Hernandez v. Go (450
SCRA 1 [2005]), where the Supreme Court
found the lawyer to have violated Canons
16 and 17 of the Code of Professional
Responsibility, and disbarred him. The
Supreme Court held that a lawyer’s acts of
acquiring for himself the lots entrusted to
him by his client are, by any standard, acts
constituting gross misconduct. The lawyer in
that case was disbarred.
FIDELITY TO CLIENT’S
CAUSE
Competence and diligence
a. Adequate protection
Q: X was indicted for murder. As he had
no counsel on arraignment, the trial
court appointed Atty. A as his counsel
de oficio. When Atty. A asked X what
was his stand, X said he was guilty. X
thereupon pleaded guilty. Trial was
thereafter conducted. When the turn of
the defense to present evidence came,
Atty. A manifested that he was not
presenting any and that he was
submitting the case for decision, praying
that X’s plea be considered mitigating.
Did Atty. A’s assistance or conduct
approximate the competence and
diligence which the Code of Professional
Responsibility expected of him? Explain.
(2000 Bar)
A: No. It is the duty of defense counsel
when his client desires to enter a plea of
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS BAR Q & A (1987-2018)
guilty to fully acquaint himself with the facts
and surrounding circumstances of the case,
advise his client of his constitutional rights
and the full import of a plea of guilty, see to
it that the prescribed procedure is observed,
present evidence, including possible
mitigating circumstances, so that the
precise degree of his client's culpability is
established and the appropriate penalty is
imposed, and thus leave no room for doubt
that there was a mistake or
misunderstanding as to the nature of the
charges to which his client has pleaded
guilty. Atty. A has fallen short of this
required conduct.
b. Negligence
Q: Nene approached Atty. Nilo and asked
him if it was alright to buy a piece of land
which Maneng was selling. What was
shown by Maneng to Nene was an
Original Certificate of Title with many
annotations and old patches, to which
Nene expressed suspicion. However,
Atty. Nilo, desirous of pushing through
with the transaction because of the high
notarial fee promised to him, told Nene
that the title was alright and that she
should not worry since he is an attorney
and that he knew Maneng well. He
notarized the Deed of Sale and Nene paid
Maneng P 108,000.00. It turned out that
Maneng had previously sold the same
property to another person. For the
injustice done to Nene, may Atty. Nilo be
disciplined? (1998 Bar)
Yes. Atty. Nilo is guilty of gross negligence
in protecting the interests of his client. A
lawyer shall not neglect a legal matter
entrusted to him and his negligence in
connection therewith shall render him liable
(Rule 18.03, Code of Professional
Responsibility). Worse, he was negligent
because he placed his own interest in
receiving a high notarial fee over and above
the Interest of his client. In the case of
Nadayag v. Grageda, 237 SCRA 202, which
involves similar facts, the Supreme Court
held that the lawyer "should have been
conscientious in seeing to it that justice
permeated every aspect of a transaction for
which his services had been engaged, in
conformity with the avowed duties of a
worthy member of the Bar."
Q: May a lawyer be held liable for
damages by his client for the lawyer’s
failure to file the necessary pleadings to
prosecute the client’s case and as a
result of which the client suffered
damages? (2014 Bar)
Page 35

A:Yes, he may be held liable. Rule 18.03 of
the Code of Professional Responsibility
provides that “a lawyer shall not neglect a
legal matter entrusted to him, and his
negligence in connection therewith shall
render him liable.”But attorney-client
relationship, want of reasonable care and
diligence, and injury sustained by the client
as the proximate result thereof, are the
prerequisites to the maintenance of an
action for damages against a lawyer.
Q:
a. State the rule on whether a client is
bound by the mistake of his counsel.
b. On account of his mistake, is counsel
liable to his client for damages?
Explain. (2002 Bar)
A:
a. A client is bound by the mistakes of his
lawyer [Cabales v. fiery, 94 SCRA 374
(1979); Valerio v. Secretary of
Agriculture, 7 SCRA 719(1963)].
However, when the lawyer has
practically sold his client down the river
or when the negligence is so gross that
the client was deprived of due process,
the client is not bound by the negligence
of the lawyer [PHHC v. Tiongco, 12
SCRA 471(1964); San Miguel Corp. v.
Laguesma, 236 SCRA 595(1994)].
b. A lawyer shall not neglect a legal matter
entrusted to him and his negligence in
connection therewith shall make him
liable (Rule 18.03, Code of Professional
Responsibility). A client who suffers
prejudice by reason of his counsel’s
inexcusable negligence in the discharge
of his duty may file an action for
damages against him. However, there
must be a showing that had the lawyer
exercised due diligence, the client under
the facts and the law would have
succeeded in recovering from the
adverse party or in resisting the claim of
the latter.
c. Collaborating counsel
Q: May a client hire additional counsel
as collaborating counsel over and above
the objection of the original counsel?
(2014, 1989 Bar)
A: Yes, the client is entitled to have as
many lawyers as he can afford.
Professional courtesy, however, demands
that a lawyer retained as a collaborating
counsel should at least communicate with
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS BAR Q & A (1987-2018)
the original counsel and should at least
communicate with the original counsel
before entering his appearance. On the
part of the original counsel, he should not
look at the employment of a collaborating
counsel as a loss of confidence in him.
Q: Atty. A objects to the collaboration of
Atty. B as proposed by Client C in a
pending case. How would A, B and C
handle the situation? (2001 Bar)
A:A, B, and C may handle the
situation in the following manner:
a. "A" can offer to withdraw his services.
Rule 22.01(c) of the Code of
Professional Responsibility allows a
lawyer to withdraw his services if his
inability to work with co-counsel will not
promote the best interest of his client.
Here, by objecting to the collaboration of
Atty. B, Atty. A foresees his inability to
work with the former. “A” may with
withdraw to give his client a free hand in
protecting his interest.
b. "B" should refuse to accept the case,
otherwise, he may be encroaching on
the professional employment of another
lawyer. A lawyer should decline
association as colleague if it is
objectionable to the original counsel, but
if the lawyer first retained is relieved,
another may come into the case (Canon
7, Canons of Professional Ethics).
c. "C" the client must choose only one of
the lawyers. If he wants Atty. B as his
lawyer, he should formally terminate the
services of "A" so "B" can formally enter
his appearance in the case.
REPRESENTATION WITH ZEAL
WITHIN
LEGAL BOUNDS
Use of fair and honest means
Q: Under Canon 19 of the Code of
Professional Responsibility, "a lawyer
shall represent his client with zeal within
the bounds of the law." How far, in
general terms, may a lawyer go in
advocating, supporting and defending
the cause of his client in a criminal case
filed against the latter? (2003, 1997 Bar)
A: The right to counsel must be more than
just the presence of a lawyer in the
courtroom or the mere propounding of
standard questions and objections. The
Page 36
right to counsel means that the accused is
simply accorded legal assistance extended
by a counsel who commits himself to the
cause of the defense and acts accordingly.
The right assumes an active involvement by
the lawyer in the proceedings, particularly at
the trial of the case, his bearing constantly
in mind the basic rights of the accused, his
being well-versed on the case, and his
knowing the fundamental procedure,
essential laws and existing jurisprudence.
The right of an accused to counsel finds
substance in the performance by the lawyer
of his sworn duty of fidelity to his client.
Tersely put, it means an efficient and truly
decisive legal assistance and not a simple
perfunctory representation. (People v.
Bemas, 306 SCRA 293 [1999], cited in
People v. Sta. Teresa, 354 SCRA 697
[2001]). However, a lawyer shall employ
only honorable and honest means in the
maintenance of his client’s cause. (Section
20, Rule 128).
Client’s fraud
Q: Atty. A discovered his client's fraud
against the adverse party. What steps
should he take so that his client will
secure only that which is legally and
justly due him? (2001 Bar)
A: A lawyer who has received information
that his client has, in the course of the
representation, perpetrated a fraud upon a
person or tribunal, shall promptly call upon
the client to rectify the same, and failing
which he shall terminate the relationship
with such client in accordance with the
Rules of Court (Rule 19.02, Code of
Professional Conduct).
Attorney’s Fees
a. Contingency fee arrangements
Q: For services to be rendered by Atty.
Hamilton as counsel for Gener in a civil
case involving the recovery of the
ownership and possession of a parcel of
land with an area of 5,000 square meters,
the two of them agreed on a success fee
for Atty. Hamilton of P50,000.00 plus 500
square meters of the land. The trial court
ultimately rendered judgment in favor of
Gener, and the judgment became final
and executory. After receiving
P50,000.00, Atty. Hamilton demanded the
transfer to him of the promised 500
square meters of the land.
Instead of complying, Gener brought an
administrative complaint charging Atty.
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS BAR Q & A (1987-2018)
Hamilton with violation of the Code of
Professional Responsibility and Art.
1491(5) of the Civil Code for demanding
the delivery of a portion of the land
subject of the litigation.
Is Atty. Hamilton liable under the Code
of Professional Responsibility and the
Civil Code? Explain your answer. (2017,
2010 Bar)
A.
No. Atty. Hamilton is not liable for violation
of the Code of Professional Responsibility
and the Civil Code. The agreement on a
success fee of P50,000.00 and 500 sq. m.
of the land involved in the case is valid. The
parties entered into a contingent fee
contract that is allowed under Canon 20,
Rules 20.01 of the Code of Professional
Responsibility and Canon 13 of the Code of
Professional Ethics.
A contract for a contingent fee is not
covered by Article 1491 because the
transfer or assignment of the property in
litigation takes effect only after the finality of
a favorable judgment (Director of Lands v.
Ababa, G.R. No. L-26096 February 27,
1979).
Q: The spouses Manuel were the
registered owners of a parcel of land
measuring about 200,000 square meters.
On May 4, 2008, the spouses Manuel
sold the land for P3,500,000.00 to the
spouses Rivera who were issued a
certificate of title for said land in their
names. Because the spouses Rivera
failed to pay the balance of the purchase
price for the land, the spouses Manuel,
through Atty. Enriquez, instituted an
action on March 18, 2010 before the
Regional Trial Court (RTC) for sum of
money and/or annulment of sale,
docketed as Civil Case No. 1111. The
complaint in Civil Case No. 1111
specifically alleged that Atty. Enriquez
would be paid P200,000.00 as attorney’s
fees on contingent basis. The RTC
subsequently promulgated its decision
upholding the sale of the land to the
spouses Rivera. Atty. Enriquez timely
filed an appeal on behalf of the spouses
Manuel before the Court of Appeals. The
appellate court found for the spouses
Manuel, declared the sale of the land to
the spouses Rivera null and void, and
ordered the cancellation of the spouses
Rivera’s certificate of title for the land.
The Supreme Court dismissed the
Page 37
spouses Rivera’s appeal for lack of
merit. With the finality of judgment in
Civil Case No. 1111 on October 20, 2014,
Atty. Enriquez filed a motion for the
issuance of a writ of execution.
Meanwhile, the spouses Rivera filed on
November 10, 2014 before the RTC a
case for quieting of title against the
spouses Manuel, docketed as Civil Case
No. 2222. The spouses Manuel, again
through Atty. Enriquez, filed a motion to
dismiss Civil Case No. 2222 on the
ground of res judicata given the final
judgment in Civil Case No. 1111.
Pending the resolution of the motion to
dismiss in Civil Case No. 2222, the RTC
granted on February 9, 2015 the motion
for issuance of a writ of execution in
Civil Case No. 1111 and placed the
spouses Manuel in possession of the
land. Atty. Enriquez, based on a
purported oral agreement with the
spouses Manuel, laid claim to ½ of the
land, measuring 100,000.00 square
meters with market value of
P1,750,000.00, as his attorney’s fees.
Atty. Enriquez caused the subdivision of
the land in two equal portions and
entered into the half he appropriated for
himself. Based on the professional and
ethical standards for lawyers, may Atty.
Enriquez claim ½ of the land as his
contingency fee? Why? (2015 Bar)
A:Atty. Enriquez may not claim ½ of the
land as his contingency fee. In the first
place, a lawyer cannot charge his client a
contingent fee or a percentage of the
amount recovered as his fees in the
absence of an express contract to that
effect (Corpus v. Court of Appeals, G.R.
No. L-40424, June 30, 1980, 98 SCRA
424). There is no such contract in this case.
As a matter of fact, the claim of a purported
oral agreement for a contingency fee of ½
of the land is contradicted by the allegation
in the Complaint in Civil Case No. 1111 for
a contingency fee of P200,000.00 only.
Moreover, the amount claimed as
contingent fee appears to be excessive and
unreasonable. The issue involved in the
case was simple and did not require
extensive skill, effort and research on the
part of Atty. Enriquez.
Furthermore, Atty. Enriquez caused the
division of the land and appropriate one half
thereof, pending resolution of the motion to
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS BAR Q & A (1987-2018)
dismiss in Civil Case No. 2222. This
constitutes a violation of Article 1491 of the
New Civil Code, because the case in which
the property is involved has not yet been
terminated (The Conjugal Partnership of
the Spouse Cadavedo v. Victorino T.
Lacaya, G.R. No. 173188, January 15,
2014).
Q: Atty. CJ handled the case for plaintiff
GE against defendant XY in an action for
damages. Judgment was rendered for
plaintiff GE. When a writ of execution
was issued, the sheriff levied on a 400
square meter lot of defendant XY.
Pursuant to their contingent fee
contract, plaintiff GE executed a deed of
assignment in favor of Atty. CJ of one-
half of the lot. Atty. CJ accepted the
assignment.
Is the contract for contingent fee valid?
Explain. (2002 Bar)
A: Contract for contingent fee is a contract
wherein the attorney’s fee, usually a
percentage of what may be recovered in
the action, is made to depend upon the
success of the lawyer in enforcing or
defending his client’s right. It is a valid
contract, unlike a champertous contract
which is invalid because the lawyer
undertakes to shoulder the expenses of the
litigation. However, the amount of the fee
agreed upon may be reduced by the courts
if it should be unconscionable. Fifty percent
(50%) of what the client might recover may
or may not be unconscionable depending
on the factors to be considered in
determining the reasonableness of an
attorney's fee.
Q: Atty. A’s services as a lawyer were
engaged by B to recover from C certain
construction materials and equipment.
Because B did not have the means of
defray the expenses of litigation, he
proposed to Atty. A that he (A)
shoulders all expenses of the litigation
and he (B) would pay him (A) a portion
of the construction materials and
equipment to be recovered as
compensation for his professional
services.
May Atty. A correctly agree to such
arrangement? (1999 Bar)
A:No, Atty. A may not correctly agree to
such an agreement.
Page 38
Such an arrangement would constitute a
champertous contract which is considered
void due to public policy, because it would
make him acquire a stake in the outcome of
the litigation which might lead him to place
his own interest above that of the client
(Bautista v. Gonzales, 182 SCRA 151). A
champertous contract is one in which a
lawyer undertakes to prosecute a case, and
bear all the expenses in connection
therewith without right of reimbursement,
and will be paid his fees by way of a portion
of the property or amount that may be
recovered, contingent on the success of his
efforts. It is different from a contingent fee
contract, which is valid, in which the lawyer
will also be paid depending on the success
of his efforts, but he does not undertake to
shoulder all the expenses in the case. He
may advance such expenses but always
subject to reimbursement by his client.
Q: Chester asked Laarni to handle his
claim to a sizeable parcel of land in
Quezon City against a well-known
property developer on a contingent fee
basis. Laarni asked for 15% of the land
that may be recovered or 15% of
whatever monetary settlement that may
be received from the property developer
as her only fee contingent upon securing
a favorable final judgment or
compromise settlement. Chester signed
the contingent fee agreement.
Assume the property developer settled
the case after the case was decided by
the Regional Trial Court in favor of
Chester for P1 Billion. Chester refused to
pay Laarni PI50 Million on the ground
that it is excessive. Is the refusal
justified?
Explain. (2008 Bar)
A: The refusal of Chester to pay is
unjustified. A contingent fee is impliedly
sanctioned by Rule 20.01 (f) of the CPR. A
much higher compensation is allowed as
contingent fees in consideration of the risk
that the lawyer will get nothing if the suit
fails. In several cases, the Supreme Court
has indicated that a contingent fee of 30%
of the money or property that may be
recovered is reasonable. Moreover,
although the developer settled the case, it
was after the case was decided by the
Regional Trial Court in favor of Chester,
which shows that Atty. Laarni has already
rendered service to the client.
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS BAR Q & A (1987-2018)
Chester’s refusal to pay Atty. Laarni P150 m
illion as attorney’s fees on the ground that it
is excessive, is justified. In the case of
Sesbreno v. Court of Appeals (245 SCRA
30 [1995]), the Supreme Court held that
“contingent fee contracts are under the
supervision and close scrutiny of the court
in order that clients may be protected from
unjust charges” and that “its validity
depends on a large measure on the
reasonableness of the stipulated fees under
the circumstances of each case.” Also,
“stipulated attorney’s fees are
unconscionable whenever the amount is by
far so disproportionate compared to the
value of the services rendered as to amount
to fraud perpetuated against the client.”
Considering the circumstances that the
case was decided by settlement of the
property developer, the attorney’s fee of
P150 Million would be unconscionable.
Q. Carina was dismissed by her
employer for breach of trust and
confidence, and for wilful violation of
company rules and policies. She filed an
action for illegal dismissal claiming that
her termination was without legal basis.
The Labor Arbiter found that she was
illegally dismissed and awarded her the
amount of PhP 80 million. On appeal to
the National Labor Relations
Commission (NLRC), the award was
reduced to PhP 40 million as separation
pay, plus PhP 5 million for the value of
her stock option plans which would have
vested if she were not illegally dismissed
from her job. Unsatisfied with the
NLRC's decision, she appealed to the
Court of Appeals (CA) the amount of
monetary award granted by the NLRC.
She engaged the services of Casal,
Casos and Associates to handle her
appeal. Her retainer agreement with
Casal, Casos and Associates provided
for contingent fees equivalent to 10% of
her claim for separation pay and 10% of
the value of stock options to be awarded
to her.
The CA decision was not favorable to
Carina, so she appealed the same to the
Supreme Court (the Court). While the
case was pending appeal with the Court,
Carina entered into a compromise
agreement with her employer to
terminate the case upon payment to her
of the full amount of PhP 40 million, less
the PhP 15 million previously paid to her
by her employer. Before the compromise
agreement was finalized, Carina
Page 39
terminated the services of Casal, Casos
and Associates and asked them to
withdraw from the case pending before
the Court. The parties negotiated the
compromise agreement without the
participation of their lawyers since the
employer imposed the condition that no
lawyers should be involved in the
compromise negotiation. She, together
with her employer, then filed the
Compromise Agreement for approval by
the Court, and sought the termination of
the case, with prejudice.
Casal, Casos and Associates filed a
motion to intervene in the case pending
with the Court, praying that Carina be
ordered to pay them PhP 4 million,
representing 10% of the amount received
by Carina from her employer in
settlement of the case, plus 6% legal
interest from the date of filing of the
motion for intervention, until fully paid.
The intervenors claimed that they were
dismissed without justifiable cause prior
to the signing of the compromise
agreement for the reason that Carina,
their client, wanted to evade payment of
their legal fees. Carina claimed they were
dismissed because Attys. Casal and
Casos, who personally handled her case,
had resigned from the law firm to join the
government, and because of the
negligence and failure of her lawyers to
attend to her case. In reply, the
intervenors said that the engagement
was with the law firm and not with
individual lawyers. The law firm also
presented letters signed by their client
commending them for work done well in
the case.
(a) May lawyers legally charge their
clients based on contingent fees? (2.5%)
(b) Should Casal, Casos and Associates
be allowed to intervene in the case
pending before the Court in order to
collect their fees from Carina? (2.5%)
(c) Can Carina refuse to pay attorneys'
fees on the ground that the lawyers who
personally handled her case had already
resigned from the law firm with which
she had contracted? (2.5%)
(d) May Carina's employer, defendant in
this case, be held solidarily liable with
Carina for the payment of the attorneys'
fees of Carina's lawyers? (2.5%)
(e) May the intervenors collect legal
interest in addition to their attorneys'
fees? (2018 Bar)
A.INCOMPLETE ANSWER
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS BAR Q & A (1987-2018)
a) A contingent fee is impliedly sanctioned
by Rule 20.01 (f) of the CPR. A much higher
compensation is allowed as contingent fees
in consideration of the risk that the lawyer
will get nothing if the suit fails. In several
cases, the Supreme Court has indicated
that a contingent fee of 30% of the money
or property that may be recovered is
reasonable.
b)
b. Attorney’s Liens
Q: M engaged the services of Atty. D to
prosecute his annulment of marriage
case in the Regional Trial Court (RTC).
After a long-drawn trial, Atty. D was able
to secure a favourable judgment from
the court. Unfortunately, M failed to pay
in full the stipulated attorney’s fees of
Atty. D. How can Atty. D collect his fees
from M? Discuss fully. (2014 Bar)
A: He can allot his fees either by filing a
motion in the annulment of marriage case
that he handled, and to order M to pay the
same, or he can file a separate action for
the recovery of his attorney’s fees. Of the
two, the first is preferable because the judge
in the annulment case will be in a better
position to evaluate the amount and value of
his services. In the meantime, he may avail
of the retaining lien, which is to retain the
moneys and properties of M in his
possession until he is paid for his services,
or a charging lien, which is to charge the
money judgment in the case for the
payment of his fees.
Q: Define an attorney's retaining lien.
(2000, 1998 Bar)
A:A retaining lien is the right of an attorney
to retain the funds, documents, and papers
of his client which have lawfully come into
his possession until his lawful fees and
disbursements have been paid, and to
apply such funds to the satisfaction thereof
(Sec. 37, Rule 138, Rules of Court).
Q: Upon being replaced by Justice C,
Atty. B, the former counsel of the
parents of the victims of the OZONE
Disco tragedy, was directed to forward
all the documents in his possession to
Justice C. Atty. B refused, demanding
full compensation pursuant to their
written contract. Sensing that a favorable
Judgment was forthcoming, Atty. B filed
a motion in court relative to his
Page 40
attorney’s fees, furnishing his former
clients with copies thereof.
Is Atty. B legally and ethically correct in
refusing to turn over the documents and
in filing the motion? Explain. (1998 Bar)
A: Atty. B is legally and ethically correct in
refusing to turn over the documents. He is
entitled to a retaining lien which gives him
the right to retain the funds, documents and
papers of his client which have lawfully
come to his possession until his lawful fees
and disbursement have been paid (Sec. 37,
Rule 138. Rules of Court. Rule 16.03, Code
of Professional Responsibility). Likewise, he
is legally and ethically correct in filing a
motion in court relative to his fees. He is
entitled to a charging lien upon all
judgments for the payment of money, and
executions issued in pursuance of such
judgments, which he has secured in a
litigation of his client, from and after the time
when the records of the court rendering
such judgment or issuing such execution
(ibid.)
Q: Harold secured the services of Atty.
Jarencio to collect from various debtors.
Accordingly. Atty. Jarencio filed
collection cases against the debtors of
Harold and in fact obtained favorable
Judgments in some. Atty. Jarencio
demanded from Harold his attorney’s
fees pursuant to their agreement but
Harold refused. When one of the
defendants paid his indebtedness of
20,000.00 through Atty. Jarencio, the
latter refused to turn over the money to
Harold; instead, Atty. Jarencio applied
the amount to his attorney’s fees having
in mind the provisions of the Civil Code
on legal compensation or set-off to
justify his act.
Was Atty. Jarencio correct in refusing to
turn over to his client the amount he
collected? Discuss fully. (1995 Bar)
A: A lawyer has a retaining lien which
entitled him to retain possession of a
client’s document, money or other property
which come into the hands of the attorney
professionally, until the general balance due
him for professional services is paid. Under
Rule 138, Section 37 of the Rules of Court,
the attorney cannot be compelled to
surrender the documents in his possession
without prior proof that his fees have been
duly satisfied.
However, Atty. Jarencio here cannot
appropriate the sum of 20,000.00. If there is
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS BAR Q & A (1987-2018)
a dispute between him and Harold as to the
amount of the fees that he can collect, what
he should do if Harold disputes the amount
of the fees he is entitled, he must file an
action for the recovery of his fee or record a
charging lien so that the court can fix the
amount to which he is entitled.
Q: The vendor filed a case against the
vendee for the annulment of the sale of a
piece of land.
Assume the vendee obtained a summary
judgment against the vendor. Would the
counsel for the defendant vendee be
entitled to enforce a charging lien?
Explain. (2008 Bar)
A:A charging lien, to be enforceable as
security for payment of attorney’s fees,
requires as a condition sine qua nona
judgment for money and execution in
pursuance of such judgment secured in the
main action by the attorney in favor of his
client (Metropolitan Bankv. Court of
Appeals,181 SCRA 367 [1990]). A summary
judgment against the vendor in this case
only means that his complaint was
dismissed. This is not a judgment for
payment of money, hence, a charging lien
cannot attach. However, if the judgment
should include a money judgment in favor of
the vendee on his counterclaim, a charging
lien can properly be enforced.
Q:Differentiate “retaining lien” from
“charging lien” (2016 Bar)
A:A retaining lien gives the lawyer the right
to retain the funds, documents and papers
of the client which have lawfully come into
his possession, until his lawful fees and
disbursements have been paid. A charging
lien is a lien upon all judgments for payment
of sum of money and executions thereof, to
ensure payment of his fees and
disbursements in the said case.
A retaining lien is a passive lien; the lawyer
is not required to perform any act except to
hold on to the client’s funds, documents and
papers, until his fees and disbursements are
paid. A charging lien is an active lien; the
lawyer is required to file a motion in court,
with copy served on the adverse party, to
have a statement of his claim to such fees
and disbursements charged or attached to
the decision in such case and executions
thereof.
A retaining lien is general lien; it may be
resorted to in order to secure payment of
Page 41
the lawyer’s fees in all the cases he has
handled and services he has rendered to
the client. A charging lien is a special lien; it
can be utilized for the purpose of collecting
only the unpaid fees and disbursements of
the lawyer in the case where the judgment
for a sum of money may be secured.
c. Fees and controversies with
clients (Quantum Meruit)
Q:
a. Explain the doctrine of quantum
meruit in determining the amount of
attorney’s fees.
b. Identify the factors to be considered
in determining attorney’s fees on a
quantum meruit basis. (2015, 2014,
2007, 1998 Bar)
A:
a. Quantum meruit means as much as the
services of a lawyer are worth. Recovery
of attorney’s fees on the basis of
quantum meruit is authorized when (1)
there is no express contract for the
payment of attorney’s fees; (2) although
there is a contract for attorney’s fees, the
fees stipulated are found unconscionable
by the court; (3) the contract for
attorney’s fees is void due to formal
defects of execution; (4) the lawyer was
not able to finish the case for justifiable
cause; (5) the lawyer and the client
disregard the contract for attorney’s fees;
and (6) the client dismissed his counsel
or the latter withdrew therefrom, for valid
reasons.
b. The factors are those set in Rule 20.01
of the Code of Professional
Responsibility (CPR), as follows:
i. the time spent and the extent
of the services rendered or
required;
ii. the novelty and difficulty of
the questions involved;
iii. the importance of the subject
matter;
iv. the skill demanded;
v. the probability of losing other
employment as a result of
acceptance of the proffered
case;
vi. the customary charges for
similar services and the
schedule of fees of the IBP
chapter to which he belongs;
vii. the amount involved in the
controversy and the benefits
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS BAR Q & A (1987-2018)
resulting to the client from
the service;
viii. the contingency or certainty
of compensation;
ix. the character of the
employment, whether
occasional or established;
and
x. the professional standing of
the lawyer.
Q: Charo Conti engaged the services of
Atty. Cesar Compostela for the
registration of a property located in
Cebu, and which property she had
inherited together with her siblings. It
was agreed in writing that Charo would
pay Atty. Compostela PhP 20,000 as
acceptance fee and PhP 2,000 as
appearance fee. During the last hearing
of the case, Atty. Compostela demanded
an additional amount of PhP 20,000 for
the preparation of a memorandum, which
he said would further strengthen Charo's
position, plus 20% of the total area of the
property as additional fees for his
services. Charo did not agree to Atty.
Compostela's demands since they were
contrary to their agreement. Besides, the
property was co-owned with her siblings
and she could not agree to Atty.
Compostela's demands without the
consent of her co-heirs.
Four (4) years later, the petition for
registration was approved and the Land
Registration Authority notified Charo
that the decree of registration and the
original of the owner's duplicate copy of
the title had already been transmitted to
the Register of Deeds (RD). When Charo
went to the RD, she was surprised to
discover that the owner's duplicate copy
of the title had already been claimed by,
and released to, Atty. Compostela.
Despite demand, Atty. Compostela
refused to deliver the title to Charo until
she paid the additional attorneys' fees
that he was demanding. Charo then
instituted a complaint for disbarment
against him. In his defense, Atty.
Compostela claimed that:
(a) he had a right to retain the owner's
duplicate of the title as his retaining lien;
and
(b) he was entitled to the payment of
additional professional fees on the basis
of the principle of quantum meruit.(2018
Bar)
Page 42
A:
(a) The defense of Atty. Compostela is
untenable. It is violative of Canon 16
Rule 16.03. He has no right to retain
the title since the additional payment
was contrary to the original
agreement between him and his
client. A lawyer is prohibited from
having a stake in a real property
subject of his own case. Canon 16
Rule 16.03 provides that a lawyer
shall deliver the funds and property
of his client when due or upon
demand. However, he shall have a
lien over the funds and may apply so
much thereof as may be necessary
to satisfy his lawful fees and
disbursements, giving notice
promptly thereafter to his client. He
shall also have a lien to the same
extent on all judgments and
executions he has secured for his
client as provided for in the Rules of
Court.
(b) The defense is not tenable.
Quantum Meruit is resorted to where
there is no express contract for
payment of attorney’s fees agreed
upon between the lawyer and the
client. In the case at bar, Atty.
Compostela and Charo Conti
already agreed with the payment.
However, The former demanded
additional compensation contrary to
their agreement. Therefore, the
defense of Quantum Meruit cannot
be appreciated. It violates Canon 20
of the code of professional
responsibility.
Q: Define champerty. (2017, 2000 Bar)
A: Champerty is any agreement by a lawyer
to conduct the litigation in his own account,
to pay the expenses thereof or to save his
client therefrom and to receive as his fee a
portion of the proceeds of the judgment. It is
contrary to public policy as it violates the
fiduciary relationship between the lawyer
and his client (Spouses Cadavedo v.
Lacaya, G.R. No. 173188, January 15,
2014).
Q: A inherited a parcel of land situated in
Batasan Hills which is occupied by
informal settlers. He wants to eject the
occupants, but he has no financial
means to pursue the ejectment case. He
contracted the services of Atty. B, who
agreed to defray all the expenses of the
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS BAR Q & A (1987-2018)
suit on the condition that he will be paid
one-half (1/2) of the property to be
recovered as his compensation.
What is the kind of attorney’s fees? Can
Atty. B enforce this contract against A?
What are the respective remedies
relative to the collection of attorney’s
fees, if any, of A and Atty. B against each
other? (2014, 2010, 1988 Bar)
A: This is a champertous fee agreement
because Atty. B agreed to defray all the
expenses of the action and will be paid only
if he is successful in recovering A’s
property.
Atty. B cannot enforce it because it is
contrary to public policy and the ethics of
the legal profession. The remedy of A is to
file an action to have the agreement
declared null and void, or simply to refuse to
pay attorney’s fees to Atty. B on the basis of
the said agreement. On the other hand,
Atty. B will still be entitled to collect
attorney’s fees on a quantum meruit basis.
He may bring an action to collect such fees.
Q: Discuss the propriety of a lawyer
filing a suit against his client concerning
his fees. (1998 Bar)
A: Rule 20.04 of the Code of Professional
Responsibility provides that “a lawyer shall
avoid controversies with his clients
concerning his compensation and shall
resort to judicial action only to prevent
imposition, injustice or fraud.” The legal
profession is not a money-making trade but
a form of public service. Lawyers should
avoid giving the impression that they are
mercenary (Perez v. Scottish Union and
National Insurance Co., 76 Phil. 325). It
might even turn out to be unproductive for
him for potential clients are likely to avoid a
lawyer with a reputation of suing his clients.
d. Concepts of Attorney’s fees
Extraordinary concept
Q: A real estate company, elated over the
decision in a case regarding a dispute
over a personal matter between its top
sales representative and his neighbor,
gifted Atty. O, who represented its sales
representative in the litigation, with a
240-square-meter lot in its newly
developed subdivision. The case
handled by Atty. O had nothing to do
with the sales representative in the
litigation, with a 240 square-meter lot in
its newly developed subdivision. The
Page 43
case handled by Atty. O had nothing to
do with the sales representative's work
for the real estate company. The latter's
offer of the lot, which Atty. O accepted,
was in consideration of its sales
representative’s being the firm's Number
One salesman. Was there a breach of the
Code of Professional Responsibility by
Atty. O when he accepts the 240 square-
meter lot? (1997 Bar)
A: Rule 20.03 of the Code of Professional
Responsibility provides that a lawyer shall
not, without the full knowledge and consent
of the client, accept any fee, reward, costs,
commission, interests, rebate of forwarding
allowance or other compensation
whatsoever related to his professional
employment from anyone other than the
client.
There should be no room for suspicion on
the part of the client that his lawyer is
receiving compensation in connection with
the case from third persons with hostile
interests (Report of IBP Committee, p. 112).
Even if the secret compensation comes
from a friendly person, if the act is
discovered, it is bound to create dissension
in the client-lawyer relationship. Worse, the
lawyer will be able to enrich himself by
receiving more than what is due him as
attorney’s fees (Pineda. Legal & Judicial
Ethics, 1995 ed. p. 243).
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
The gift of the real estate company does not
come from the adverse party, hence, there
is no violation of the lawyer is duty of loyalty
to his clients. The property given was not
his client's property involved in the litigation.
Hence, it does not violate Article 1491 of the
Civil Code. The lawyer's acceptance of the
gift is proper. However, it would be better if
he informs his client.
Q: Deciding a case for malicious
prosecution, Judge Sales awarded
attorney's fees and expenses of
litigation, in addition to exemplary
damages, to the plaintiff.
a. Did the judge act within his
discretion in awarding attorney's
fees?
b. As counsel for the plaintiff, are you
entitled to receive the attorney's fees
thus awarded in addition to your
stipulated legal fees? (1994 Bar)
A:
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS BAR Q & A (1987-2018)
a. A party may recover attorney's fees in
cases of malicious prosecution against
him in an action for damages against
the party responsible therefore (Art.
2208 (3), Civil Code). But he must prove
not only that he was acquitted in the
criminal action, but that the person who
charged him knowingly made a false
statement of facts to induce the
prosecutor to prosecute or that the
institution of the criminal action was
prompted by a sinister design to vex or
humiliate him and to cast upon him
dishonor and disgrace.
b. No. Attorney’s fees in the concept or as
an item of damages is an indemnity for
damages sustained by the client, and
belongs to him.
Q: A, after taking his oath as a lawyer in
1985, was maliciously charged with the
crime of seduction by Amor, his former
girlfriend. Her parents instigated the
filing of the case. A appeared for and
defended himself. In the decision
acquitting him, the court explicitly stated
that he was a victim of malicious
prosecution. A then filed a complaint for
damages and attorney’s against Amor
and her parents. A likewise appeared for
himself in the case. Can her recover
attorney’s fees? (1991 Bar)
A: No. Attorney A is not entitled to
attorney's fees. He may, however, be
entitled to attorney’s fees in the form of
damages upon proof of bad faith of the
defendant and a definite ruling be made by
the court on the claim.
PRESERVATION OF CLIENT’S
CONFIDENCES Prohibited disclosures
and use:
A. Brando & Luzon Law Office had a
retainer agreement with Gregory, a
businessman with shady connections.
Gregory was recently charged in the
RTC in Manila with money laundering in
relation to an illegal drugs syndicate
using Cable Co., his holding company,
as its money-laundering conduit. The
members of the Brando & Luzon Law
Office assigned to handle Gregory's
account, including yourself, were
implicated in the money laundering case
for their role in the incorporation of
Cable Co. and in the active management
of its business affairs.
Page 44
 In a bid to fortify the case against
Gregory and the others, the public
prosecutor approaches you (as the least
guilty person who will qualify for a
discharge as a state witness) and offers
to make you a state witness. Should you
accept the offer? Explain your answer.
B. Under the facts of the preceding
question, assume that you had resigned
from the Brando & Luzon Law Office
prior to the filing of the money
laundering case against Gregory and the
others, and that you were not implicated
in the case. However, you had assisted
in handling the Cobra Co. account
during your time with the law firm.
Cobra Co. was largely owned by Cable
Co.
The public prosecutor handling the case
against Gregory and the others asks you,
as a former member of the Brando
&Luzon Law Office, to help strengthen
the case for the Government, and hints
that you may be implicated in the case if
you do not cooperate. What is your legal
and ethical course of action? Explain
your answer. (2017, 2013 Bar)
A:
A. No. The information acquired involving
the criminal case against Gregory is
covered by the privileged
communications rule. Rule 15.02of the
Code of Professional Responsibility
provides that “A lawyer shall be bound
by the rule on privilege communication in
respect of matters disclosed to him by a
prospective client.”
There being a lawyer-client relationship
between the parties, the lawyer cannot
serve as a state witness and disclose
the information obtained from his client.
B. Decline to testify against the defendants
and to provide evidence in the case as
the attorney-client privilege lasts even
beyond the termination of the
relationship.
The duty of a lawyer to preserve his
client’s secrets and confidence outlasts
the termination of the attorney-client
relationship, and continues even after
the client’s death (Mercado v. Vitriolo,
A.C. No. 5108, May 26, 2005).
Q: A, who is charged in Court with estafa
for misappropriating funds entrusted to
him by B, consulted Atty. C about the
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS BAR Q & A (1987-2018)
case with the intention of engaging his
services as defense counsel. Because A
could not afford to pay the fee that Atty.
C was charging him, A engaged the
services of another counsel, Atty. D. At
the trial of the case for estafa against A
the prosecutor announced in open court
that his next witness was Atty. C. whom
he was calling to the witness stand.
Counsel for A. Atty. D, vigorously
opposed the prosecutor's move on the
ground that Atty. C may not be called as
a witness for the prosecution as he
might disclose a would be client's
confidence and secret. Asked by the
presiding Judge what would be the
nature of Atty. C's testimony, the
prosecutor answered it has something to
do with how A obtained from B the funds
that the latter received from the former
but failed to account for. Thereupon,
Atty. A vigorously opposed the
prosecutor's motion.
If you were the Judge, how would you
rule on the matter? (1999 Bar)
A: If I were the judge, I will not allow Atty. C
to take the witness stand. When A
consulted Atty. C about his case, a lawyer-
client relationship was established between
them. It does not matter that A did not
eventually engage his services because of
his fees; such relationship has already been
created (Hilado v. David, 84 Phil 569). A
lawyer shall be bound by the rule on
privileged communication in respect to
matters disclosed to him by a prospective
client (Rule 15.02 Code of Professional
Responsibility). The rule on privileged
communication provides that an attorney
cannot, without the consent of his client, be
examined as to any communication made
by the client to him (Sec. 21 [b], Rule 130,
Rules of Court). The prosecutor has
announced that Atty. C will be asked about
how A obtained from B the funds that he
failed to account for. Atty. C's knowledge of
such matter could have come only from A.
COMMENT: There seems to be a
typographical error in the last sentence
which refers to Atty. A. Perhaps, the
examiner intended to refer to simply A or to
his counsel Atty.D. It is recommended that
the use by the candidate of Atty. A should
not detract from the appreciation of his
answer.
Q: Christine was appointed counsel de
oficio for Zuma, who was accused of
raping his own daughter. Zuma pleaded
Page 45
not guilty but thereafter privately
admitted to Christine that he did commit
the crime charged.
Can Christine disclose the admission of
Zuma to the court? Why or why not?
(2008 Bar)
A: Christine cannot disclose the admission
of Zuma to the Court. If she does so, she
will violate her obligation to preserve
confidences or secrets of her client (Canon
21, Rule 21.02, CPR). The privileged
communication between lawyer and client
may be used as a shield to defend crimes
already committed.
Q: When Atty. Romualdo interviewed
his client, Vicente, who is accused of
murder, the latter confessed that he
killed the victim in cold blood. Vicente
also said that when he takes the
witness stand, he will deny having done
so. Is Atty. Romualdo obliged, under his
oath as lawyer, to inform the judge (a)
that his client is guilty? (2009 Bar)
A: Atty. Romualdo cannot reveal to the
judge that Vicente is guilty. He is bound to
keep what Vicente told him in confidence,
because that is an admission of a crime
already committed.
Disclosure, when allowed
Q: When Atty. Romualdo interviewed his
client, Vicente, who is accused of
murder, the latter confessed that he
killed the victim in cold blood. Vicente
also said that when he takes the witness
stand, he will deny having done so. Is
Atty. Romualdo obliged, under his oath
as lawyer, to inform the judge that (b) his
client will commit perjury on the witness
stand? Explain. (2009 Bar)
A:Atty. Romualdo can reveal to the judge
that Vicente will commit perjury on the
witness stand. This is already a revelation
of a crime still to be committed, and that lies
outside the mantle of privileged
communication.
Q: Atty. Serafin Roto is the Corporate
Secretary of a construction corporation
that has secured a multi-million
infrastructure project from the
government. In the course of his duties
as corporate secretary, he learned from
the company president that the
corporation had resorted to bribery to
secure the project and had falsified
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS BAR Q & A (1987-2018)
records to cut implementing costs after
the award of the project.
The government filed a civil action to
annul the infrastructure contract and has
subpoenaed Atty. Roto to testify against
the company president and the
corporation regarding the bribery. Atty.
Roto moved to quash the subpoena,
asserting that lawyer-client privilege
prevents him from testifying against the
president and the corporation.
Resolve the motion to quash. (2013 Bar)
A: Motion denied. The motion should be
denied because Atty. Roto did not learn of
the bribery and falsification in connection
with a lawyer-client relation. Being a
corporate secretary does not create a
lawyer -client relation because membership
to the Bar is not a requirement to perform
the functions of a corporate secretary.
Consequently, Atty. Roto does not owe any
obligation of confidentiality to the
corporation.
Atty. Roto may be compelled to testify. As
an officer of the court, a “lawyer shall exert
every effort and consider it his duty to assist
in the speedy and efficient administration of
justice” (Code of Professional
Responsibility, Canon 12). Furthermore, “a
lawyer owes candor, fairness and good faith
to the court” (Ibid., Canon 10).
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
Motion Granted.It is true that being a
corporate secretary does not necessarily
constitute a lawyer- client relationship.
However, Atty. Roto may be considered in
the practice of law if part of his duties as a
corporate secretary is to give legal advice to
or prepares legal documents for the
corporation. Thus a lawyer-client
relationship may have been constituted
between Atty. Roto and the corporation.
Consequently, it is his duty as an attorney
“to maintain inviolate the confidence, and at
every peril to himself, to preserve the
secrets of his client” (Rules of Court, Rule
138, Sec. 20, par. E, paraphrasing and
arrangement supplied).
Atty. Roto learned from the company
president of the bribery and falsification,
while Atty. Roto was in the course of his
performance of his duties as corporate
secretary. Thus, he could not be examined
on that matter without the consent of his
client. [Ibid., Rule 130, Sec. 24(b)].
Page 46
Q: A mayor charged with Homicide
engaged your services as his lawyer.
Since there is only one witness to the
incident, the mayor disclosed to you his
plan to kill the lone witness through a
contrived vehicular accident.
a. What are the moral and legal
obligations of an attorney to the
mayor and to the authorities?
b. Should the killing push through and
are you certain that the mayor is the
one responsible, are you under
obligation to disclose to the
authorities what was confided to
you? Is this not a privileged
communication between client and
attorney? (1998 Bar)
A:
a. It is the duty of an attorney to divulge
the communication of his client as to his
announced intention to commit a crime
to the proper authorities to prevent the
act or to protect the person against
whom it is threatened.
b. Public policy and the lawyer's duty to
counsel obedience to the law forbid that
an attorney should assist in the
commission of a crime or permit the
relation of attorney and client to conceal
a wrongdoing. He owes it to himself and
to the public to use his best efforts to
restrain his client from doing any
unlawful act and if, notwithstanding his
advise, his client proceeds to execute
the illegal deed, he may disclose it or be
examined as to any communication
relating thereto. There is privileged
communication only as to crimes
already committed before its
communication to the lawyer.
Q: In a prosecution for murder
against a ranking army officer, the
latter engaged the services of Atty.
Carlos Malilin, a well-known trial
lawyer, to whom the officer in one
of their conferences disclosed a
plan to “eliminate” or “salvage”—
i.e., kill or otherwise cause to
disappear— the only witness, a
fellow military officer, through a
contrived traffic or highway
accident.
a. What are the legal and moral
obligations of Atty. Carlos
Malillin to his client and to the
authorities, under the given
circumstances?
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS BAR Q & A (1987-2018)
b. Should the planned “accident”
take place and the only witness
for the prosecution be killed as
a result, is Atty. Carlos Malillin
under any obligation to disclose
to the authorities the plan that
his client had mentioned to him
as above mentioned? Reasons.
(1988, 1987 Bar)
A:
a. Attorney Malillin has the moral and
legal obligation to advise the army
officer not to execute his plan. If
the accused army officer does not
abide by his advise, Atty. Malillin
should withdraw from the case.
b. Atty. Malillin has the obligation to
testify in said case if he is called
upon by the Court to do so. The
obligation of the lawyer to keep the
secrets of his client obtained in the
course of his employment covers
only lawful purposes.
Withdrawal of services
Q: Give three instances when a
lawyer is allowed to withdraw
his/her services. (2015, 1997, 1988
Bar)
A: (Any three of the following:)
1. When the client pursues an illegal
or immoral course of conduct in
connection with the matter he is
handling;
2. When the client insists that the
lawyer pursue conduct violative of
these canons and rules;
3. When his inability to work with co-
counsel will not promote the best
interest of the client;
4. When the mental or physical
condition of the lawyer renders it
difficult for him to carry out the
employment effectively;
5. When the client deliberately fails to
pay the fees for the services or
fails to comply with the retainer
agreement;
6. When the lawyer is elected or
appointed to apublic office.
7. Other similar cases.
Q: B hired Atty. Z to file a replevin case
against C for an agreed acceptance fee
of P30,000.00 which was evidenced by a
written contract. After the complaint was
Page 47
filed by Atty. Z, B terminated his services
and hired a new lawyer for the same
amount of attorney’s fees. How much
attorney’s fees is Atty. Z entitled? (2014
Bar)
A: Atty. Z is entitled to the entire amount of
the attorney’s fees agreed upon because
his services were terminated by the client
without just cause (Sec. 26, Rule 138,
Rules of Court).
Q. Mrs. Conchita Conchu engaged the
services of Atty. Carlo Colorado to act as
private prosecutor to handle a criminal
case against persons suspected of
slaying her husband. Atty. Colorado
performed his duties - he interviewed
witnesses to build up his case and
religiously attended hearings. However,
he failed to attend one hearing (allegedly
because he did not receive a notice) in
which the court, over Mrs. Conchu's
objections, granted bail to all the
accused. Mrs. Conchu belligerently
confronted Atty. Colorado about his
absence. Stung by Mrs. Conchu's words,
Atty. Colorado filed with the court a
"Motion to Withdraw as Counsel". The
motion did not bear the consent of Mrs.
Conchu, as in fact, Mrs. Conchu refused
to sign her conformity to Atty.
Colorado's withdrawal. Meanwhile, the
hearing in the criminal case continued,
but Atty. Colorado no longer appeared at
the hearings nor did he contact Mrs.
Conchu. Mrs. Conchu then filed a
complaint seeking disciplinary sanctions
against Atty. Colorado. Atty. Colorado
cited "loss of confidence" and "serious
differences" with the client as his
reasons for withdrawing his services
unilaterally.
Can Atty. Colorado be sanctioned for his
actions? (2018 Bar)
A.
No, he cannot be sanctioned. According to
the law, a lawyer may withdraw his services
in any of the following cases:
1) When the client pursues an illegal or
immoral course of conduct in
connection with the matter he is
handling;
2) When the client insists that the
lawyer pursues conduct violative of
these canons and rules;
3) When his inability to work with co-
counsel will not promote the best
interest of the client;
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS BAR Q & A (1987-2018)
4) When the mental or physical
condition of the lawyer renders it
difficult for him to carry out the
employment effectively;
5) When the client deliberately fails to
pay the fees for the services or fails
to comply with the retainer
agreement;
6) When the lawyer is elected or
appointed to public office; and
7) Other similar cases.
Since the given facts is under these
circumstances, Atty. Colorado can withdraw
and it is immaterial that his client did not
sign the conformity for the said action since
the court was noticed anyways.
Q: Atty. Bravo represents Carlos Negar
(an insurance agent for Dormir Insurance
Co.) in a suit filed by insurance claimant
Andy Limot who also sued Dormir
Insurance. The insurance policy requires
the insured/claimant to give a written
notice to the insurance company or its
agent within 60 days from the
occurrence of the loss.
Limot testified during the trial that he
had mailed the notice of the loss to the
insurance agent, but admitted that he
lost the registry receipt so that he did
not have any documentary evidence of
the fact of mailing and of the timeliness
of the mailed notice. Dormir Insurance
denied liability, contending that the
timely notice had not been given either
to the company or its agent. Atty.
Bravo’s client, agent Negar, testified and
confirmed that he never received any
notice.
A few days after Negar testified, he
admitted to Atty, Bravo that he had lied
when he denied receipt of Limot’s notice,
he did receive the notice by mail but
immediately shredded it to defeat
Limot’s claim.
If you were Atty. Bravo, what would you
do in light of your client’s disclosure that
he perjured himself when he testified?
(2013 Bar)
A: If I were Atty. Bravo I shall promptly call
upon Carlo Negar, my client, to rectify his
perjured testimony by recanting the same
before the court.
Should he refuse or fail to do so I shall then
terminate my relationship with him (Code of
Professional Responsibility, Canon 19, Rule
Page 48
19.02) stating that with his having
committed perjury he pursued an illegal
conduct in connection with the case (Ibid.,
Canon 22, Rule 22.01).
Since my client Limot refuses to forego the
advantage thus unjustly gained as a result
of his perjury, I should promptly inform the
injured person or his counsel, so that they
may take the appropriate steps (Canons of
Professional Ethics, Canon 41).
Finally, as part of my duty to do no
falsehood, nor consent to the doing of any
in court (Code of Professional
Responsibility, Canon 10, Rule 10.01, and
the Attorney’s oath). I shall file a
manifestation with the court attaching
thereto the notice of termination as Limot’s
counsel.
Q: On the eve of the initial hearing for the
reception of evidence for the defense,
the defendant and his counsel had a
conference where the client directed the
lawyer to present as principal defense
witnesses two
(2) persons whose testimonies were
personally known to the lawyer to have
been perjured. The lawyer informed his
client that he refused to go along with
the unwarranted course of action
proposed by the defendant. But the
client insisted on his directive, or else he
would not pay the agreed attorney’s
fees.
When the case was called for hearing the
next morning, the lawyer forthwith
moved in open court that he be relieved
as counsel for the defendant. Both the
defendant and the plaintiffs counsel
objected to the motion.
Under the given facts, is the defense
lawyer legally justified in seeking
withdrawal from the case? Why or why
not? Reason briefly. (2004 Bar)
A:Yes, he is justified. Under Rule 22.01 of
the Code of Professional Responsibility, a
lawyer may withdraw his services "if the
client insists that the lawyer pursue conduct
violative of these canons and rules". The
insistence of the client that the lawyer
present witnesses whom he personally
knows to have been perjured, will expose
him to criminal and civil liability and violate
his duty of candor, fairness and good faith
to the court.
Q: Atty. X filed a notice of withdrawal of
appearance as counsel for the accused Y
after the prosecution rested its case. The
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS BAR Q & A (1987-2018)
reason for the withdrawal of Atty. X was
the failure of accused Y to affix his
conformity to the demand of Atty. X for
increase in attorney’s fees. Is the ground
for withdrawal justified? Explain. (2000
Bar)
A: The ground for the withdrawal is not
justified. Rule 22.01 (e) of the Code of
Professional responsibility provides that a
lawyer may withdraw his services when the
client deliberately fails to pay the fees for
his services or fails to comply with the
retainer agreement. In this case, the client
has not failed to pay the lawyer’s fees or to
comply with the retainer agreement. He has
only refused to agree with the lawyer’s
demand for an increase in his fees. It is his
right to refuse; that is part of his freedom of
contract.
Q: Atty. Jessa was the counsel for Mr.
Nolan, a cantankerous millionaire, in the
latter's personal case. Soon after the
case was submitted for decision, Mr.
Nolan withdrew the files from Atty. Jessa
and informed her that he was engaging
another lawyer. On that same day, a
copy of the decision in the case was
received by Atty. Jessa but she did not
do anything anymore with the decision.
She did not also file a withdrawal of her
appearance. Mr. Nolan's new counsel did
not file any notice of his appearance. By
the time Mr. Nolan found out about the
adverse decision, his period to appeal
had lapsed. Was the service of the
decision on Atty. Jessa still effective?
Explain your answer. (2017, 2012 bar)
A: Yes. The service of decision to Atty.
Jessa is still effective. Atty. Jessa is
still considered the counsel of record
until his withdrawal of appearance
has been actually filed and granted.
Q: State the rule on (a) the right of the
client to dismiss his lawyer and (b) the
prerogative of a lawyer to withdraw as
counsel. (1998,1994, 1989 Bar)
A:
a. A client has the right to dismiss his
lawyer at any time, with or without just
cause. The existence or non-existence of
just cause is material only for determining
the right of the lawyer to compensation
for services rendered. The client's right to
terminate the lawyer's services springs
from the strictly personal and highly
confidential nature of the relationship
Page 49
 between the lawyer and the client. Once
the client loses confidence in his lawyer,
he has the right to dismiss him.
b. On the other hand, the lawyer does
not have an unqualified right to withdraw
as counsel. As an officer of the court, he
may not withdraw or be permitted to
withdraw as counsel if such withdrawal
will work injustice to a client or frustrate
the ends of justice. A lawyer may
withdraw at any time with his client's
written consent. Without such consent,
he may withdraw his services only for
good cause and upon notice appropriate
in the circumstances (Canon 22, Code of
Professional Responsibility).
SUSPENSION, DISBARMENT AND
DISCIPLINE OF LAWYERS (RULE 139-B,
RULES OF COURT)
NATURE AND CHARACTERISTICS
OF
DISCIPLINARY ACTIONS AGAINST
LAWYERS
Sui generis
Q: Is the defense of Atty. R in a
disbarment complaint for immorality filed
by his paramour P that P is in pari delicto
material or a ground for exoneration?
Explain. (2010 Bar)
A:The defense of in pari delicto is immaterial
in an administrative case which is sui generis.
The administrative case is about the lawyer’s
conduct, not the woman’s (Mortel v. Aspiras,
100 Phil. 586 [1956]; Po Cham v. Pizarro,
467 SCRA 1 [2005]; Marjorie F. Samaniego
v. Atty. Andrew V. Ferrer, 555 SCRA 1
[2008]).
Q: Arabella filed a complaint for
disbarment against her estranged
husband Atty. P on the ground of
immorality and use of illegal drugs.
After Arabella presented evidence and
rested her case before the Investigating
Commissioner of the IBP Committee on
Bar Discipline, she filed an Affidavit of
Desistance and motion to dismiss the
complaint, she and her husband having
reconciled for the sake of their children.
You are the Investigating Commissioner
of the IBP. Bearing in mind that the
family is a social institution which the
State is duty-bound to preserve, what
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS BAR Q & A (1987-2018)
will be your action on Arabella’s motion
to dismiss the complaint? (2010 Bar)
A: I would still deny the motion to
dismiss. The general rule is that “no
investigation shall be interrupted or
terminated by reason of the desistance,
settlement, compromise, restitution,
withdrawal of the charges or failure of the
complainant to prosecute the same unless
the Supreme Court motu proprio or upon
recommendation of the IBP Board of
Governors determines that there is no
compelling reason to continue with the
proceedings. An administrative investigation
of a lawyer is sui generis, neither a civil nor
criminal proceeding. An affidavit of
desistance has no place in it.
Q. Atty. Celso Casis' relationship with
Miss Cory Cerrada began when he
represented her in several criminal cases
for estafa and violation of B.P. 22. His
expertise and diligence in personally
assisting and facilitating her release on
bail and other legal actions saved her
from many legal predicaments. Despite
her initial resistance, Miss Cerrada,
convinced by Atty. Casis' sincerity and
representation that he was separated
from his wife and was taking necessary
steps for the annulment of his marriage,
began to live with him openly as
husband and wife. One day, Atty. Casis'
wife suddenly entered Miss Cerrada's
home and assaulted her, inflicting
injuries. Miss Cerrada then filed a
complaint with the IBP charging Atty.
Casis with gross immorality and gross
misconduct. However, shortly
afterwards, upon Atty. Casis' pleas, Miss
Cerrada filed a motion to withdraw
complaint. The IBP had required Atty.
Casis to file an answer but he did not do
so, relying on Miss Cerrada's withdrawal
of the complaint against him.
Can the IBP continue to investigate Atty.
Casis and recommend the imposition of
sanctions against him, and for the Court
to impose sanctions, if warranted,
notwithstanding Miss Cerrada's filing of
the motion to withdraw the complaint
against him? (2018 Bar)
A.
Yes, they can still continue to investigate.
According to the law, the procedural
requirement observed in ordinary civil
proceedings that only the real party-in-
interest must initiate the suit does not apply
Page 50
in disbarment cases. In fact, the person who
called the attention of the court to a lawyer’s
misconduct is in no sense a party, and
generally has no interest in the outcome.
Furthermore, a compromise or withdrawal of
charges does not terminate an
administrative complaint against a lawyer.
Q: A proceeding for disbarment is
considered sui generis, explain briefly,
giving at least five (5) reasons in support
of your answer. (2002 Bar)
A: A disbarment proceeding is sui
generis or a class by itself, because
of the following reasons:
a. It Is neither a civil nor a
criminal proceeding;
b. Double jeopardy cannot be availed
of as a defense;
c. It can be initiated motu proprio by
the Supreme Court or by the IBP;
d. It can proceed regardless of
interest or lack of interest of the
complainant;
e. It is imprescriptible;
f. It is confidential;
g. It is in itself due process
Q. Carlos contracted two marriages: the
first was with Consuelo, whom he left in
the province, and the second was with
Corinne in Manila, with whom he had six
(6) children. Both women were unaware
of Carlo's marriage to the other.
When Carlos entered law school, he met
Cristina, a classmate, to whom he
confided his marital status. Not long
after, Carlos and Cristina became
involved in an extramarital affair, as a
result of which Carlos left Corinne and
their children. During Carlos and
Cristina's senior year in law school,
Consuelo passed away. After their
admission to the bar, Atty. Carlos and
Atty. Cristina decided to get married in
Hong Kong in a very private ceremony.
When Corinne learned of Carlos and
Cristina's wedding in Hong Kong, she
filed a disbarment case against Atty.
Carlos and Atty. Cristina on the ground
of gross immorality. Atty. Carlos and
Atty. Cristina raised the following
defenses:
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS BAR Q & A (1987-2018)
a) the acts complained of took place
before they were admitted to the bar; and
b) Atty. Carlos' marriage to Corinne was
void ab initio due to his subsisting first
marriage with Consuelo, and they were
free to marry after Consuelo died.
Rule on each defense. (2018 Bar)
A. Their contentions are incorrect.
According to the law, a lawyer shall not
engage in conduct that adversely reflects on
his fitness to practice law, nor shall he,
whether in public or private life, behave in a
scandalous manner to the discredit of the
legal profession. His marriage to Corinne,
even though void ab ignition, is immaterial
since both of their action is against the
standards and morals set forth for
individuals to be admitted to the Judicial Bar
and Council.
Q: Alleging that Atty. Malibu seduced her
when she was only sixteen (16) years
old, which resulted in her pregnancy and
the birth of a baby girl, Miss Magayon
filed a complaint for his disbarment
seven years after the alleged seduction
was committed.
Atty. Malibu contended that, considering
the period of delay, the complaint filed
against him can no longer be entertained
much less prosecuted because the
alleged offense has already prescribed.
Is Atty. Malibu’s contention tenable or
not? Reason briefly. (2017, 2004 Bar)
A: No. Atty. Malibu’s contention is not
tenable.
The ordinary statute of limitations has no
application to disbarment proceedings (Calo
v. Degamo, A.C. No. 516, June 27, 1967).
Disciplinary proceedings against lawyers
are sui generis. They are neither civil nor
criminal proceedings. Its purpose is not to
punish the individual lawyer but to
safeguard the administration of justice by
protecting the court and the public from the
misconduct of lawyers and to remove from
the profession of law persons whose
disregard of their oath of office proves them
unfit to continue discharging the trust
reposed in them as members of the bar.
Unlike ordinary proceedings, it is not subject
to the defense of prescription.
Q: C filed a verified administrative
complaint against Atty. D. In the course
Page 51
of the investigation, C presented an
affidavit of desistance which she
identified on the witness stand. What
course of action should the investigator
take? Explain. (2000 Bar)
A: The investigator should continue with the
investigation. A disbarment proceeding is
sui generis, neither a civil nor criminal
action. As such, a desistance by the
complainant is unimportant. The case may
proceed regardless of interest or lack of
interest of the complainant (Rayos-Ombac
v. Rayos, 285 SCRA 93 [1998]). If the
evidence on record warrants, the
respondent may be suspended or disbarred
regardless of the desistance of the
complainant. Of course, if the complainant
refuses to testify and the charges cannot
then be substantiated, the court will have no
alternative but to dismiss the case.
Grounds
Q: What are the grounds for disbarment
or suspension from office of an
attorney? (2015 Bar)
A: Under Sec. 27, Rule 138, the grounds for
suspension or disbarment of a lawyer are
“any deceit, malpractice, or other gross
misconduct in such office, grossly immoral
conduct, or by reason of conviction of a
crime involving moral turpitude, or for any
violation of the oath which he is required to
take before admission to practice, or for a
willful disobedience appearing as an
attorney for a party or to a cause without
authority to do so.” The practice of soliciting
cases for the purposes of gain, either
personally or through paid agents or brokers
constitutes malpractice.
Q: Atty. Forma is a member of the
Philippine Bar. He went to New York City,
took the New York State Bar, and passed
the same. He then practiced in New York
City. One of his American clients filed a
case for disbarment against him for
pocketing the money which was
entrusted to him as payment for the
filing fee and other incidental expenses
of his damage suit. Atty. Forma was later
disbarred for dishonesty. Disheartened,
Atty. Forma came back to the Philippines
and practiced as a lawyer.
Will his disbarment in New York be used
against him for purposes of disbarment
proceedings here in the Philippines?
(2014, 2006, 2002 Bar)
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS BAR Q & A (1987-2018)
A: Atty. Forma may be disbarred in the
Philippines if the ground for his disbarment
in New York is also a ground for disbarment
in this country. But he is still entitled to due
process of law, and the foreign court’s
judgment against him only constitutes prima
facie evidence of unethical conduct as a
lawyer. He is entitled to be given an
opportunity to defend himself in an
investigation to be conducted in accordance
with Rule 139 of the Revised Rules of Court
(In Re: Suspension from the Practice of
Law in the Territory of Guam of Atty. Leon
Maquera, B.M. 793, July 30, 2004; Velez v.
De Vera, A.C. No. 6697, July 25, 2006).
Q: Cliff and Greta were law school
sweethearts. Cliff became a lawyer, but
Greta dropped out. One day, Cliff asked
Greta to sign a marriage contract. The
following day, Cliff showed Greta the
document already signed by an alleged
solemnizing officer and two witnesses.
Cliff then told Greta that they were
already married and Greta consented to
go on a honeymoon. Thereafter, the
couple cohabited and begot a child. Two
years later, Cliff left Greta and married a
Venezuelan beauty. Incensed, Greta filed
a disbarment complaint against Cliff. Will
the case prosper? Explain. (2009 Bar)
A: The disbarment case will prosper. In the
case of Cabrera v. Agustin (106 Phil. 256
[1959]), a lawyer who deceived a woman to
believe that they were already married after
they had signed an application for a
marriage license, and afterwards took
advantage of her belief to satisfy his lust,
until she bore him a child, was considered
by the Supreme Court to be lacking in
integrity and good moral character to
remain a member of the bar.
Q: Atty. Walasunto has been a member
of the Philippine Bar for twenty (20)
years but has never plied his profession
as a lawyer. His sole means of livelihood
is selling and buying real estate. In one
of his transactions as a real estate
broker, he issued a bouncing check. He
was criminally prosecuted and
subsequently convicted for violating B.P.
Big. 22. In the disbarment proceedings
filed against him, Atty. Walasunto
contended that his conviction for
violation of B.P. Big. 22 was not a valid
ground for disciplinary action against a
member of the bar. He further argued
that his act in issuing the check was
done in relation to his calling as a real
Page 52
estate broker and not in relation to the
exercise of the profession of a lawyer.
Are the contentions of Atty. Walasunto
meritorious or not? Reason. (2004, 1992
Bar)
A:No. His contentions are not meritorious.
In the first place, a ground for disbarment is
conviction of a crime involving moral
turpitude (Sec. 27, Rule 138, Rules of
Court), and the violation of B.P. 22 is
considered to be a crime involving moral
turpitude (People v. Tuanda, 181 SCRA
692 [1990]). In the second place, Rule 7.03
of the Code of Professional Responsibility
provides that “a lawyer shall not engage in
conduct that adversely reflects on his fitness
to practice law, nor shall he, whether in
public or private life, behave in a
scandalous manner to the discredit of the
legal profession.” Additionally, Rule 1.01 of
the same Code provides that “a lawyer shall
not engage in unlawful, dishonest, immoral
or deceitful conduct."
Q: The agreement between the
estranged husband and wife provided
for, among others, the liquidation of the
conjugal partnership of gains, custody
of the children, and support for the
children. In the same agreement, the
couple waived the right to prosecute
each other for bigamy, adultery,
concubinage and whatever acts of
infidelity. There was also a condonation
provision. The agreement was prepared
and notarized by a lawyer who was the
best man at the wedding. What are the
liabilities, if any, of this lawyer? Explain
your answer. (1989 Bar)
A: The document executed by the spouses
is immoral and contrary to law. The lawyer
who drafted and notarized all said
documents committed malpractice and can
be disbarred or suspended. Although the
principal duty of the notary public is to
ascertain the identity of the parties and the
voluntariness of the declaration, it is
nevertheless incumbent upon him to guard
against any illegal or immoral agreement.
Proceedings
Q: A disbarment complaint against a
lawyer was referred by the Supreme
Court to a Judge of the Regional Trial
Court for investigation, report and
recommendation. On the date set for the
hearing of the complaint, the Judge had
the case called for trial in open court
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS BAR Q & A (1987-2018)
and proceeded to receive evidence for
the complainant. What would you have
done if you were the counsel for the
respondent-lawyer? Why? Reason
briefly. (2004 Bar)
I would object to the holding of a trial in
public. Disciplinary proceedings against an
attorney are confidential in nature until its
termination. The professional success of a
lawyer depends almost entirely on his good
reputation. If that is tarnished, it is difficult to
restore the same (Ibanez v. Vina, 107
SCRA 607 [1981]). To avoid the
unnecessary ruin of a lawyer’s name,
disbarment proceedings are directed to be
confidential until their final determination
(Sec. 18, Rule 139-B, Rules of Court).
Q: Atty. D was required by Judge H of the
Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Manila to
show cause why he should not be
punished for contempt of court for
shouting invectives at the opposing
counsel and harassing his witness.
Assuming that there was sufficient
cause or ground, may Judge H suspend
Atty. D from the practice of law? If
Judge H finds that the actuations of
Atty. D are grossly unethical and
unbecoming of a member of the bar,
may Judge H disbar Atty. D instead?
Explain your answer. (2014 Bar)
A: Under Section 28, Rule 138 of the Rules
of Court, a Regional Trial Court may
suspend a lawyer from the practice of law
for any of the causes provided in Section
27, until further action of the Supreme
Court. But it may not disbar him, for only
the Supreme Court can disbar a lawyer
pursuant to its constitutional power to admit
persons to the practice of law.
Q: Atty. Hyde, a bachelor, practices law
in the Philippines. On long weekend, he
dates beautiful actresses in Hong Kong.
Kristine, a neighbor in the Philippines,
filed with the Supreme Court an
administrative complaint against the
lawyer because of sex videos uploaded
through the internet showing Atty. Hyde’
s sordid dalliance with the actresses in
Hong Kong.
In his answer, Atty. Hyde (1) questions
the legal personality and interest of
Kristine to institute the complaint and (2)
insists that he is a bachelor and the sex
videos relate to his private life which is
Page 53
outside public scrutiny and have nothing
to do with his law practice.
Rule on the validity of Atty. Hyde’s
defenses. (2009 Bar)
A:
a. The legal personality and interest
of Kristine to initiate the complaint for
disbarment is immaterial. A disbarment
proceedings is sue generis, neither a civil
nor a criminal proceeding. Its sole purpose
is to determine whether or not a lawyer is
still deserving to be a member of the bar. In
a real sense, Kristine is not a plaintiff;
hence, interest on her part is not required.
b. Atty. Hyde’s second defense is
untenable. His duty not to engage in
unlawful, dishonest, immoral and deceitful
conduct under Rule 1.01 of the CPR, as
well as his duty not to engage in scandalous
conduct to the discredit of the legal
profession under Rule 7.03, is applicable to
his private as well as to his professional life.
Q: Y hired Attorney X to represent him in
a collection case he filed against Z. The
parties later on agreed to settle the case
and Z turned over to Attorney X the
amount of P25,000.00 as partial
settlement of his obligation. Attorney X
kept the money. Y, upon learning of
Attorney X’s action, filed a disbarment
case against the latter before the
Supreme Court, which in turn, referred
the case to the Integrated Bar of the
Philippines for investigation, report and
recommendation.
The IBP Commissioner tasked to
investigate the case reviewed all the
pleadings submitted by Y and Attorney X
and their respective witnesses, and
promptly made a report recommending
that Attorney X be suspended for six
months. The IBP Board of Governors
adopted the recommendation of the
Investigating Commissioner. Attorney X
assailed his suspension on the ground
of an impingement on his right to due
process. Is Attorney X's contention
sustainable? Explain. (2003 Bar)
A: There is no impingement on Attorney X’s
right to due process. The IBP
Commissioner tasked to investigate the
case reviewed all the pleadings of the
parties and their respective witnesses. This
implies that Atty. A was given an
opportunity to present his side. Due process
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS BAR Q & A (1987-2018)
has been satisfied. This is especially true if
the principle of res ipsa loquitur is
applicable. (However, it may be noted that
the IBP Board of Governors is not
authorized to impose the penalty of
suspension).
Q: A engaged the services of Atty. B to
defend him in a case for collection of
sum of money that was brought against
him in the Municipal Trial Court by D.
Despite notice of the scheduled dates of
hearing, Atty. B failed to appear much
less to inform A about it. The case was
decided against A. It was only when the
adverse judgment was being executed
against him that A learned he had lost
the case. When he went to see counsel,
Atty. B put up the excuse that he was
busy attending to his cases which were
more important than A's.
Before whom can A seek redress against
Atty. B who apparently was negligent in
attending his case? (1999 Bar)
A: He may file a verified complaint against
Atty. B, asking that he be administratively
disciplined, with either the Supreme Court,
the Board of Governors of the Integrated
Bar of the Philippines (IBP), or the EBP
Chapter to which Atty. B belongs (Sec. 1,
Rule 139-B).
ADDITIONAL ANSWER:
He may also file a complaint against Atty. B
before a Regional Trial Court or Municipal
Trial Court, depending on the amount
involved, for damages he may have
sustained due to the latter's negligence.
Q: When Atty. Aldrin received copy of
the decision of the Court of Appeals, he
filed a motion for reconsideration using
intemperate and disrespectful language
with a subtle threat that “knowingly
rendering an unjust judgment is
punishable under the Revised Penal
Code."
The Court of Appeals ordered him to
explain why he should not be cited in
contempt of court. Instead of complying,
he submitted to the Court of Appeals his
Petition to Retire from the practice of law
which he immediately filed with the
Supreme Court after receiving the
citation for contempt. May he be allowed
to retire from the practice of law? (1998
Bar)
Page 54
A: No. A practicing lawyer and officer of the
court facing contempt proceedings cannot
just be allowed to voluntarily retire from the
practice of law which would negate the
inherent power of the court to punish him for
contempt (Montecillo v. Gica, 60 SCRA
234).
Q: Ben filed proceedings for disbarment
against his lawyer, Atty. Co, following
the latter’s conviction for estafa for
misappropriating funds belonging to his
client (Ben). While the proceedings for
disbarment was pending, the President
granted absolute pardon in favor of Atty.
Co. Atty. Co. then, moved for the
dismissal of the disbarment case.
Should the motion be granted? (1998
Bar)
A:An absolute pardon by the President is
one that operates to wipe out the conviction
as well as the offense itself. The grant
thereof to a lawyer is a bar to a proceeding
for disbarment against him, if such
proceeding is based solely on the fact of
such conviction (In Re: Parcasion, 69
SCRA 336). But where the proceeding to
disbar is founded on the professional
misconduct involved in the transaction
which culminated in his conviction, the
effect of the pardon is only to relieve him of
the penal consequences of his act and does
not operate as a bar to the disbarment
proceeding, inasmuch as the criminal acts
may nevertheless constitute proof that the
attorney does not possess good moral
character (In Re: Lontoc, 43 Phil. 293).
Q: A verified complaint for disbarment
was filed against Atty. Cruz who was
accused of misappropriating funds
belonging to the complainant. The matter
was referred to the IBP which forthwith
conducted an investigation through its
local chapter. During the pendency of
the investigation, the complainant filed
an Affidavit of Desistance claiming that
Atty. Cruz had already reimbursed him
for the funds which he had accused him
of unlawfully spending for his own use.
Atty. Cruz moved for the dismissal of the
complaint.
As the hearing officer, how will you act
on the motion of Atty. Cruz? (1994 Bar)
A: The desistance of a complaint in a
disbarment proceedings or his withdrawal of
the charges against a lawyer does not
deprive the court of the authority to proceed
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS BAR Q & A (1987-2018)
to determine the matter. Nor does it
necessary result in the dismissal of the
complaint, except when, as a consequence
of withdrawal or desistance, no evidence is
adduced to prove the charges. Since a
disbarment proceeding is neither a civil nor
a criminal action but one presented solely
for public interest, the fact that the
complainant and the respondent have
considered the case closed, is unimportant.
As hearing officer, I will deny the motion of
Atty. Cruz and continue the hearings.
Q: A lawyer charged his client P
10,000.00 for filing fees pertaining to the
complaint he filed in court. He actually
spent only P1,000,00. He did not account
for the balance.
Suppose that the lawyer should be
charged, how and where should the
complaint be filed? Explain your answer.
(1990 Bar)
A: The client may file a verified complaint
for disbarment against his lawyer. His
verified complaint shall state clearly and
concisely the facts complained of and shall
be supported by affidavits of person or
persons having personal knowledge of the
facts therein alleged and/or by such
documents as may substantiate said facts.
The client may file the complaint directly
with the Supreme Court, in which case at
least 18 copies thereof shall be filed, and
the Supreme Court may refer the complaint
to the IBP Board of Governors for
appropriate action, such as assigning the
complaint to an investigator, or to the
Solicitor General or court officer or judge for
investigation when the interest of justice
requires. The client may, however, file his
complaint, in six copies, with the IBP Board
of Governors, which will then assign the
case to an investigator for investigation, or
with the Secretary of a local chapter of the
IBP, which will in turn transmit the same to
the IBP Board of Governors for assignment
to an investigator (Rule 139-B of the Rules
of Court).
Q: How may a proceeding for
disbarment, suspension or discipline of
attorneys be instituted? (1989 Bar)
A: A proceeding for disbarment, or
suspension or discipline of attorneys may be
taken by the Supreme Court, the Court of
Appeals or the Regional Trial Court, on its
own motion, or upon complaint under oath of
another in writing. The Integrated Bar of the
Philippines may investigate the matter and
Page 55
recommend to the Supreme Court the
disbarment and suspension from the
practice of law of the erring lawyer.
DISCIPLINE OF FILIPINO LAWYERS
PRACTICING ABROAD
Q: Atty. Perez was admitted as a member
of the New York Bar. While in Manhattan,
he was convicted of estafa and was
disbarred.
Does his disbarment in New York a
ground for his automatic disbarment in
the Philippines? (2006 Bar)
A:The disbarment or suspension of a
member of the Philippine Bar by a
competent court or other disciplinary agency
in a foreign jurisdiction where he has also
been admitted as an attorney is a ground for
his disbarment or suspension if the basis of
such action includes any of the acts
hereinabove enumerated.
The judgment, resolution or order of the
foreign court or disciplinary agency shall be
primafacie evidence of the ground for
disbarment or suspension (pars. 2 & 3,
Section 27, Rule 138, as amended by
Supreme Court Resolution, dated February
13,1992).
Thus, the disbarment of Atty. Perez in New
York for estafa is a ground for his
disbarment in the Philippines. However,
such disbarment in the Philippines is not
automatic. Atty. Perez is still entitled to due
notice and hearing (In Re Suspension from
the Practice of Law in the Territory of Guam
of Atty. Leon G. Maquera, 435 SCRA 417
(2004]).
Q. Atty. LA is a member of the Philippine
Bar and the California Bar in the United
States. For willful disobedience of a
lawful order of a Superior Court in Los
Angeles, Atty. LA was suspended from
the practice of law in California for one
(1) year.
May his suspension abroad be
considered a ground for disciplinary
action against Atty. LA in the
Philippines? Why? (2002 Bar)
A: The suspension of Atty. LA from the
practice of law abroad may be considered
as a ground for disciplinary action here if
such suspension was based on one of the
grounds for disbarment in the Philippines or
shows a loss of his good moral character, a
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS BAR Q & A (1987-2018)
qualification he has to maintain in order to
remain a member of the Philippine Bar.
Q. Atty. Claire Cortez, a member of the
Philippine Bar who was also admitted to
the New York Bar, was disbarred from
the practice of law in New York for
violation of Anti-Money Laundering laws
of that State. She returned to the
Philippines in order to resume her
Philippine law practice.
Can she also be disbarred from
practicing law in the Philippines for the
same infraction committed in the foreign
jurisdiction?
A.
The disbarment or suspension of a member
of the Philippine Bar by a competent court
or other disciplinary agency in a foreign
jurisdiction where he has also been
admitted as an attorney is a ground for his
disbarment or suspension if the basis of
such action includes any of the acts
hereinabove enumerated. The judgment,
resolution or order of the foreign court or
disciplinary agency shall be prima facie
evidence of the ground for disbarment or
suspension. However, such disbarment in
the Philippines is not automatic and
therefore, Atty. Cortez is still entitled to due
notice and hearing.
Q. Dr. Cielo is a well-known medical
doctor specializing in cosmetic surgery.
Dr. Cielo, together with a team of
doctors, performed a surgical buttocks
enhancement procedure in her clinic on
Ms. Cossette Cancio (Cancio).
Unfortunately, after a couple of years,
the implant introduced during the
enhancement procedure caused
infection and Cancio became seriously
ill.
Concio filed a criminal action for medical
malpractice against Dr. Cielo which was
eventually dismissed for failure to prove
that Dr. Cielo was negligent. Cancio was
represented in this action by Atty. Cogie
Ciguerra (Ciguerra). After they lost the
medical malpractice case, Ciguerra
started writing a series of posts on his
Facebook (FB) account containing
insulting and verbally abusive language
against Dr. Cielo. Among others,
Ciguerra called Dr. Cielo a quack doctor,
"reyna ng kaplastikan at kapalpakan",
and accused her of maintaining
a payola or extralegal budget to pay off
Page 56
prosecutors and judges in order to win
her cases. He also called on patients to
boycott the clinic of Dr. Cielo.
Dr. Cielo filed a disbarment case against
Ciguerra for posting on his FB account
sexist, vulgar, and obscene comments
and language disrespectful of women.
Ciguerra's defense is that his FB posts
were private remarks on his private FB
account and meant only to be shared
among his FB friends, and Dr. Cielo was
not part of them. He also claimed that the
disbarment case was filed in violation of
his constitutionally-guaranteed right to
privacy. The Court, however, found that
Ciguerra did not have privacy settings.
Can Ciguerra be disbarred for the series
of posts against Dr. Cielo in his FB
account? (2018 Bar)
A.
Yes, he can be disbarred. According to rule
7.03, a lawyer shall not engage in conduct
that adversely reflects on his fitness to
practice law, nor shall he, whether in public
or private life, behave in a scandalous
manner to the discredit of the legal
profession. Moreover, rule 8.01 states that a
lawyer shall not, in his professional
dealings, use language which is abusive,
offensive or otherwise improper. Rule 19.01
also states that a lawyer shall employ only
fair and honest means to attain the lawful
objectives of his client and shall not present,
participate in presenting or threaten to
present unfounded criminal charges to
obtain an improper advantage in any case
or proceeding.
By posting the subject remarks on
Facebook directed at complainant, the
respondent disregarded the fact that, as a
lawyer, he is bound to observe proper
decorum at all times, be it in his public or
private life. He overlooked the fact that he
must behave in a manner befitting of an
officer of the court, that is, respectful, firm,
and decent. Instead, he acted
inappropriately and rudely; he used words
unbecoming of an officer of the law, and
conducted himself in an aggressive way by
hurling insults and maligning complainant's
reputation.
READMISSION TO THE BAR
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS BAR Q & A (1987-2018)
LAWYERS WHO HAVE BEEN
DISBARRED
Q: Atty. Queliza was convicted of
qualified seduction. He was
subsequently disbarred at the initiative
of the IBP. Before he could complete the
service of his sentence, he was given an
absolute pardon by the President. He
thereupon petitioned the Supreme Court
for reinstatement to the practice oflaw as
a legal and logical consequence of the
absolute pardon.
Is he entitled to reinstatement? (1994
Bar)
A:An absolute pardon granted to a lawyer
who has been previously disbarred for
conviction of a crime involving moral
turpitude does not automatically entitle him
to reinstatement. The matter of his
reinstatement is still subject to the discretion
of the Supreme Court. He should still show
by evidence aside from the absolute pardon
that he is now a person of good moral
character, a fit and proper person to
practice law (In Re Rovero, 101 SCRA 797).
Q: The Faculty of the College of Law of
the
University of the Philippines pleaded for
compassion on behalf of Atty. Juan
Santos. The Supreme Court had earlier
found Atty. Santos guilty of grave
professional misconduct and imposed
upon him “an indefinite suspension,
leaving it to him to prove at some future
and opportune time that he shall have
once again regained the fitness to be
allowed to resume the practice of law as
an officer of the court."
Is the plea of the Faculty for Atty. Juan
Santos well taken? Explain. (1993 Bar)
A: The plea of the Faculty of Law of the
University of the Philippines asking
compassion on behalf of Atty. Juan Santos
is not well taken.
In order that a lawyer who was disbarred
can be reinstated, he must show with
convincing proof that he has good moral
character acquired through positive efforts,
honorable dealings and moral reformation
as to be fit to practice law again. Mere
allegation of compassion for a lawyer is not
sufficient. In one decision of the Supreme
Court, in order that a disbarred lawyer can
be reinstated, he must prove his good moral
Page 57
character as if he is applying for admission
to the bar.
LAWYERS WHO HAVE BEEN
REPATRIATED
Q: Atty. Repatriar, a law school
classmate, approached you on your 25th
Class Reunion, with questions on how
he can resume the practice of law in the
Philippines. He left the country in 1977
after two (2) years of initial law practice,
and migrated to the United States where
he was admitted to the practice of law in
the State of New York. He asks that you
give him a formal legal opinion on his
query.
Outline briefly the steps and the
supporting legal reasons you would
state in your legal opinion on what Atty.
Repatriar should do to resume his
Philippine practice. (2013 Bar)
A: Atty. Repatriar must prepare a sworn
petition to reacquire the privilege to practice
law in the Philippines. He should manifest in
his petition his desire to resume his law
practice in the Philippines, and he is not
disqualified to practice law. The “right to
resume the practice of law” is not automatic.
R.A. No. 9225 provides that a person who
intends to practice his profession in the
Philippines must apply with the proper
authority for a license or permit to engage in
such practice. It cannot be overstressed
that the practice of law is a privilege
burdened with conditions. It is so delicately
affected with public interest that it is both
the power and duty of the State (through
this Court) to control and regulate it in order
to protect and promote the public welfare.
Adherence to rigid standards of mental
fitness, maintenance of the highest degree
of morality, faithful observance of the legal
profession, compliance with the mandatory
continuing legal education requirement and
payment of membership fees to the
Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP) are
the conditions required for membership in
good standing in the bar and for enjoying
the privilege to practice of law. Any breach
by a lawyer of any of these conditions
makes him unworthy of the trust and
confidence which the courts and clients
repose in him for the continued exercise of
his professional privilege” ( In Re: Petition
to re-acquire the privilege to practice law in
the Philippines, Epifanio B. Muneses, B.M.
No. 2112, July 24, 2012).
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS BAR Q & A (1987-2018)
He should file the petition with the Supreme
Court, through the Bar Confidant
accompanied by the original or certified
copies of the following documents:
1. Showing that he is still a Filipino citizen.
”The Court reiterates that Filipino
citizenship is a requirement for
admission to the bar and is, in fact, a
continuing requirement for the practice
of law” (In Re: Petition to Re-acquire the
Privilege to Practice Law in the
Philippines, B.M. No. 2112, supra).
Having retained Philippine citizenship
could be evidenced by the Philippine
passport, the U.S. Green card showing
Philippine citizenship and U.S.
residency or other authentic documents
which the Supreme Court may require.
On the other hand, if Atty. Repatriar has lost
his Philippine citizenship, he must submit
the following:
a. Petition for Re-Acquisition of Philippine
Citizenship;
b. Order (for Re-Acquisition of Philippine
citizenship);
c. Oath of Allegiance to the Republic of the
Philippines;
d. Identification Certificate (IC) issued by
the Bureau of Immigration.
The loss of Filipino citizenship means
termination of Atty. Repatriar’s membership
in the bar; ipso jure the privilege to engage
in the practice of law. Under R.A. No. 9225,
natural-born citizens who have lost their
Philippine citizenship by reason of their
naturalization as citizens of a foreign
country are deemed to have re-acquired
their Philippine citizenship upon taking the
oath of allegiance to the Republic. Thus, a
Filipino lawyer who becomes a citizen of
another country and later re-acquires his
Philippine citizenship under R.A. No. 9225,
remains to be a member of the Philippine
Bar (B.M. No. 2112, In re: Petition to re-
acquire the privilege to practice law in the
Philippines, supra).
2. Certification from the IBP
indicating updated payments of
annual membership dues;
3. Proof of payment of professional tax;
and
4. Certificate of compliance issued by
the MCLE Office. (Ibid.)
5. A certificate of good moral
character attested to by at least
three (3) members of the bar; and
6. A certification from the State Bar of
New York that Atty. Repatriar does
Page 58
 not have any previous or pending
disciplinary action filed against him
before that body.
Q: After passing the Philippine Bar in
1986,
Richards practiced law until 1996
when he migrated to Australia
where he subsequently became an
Australian citizen in 2000. As he
kept abreast of legal developments,
petitioner learned about the
Citizenship Retention and Re-
Acquisition Act of 2003 (Republic
Act No. 9225), pursuant to which he
reacquired his Philippine
citizenship in 2006. He took his oath
of allegiance as a Filipino citizen at
the Philippine Embassy in
Canberra, Australia. Jaded by the
laid back life in the outback, he
returned to the Philippines in
December 2008. After the holidays,
he established his own law office
and resumed his practice of law.
Months later, a concerned woman
who had secured copies of Atty.
Richards’ naturalization papers with
consular authentication, filed with
the Supreme Court an anonymous
complaint against him for illegal
practice of law.
Is respondent entitled to resume
the practice of Law? Explain. (2010
Bar)
A:Yes, as long as he observes the
procedure laid down in Petition for
Leave to Resume Practice of Law of
Benjamin M. Dacanay (B.M. No. 1678,
December 17, 2007, 540 SCRA 424),
to wit:
a. Updating and payment in full of the
annual membership dues in the
IBP;
b. Payment of the professional tax;
c. Completion of at least 36 credit
hours of mandatory continuing
legal education; and,
d. Pre-taking of the lawyer’s oath.
NOTARIAL PRACTICE (A.M. NO. 02-
8-13-SC,
AS AMENDED)
POWERS AND LIMITATIONS
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS BAR Q & A (1987-2018)
Q: Enumerate the instances when a
Notary
Public may authenticate documents
without requiring the physical presence
of the signatories. (2010 Bar)
A:
1. If the signatory is old or sick or
otherwise unable to appear, his presence
may be dispensed with if one credible
witness not privy to the instrument and who
is known to the notary public, certifies under
oath or affirmation the identity of the
signatory.
2. If two credible witnesses neither of
whom is privy to the instrument, not known
to the notary public but can present their
own competent evidence of identity, certify
under oath or affirmation to the identity of
the signatory.
3. In case of copy certification and
issuance of certified true copies.
Q: What are the powers and duties of a
notary public? (1995 Bar)
A: Every notary public shall have
power to administer all oaths and
affirmations provided for by law, in all
matters incidents to his notarial office, and
in the execution of affidavits, depositions,
and other documents requiring an oath; to
receive the proof or acknowledgment of all
writings relating to commerce or navigation,
such as bills of exchange, bottomries,
mortgages, and hypothecations of ships,
vessels, or boats, charter parties or
affreightments, letters of attorney, deeds,
mortgages, transfers and assignments of
land or buildings, or an interest therein, and
such other writings as are commonly
proved or acknowledged before notaries; to
act as a magistrate in the writing of
affidavits or depositions, and to make
declarations and certify the truth thereof
under his seal of office, concerning all
matters done by him by virtue of his office
(Sec. 241, Notarial Law).
The duties of a notary public are the
following:
1. To keep a notarial register;
2. To make the proper entry or entries
in the notarial register touching his notarial
acts in the manner required by the law;
3. To send the copy of the entries to
the proper clerk of court within the first 10
days of the month next following;
Page 59

4. To affix to acknowledgments the
date of expiration of his commission, as
required by law;
5. To forward his notarial register,
when filled, to the proper clerk of court;
6. To make report, within a reasonable
time, to the proper judge concerning the
performance of his duties, as may be
required by such judge;
7. To make the proper notation
regarding residence certificates (Sec. 247,
Rev. Adm. Code).
Q: Comment on the propriety of the acts
of the municipal judge who prepared and
notarized the following documents:
a. a deed of absolute sale executed by
two of his friends;
b. an extrajudicial settlement of estate
of his cousins;
c. a memorandum of agreement
between a building contractor and a
neighboring municipality;
d. a memorandum of agreement
between another private contractor
and the municipality where he sits as
judge. (1995 Bar)
A:Municipal Judges may not engage in
notarial work except as notaries public ex-
officio. As notaries public ex-officio, they
may engage only in notarization of
documents connected with the exercise of
their judicial functions. They may not as
such notaries public ex-officio,
undertake the preparation and
acknowledgment of private documents,
contracts and other acts of conveyance,
which bear no relation to the performance of
their functions as judges.
However, taking judicial notice of the fact
that there are still municipalities which have
neither lawyers nor notaries public, the
Supreme Court ruled that MTC and MCTC
Judges assigned to municipalities or circuits
with no lawyers or notaries public may, in
their capacity as notaries public ex-officio,
perform any act within the competency of a
regular notary public, provided that: (1) all
notarial fees charged be for the account of
the Government and turned to the municipal
treasurer and (2) certification be made in
the notarized documents attesting to the
lack of any lawyer or notary public of such
municipality or circuit (Balayon, Jr. vs.
Ocampo, 218 SCRA 13).
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS BAR Q & A (1987-2018)
On the basis of the foregoing, I would say
that the propriety of the actuations of the
municipal judge in this problem depends on
whether or not there are notaries public
available in his community. If there are
notaries available, his acts are improper.
Otherwise they are proper, provided that the
two conditions mentioned above are
complied with.
JURISDICTION OF NOTARY PUBLIC
AND
PLACE OF NOTARIZATION
Q: Atty. Sabungero obtained a notarial
commission. One Sunday, while he was
at the cockpit, a person approached him
with an affidavit that needed to be
notarized. Atty. Sabungero immediately
pulled out from his pocket his small
notarial seal, and notarized the
document. Was the affidavit validly
notarized? Explain. (2009 Bar)
A: Section 2, Rule IV of the 2004 Rules on
Notarial Practice provides that a Notary
Public shall not perform a notarial act
outside his regular place of work, except in
few exceptional occasions or situations, at
the request of the parties. Notarizing in a
cockpit is not one of such exceptions. The
prohibition is aimed to eliminate the practice
of ambulatory notarization. However,
assuming that the cockpit is within his
notarial jurisdiction, the notarization may be
valid but the notary public should be
disciplined.
Q: What is the extent of the jurisdiction
of a notary public? (1995 Bar)
A: The Jurisdiction of a notary public in a
province shall be co-extensive with the
province. The jurisdiction of a notary public
in the City of Manila shall be co-extensive
with said city. No notary shall possess
authority to do any notarial act beyond the
limits of his jurisdiction (Sec. 240, Rev.
Adm. Code).
Q: Atty. Z, a notary public commissioned
in Quezon City, attended a wedding at
Makati. B requested Z to notarize a deed
of sale executed between X and Y who
were both in Baguio City. Atty. Z who
has a portable notarial seal, notarized
the document. Subsequently, X assailed
the document alleging that his signature
thereon was falsified. X filed a case for
disbarment against Atty. Z.
Will the complaint prosper? Explain.
(1996 Bar)
Page 60
 activities of the integrated bar
A: Atty. Z may be held criminally liable for (Canon 7, Code of Professional
violating Article 171 (Falsification by Public Responsibility).
Officer) of the Revised Penal Code, by b. A lawyer shall conduct himself with
making it appear that X and Y appeared and courtesy, fairness and candor
acknowledged having executed the deed of towards his professional
sale before him, when in fact they did not so colleagues, and shall avoid
appear or acknowledged. He may also be harassing tactics against opposing
administratively liable for not obeying the counsel (Canon 8, Code of
laws of the land (Canon 1, Code of Professional Responsibility).
Professional Responsibility). Moreover, his c. A lawyer shall participate in the
jurisdiction as notary is only in Quezon City. improvement of the legal system
by initiating or supporting efforts in
Q: Jojo, a resident of Cavite, agreed to law reform and in the
purchase the lot owned by Tristan, a administration of justice (Canon 4,
resident of Bulacan. Atty. Agaton, Jojo’s Code of Professional
lawyer who is also a notary public, Responsibility).
prepared the Deed of Sale and Jojo
signed the document in Cavite. Atty. ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
Agaton then went to Bulacan to get the
signature of Tristan. Thereafter, Atty. a. A lawyer shall keep abreast of
Agaton went back to his office in Cavite legal developments, participate in
where he notarized the Deed of Sale. Is continuing legal education
the notarization legal and valid? Explain. programs, support efforts to
(2016 Bar) achieve high standards in law
schools as well as in the practical
The Notarization is not legal and valid. training of law students and assist
Rule IV, Section 2(b) of the 2004 in disseminating information
Rules on Notarial Practice provides regarding the law and
that a person shall not perform a jurisprudence (Canon 5, Code of
notarial act if the person involved as Professional Responsibility).
signatory to the instrument or b. A lawyer shall exert every effort
document is not personally in the and consider his duty to assist in
notary’s presence at the time of the speedy and efficient
notarization. Tristan was not in Atty. administration of justice (Canon
Agaton’s presence when the latter 12, Code of Professional
notarized the deed of sale in his office Responsibility).
in Cavite; moreover, Tristan signed in
Bulacan which is outside the Atty. ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
Agaton’s territorial jurisdiction.
a. A lawyer shall participate in the
improvement of the legal system
CANONS OF PROFESSIONAL by initiating or supporting efforts in
ETHICS law reform and in the
administration of justice (Canon 4,
Code of Professional
Q: Under the Code of Professional Responsibility).
Responsibility, what is the principal b. A lawyer shall observe candor, fairness
obligation of a lawyer towards: and loyalty in all his dealings and
transactions with his client (Canon 15, Code
a. The legal professional and the of Professional Responsibility).
Integrated Bar?
b. His professional colleagues?
c. The development of the legal JUDICIAL ETHICS
system?
d. The administration of justice? Disqualification of Justices and Judges
e. His client? (2004 Bar) (Rule 137)

A: Q: In a land registration case before

Judge Lucio, the petitioner is
a. A lawyer shall at all times uphold represented by the second cousin of
the integrity and dignity of the legal Judge Lucio’s wife.
profession, and support the

LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS BAR Q & A (1987-2018) Page 61

a. Differentiate between compulsory and
voluntary disqualification and determine
if Judge Lucio should disqualify himself
under either circumstances.
b. If none of the parties move for his
disqualification, may Judge Lucio
proceed with the case? (2015 Bar)
A:
a. In compulsory disqualification, the judge
is compelled to inhibit himself from
presiding over a case when any of the
ground provided by the law or the rules
exist. Under Section 1, Rule 137 of the
Revised Rules of Court, no judge or judicial
officer shall sit in any case (1) in which he,
or his wife or child, is pecuniarily interested
as heir, legatee, creditor or otherwise, or (2)
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
(3) in which he has been executor,
administrator, trustee or counsel, or (4) in
which he has presided in any inferior court
when his ruling or decision is the subject of
review, without consent of all parties in
interest and entered upon the record.
Section 5, Canon 3 of the New Code of
Judicial Conduct for the Philippine Judiciary
adds the following grounds:
a. The judge has actual bias or prejudice
concerning a party or personal knowledge
of disputed evidentiary facts concerning the
proceedings;
b. The judge has previously served as a
lawyer or was a material witness in the
matter under controversy.
In voluntary disqualification, a judge may
inhibit himself in the exercise of his
discretion. Paragraph 2, Rule 137 of the
Revised Rules of Court provides that “a
judge may, in the exercise of his sound
discretion, disqualify himself from sitting in a
case, for just and valid reasons other than
those mentioned above”. The New Code of
Professional Conduct for the Philippine
Judiciary adds that “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.”
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS BAR Q & A (1987-2018)
There is no mandatory ground for Judge
Lucio to disqualify himself. The second
cousin of his wife, a sixth degree relative, is
appearing not as a party but as counsel.
b. If none of the parties moves for his
disqualification, Judge Lucio may proceed
with the case. All the more so if, without the
participation of the Judge, the parties and
their lawyers execute a written agreement
that Judge Lucio may proceed with the
same, and such agreement Is signed by
them and made a part of the records of the
case.
Q: Judge Celso Camarin posted in the
bulletin board of his sala for two weeks,
an advertisement which says: "Wanted
attractive waitresses, personable waiters
and cooks who may be interested in
applying for employment in my family's
restaurant business. Interested
applicants may submit applications to
Branch XXX, RTC of Camarines Sur."
The screening of some applicants was
also conducted in the Judge's office.
What provisions, if any, of the Code of
Judicial Conduct did Judge Camarin
violate? (2018 Bar)
A: According to the law, a judge shall
maintain order and proper decorum in the
court. Since he is advertising and even
screening some applicants in court, he is
not maintaining the order ad proper
decorum that a court should have and
therefore, he is violating the said provision.
Q: Rebecca’s complaint was raffled to
the sala of Judge A. Rebecca is a
daughter of Judge A’s wife by a previous
marriage. This is known to the defendant
who does not, however, file a motion to
inhibit the Judge.
Is the Judge justified in not inhibiting
himself from the case? (2010 Bar)
A: The judge is not justified in not inhibiting
himself. It is mandatory for him to inhibit if
he is related to any of the parties by
consanguinity or affiant within the sixth civil
degree (Sec. 3 [f] Canon 3, New Code of
Judicial Conduct for the Philippine
Judiciary). Judge A, being the stepfather of
Rebecca, is related to her by affinity by just
one degree. “Judges shall disqualify
themselves from participating in any
proceeding 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” (Id., Sec. 5, Canon 3). The fact
Page 62
that Rebecca is a daughter of Judge A’s
wife is liable to make a reasonable observer
doubt his impartially.
Q: RTC Judge Q is a deacon in the
IglesianiKristo church in San Francisco
del Monte, Quezon City. R, a member of
the same religious sect belonging to the
same INK community in San Francisco
del Monte, filed a case against S who
belongs to the El Shaddai charismatic
group. The case was raffled to Judge Q's
sala. The lawyer of S filed a motion to
disqualify Judge Q on the ground that
since he and the plaintiff belonged to the
same religious sect and community in
San Francisco del Monte, Judge Q would
not possess the cold neutrality of an
impartial judge. Judge Q denied the
motion on the ground that the, reason
invoked for his disqualification was not
among the grounds for disqualification
under the Rules of Court and the Code of
Judicial Conduct. Was Judge Q’s denial
of
the motion for inhibition well founded?
(1997 Bar)
A: The fact that Judge Q and Litigant R both
belong to the Iglesia Ni Kristo while Litigant
S belongs to the El Shaddai group, is not a
mandatory ground for disqualifying Judge Q
from presiding over the case. The motion for
his inhibition is addressed to his sound
discretion and he should exercise the same
in a way the people's faith in the courts of
justice is not impaired. He should reflect on
the probability that a losing party might
nurture at the back of his mind the thought
that the Judge had unmeritoriously tilted the
scales of Justice against him (Dimacuha vs.
Concepcion. 117 SCRA630). Under the
circumstances of this case, where the only
ground given for his disqualification is that
he and one of the litigants are members of
the same religious community, I believe that
his denial of the motion for his
disqualification is proper. In Vda. de Ignacio
v. BLTBus Co., 34 SCRA 618, the Supreme
Court held that the fact that one of the
counsels in a case was a classmate of the
trial judge is not a legal ground for the
disqualification of the judge.
Q: Lawyer W lost his ejectment case in
the
Municipal Trial Court. He appealed the
decision to the RTC which V, the judge
thereof, affirmed through a grounds under which a judge is legally
memorandum decision. He filed a motion
for reconsideration praying that the RTC
should state the facts and the law on
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS BAR Q & A (1987-2018)
which its decision is based. Judge V
denied his motion. Instead of filing a
Petition for Review, lawyer W filed an
administrative complaint against Judge
V for breach of the Code of Judicial
Conduct. What is the liability of Judge V,
if any? (1991 Bar)
A: There is no breach of the Code of
Judicial Conduct committed by the RTC
Judge. The memorandum decision
rendered in an appeal from the Municipal
Court in its original jurisdiction carries with it
the statement of facts found by the
Municipal Court which are deemed affirmed
by the RTC judge. Memorandum decisions
are allowed on appeal.
Q:
1. Discuss briefly the grounds for
disqualification or inhibition of
judges to try a case.
2. A judge rendered a decision in a
criminal case finding the accused
guilty of estafa. Counsel for the
accused filed a motion for
reconsideration which was submitted
without arguments. Later, another
lawyer entered his appearance for the
accused. The judge issued an order
inhibiting himself from further sitting
in the case because the latter lawyer
had been among those who
recommended him to the Bench. Can
the judge's voluntary inhibition be
sustained? (1989, 1988 Bar)
A:
1. Under Rule 137 Section 1 of the Rules of
Court, a judge is disqualified to sit in every
case in which he, or his wife or child, is
pecuniarily interested as heirs; 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 civil law or in which
he has been executor, administrator,
guardian, trustee or counsel, or in which he
has 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. This rule enumerates the
disqualified from sitting in a case, and
excludes all other grounds not specified
therein. The judge may, however, in the
Page 63
exercise of his sound discretion, disqualify
himself from sitting in a case, for just or
valid reasons other than those mentioned
above.
Under said rule, the judge may voluntarily
inhibit himself from sitting in a case, for just
and valid reasons other than those
mentioned in the rule.
2. The judge may not voluntarily inhibit
himself by the mere fact that a lawyer
recommended him to the Bench. In
fact, the appearance of said lawyer is
attest as to whether the judge can act
independently and courageously in
deciding the case according to his
conscience. Inhibition is not allowed at
every instance that a friend,
classmate, associate or patron of a
presiding judge appears before him as
counsel for one of the parties to a
case. “Utang na loob”, per se, should
not be a hindrance to the
administration of justice. Nor should
recognition of such value in Philippine
society prevent the performance of
one’s duties as judge, xxx (Masadao
and Elizaga Re: Criminal Case No.
4954-M; 155 SCRA 78-79). However,
in order to avoid any suspicion of
partiality, it is better to the judge to
voluntarily inhibit himself.
Q: In a case pending before the
Sandiganbayan, the Sandiganbayan
justices themselves actually took
part in the questioning of a defense
witness and the accused. The
records show that, while a witness
was asked 16 questions on direct
examination by the defense counsel
and six (6) questions by the
prosecutor on cross-examination,
one justice interjected a total of 27
questions. After the defense opted
not to conduct any re-direct
examination, another justice asked
10 more questions. With respect to
one of the accused, both justices
asked a total of 67 questions after
cross-examination, and with
respect to the other accused, a total
of 41 questions after cross-
examination. More importantly, the
questions of the justices were in
the nature of cross-examinations
characteristic of confrontation,
probing, and insinuation. Is this
manner of questioning proper?
(2018 Bar)
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS BAR Q & A (1987-2018)
A: No. There is a right given to a trial
judge to question witnesses to satisfy
his mind upon any material point
which presents itself during the trial of
a case over which he presides but this
should only be limited to asking
clarificatory questions, and this right
should be sparingly and judiciously
used. The rule is that the court should
stay out of it as much as possible,
neither interfering nor intervening in
the conduct of the trial and in this
case, these limitations were not
observed. The interference by the
Sandiganbayan Justices was just too
excessive that it cannot be justified
under the norm applied to a jury trial,
or even under the standard employed
in a non-jury trial.
Q: Judge L is assigned in Turtle
Province. His brother ran for
Governor in Rabbit Province.
During the election period this year,
judge L took a leave of absence to
help his brother conceptualize the
campaign strategy. He even
contributed a modest amount to the
campaign kitty and hosted lunches
and dinners. Did Judge L incur
administrative and/or criminal
liability? Explain. (2010 Bar)
A: Judge L incurred administrative liability.
Rule 5.18 of the Code of Judicial Conduct
(which is applicable in a suppletory
character to the New Code of Conduct for
the Philippine Judiciary) provides that “[A]
Judge is entitled to entertain personal views
on political questions, but to avoid suspicion
of political partisanship, a judge shall not
make political speeches, contribute to party
funds, publicly endorse candidates for
political office or participate in other partisan
political activities.” He may also be held
criminally liable for violation of Section 26 (I)
of the Omnibus Election Code, which
penalizes any officer or employee in the civil
service who, directly or indirectly,
intervenes, in any election campaign or
engages in any partisan political activity,
except to vote or to preserve public order.
Q: Judge C was appointed MTC Judge in
1993. Subsequently, the Judicial and Bar
Council received information that
previously he had been dismissed as
Assistant City Prosecutor of Manila. It
appeared that when he applied for
appointment to the Judiciary, his answer
to the question in the personal Data
Sheet - “Have you ever been retired,
Page 64
dismissed or forced to resign from any
employment?" was - “Optional under
Republic Act No. 1145. ” The truth is, he
was dismissed for gross misconduct as
Assistant City prosecutor.
May he be dismissed as Judge? [1998
Bar]
A: Yes. By his concealment of his previous
dismissal from the public service, which the
Judicial and Bar Council would have taken
into consideration in acting on his
application for appointment as a judge, he
(the judge) committed an act of dishonesty
that rendered him unfit to be appointed, and
to remain, in the Judiciary he has tarnished
with his falsehood (Re: Inquiry on the
Appointment of Judge Enrique A. Cube,
227 SCRA 193; Jose Estacion, 181 SCRA
33, EstanislaoBelan, August 6, 1998).
Compulsory
Q: State at least five (5) instances where
judges should disqualify themselves
from participating in any proceedings
where their impartiality might reasonably
be questioned (2016 Bar)
A: Any five (5) of the following instances
provided in Sec. 5, Canon 3 of the New
Code of Conduct for the Philippine
Judiciary:
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
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS BAR Q & A (1987-2018)
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.
Section 1, Rue 137 of the Revised Rules of
Court, provides for similar grounds.
Q: In a case for homicide filed before the
Regional Trial Court (RTC), Presiding
Judge Quintero issued an order for the
arrest of the accused, granted a motion
for the reduction of bail, and set the date
for the arraignment of the accused.
Subsequently, Judge Quintero inhibited
himself from the case, alleging that even
before the case was raffled to his court,
he already had personal knowledge of
the circumstances surrounding the case.
Is Judge Quintero’s inhibition justified?
Explain. (2009, 2004 Bar)
A: Judge Quintero’s inhibition is justified.
One of the grounds for inhibition under
Section 5, Canon 3 of the New Code of
Judicial Conduct for the Philippine Judiciary
is “where the judge has actual bias or
prejudice concerning a party or personal
knowledge of disputed evidentiary facts
concerning the proceedings.”
Q: In a case before him, it was the son of
Municipal Trial Court Judge X who
appeared as counsel for the plaintiff.
After the proceeding, judgment was
rendered in favor of the plaintiff and
against the defendant, B. the defendant
in the case, complained against Judge X
for not disqualifying himself in hearing
and deciding the case. In his defense,
Judge X alleged that he did not
disqualify himself in the case because
the defendant never sought his
disqualification. Is Judge X liable for
misconduct in office? (1999 Bar)
A: Judge X is liable for misconduct in office.
Rule 3.12 of the Code of Judicial Conduct
provides that a judge should take no part in
a proceeding where his impartiality might
reasonably be questioned. In fact, it is
mandatory for him to inhibit or disqualify
himself if he is related by consanguinity or
affinity to a party litigant within the sixth
degree or to counsel within the fourth
degree (Hurtado v. Jurdalena, 84 SCRA
Page 65
41). He need not wait for a motion of the
parties in order to disqualify himself.
Voluntary
Q: Judge Clint Braso is hearing a case
between Mr. Timothy and Khristopher
Company, a company where his wife
used to work as one of its Junior
Executives for several years. Doubting
the impartiality of the Judge, Mr. Timothy
filed a motion to inhibit Judge Clint
Braso refused on the ground that his
wife has long resigned from the
company. Decide. (2014 Bar)
A: The fact that Judge Braso’s wife used to
work for Khristopher Company is not a
mandatory ground for his inhibition.
However, Section 2, Canon 3 of the New
Code of Judicial Conduct for the Philippine
Judiciary provides that judges should
disqualify themselves from participating in
any proceeding in which “it may appear to a
reasonable observer that they are unable to
decide the matter in partially.”
The Supreme Court has advised that a
judge “should exercise his decision in a way
that the people’s faith in the courts of justice
is not impaired” (Pimentel v. Salanga, G.R.
No. L-27934, September 18, 1967). While it
may not be reasonable to believe that
Judge Braso cannot be impartial because
his wife used to work as a Junior Executive
for Khristopher Company, the better part of
prudence would dictate that he inhibit
himself from the case involving the said
company.
Q: Justice B of the Court of Appeals (CA)
was a former Regional Trial Court (RTC)
Judge. A case which he heard as a trial
judge was raffled off to him. The
appellant sought his disqualification
from the case but he refused on the
ground that he was not the judge who
decided the case as he was already
promoted to the appellate court before
he could decide the case.
Was the refusal of Justice B to recuse
from the case proper? Explain your
answer. (2014 Bar)
A: The refusal of Justice B to recuse from
the case is improper. In the case of
Sandoval v. CA (G.R. No. 106657, August
1, 1996, 260 SCRA 283), involving the
same facts, the Supreme Court held that the
Court of Appeals Justice concerned was not
legally bound to inhibit himself from the
case. However, he “should have been more
prudent and circumspect and declined to
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS BAR Q & A (1987-2018)
take on the case, owing to his earlier
involvement in the case,” because “a judge
should not handle a case in which he might
be perceived, rightly or wrongly, to be
susceptible to bias and partiality.” This
axiom is “intended to preserve and promote
public confidence in the integrity and
respect for the judiciary.”
Q: The criminal case arising from the
P10 Billion Peso pork barrel scandal was
raffled to Sandiganbayan Justice
Marciano Cobarde. Afraid that he would
antagonize the parties, his political
patrons and ultimately, his judicial
career, he decided to inhibit from
participating in the case, giving
“personal reasons” as his justification.
If you were to question the inhibition of
SB Justice Cobarde, on what legal basis,
and where and how will you do this?
(2013 Bar)
A: The grounds relied upon by Justice
Cobarde for his inhibition conveys the
impression that “the parties” and “his
political patrons” are in a special position
improperly to influence him in the
performance of judicial duties (New Code of
Conduct for the Philippine Judiciary, Canon
4, Sec. 8). Furthermore, the Sandiganbayan
sits in Divisions, so the fears of Justice
Cobarde are unfounded. Justice Cobarde
should not shirk from the performance of his
judicial duties.
I would file a motion with the Division of the
Sandiganbayan in which Justice Cobarde is
sitting for the remittal of his voluntary
inhibition. I would advance in motion the
reasons why the “personal reasons” set
forth by the Justice are insubstantial and
does not merit his inhibition. I would likewise
set the motion for hearing as appropriate.
Q4: Assume that your friend and
colleague, Judge Peter X. Mahinay, a
Regional Trial Court judge stationed at
KL City, would seek your advice
regarding his intention to ask the
permission of the Supreme Court to act
as counsel for and thus represent his
wife in the trial of a civil case for
damages pending before the Regional
Trial Court of Aparri, Cagayan.
What would be your advice to him?
Discuss briefly. (2004 Bar)
A: I would advise him against it. Rule 5.07
of the Code of Judicial Conduct expressly
Page 66
and absolutely prohibits judges from
engaging in the private practice of law,
because of the incompatible nature between
the duties of a judge and a lawyer.
Moreover, as a Judge he can influence to a
certain extent the outcome of the case even
if it is with another court. A Judge shall
refrain from influencing in any manner the
outcome of litigation or dispute pending
before another court or administrative
agency (Rule 2.04, Code of Judicial
Conduct).
Q: On what grounds may a judge be
disqualified, or asked to voluntarily
inhibit himself from hearing a case?
Briefly explain each ground. (1988 Bar)
A: Rule 137, Section 1 of the Rules of Court
provides that a judge is disqualified from
sitting on 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 sixth degree
of consanguinity of affinity or to counsel
within the fourth civil degree.
Under the last sentence of Rule 137,
Section 1 of the Rules of Court, a judge may
voluntarily inhibit himself from participating
in a case for just and valid reasons. The rule
on voluntarily inhibition of judges was set by
the Supreme Court in Pimentel v. Salonga,
21 SCRA160 as follows:
All the foregoing
notwithstanding, this should
be a good occasion as any to
draw the attention of all
judges to appropriate
guidelines in a situation
where their capacity to try
and decide fairly and
judiciously comes to the fore
by way of challenge from any
one of the parties. A judge
may not be legally prohibited
from sitting in a litigation. But
when the suggestion is made
of record that he might be
induced to act in favor 'of one
party or with bias or prejudice
‘against a litigant arising out
of circumstances reasonably
capable of inciting such a state
of mind, he should conduct a
careful self-examination.
He should exercise his discretion in a way
that the people’s faith in the courts of justice
is not impaired.
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS BAR Q & A (1987-2018)
INITIATION OF COMPLAINT
AGAINST
JUDGES AND JUSTICES
Q: An anonymous letter addressed to the
Supreme Court was sent by one Malcolm
X, a concerned citizen, complaining
against Judge Hambog, Presiding Judge
of the RTC of Mahangin City, Branch 7.
Malcolm X reported that Judge Hambog
is acting arrogantly in court; using
abusive and inappropriate language; and
embarrassing and insulting parties,
witnesses, and even lawyers appearing
before him. Attached to the letter were
pages from transcripts of records in
several cases heard before Judge
Hambog, with Judge Hambog’s arrogant,
abusive, inappropriate, embarrassing
and/or insulting remarks or comments
highlighted.
Describe briefly the procedure followed
when giving due course to a complaint
against an RTC judge. (2015 Bar)
A: If the complaint is sufficient in form and
substance, a copy thereof shall be sent to
the respondent, and he shall be required to
comment within 10 days from date of
service. Upon the filing of the respondent’s
comment, the Supreme Court shall refer the
matter to the Office of the Court
Administrator for evaluation, report and
recommendation, or assign the case to a
Justice of the Court of Appeals, for
investigation, report and recommendation.
The investigating Justice shall set a date for
the hearing and notify the parties thereof,
and they may present evidence, oral or
documentary, at such hearing. The
investigating Justice shall terminate the
investigation within 90 days from its
commencement, and submit his report and
recommendation to the Supreme Court
within 30 days from the termination of the
investigation. The Supreme Court shall take
action on the report as the facts and the law
may warrant (Rule 140).
Q: Judge A has an illicit relationship with
B, his Branch Clerk of Court. C, the wife
of Judge A, discovered the illicit affair
and consulted a lawyer to vindicate her
violated marital rights. If you were that
lawyer, what would you advice C, and if
she agrees and asks you to proceed to
take action, what is the legal procedure
that you should follow? Discuss fully.
(2014 Bar)
Page 67
I will advise her to file an administrative
case against Judge A with the Supreme
Court. I can tell her that she can also file
civil or criminal actions against him. But an
administrative case is confidential in nature
and will not unnecessarily drag the name
and reputation of the court into the picture.
DISCIPLINE OF MEMBERS OF THE
JUDICIARY
Lower court judges and justices of the
Court of Appeals, Sandiganbayan and
Court of Tax Appeals (Rule 140)
Q: A complaint for rape against ZZ was
filed by the father of Dulce, an 11-year
old girl, with the Municipal Trial Court of
Bantayan, Cebu. After preliminary
examination of the offended party and
the witnesses, Judge YY of said court
issued an order finding probable cause
and ordering the arrest of ZZ without
bail. ZZ was arrested and detained. He
file: (1) a Waiver of Preliminary
Investigation, and (2) an Ex-Parte Motion
to Fix Bail Bond. Judge YY granted the
waiver and forthwith elevated the
records of the case to the RTC, which
forwarded the same to the Office of the
Provincial Prosecutor.
Ten (10) days after the elevation of the
records. YY, acting on the Motion To Fix
Bail, issued an order fixing the bail bond
at P20, 000.00. The father of Dulce filed
against YY an administrative complaint
for ignorance of law, oppression, grave
abuse of discretion and partiality. If you
were the executive judge of the RTC
designated to investigate the case and to
make a report and recommendation
thereon, what would be your
recommendation? (1991 Bar)
A:The facts narrated in this case is similar
to the decision of the Supreme Court in
1989. The judge was found guilty of
ignorance of the law for granting bail
despite the fact that he had already lost
jurisdiction after elevating the records of the
case to the Regional Trial Court.
If I am the RTC Judge assigned to
investigate the case I would recommend the
dismissal of the Judge for gross ignorance
of the law.
Q: Under the grievance procedures in
Rule 139-B of the Rules of Court, may
judges be investigated by the Integrated
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS BAR Q & A (1987-2018)
Bar of the Philippines? Explain. (1989
Bar)
A: Judges may not be investigated under
the grievance procedure in Rule 139-B of
the Rules of Court. Complaints against
judges are filed with the Supreme Court
which has administrative supervision over
all courts. This was the ruling of the
Supreme Court in a minute resolution in
reply to the letter of acting Presiding Justice
of the Court of Appeals Rodolfo Nocon 03
January 1989.
Q: In Administrative Circular No. 1
addressed to all lower courts dated
January 28, 1988, the Supreme Court
stressed:
All judges are reminded that the
Supreme Court has applied the
“Res Ipsa Loquitur” rule in the
removal of judges even without
any formal investigation
whenever a decision, on its face,
indicates gross incompetence or
gross ignorance of the law or
gross misconduct (See: People
vs. Valenzuela, 135 SCRA 712;
Cathay Pacific Airways vs.
Romillo, Jr., 142 SCRA 262). The
application of the “res ipsa
loquitur” rule in the removal of
judges is assailed in various
quarters as inconsistent with due
process and fair play. Is there
basis for such a reaction?
Explain. (1988 Bar)
A: In one view, there is a basis
for the reaction against the res ipsa
loquitur rule on removing judges.
According to the position taken by
the Philippine Bar Association. The
res ipsa loquitur rule might violate
the principle of due process, that is
the right to be heard before one is
condemned
Moreover, Rule 140 of the Rules of
Court provides for the procedure for
the removal of judges. Upon service
of the complaint against him, he is
entitled to file his answer. If the
answer merits a hearing, it is
referred to a justice of the Court of
Appeals for investigation, the report
of the investigation is submitted to
the Supreme Court for proper
disposition.
Page 68
The danger in applying the res ipsa
loquitur rule is that the judge may
have committed only an error of
judgment. His outright dismissal
does violence to the jurisprudence
set In Re Horilleno, 43 Phil. 212. The
other view taken by the Supreme
Court is that the lawyer or a judge
can be suspended or dismissed
based in his activities or decision, as
long as he has been given an
opportunity to explain his side. No
investigation is necessary.
Grounds
Q: An Audit team from the Office
of the Court Administrator found
that Judge Contaminada
committed serious infractions
through the indiscriminate grant
of petitions for annulment of
marriage and legal separation. In
one year, the judge granted 300 of
such petitions when the average
number of petitions of similar
nature granted by an individual
judge in his region was only 24
petitions per annum.
The audit revealed many different
defects in the granted petitions;
many petitions had not been
verified; the required copies of
some petitions were not furnished
to the Office of the Solicitor
General and the Office of the
Provincial Prosecutor; docket
fees had not been fully paid; the
parties were not actual residents
within the territorial jurisdiction of
the court; and, in some cases,
there was no record of the cross-
examinations conducted by the
pubic prosecutor or any
documentary evidence marked
and formally offered. All these,
viewed in their totality, supported
the improvident and
indiscriminate grant that the OCA
found. If you were the counsel for
Andy Malasuerte and other
litigants whose marriages had
been improperly and finally
annulled, discuss your options in
administratively proceeding
against JudgeContaminada, and
state where and how you would
exercise these options. (2013 Bar)
A: As a counsel for Andy Malasuerte, I have
the option of participating in the
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS BAR Q & A (1987-2018)
administrative proceedings by filing a
verified complaint in writing against Judge
Contaminado, with the Office of the Court
Administrator, supported by affidavits of
persons who have personal knowledge of
the facts alleged therein or by documents
which may substantiate said allegations.
The complaint shall state clearly and
concisely the acts and omissions
constituting violations of standards of
conduct prescribed for judges by law, the
Rules of Court, the Code of Judicial
Conduct (Rules of Court, Rule 140, Sec. 1)
and the new Code of Conduct for the
Philippine Judiciary.
Q: Judge Horacio would usually go to
the cockpits on Saturdays for relaxation,
as the owner of the cockpit is a friend of
his. He also goes to the casino once a
week to accompany his wife who loves
to play the slot machines. Because of
this, Judge Horacio was administratively
charged. When asked to explain, he said
that although he goes to these places, he
only watches and does not place any
bets.
Is his explanation tenable? Explain.
(2005 Bar)
A: The explanation of Judge Horacio is not
tenable. In the case of City of Tagbilaran vs.
Hontanosas, Jr., 375 SCRA 1 [2002], the
Supreme Court penalized a city court judge
for going to gambling casinos and cockpits
on weekends. According to the Court, going
to a casino violates Circular No. 4, dated
August 27, 1980, which enjoins judges of
inferior courts from playing or being present
in gambling casinos. The prohibition refers
to both actual gambling and mere presence
in gambling casinos. A judge’s personal
behavior, not only in the performance of
judicial duties, but also in his everyday life,
should be beyond reproach. With regard to
going to cockpits, the Supreme Court held
that “verily, it is plainly despicable to see a
judge inside a cockpit and more so, to see
him bet therein. Mixing with the crowd of
cockfighting enthusiasts and bettors is
unbecoming a judge and undoubtedly
impairs the respect due him. Ultimately, the
Judiciary suffers therefrom because a judge
is a visible representation of the Judiciary"
(City of Tagbilaran v. Hontanosas, Jr., ibid
at p. 8).
Q: Before he joined the bench, Judge J
was a vice-mayor. Judge J resumed
writing a weekly column in a local
newspaper. In his column, Judge J
wrote:
Page 69

“It was wondering if the present vice-
mayor can shed off his crocodile hide so
that he can feel the clamor of the public
for the resignation of hoodlum public
officers of which he is one".
When charged administratively, Judge J
invoked freedom of expression. Is his
defense tenable? Explain. (Bar)
A: The Judge’s reliance on freedom of
expression is untenable. The judge's vicious
writings compromise his duties as judge in
the impartial administration ofjustice. His
writings lack judicial decorum which
requires the use of temperate language at
all times. The judge should not instigate
litigation (Galang v. Santos, 307 SCRA 583
[1999], Royeca v. Animas. 71 SCRA 1
[1976]).
Q: A judge, in order to ease his clogged
docket, would exert efforts to compel the
accused in criminal cases to plead guilty
to a lesser offense and advise party
litigants in civil cases, whose positions
appear weak, to accept the compromise
offered by the opposing party.
Is the practice legally acceptable? (1998
Bar)
A:The practice is legally acceptable as long
as the judge does not exert pressure on the
parties and takes care that he does not
appear to have prejudged the case. Where
a judge has told a party that his case is
weak before the latter was fully heard, such
was considered as a ground for his
disqualification (Castillo v. Juan, 62 SCRA
124).
Q: A Judge of the Regional Trial Court,
notwithstanding the fact that he was
facing criminal charges at the time he
obtained his appointment, did not
disclose the pendency of the cases
either to the President or to the Supreme
Court. He claims that: (a) he enjoys
presumption of innocence in the pending
criminal cases; (b) that the said cases
even if sustained after trial do not
involve moral turpitude; and (3) before
an administrative complaint based on a
criminal prosecution can be given due
course there must be a conviction by
final Judgment.
May the Judge be considered as an
undeserving appointee and therefore be
removed from his office? (1996 Bar)
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS BAR Q & A (1987-2018)
A: He may be considered as undeserving
and removed from office. This problem falls
squarely under the decision of the Supreme
Court in the case of Court Administrator v.
Estacion, 181 SCRA 33, wherein a
complaint was filed concerning the
appointment of a Regional Trial Court judge
notwithstanding the fact that he was then
facing criminal charges for homicide and
attempted homicide. The Judge also
claimed that (a) he enjoys the presumption
of innocence, (b) the said cases, even if
sustained, do not involved moral turpitude,
and (c) before an administrative complaint
based on a criminal prosecution is given
due course, there must be a conviction by
final judgment. The Supreme Court held:
“The argument that he had not yet been
convicted and should be presumed innocent
is beside the point, and so is the contention
that the crimes of homicide and attempted
homicide do not involve moral turpitude.
The important consideration is that he had a
duty to inform appointing authority and this
Court of the pending criminal charges
against him to enable them to determine on
the basis of his record, eligibility for the
position he was seeking. He did not
discharge that duty. His record did not
contain the important information in
question because he deliberately withheld
and thus effectively hid it. His lack of candor
is as obvious as his reason for suppression
of such vital fact, which he knew would have
been taken into account against him if it had
been disclosed.
As stressed in the report, it behooves every
prospective appointee to the judiciary to
apprise the appointing authority of every
matter bearing on his fitness for judicial
office, including such circumstances as may
reflect on his integrity and probity. These
are qualifications specifically required of
appointees to the judiciary under Article VIII,
Sec. 7 (3) of the Constitution. The fact alone
of his concealment of the two criminal cases
against him is clear proof of his lack of the
said qualifications and renders him
unworthy to sit as a Judge."
The respondent Judge was accordingly
removed from office.
PRACTICAL EXERCISES
SIMPLE CONTRACTS – LEASE, SALE
OF
REALTY
Page 70
Q: Prepare a Contract of Lease of an
apartment unit, (1998, 1996, 1988, 1987)
A:
CONTRACT OF LEASE
KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS:
This contract of lease, entered into by and
between:
A.B., Filipino, of legal age, single, with
residence at _______________ and
hereafter called the
Transfer Certificate of Title No.
12345 located in Sampaloc. Metro
Manila. Gerry decided to sell the
property but did not have the time
to look for a buyer. He then
designated his brother, Jon, to look
for a buyer and negotiate the sale.
Jon met Angelo Santos who
expressed his interest to buy the
lot. Angelo agreed to pay PI Million
for the property on September 26.
2005.
Draft the Deed of Sale of Real
Property. (2005, 1991, 1989)

LESSOR A: DEED OF ABSOLUTE SALE

- and- KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE

PRESENTS:
B.D., Filipino, of legal age, single, with
residence at _________________and This instrument, executed by and
hereafter called the LESSEE. between:

WITNESSETH: GERRY CRUZ, of legal age, single,

and a resident of _______________,
THAT, for and in consideration of the herein represented by his Attorney-in-
rentals to be paid, the LESSOR has Fact, JON CRUZ, of legal age and a
hereby leased to the LESSEE and the resident of _____________ and
LESSEE hereby accepts the same In _____________
lease, the * following described hereafter referred to as the VENDOR,
property:
- and -
(description of apartment)
ANGELO SANTOS, Filipino, of legal
subject to the following terms and age, single, a resident of
conditions: _____________ and hereafter
referred to as the VENDEE,
1. Period of the Lease-
WITNESSETH:
2. Rentals to be Paid –
THAT, for and in consideration
3. (Other terms and conditions) of the sum of One Million Pesos
(P1,000,000.00), in hand paid by the
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties VENDEE to the VENDOR and receipt
hereto have signed these presents, at of which is herein acknowledged by
__________________, this the latter, the VENDOR has sold,
_________________day of transferred and conveyed, and by
_____________, 1998. these presents does hereby sell,
transfer and convey, unto the
A.B. VENDEE, that certain parcel of land
C.D. with an area of 1,000 square meters,
more or less, located in Sampaloc,
Lessor Manila, covered by Transfer Certificate
of Title No. 12345 of the Register of
Lessee Deeds of Manila, and which is more
particularly described as follows:
WITNESSES
(technical description)
(acknowledgment)
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the
Q: Gerry Cruz is the owner of a parties hereto have signed these
1,000-square meter lot covered by

LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS BAR Q & A (1987-2018) Page 71

 presents at Manila, this 26th day of IBP Membership No.
September, 2005. PTR O.R. No. ________,
Manila, 2005
GERRY CRUZ ANGELO
SANTOS
Vendor Vendee Doc. No.
T.I.N. _________ T.I.N. Page No.
_________ Book No.
Series of 2005.
By:
Q: On March 1, 2017, sisters and
JON CRUZ business partners Carmina and Celeste
Attorney-in-Fact Corominas borrowed PhP 500,000 from
Carmen Carunungan. It was agreed that
WITNESSES: the amount will be paid in full one (1)
year after, or on March 1, 2018, with
___________________ interest at the rate of 10% per annum,
_________________ without necessity of a demand. They
also agreed to be bound jointly and
severally. For this purpose, they
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
executed a promissory note, secured by
REPUBLIC OF THE a postdated check in the amount of PhP
550,000 drawn from their joint account,
PHILIPPINES)
which check was dated March 1, 2018.
CITY OF MANILA ) S.S.
When the debt became due, Carmen
IN THE CITY OF MANILA, deposited the check but it was
Philippines, personally appeared dishonored for insufficient funds.
before me, Mr. JON CRUZ, with Carmen then sued Carmina and Celeste
Community Tax Certificate No. for estafa through falsification of a
____________issued at commercial document. After finding
____________ on ______________, probable cause, the prosecutor filed a
2005, in his capacity as Attorney-in- criminal case in court, where the sisters
Fact of Mr. GERRY CRUZ, with were required to file their joint judicial
Community Tax Certificate No. affidavit. In their affidavit, they raised the
____________issued at defense that they could not be guilty of
____________ on estafa because: (i) the check was issued
______________, 2005, both of whom only as a form of security; (ii) even if
are personally known to me to be the issued as payment, it was for a pre-
same persons who executed the existing debt; and (iii) it was only upon
foregoing instrument, and they Carmen's insistence that they issued the
acknowledged to me that the same is check.
their free and voluntary act and deed,
and the free and voluntary act and Before the case could be decided, the
deed of the principal whom Mr. JON sisters offered to settle their debt
CRUZ represents. I further certify that through a dacion en pago. They
the foregoing instrument is a deed of
sale of a parcel of land located in
Sampaloc, Manila, and consists of offered a Honda CRV which they jointly
____ pages, including this page, and owned in full settlement of the loan.
is signed on each and every page by Carmen agreed.
the said parties and their instrumental Prepare the following documents in
witnesses. legally acceptable and enforceable
forms, based on the above facts:
WITNESS MY HAND AND SEAL. (a) The promissory note (5% );
(b) The judicial affidavit (10%); and
NOTARY PUBLIC (c) The dacion en pago (10%). (2018 Bar)
My Commission expires on December
31, 2005 (Address) A:
Commission No._______, 1) City of Manila, March 1, 2017
Manila
Attorney’s Roll No. P 500,000.00

LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS BAR Q & A (1987-2018) Page 72


One year after date, we, Carmina
Corominas and Celeste Corominas, hereby
promise to pay to the order of Carmen
Carunungan, the sum of five hundred
thousand (500, 000.00) Pesos (Philippine
Currency).
(Sgd.) Carmina Corominas.
(Sgd.) Celeste Corominas.
PROMISSORY NOTE
Q: Prepare a negotiable promissory note.
(1994, 1991 Bar)
A:
City of Manila, September 28,
1994
6,000.00
Thirty (30) days after date, I, Arturo M.
Padilla, hereby promise to pay to the
order of Milagros Concepcion, the sum
of six thousand (6,000.00) Pesos
(Philippine Currency).
(Sgd.) Arturo M. Padilla
VERIFICATION AND CERTIFICATION OF
NON-FORUM SHOPPING
Q: Prepare a Verification and
Certification against Forum Shopping.
(2010, 2003)
A:
VERIFICATION AND CERTIFICATION
AGAINST FORUM SHOPPING
X, after being duly sworn, hereby deposes
and states:
That he is the plaintiff in the above- entitled
case; that he has caused the foregoing
Complaint to be prepared; that he has read
the same and that the allegations of fact
therein contained are true of his personal
knowledge or based on authentic
documents;
That (a) he has not heretofore commenced
any action of filed an claim involving the
same issued in any court, tribunal or quasi-
judicial agency, and to the best of his
knowledge, no such other action or claim is
pending therein; and (b) if he should
thereafter learn that the same of similar
action or claim has been filed or is pending,
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS BAR Q & A (1987-2018)
he shall report that fact within five (5) days
therefrom to this Honorable Court.
DEATH OF A PARTY
Q: The plaintiff died during the pendency
of the case in the RTC. If you were the
counsel of the plaintiff, what is the last
duty you need to discharge in behalf of
the late client before your professional
engagement for the case may be deemed
terminated? Explain briefly your answer.
(2017 Bar)
A: Where the claim is not extinguished due
to the death of my client, my last duty shall
be to inform the court in which his case is
pending, within thirty (3)) days after such
death, and to give the name and address of
his legal representatives (par. 1, section 16,
Rule 3, Rules of Court).
AFFIDAVIT OF LOSS
Q: Herbert Madasalin, a 25-year old Bar
candidate, surrendered his driver's
license to the security guard at the
Arlegui Gate when he entered the
Malacanang compound to pray at the
National Shrine of St. Jude Thaddeus.
After praying the novena to St. Jude,
Herbert went to the Arlegui Gate to
retrieve his driver's license. However, he
was not able to get the license because
the security guard was then elsewhere.
He returned the next day only to be told
that the security guard had misplaced
the license. The security guard
concerned could not anymore remember
where he had placed the license.
Herbert immediately requests your
assistance in the preparation of an
affidavit of loss. His address is at 143
Zuzuaregui Street, Don Antonio Heights,
Quezon City. As his friend, prepare
Herbert's affidavit of loss. (2017 Bar)
A:
Republic of the Philippines )
City of Quezon ) S.S.
AFFIDAVIT OF LOSS
I, Herbert Madasalin, of legal age, single,
Filipino, with residence at 143 Zuzuaregui
Street, Don Anotnio Heights, Quezon City
after having been duly sworn deposes and
says that:
Page 73
1. That I am the holder of a Non-
Professional Driver’s License No. _____
issued by the La Loma, Quezon City LTO
branch with expiration at ______.
2. That sometimes in ____ when I entered
the Malacanang Compound to pray at the
National Shrine of St. Jude Thaddeus, I
surrendered my driver’s license to the
security guard at the Arlegui Gate. That
after praying the novena, I went to the
Arlegui Gate to retrieve my driver’s license,
but I was not able to get my license
because the security guard was then
elsewhere;
Kyle Angelo engaged the services of
Atty. Carlos Sabit, who decided to file a
motion to dismiss on the ground of lack
of cause of action and prescription. Atty.
Carlos Sabit drafted the motion and sent
the draft to Kyle Angelo for his perusal.
Kyle Angelo, being himself a law
graduate, quickly noticed that the draft
did not contain a notice of hearing.
Draft the notice of hearing that Atty.
Carlos Sabit should include in the
motion to dismiss. (3%) (2017 Bar)
A.

3. That when I returned the next day, I was NOTICE OF HEARING

told that the security guard had misplaced
my license, and could not anymore Atty. _______
remember where he had placed my license;
Counsel for the plaintiff
4. That despite earnest efforts to locate said
driver’s license proved futile’ GREETINGS:

5. That I am executing this affidavit to Please take notice that the above
support my application for the issuance of a motion shall be submitted for the
replacement driver’s license. consideration of the Honorable Court on
Friday _____ at ____, or as soon thereafter
Affiant as counsel may be heard.
(Signature over Printed Name)
Competent Evidence of Identity
ID:
issued on: ATTY. CARLOS SABIT
at: Counsel for defendant
SUBSCRIBED and SWORN TO before me
on the date and at the place indicated
below. The affiant exhibited to me his
competent evidence of identity as indicated
above.

Signed this ______________at

________________,
______________________, Philippines.

WITNESS MY HAND AND SEAL.

Notary Public

NOTICE OF HEARING

Q: Kyle Angelo was served with

summons and a copy of the complaint of
Ciara Jane for collection of the amount
of ₱1,000,000.00 as evidenced by a
promissory note signed by Kyle Angelo.
She alleged that the debt was overdue;
and that Kyle Angelo refused to pay
despite repeated demands.

LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS BAR Q & A (1987-2018) Page 74