THE LAWYER’S OATH

“I, _______________, of ___________ do solemnly swear that I will maintain allegiance to

the Republic of the Philippines; I will support its 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 nor 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 my
knowledge and discretion, with all good fidelity as well to the court as to my clients; and I
impose upon myself this voluntary obligation without any mental reservation or purpose of
evasion. So help me God.”
2 | LEGAL ETHICS MEMORY AID
LEGAL ETHICS
LEGAL ETHICS – branch of moral science which treats
of the duties which an attorney owes to the court, to his
client, to his colleagues in the profession and to the
public (Justice Malcolm).
PURPOSE AND SIGNIFICANCE
Legal Ethics:
a. guards against the abuses and ills of the
profession such as dishonesty, deceit,
immorality negligence, slothness (SLOTH),
lack of diligence and the many forms of
malpractice of the members of the Bar.;
b. Provides the basis for the weeding out of the
unfit and the misfit in the legal profession for
the protection of the public;
c. Raise the standard of the legal profession;
d. Encourages and enhances the respect for the
law; and
e. Assures an efficient and effective
administration of justice.
f. Assist in the keeping and maintenance of law
and order in coordination with the other
Departments of the Government
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 the 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.
SOURCES OF LEGAL ETHICS
(C-C-Ru-D-O-S)
1. Constitution
2. Code of Professional Responsibility
3. Code of Judicial Ethics
4. Rules of Court
5. Judicial Decisions
6. Attorneys’ Oath
7. Legislations from Congress / Statutes
(Creation and Jurisdiction of Appellate Courts
and other lower courts, also the Lapid Law on
legal aid service of lawyers)
PRACTICE OF LAW
Q: Who may practice law?
A: Any person heretofore duly admitted as a
member of the bar, or hereafter admitted as such in
accordance with the provisions of this rule, and who is in
good and regular standing, is entitled to practice law.
(RULE 138, Section 1, Rules of Court)
A lawyer cannot be a full-fledged member of
the bar if he has not signed the Roll of Attorneys after
taking his Oath as a lawyer. ( In Re : Medado, B.M. No.
2540, September 24, 2013)
ESSENTIAL CRITERIA ENUMERATED BY THE
C.A. AS DETERMINATIVE OF ENGAGING IN
THE PRACTICE OF LAW:
(H-A-C-A)
1. Habituality - implies customarily or habitually
holding oneself out to the public as a lawyer
2. Attorney-Client relationship
3. Compensation - implies that one must have
presented himself to be in the active practice
and that his professional services are available
to the public for compensation, as a source of
his livelihood or in consideration of his said
services.
4. Application of law, legal principle, practice, or
procedure - which calls for legal knowledge,
training and experience
CONCEPT OF PRACTICE OF LAW
Generally, to engage in the practice is to do any of those
acts which are characteristic of the legal profession. (In
re: David, 93 Phil. 46).
It covers any activity, in or out of court, which requires
the application of law, legal principles, practice or
procedure and calls for legal knowledge, training and
experience (PLA vs. Agrava, 105 Phil. 173)
Practice of law means any activity in or out of court
which requires the application of law, legal procedure,
knowledge, training and experience. To engage in the
practice of law is to perform those acts which are
characteristics of the legal profession. Generally, to
practice law is to give notice or render any kind of
service, which devise or service requires the use, in any
degree, of legal knowledge or skill. (Cayetano vs.
Monsod, 201 SCRA 210)
Practice of law is understood in two senses namely, (1)
as a qualification for a position in the government
service and (2) as a habitual act of a lawyer in contrast
to the term of unauthorized practice of law.
In the first sense, it is understood that any activity, in or
out of court, which requires application of law, legal
procedure, knowledge, training and experience.
In the second sense, he must be in actual, active and
habitual exercise of his legal knowledge or skill
especially in court appearances and pleadings and this is
done generally for compensation (Cayetano vs.
Monsod, Dissenting opinion of Justice Isagani A. Cruz)
Practice of law is more than an isolated appearance, for
it consists of frequent or customary actions, a
succession of acts of the same kind. In other words, it is
frequent habitual exercise. Practice of law to fall within
the prohibition of statute has been interpreted as
customarily or habitually holding one’s self out to the
public as a lawyer for such services. (People vs.
Villanueva, 14 SCRA 111)
In the practice of his profession, a licensed attorney-at-
law generally engages in three principal types of
professional activities:
1. Legal advice and instructions to clients to
inform them of their rights and obligations
2. Preparation for clients of documents requiring
knowledge of legal principles not possessed
by ordinary layman; and
3. Appearance for clients before public tribunals
which possess power and authority to
determine rights of life, liberty and property
according to law, in order to assist in the
proper interpretation and enforcement of
law. (Ulep vs. Legal Clinic Inc. 223 SCRA 378
(1993)
Scrivening or the filling of blanks in a standard or
stereotype forms which involves pure clerical work
without need for any legal interpretation is NOT
practice of law.
CHARACTERISTICS OF THE PRACTICE OF LAW
(P-I-C-N-N-I-C)
1. Practice of law is not a matter of right but
merely a privilege burdened with conditions;
2. A calling that is impressed with public
interest;
3. It is not a right de jure.(In re: Ellis, 203, p.
957)
4. Not money- making venture
5. Cannot be assigned or inherited, but must be
earned by hard study and good conduct.(In
re: Clifton, 155, Am. 324)
PRACTICE OF LAW AS A PRIVILEGE
The practice of law is not a matter of right but merely
a privilege bestowed upon individuals who are not only
learned in the law but who are also known to possess
good moral character.
It is reserved only to those who are academically trained
in law and possessed of good moral character not only
at the time of his admission to the Bar but even so,
thereafter, to remain in the practice of law.
Case Law:
The practice of law is not a property right but a mere
privilege and as such must bow to the inherent
regulatory power of the Court to exact compliance with
the lawyer’s public responsibilities. (In re: Edillion, 84
SCRA 568, August 3, 1978)
The power of admission to the practice of law is
vested by the Constitution in the Supreme Court.
ART. VIII, Sec. 5(5): “The Supreme Court shall have the
following powers: (5) Promulgate rules concerning the
protection and enforcement of constitutional rights,
pleading, practice and procedure in all courts, the
admission to the practice of law, the Integrated Bar, and
legal assistance to the underprivileged.”
Case Law
The constitutional power to admit candidates to the
legal profession is a judicial function and involves
exercise of discretion (In re: Almacen, 31 SCRA 562).
The power of the Supreme Court to regulate the
practice of law includes:
1. Defining the term “practice of law”
2. Prescribing the qualifications of a candidate to
and the subjects of the bar examinations
3. decide who will be admitted to practice
4. Disciplining, suspending or disbarring any
unfit and unworthy member of the bar
5. Reinstating any disbarred or indefinitely
suspended attorney
6. Ordaining the integration of the Philippine
Bar
7. Punishing for contempt any person for
unauthorized practice of law and
8. In general, exercising overall supervision of
the legal profession.
Case Law:
The Legislature, in the exercise of its police power, may
however, enact laws regulating the practice of law to
protect the public and promote the public welfare. But
the legislature may not pass a law that will control the
Supreme Court in the performance of its function to
decide who may enjoy the privilege of practicing law,
and any law of that kind is unconstitutional as an invalid
exercise. (In re Cunanan, 94 Phil. 543)
Notes:
1. Any legislative or executive judgment substituting
that of the Supreme Court in matters concerning the
admission to the practice of law or the suspension,
disbarment or reinstatement of an attorney infringes
upon and constitutes an invalid exercise of the
legislative or executive power.
2. The legislature may pass a law prescribing additional
qualifications for candidates for admission to practice or
filling up deficiencies in the requirements for admission
to the bar. Such a law may not, however, be given
retroactive effect so as to entitle a person, not
otherwise qualified, to be admitted to the bar, nor will
such a law preclude the Supreme Court from fixing
other qualifications or requirements for the practice of
law.
4 | LEGAL ETHICS MEMORY AID
3. The Supreme Court acts through a Bar Examination
Committee for the exercise of his judicial function to
admit candidates to the legal profession.
PRACTICE OF LAW AS A PROFESSION
Profession, NOT business
The practice of law is a profession and not a business as
it is an essential part in the administration of justice, a
profession in pursuit of which pecuniary reward is
considered as merely incidental; it is a pursuit of learned
art in the interest of public service. (see Koscoe Pound,
The Lawyer from Antiquity to Modern Times, p.5)
CHARACTERISTICS WHICH DISTINGUISH THE
LEGAL PROFESSION FROM BUSINESS:
1. A duty of public service, of which the
emolument is a by-product, and in which one
may attain the highest eminence without
making much money
2. A relation as an officer of court to the
administration of justice
3. A relation to the clients in the highest degree
of fiduciary
4. A relation to colleagues characterized by
candor, fairness and unwillingness to resort to
business methods of advertising and
encroachment on their practice, or dealing
with their clients.
QUALIFICATIONS FOR ADMISSION TO THE
BAR ( Rule 138, Sec. 2 , Rules of Court)
Requirements for all applicants for admission to the
Bar (Section 2, Rule 138, RRC):
( C-21-M-R-P)
1. Citizen of the Philippines;
2. At least 21 years of age;
3. Of good moral character;
4. Resident of the Philippines;
5. Must produce before the Supreme Court
satisfactory evidence of
 good moral character; and
 that no charges against him,
involving moral turpitude, have
been filed or are pending in any
court in the Philippines
Good moral character is a continuing
qualification required of every member of the
Bar, it is not only a qualification precedent to
the practice of law. (Narag, 291 SCRA 451,
June 29, 1998)
Case Law:
Q: Atty. A hired B as his secretary who later on
became his lover and common-law wife. She was left
by Atty. A to the religious group in which he was a
leader and when she tried to escape, Atty. A ordered
the followers to torture her. Further, he was charged
of bigamy for contracting two marriages. He was
disbarred and his name was stricken from the Roll of
Attorneys. Whether or not he failed to comply with the
qualifications required under the law?
A: Yes. The practice of law is not a right but a
privilege bestowed by the state upon those who show
that they possess, and continue to possess, the
qualifications required by law for the conferment of
such privilege. When a lawyer’s moral character is
assailed, such that his right to continue practicing his
cherished profession is imperiled, it behooves him to
meet the charges squarely and present evidence, to
the satisfaction of the investigating body and this
Court, that he is morally fit to keep his name in the
Roll of Attorneys. Atty. A failed to do so. (Mecaral vs
Velasquez, A.C. No. 8392).
Q: Atty. Florendo has been serving as the lawyer
of spouses Tiong for their various business dealings. The
husband suspected that his wife and Atty. Florendo
were having an affair. Finally he was able to listen to a
telephone conversation where he heard Atty. Florendo
mention amorous words his wife. The husband
confronted the two and both eventually admitted to
their illicit relationship. They executed and signed an
affidavit, which was later notarized, stating that they
admit of their illicit relationship; that they are seeking
the forgiveness of their respective spouse. Did Atty.
Florendo violate the CPR?
A: Yes. Good moral character is not only a
condition for admission to the Bar but is a continuing
requirement to maintain one's good standing in the
legal profession. It is the bounden duty of law
practitioners to observe the highest degree of morality
in order to safeguard the integrity of the Bar. Atty.
Florendo's act of having an affair with his client's wife
manifested his disrespect for the laws on the sanctity of
marriage and his own marital vow of fidelity. It showed
his utmost moral depravity and low regard for the ethics
of his profession. ( Tiong vs. Florendo, 662 SCRA 1,
2011)
Academic Requirements for Candidates:
1. A bachelor’s degree in arts or sciences
(a.k.a Pre-law course)
2. Completed course on
(a) Civil law
(b) Commercial law
(c) Remedial law
(d) Public international law
(e) Private international law
(f) Political law
(g) Labor and social legislation
(h) Medical jurisprudence
(i) Taxation
(j) Legal ethics

REQUIREMENTS BEFORE A CANDIDATE CAN
ENGAGE IN THE PRACTICE OF LAW:
I. Admission to the Bar
1. Furnishing satisfying proof of educational,
moral and other qualifications
2. Passing the bar
3. Taking the Lawyer’s Oath before the SC
4. Signing the Attorney’s Roll and receiving
from the Clerk of Court of the SC a Certificate
of the license to practice
II. After his admission to the bar, a lawyer must
remain in good and regular standing, which is a
continuing requirement to the practice of law. This
means that he must:
1. Remain a member of the IBP
2. Regularly pay all IBP membership dues and
other lawful assessments, as well as the
annual privilege tax
3. Faithfully observe the rules and ethics of the
legal profession and
4. Be continually subject to judicial disciplinary
control
Case Law:
Q: Are persons who passed the Shari’a Bar
considered as members of the Philippine
Bar?
A: NO. Persons who passed the Shari’a Bar are
not full-fledged members of the Philippine
Bar, hence, may only practice before the
Shari’a courts. They are also not entitled to
use the title “attorney” as such is reserved to
those who, having obtained the necessary
degree in the study of law and successfully
taken the Bar Examinations, have been
admitted to the Integrated Bar of the
Philippines and remain members thereof in
good standing. (Alawi vs Alauya, 268 scra
639)
Case Law:
Q: Atty. Z was hired as the legal counsel of
spouses X and Y. it was suspected that Atty. Z
and the wife Y were having an illicit affair
which was later on confirmed as the two
confessed to their respective spouses. An
affidavit was executed attesting to their
illicit affair. It was also mentioned that no
case would be filed against them. Despite
the existence of said affidavit, husband X
filed a disbarment case for gross immorality
and grave misconduct. Will it prosper?
A: YES. It has been consistently held by the
Court that possession of good moral character is not
only a condition for admission to the Bar but is a
continuing requirement to maintain one’s good
standing in the legal profession. Consequently, any
errant behaviour on the part of a lawyer, be it in his
public or private activities, which tends to show him
deficient in moral character, honesty, probity or good
demeanor, is sufficient to warrant his suspension or
disbarment.
Illicit relationship with the wife of the
complainant amounts to a disgraceful and grossly
immoral conduct warranting disciplinary action from
the Court.13 Section 27, Rule 138 of the Rules of
Court provides that an attorney may be disbarred or
suspended from his office by the Court for any deceit,
malpractice, or other gross misconduct in office,
grossly immoral conduct, among others. (Tiong vs
Florendo ,A.C. No. 4428)
NON-LAWYERS WHO ARE
ALLOWED TO PRACTICE LAW
Non-lawyers are allowed to appear only in certain cases.
They do not practice law.
General Rule:
Only those who are licensed to practice law can
appear and handle cases in the Court.
Exceptions:
1. Before the MTC – a party may conduct his
case or litigation in person with an aid of an
agent or friend appointed by him for that
purpose (Sec. 34, Rule 138).
2. Before any court – a party may conduct his
litigation personally. But if he gets someone
to aid him, that someone must be a member
of the Philippine Bar (Sec. 34, Rule 138).
3. In a criminal case before the MTC – in a
locality where a duly licensed member of the
Bar is not available, the judge may appoint a
non-lawyer who is a resident of that province,
of good repute for probity and ability to
defend the accused in his defense (Sec. 7, Rule
116).
4. A non-lawyer representing a claimant
before the Cadastral Court (Sec. 9, Act No.
2259).
5. Any person appointed to appear for the
government of the Philippines in accordance
with law (Sec. 33, Rule 138).
6. Practice by Corporation: Corporation cannot
engage in the practice of law. It may,
however, hire an attorney to attend to and
conduct its own legal businesses or affairs.
( Agpalo, Legal and Judicial Ethics, p 46)
7. Law Student Practice Rule: 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
6 | LEGAL ETHICS MEMORY AID
indigent clients, accepted by the Legal Clinic
of the law school. The student shall be under
the direct supervision and control of an IBP
NON-LAWYERS IN
ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
Allowable instances:
1. Under the Labor Code – non-lawyers may appear
before the NLRC or any Labor Arbiter if they represent
themselves or represent their organization or members
thereof.
2. A non-lawyer may represent a party before the
Department of Agrarian Reform Adjudication Board
(DA-RAB).
3. Non-lawyers appearing before the HLURB, DENR,
etc.
NOTE: Limitations on their appearance:
1. Non-lawyers should not confine his work to
non-adversary contentions. He should not
undertake purely legal work.
2. Services should not be habitually rendered.
3. No charge of attorney’s fees. (PAFLU vs.
Binalbagan Isabela Sugar Co. 42 SCRA 302)
INSTANCES OR PROCEEDINGS WHERE
LAWYERS ARE PROHIBITED FROM
APPEARANCE
1. Lawyer-member of Congress
2. Lawyers who have conflicting interests
3. Small claims
However, lawyers may appear before small claim
proceedings if he is the plaintiff or defendant.
SANCTIONS FOR PRACTICE OR
APPEARANCE WITHOUT AUTHORITY
As to Lawyers without Authority:
A disbarred or suspended lawyer has no more authority
to appear in court as a lawyer. Acting as such is
punishable with contempt of court.
Case Law:
A lawyer who has been suspended or disbarred cannot
practice law without being held liable for contempt of
court. The suspended lawyer may be disbarred for
violation of the suspension order. Such judgment does
not prohibit pro se practice. (Geeslin v. Navarro, AC
No. 2033, May 1990)
A lawyer who holds a government office may not be
disciplined as a member of the bar for misconduct in the
discharge of his duties as a government official except if
the misconduct is of such character as to affect his
qualification as a lawyer, then he may be disciplined as a
member of the bar. (Gonzales-Austria vs. Abaya, 176
SCRA 634)
As to Non-lawyers:
The act of pretending or assuming to be a lawyer or an
officer of a court and acting as such without authority is
punishable with contempt of court. The practice of law
is limited only to individuals duly qualified in terms of
moral character and education and who passed the Bar.
PUBLIC OFFICIALS WHO
MAY PRACTICE OF LAW
A lawyer does not shed his professional obligations
upon assuming public office. Hence, lawyers engaged in
government service are also governed by the Canon and
Rules in the Code of Professional Responsibility. They
are expected to be more sensitive to their professional
obligation because their conduct may be scrutinized by
the public eye.
Public officials and employees are prohibited from
engaging in the private practice of law during their
term, unless authorized by the Constitution or law, and
provided such practice shall not interfere in the
performance of his duties.
PUBLIC OFFICIALS WHO CANNOT PRACTICE
LAW IN THE PHILIPPINES
1. Judges and other officials or employees of the
Superior Court (Rule 148, Sec. 35, RRC).
2. Officials and employees of the Office of the
Solicitor General
3. Government prosecutors (People v.
Villanueva, 14 SCRA 109)
4. If permitted by their department head, it
should only be in isolated cases involving
relatives or close family friends
5. President, Vice-President, members of the
cabinet, their deputies and assistants, (Art.
VIII Sec. 15, 1987 Constitution).
6. Chairmen and Members of the Constitutional
Commissions (Art. IX-A, Sec. 2, 1987
Constitution).
7. Ombudsman and his deputies (Art. IX, Sec.
8 (2nd par.), 1987 Constitution).
8. All governors, city and municipal mayors
(R.A. No. 7160, Sec. 90).
Those who, by special law, are prohibited from
engaging in the practice of their legal profession
They may resign, retire, or leave government service in
any other manner. But, they are not allowed to accept
any engagement or employment in connection with any
matter he intervened with while he was in government
service. This is to avoid a conflict of interest, whether
these are adverse-interest conflicts or congruent-
interest conflicts, between the lawyer and his former
clients.
Q Can a civil service employee engage in the
. private practice of law?
A. A civil service officer or employee whose duty or
responsibility does not require his entire time to
be at the disposal of the government may not
engage in private practice of law without the
written permit from the head of the department
concerned.
However, government officials who by express
mandate of the law are prohibited from
practicing law may not, even with the consent of
the department head, engage in the practice of
law. If so authorized by the department head, he
may, in an isolated case, act as counsel for a
relative or close family friend.
A government official forbidden to practice law
may be held criminally liable for doing so. An
officer or employee of the civil service who, as a
lawyer, engages in the private practice of law
without a written permit from the department
head concerned may be held administratively
liable therefor.
Case Law:
Q: The City of Manila hired the services of
Atty. X of the ABC Law Offices to represent it
in case pending before the RTC. Can Atty. X
validly represent it?
A: NO. A local government unit could not hire
a private attorney to represent. The provisions
of Sec. 1683 complemented by Sec. 3 of the
Local Autonomy Law, is clear in providing that
only the provincial prosecutor and the municipal
attorney can represent a province or
municipality. The provision is mandatory. The
municipality’s authority to employ a private
lawyer is expressly limited only to situations
where the provincial prosecutor is disqualified to
represent it, as when he represents that province
against a municipality.
Public Officials with Restrictions in the Practice of
Law:
Some officials are not absolutely disqualified to practice
law. They are merely subject to certain restrictions:
1. No senator or member of the House of
Representatives may personally appear as counsel
before any courts of justice or before the Electoral
Tribunals, or quasi-judicial and other administrative
bodies xxx (Art. VI, Sec. 14, 1987 Constitution).
A lawyer-member of the legislature is only prohibited
from appearing as counsel before any court of justice,
electoral tribunals or quasi-judicial and administrative
bodies.
The word “appearance” includes not only arguing a case
before any such body but also filing a pleading on behalf
of a client as “by simply filing a formal motion, plea or
answer”. (Ramos vs. Manalac, 89 Phil 270)
Neither can he allow his name to appear in such
pleading by itself or as part of firm name under the
signature of another qualified lawyer because the
signature of an agent amounts to signing of a non-
qualified senator or congressman, the office of an
attorney being originally an agency, and because he
will, by such act, be appearing in court or quasi-judicial
or administrative body in violation of the constitutional
restriction. “He cannot do indirectly what the
Constitution prohibits directly.” (In re: David 93 PHIL.
461)
2. Under the Local Government Code (R.A. 7180, Sec.
90), Sanggunian members may practice their
professions provided that if they are members of the
Bar, they shall not:
a. Appear as counsel before any court in any civil
case wherein a local government unit or any unit,
agency, or instrumentality of the government is
the adverse party;
b. 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;
c.Collect any fee for their appearance in
administrative proceedings involving the local
government unit of which he is an official; and
d. Use property and personnel of the Government
except when the Sanggunian member concerned is
defending the interest of the government.
3. Under RA 910, Sec. 1, as amended, a retired justice
or judge receiving a pension from the government,
cannot act as counsel in any civil case in which the
Government, or any of its subdivision or agencies in the
adverse party or in criminal case wherein an officer or
employee of the Government is accused of an offense in
relation to his office.
4. Civil service officers or employees without permit
from their respective department heads (Noriega vs.
Sison 125 SCRA 293)
Remedies Against Unauthorized Practice:
8 | LEGAL ETHICS MEMORY AID
1. Petition for Injunction
2. Declaratory Relief
3. Contempt of Court
4. Disqualification and complaints for
disbarment
5. Criminal complaint for estafa who falsely
represented to be an attorney to the damage
party
LAWYERS AUTHORIZED TO REPRESENT THE
GOVERNMENT
Government Lawyers
Lawyers in the government service are also prohibited
to engage in the private practice of their profession
unless authorized by the Constitution or law, provided
that such practice will not conflict or tend to do with
their official functions. The prohibition will not continue
for one year after their separation from public office in
connection with any matter pending before the office
they used to be with.
Any misconduct in office as a public official may be a
ground for disciplinary action.
Any person appointed to appear for the Government of
the Philippines in accordance with law is authorized to
represent the government.
The Solicitor General may deputize other government
officials in the prosecution of its cases. In such a case,
notice to the DEPUTIZED AGENT will not bind the Sol.
Gen. until notice is actually received by the Sol. Gen.
But when a government agency, which the Sol. Gen. is
tasked to represent, appears is represented by the
government agency’s INTERNAL COUNSEL, then
notice to such counsel is deemed notice to the Sol. Gen.
THE LAWYER’S OATH
“I, _______________, of ___________ do solemnly
swear that I will maintain allegiance to the Republic of
the Philippines; I will support its 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 nor 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 my
knowledge and discretion, with all good fidelity as well
to the court as to my clients; and I impose upon myself
this voluntary obligation without any mental
reservation or purpose of evasion. So help me God.”
Nature of a Lawyer’s Oath:
The lawyer’s oath is not a mere formality recited for a
few minutes in the glare of flashing cameras and before
the presence of select witness. (In re: Arthur M.
Cuevas, Jr. 285 SCRA 59, January 27. 1998)
The lawyer’s oath is not mere facile words, drift and
hollow, but a sacred trust that must be upheld and kept
inviolable. (Sebastian v. Calis, Adm. Case No. 5118,
Sept. 9, 1999)
The oath is not a mere ceremony or formality for
practicing law. Every lawyer should at all times weigh
his actions according to the sworn promises he makes
when taking the lawyer’s oath. (In re: Al Argosino, 270
SCRA 26)
DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES
OF A LAWYER
FOUR-FOLD DUTY OF A LAWYER
1. Lawyer and Society
2. Lawyer and the Legal Profession
3. Lawyer and the Courts
4. Lawyer and the Client
DISTINCTIONS ON THE DIFFERENT ROLES OF
A LAWYER
1. Attorneys-at-law: The class of persons who
are by license, officers of the court, empowered to
appear, prosecute and defend, and upon whom peculiar
duties, responsibilities and liabilities are developed by
law as a consequence. ( Cul v. Cul, 120 Phil 729)
2. Attorney-in-fact: An agent whose authority
is strictly limited by the instrument appointing him. His
authority is provided in a SPA or GPA or letter of
authority. An attorney-in-fact is not necessarily a
lawyer.
3. Counsel de officio: a counsel, appointed or
assigned by the court, from among such members of
the bar in good standing who, by reason of their
experience and ability may adequately defend the
accused. The person need not be a member of the bar if
no lawyer is available in a given locality. (Sec. 7, Rule
116, Rules of Court)- 2015 Bar Exam.
4. Attorney Ad hoc: A person named and
appointed by the court to defend an absentee
defendant in a suit in which the appointment is made.
5. Attorney of Record: a member of the bar
appointed by a client to represent in cause of a court
and upon whom service of papers may be made. 2015
Bar Exam.
6. Of Counsel: A member of the bar who is
associated with a law office but does not normally
appear as counsel of record of cases handled by the law
office. .
7. Lead Counsel: A member of the bar who
charged with the principal management and direction
of a party-litigant
8. House Counsel: A member of the bar who
acts as attorney for a business company as an employee
of such company and renders legal advice on matters
necessary in the ordinary course of its business.
9. Amicus Curiae: a friend of the court. A person
with strong interest in or views on the subject matter of
the action. One who is considered as an experience and
impartial attorney to help in the disposition of issues
submitted to the Court. (Sec. 36, Rule 138) -2015 Bar
Exam.
10. Amicus Curiae Par Excellence: Bar
associations who appear in court as amicus curiae or
friends of court. Like an individual amicus curiae.
Amicus Curiae Par Excellence do not represent any
party to the case but act as consultant in a doubtful
issue for resolution of the court. They do not receive any
compensation for their legal services to the court.
11. Counsel de parte: a lawyer retained by a
party litigant, usually, for a fee, to prosecute or defend
his cause in court. The term implies freedom of choice
either on the part of the lawyer to accept the
employment or on the part of the litigant to continue or
terminate the retainer at any time. -2015 Bar Exam.
12. Pro bono Counsel: A lawyer who renders
legal services without charging any professional fees
but does not shoulder the costs of litigation on behalf of
his client.
13. Advocate: A person who pleads on behalf of a
third-party.
THE LAWYER AND SOCIETY
CANON 1 – A LAWYER SHALL UPHOLD THE
CONSTITUTION, OBEY THE LAWS OF THE LAND
AND PROMOTE RESPECT FOR LAW AND LEGAL
PROCESSES
Rule 1.01 – A lawyer shall not engage in unlawful,
dishonest, immoral or deceitful conduct.
Rule 1.02 – A lawyer shall not counsel or abet
activities aimed at defiance of the law or at lessening
confidence in the legal system.
Rule 1.03 – A lawyer shall not, for any corrupt motive
or interest, encourage any suit or proceeding or delay
any man's cause.
Rule 1.04 – A lawyer shall encourage his clients to
avoid, end or settle a controversy if it will admit of a
fair settlement.
RESPECT FOR LAW
AND LEGAL PROCESSES
The purposes for the requirement of good moral
character are:
1. To protect the public;
2. To protect the public image of lawyers;
3. To protect prospective clients;
4. To protect errant lawyers from themselves
The nature of the office of an attorney at law requires
that he shall be a person of good moral character. This
qualification is not only a condition precedent to an
admission to the practice of law; its continued
possession is also essential for remaining in the practice
of law. (People vs. Tuanda, Adm. Case No. 3360, Jan.
30, 1990)
All aspect of moral character and behavior may be
inquired into in respect of those seeking admission to
the Bar (In Re: Al C. Argosino, 246 scra 14)
Morality – a human standard based on natural moral
law which is embodied in man’s conscience and which
guides him to do good and avoid evil
Immoral Conduct – that conduct which is willful,
flagrant, or shameless and which shows a moral
indifference to the opinion of the good and respectable
members of the community. [Arciga vs. Maniwang,
106 SCRA 591 (1981)]
For immorality to be a ground for disciplinary action, it
must not only be merely immoral but also grossly
immoral
Grossly Immoral Conduct – one that is so corrupt and
false as to constitute a criminal act or so unprincipled or
disgraceful as to be reprehensible to a high degree.
[Figueroa vs. Barranca, 275 SCRA 445 (1997)]
Unlawful Conduct – an act or omission which is
contrary to law. It does not necessarily imply the
element of criminality although it is broad enough to
include it. It includes violation of the statutory
prohibition on a government employee to “engage in
the private practice of his profession unless authorized
by the Constitution or law, provided that such practice
will not conflict or tend to conflict with his official
functions” (Lim- Santiago vs. Sagucio, 486 SCRA 11)
Immoral or deceitful Conduct – involves moral
turpitude.
Moral Turpitude – an act of baseness, vileness or
depravity in the private and social duties which a man
owes his fellowmen, or to society in general. It includes
everything which is done contrary to justice, honesty,
modesty, or good morals.
A number of lawyers have been suspended or disbarred
for conviction of crimes involving moral turpitude such
as:
1. Estafa
2. Bribery
3. Murder
4. Seduction
5. Abduction
6. Concubinage
7. Smuggling
8. Falsification of public document
9. Violation of B.P. Blg. 22
The lawyer involved in the aforementioned crimes had
shown their unfitness to protect the administration of
justice, or are no longer of good moral character, which
10 | LEGAL ETHICS MEMORY AID
therefore justifies their suspension or disbarment (Rule,
138, Section 27, RRC)
All acts of lawyer which are unlawful, dishonest,
immoral or deceitful corrode public confidence in the
legal system. Hence, lawyer must always conduct
themselves in accord with the immutable tenets
embodied in the lawyer’s oath and the rules of legal
ethics.
Lawyers owe it to the court and to society not to stir up
litigations. While the act is not a crime, it is proscribed
by the rules of legal ethics. The reason for the rule is to
prevent barratry and ambulance chasing
Barratry – an offense of frequently exciting and stirring
up quarrels and suits, either at law or otherwise. It is the
lawyer’s act of fomenting suits among individuals and
offering his legal services to one of them.
Ambulance Chasing – an act of chasing victims of
accidents for the purpose of talking to them or their
relatives and offering his legal services for the filing of a
case against the person who caused the accident.
Ambulance chasing has spawned recognized evils such
as:
1. Fomenting of litigation with resulting burdens
on the courts and the public;
2. Subornation of perjury;
3. Mulcting of innocent persons by judgments,
upon manufactured causes of actions, and
4. Defrauding of injured persons having proper
causes actions but ignorant of legal rights and
court procedure by means of contracts which
retain exorbitant percentages of recovery and
illegal charges for court costs and expenses
and by settlement made for quick returns of
fees and against the just rights of the injured
persons.
Q: May a lawyer volunteer advice to bring a
lawsuit?
A: NO. It is unprofessional for a lawyer to
volunteer advice to bring a lawsuit, EXCEPT in
rare cases where ties of blood, relationship or
trust make it his duty to do so. (Canon 28,
CPE)
It is one of the duties of a lawyer not to encourage
either the commencement or the continuance of an
action or proceeding, or delay any man’s cause from
any corrupt motive or interest (Rule 138, section 20)
Nature of Compromise – Compromise agreement is
such that a party must give up some of the rights that
he has, in consideration of the same act on the part of
the other side
The settlement of cases in court is authorized and even
encourage by express provision of law (Articles 2028
and 2029, Civil Code)
Thus, a lawyer cannot delay the approval of a
compromise agreement entered into between the
parties, just because his attorney’s fees were not
provided for in the agreement (Jesalva vs. Bautista,
105 phil 348)
A lawyer cannot, without special authority, compromise
his client’s litigation or receive anything in discharge of
the client’s claim but the full amount in cash. A
compromise entered into without authority is merely
unenforceable. It can be ratified by the client, if he so
desires.
CANON 2 – A LAWYER SHALL MAKE HIS LEGAL
SERVICES AVAILABLE IN AN EFFICIENT AND
CONVENIENT MANNER COMPATIBLE WITH THE
INDEPENDENCE, INTEGRITY AND EFFECTIVENESS
OF THE PROFESSION.
Rule 2.01 – A lawyer shall not reject, except for valid
reasons, the cause of the defenseless or the
oppressed.
Rule 2.02 – In such cases, even if the lawyer does not
accept a case, he shall not refuse to render legal
advice to the person concerned if only to the extent
necessary to safeguard the latter's rights.
Rule 2.03 – A lawyer shall not do or permit to be done
any act designed primarily to solicit legal business.
Rule 2.04 – A lawyer shall not charge rates lower
than those customarily prescribed unless the
circumstances so warrant.
EFFICIENT AND CONVENIENT
LEGAL SERVICES
Legal services should not only be efficient but should
also be available and accessible to those who need
them in a manner compatible with the ethics of the
profession. A lawyer who accepts professional
employment should be in a position to render efficient
and effective legal assistance; otherwise he should help
find another lawyer who is qualified and able to do so.
A lawyer assigned as counsel for an indigent prisoner
must not ask to be excused for any trivial reason and
should always exert his best efforts in his behalf.
A lawyer who accepts the cause of the person unable to
pay his professional fees shall observe the same
standard of conduct governing his relation with paying
client. (Rule 14.04, CPR)
ADVERTISING AND SOLICITATION
Q: Is the practice of law a business?
A: NO. The practice of law is a profession and not
a business as it is part of the administration of justice a
profession in pursuit of which pecuniary reward is
considered merely incidental.
 Case Law:
It is highly unethical for an attorney to advertise his
talents or skill as a merchant advertises his wares. To
allow a lawyer to advertise his talent or skill is to
commercialize the practice of law, lower the profession
in public confidence and lessen his ability to render
efficiently that high character of service to which every
member of the bar is called. It is destructive of the
honor of a great profession. It lowers the standards of
that profession. It works against the confidence of the
community in the integrity of the members of the bar. It
results in needless litigation and in inventing to strife
otherwise peacefully inclined citizens. (In re: Tagorda
53 Phil 42)
 Exemption: Not all types of advertising or
solicitation is prohibited that activity not being
inherently malum in se. What makes advertising or
solicitation improper is the employment of such
methods as are incompatible with the traditional
dignity of the profession and the maintenance of
correct professional standards.
The canons of the profession tell that the best
advertising possible for a lawyer is a well-merited
reputation for professional capacity and fidelity to trust.
Permissible Solicitation of Legal Services:
1. Reputable law list, in a manner consistent
with the standards of conduct imposed by the
canons, of brief biographical and informative
data, is allowed.
2. Ordinary simple professional card: may
contain only a statement of his name, the
name of the law firm which he is connected
with, address, telephone number and special
branch of law practiced.
3. Simple announcement of the opening of a
law firm or of changes in the partnership,
associates, firm name or office address,
being for convenience of the profession.
4. Advertisement or simple announcement of
the existence of a lawyer or his law firm
posted anywhere, such as his place of
business or residence, except court rooms and
government building.
5. Advertisement or announcement in any
legal publication , including books, journals,
legal magazines and in telephone directories
(Ulep vs. Legal Clinic, BM No. 553 (1993)
Bar Question (2003):
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 221-221
Mon-Fri
8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.
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 X’s contention.
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 vs.
Legal Clinic, Inc., [223 SCRA 378 (1993)], the
Supreme Court found a similar advertisement to
be improper in spite of the fact that the name of
a lawyer was also not mentioned.
Case Law:
Q: Is the use of business entities to solicit clients
and to advertise his legal services, purporting
to be specialized in corporate rehabilitation
cases violative of the ethical standards of
lawyers?
A: Yes. Such practice circumvents Rule 2.03 which
prohibits lawyers from soliciting cases for the
purpose of profit. A lawyer is not prohibited
from engaging in business or other lawful
occupation. Impropriety arises when the
business is of such a nature or is conducted in
such a manner as to be inconsistent with the
lawyer’s duties as a member of the bar. This
inconsistency arises when the business is one that
can readily lend itself to the procurement of
professional employment for the lawyer; or that
can be used as a cloak for indirect solicitation on
the lawyer’s behalf; or is of a nature that, if
handled by a lawyer, would be regarded as the
practice of law. Business entities such as a
financial and legal consultant, may be used as a
vehicle to procure professional employment.
(Villatuya v. Tabalingcos, A.C. No. 6622, 10 July
2012)
Notes:
The canons of the profession tell that the most worthy
and effective advertisement possible is the
establishment of a well-merited reputation for
professional capacity and fidelity to trust which must be
earned as the outcome of character and conduct.
12 | LEGAL ETHICS MEMORY AID
On rule 2.04 what the rule prohibits is the competition
in the matter of charging fees for professional services
for the purpose of attracting prospective clients in favor
of the lawyer who offers lower rates. The rule does not
prohibit a lawyer from collecting a reduced or no fee at
all from a person who would have difficulty in paying
the fee usually charged for the service. (Agpalo)
CANON 3 – A LAWYER, IN MAKING KNOWN HIS
LEGAL SERVICES SHALL USE ONLY TRUE,
HONEST, FAIR, DIGNIFIED AND OBJECTIVE
INFORMATION OR STATEMENT OF FACTS.
Rule 3.01 – A lawyer shall not use or permit the use of
any false, fraudulent, misleading, deceptive,
undignified, self-laudatory or unfair statement or
claim regarding his qualifications or legal services.
Rule 3.02 – In the choice of a firm name, no false,
misleading or assumed name shall be used. The
continued use of the name of a deceased partner is
permissible provided that the firm indicates in all its
communications that said partner is deceased.
Rule 3.03 – Where a partner accepts public office, he
shall withdraw from the firm and his name shall be
dropped from the firm name unless the law allows
him to practice law currently.
Rule 3.04 – 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.
Notes:
True, Honest, Fair, Dignified and Objective
Information on Legal Services
1. The continued use of the name of a deceased partner
is permissible provided that the firm indicates in all its
communication that said partner is deceased.
2. Negligence of a member in the law firm is negligence
of the firm. When the counsel of records is the Law
Firm, the negligence of the lawyer assigned to the case
consisting in his leaving for abroad without notifying his
colleagues is negligence of the Law Firm. (Antonio vs.
Court of Appeals, 153 SCRA 592)
3. Filipino lawyers cannot practice under the name of a
foreign law firm, as the latter cannot practice law in the
Philippines and the use of such firm name in our country
is unethical.
4. The name of a partner who has accepted a public
office should be dropped from the firm name when he
accepts public office to prevent the law firm from
making use of the name of the public official to attract
legal business and to avoid suspicion of undue
influence.
5. A partner’s name, upon his death, must be dropped
from the firm name, as its retention has the tendency to
improperly exploit its advertising value. The rule in
Sycip is that Law partnerships are prohibited from
continuing their business under firm names that include
the names of deceased partners. (In the Matter of the
Petition for Authority to continue Use of the Firm
name “Sycip, Salazar, Feliciano, Hernandez and
Castillo” and the Petition for Authority to Continue
Use of the Firm Name “Ozaeta, Romulo, de Leon,
Mabanta and Reyes, 92 scra 1)
6. Under Rule 3.02, partnerships are allowed the
continued use of the name of a deceased partner
provided that there is an indication that said partner is
already deceased.
CANON 4 – A LAWYER SHALL PARTICIPATE IN THE
DEVELOPMENT OF THE LEGAL SYSTEM BY
INITIATING OR SUPPORTING EFFORTS IN LAW
REFORM AND IN THE IMPROVEMENT OF THE
ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE.
Notes:
Participation in the improvement and reforms in the
legal systems
1. Every man owes some of his time to the up building
of the profession to which he belongs. (Report of the
IBP)
2. While the lawyer’s task in contributing to the
improvement of the legal system is not a matter of
strict duty, it is a duty nonetheless which flows from a
lawyer’s sense of his public responsibility. (Pineda)
3. Experienced legal practitioners and professors of law
may write legal publications or books as an avenue of
improving the legal system
4. Lawyers who are members of the Congress are in the
best position to take a close look at the system and
introduce bills for the improvement.
CANON 5 – A LAWYER SHALL KEEP ABREAST OF
LEGAL DEVELOPMENTS, PARTICIPATE IN
CONTINUING LEGAL EDUCATION PROGRAMS,
SUPPORT EFFORTS TO ACHIEVE HIGH STANDARDS
IN LAW SCHOOLS AS WELL AS IN THE PRACTICAL
TRAINING OF LAW STUDENTS AND ASSIST IN
DISSEMINATING THE LAW AND JURISPRUDENCE.
THREE-FOLD OBLIGATION
OF A LAWYER
A lawyer:
1. Owes it to himself to continue improving his
knowledge of the laws;
2. Owes it to his profession to take an active
interest in the maintenance of high standards
of legal education;
 3. Owes it to the lay public to make the law a
part of their social consciousness. [Abad vs.
Bleza, 145 SCRA 1 (1986)]
Case Law:
It is the bounden duty of counsel as lawyer in active law
practice to keep abreast of decisions of the Supreme
Court particularly where issues have been clarified,
consistently reiterated, and published in the advance
report of Supreme Court decisions (G.R.s) and in such
publications as the Supreme Court Reports Annotated
(SCRA) and law journals. (De Roy vs. Court of Appeals,
157 SCRA 757)
Judges by nature of their functions, must keep abreast
with the laws, rulings and decisions of the Supreme
Court (Uy vs. Capulong, 221 scra 89; rule 1.01, CJC)
Notes:
Credit units: for every class of credit, a corresponding
1. The lawyer’s life is one of continuous and laborious
number of credit units shall be assigned.
study; otherwise, his skill and knowledge of the law and
related disciplines will lag behind and become obscure
Classes of credits:
due to obsoleteness.
2. Lawyers must update themselves with the law and
must participate in the dissemination thereof.
MANDATORY CONTINUING LEGAL
EDUCATION PROGRAM
PARTICIPATION IN THE MANDATORY CONTINUING
LEGAL EDUCATION ( MCLE) PROGRAM
Continuing legal education is required of
members of the Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP)
to ensure that throughout their career, they keep
abreast with law and jurisprudence, maintain the ethics
of the profession and enhance the standards of the
practice of law. (Section 1, BAR MATTER NO. 850)
Purpose:
Continuing legal education is required of
members of the Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP)
to ensure that throughout their career, they keep
abreast with law and jurisprudence, maintain the
ethics of the profession and enhance the standards of
the practice of law.
REQUIREMENTS/ REQUISITES FOR
COMPLETION OF MCLE
Members of the IBP not exempt shall complete every
three (3) years at least thirty-six (36) hours of continuing
legal education activities approved by the MCLE
Committee. Of the 36 hours:
1. At least six (6) hours shall be devoted to legal
ethics equivalent to six (6) credit units.
2. At least four (4) hours shall be devoted to trial
and pretrial skills equivalent to four (4) credit
units.
3. At least five (5) hours shall be devoted to
alternative dispute resolution equivalent to
five (5) credit units.
4. At least nine (9) hours shall be devoted to
updates on substantive and procedural laws,
and jurisprudence equivalent to nine (9)
credit units.
5. At least four (4) hours shall be devoted to
legal writing and oral advocacy equivalent to
four (4) credit units.
6. At least two (2) hours shall be devoted to
international law and international
conventions equivalent to two (2) credit
units.
7. The remaining six (6) hours shall be devoted
to such subjects as may be prescribed by the
MCLE Committee equivalent to six (6) credit
units. (Bar Matter 850)
1. Participatory credit:
(a) Attending approved education activities
like seminars, conventions, symposia, and the
like;
(b) Speaking or lecturing, or assigned as
panelist, commentator, etc. in approved
education activities; and
(c) Teaching in law school or lecturing in bar
review classes.
2. Non- participatory credit:
(a) Preparing, as author or co-author, written
materials ( e.g. article , book or book review)
which contribute to the legal education of the
author member, which were not prepared in the
ordinary course of his practice or employment;
and
(b) Editing a law book, law journal or legal
newsletter.
PARTIES EXEMPTED FROM THE MCLE
1. The President and the Vice President of the
Philippines, and the Secretaries and
Undersecretaries of Executive Departments;
2. Senators and Members of the House of
Representatives;
3. The Chief Justice and Associate Justices of the
Supreme Court, incumbent and retired
members of the judiciary, incumbent
members of the Judicial and Bar Council and
incumbent court lawyers covered by the
Philippine Judicial Academy program of
continuing judicial education;
14 | LEGAL ETHICS MEMORY AID
4. The Chief State Counsel, Chief State
Prosecutor and Assistant Secretaries of the
Department of Justice;
5. The Solicitor General and the Assistant
Solicitors General;
6. The Government Corporate Counsel, Deputy
and Assistant Government Corporate
Counsel;
7. The Chairmen and Members of the
Constitutional Commissions;
8. The Ombudsman, the Overall Deputy
Ombudsman, the Deputy Ombudsman and
the Special Prosecutor of the Office of the
Ombudsman;
9. Heads of government agencies exercising
quasi-judicial functions;
10. Incumbent deans, bar reviewers and
professors of law who have teaching
experience for at least ten (10) years in
accredited law schools;
11. The Chancellor, Vice-Chancellor and members
of the Corps of Professors and Professorial
Lecturers of the Philippine Judicial Academy;
and
12. Governors and Mayors. (Bar Matter 850)
Other exempted parties:
1. Those who are not in law practice, private or
public; and
2. Those who have retired from law practice with
the approval of the IBP Board of Governors.
NOTE: Good cause for exemption from or
modification of requirement:
A member may file a verified request setting
forth good cause for exemption (such as physical
disability, illness, post-graduate study abroad, proven
expertise in law, etc.) from compliance with or
modification of any of the requirements, including an
extension of time, in accordance with the procedure to
be established by the Committee on MCLE.
Proof of Exemption:
Applications for exemption from or
modification of the MCLE must be:
1. Under Oath; and
2. Supported by documents;
General Compliance Procedures:
1. Compliance Card:
(a) Secured from the MCLE Committee before
the end of the compliance period;
(b) Completed by attesting under oath that
he has complied with the education
requirement or that he is exempt; and
(c) Must be returned to the address indicated
therein not later than the day after the end of
the member’s compliance period.
2. Record of Compliance or Exemption:
(a) Members shall maintain a sufficient
record or compliance or exemption, copy
furnished the MCLE Committee;
(b) The recordprovided to the member by the
provider shall indicate attendance at a
participatory activity.
Sanctions:
1. Non-Compliance Procedures: members
failing to comply will:
(a) Receive a Non-Compliance
Notice stating the specific deficiency; and
(b) Be given 60 days from date of
notification to explain the deficiency or show
compliance with the requirements, or to comply with it.
What constitutes NON COMPLIANCE
(a) Failure to complete education requirement
within the compliance period;
(b)Failure to provide attestation of
compliance or exemption;
(c) Failure to provide satisfactory evidence of
compliance (including evidence of exempt
status) within the prescribed period;
(d)Failure to satisfy the education
requirement and furnish evidence of such
compliance within 60 days from receipt of
non-compliance notice;
(e) Failure to pay non-compliance fee within
the prescribed period;
(f) Any other act or omission analogous to any
of the foregoing or intended to circumvent or
evade compliance with MCLE requirements;
3. Consequence of non- compliance:
(a) Pay a non-compliance fee;
(b) Listed as delinquent member by the IBP
Board of Governors upon recommendation of the
Committee on MCLE.
Reinstatement Process:
1. Member shall provide proof of compliance
with the MCLE requirements, including payment of
non-compliance fee; and
2. Termination of listing as a delinquent
member (administrative in nature but with notice and
hearing)
Committee on Mandatory Continuing Legal
Education:
1. Duty:
(a)Administer and adopt implementing rules
as may be necessary;
(b) Prescribe a schedule of MCLE fees;
2. Composition, Requirements, Compensation &
Term:
(a) Retired Justice of the SC: Chairman,
nominated by the SC;
 (b) IBP National President: Vice Chair;
(c) Three (3) other members: nominated by
the Philippine Judicial Academy, UP :Law
Center and Association of Law Professors,
respectively;
(d) Members of are of proven probity and
integrity;
(e) Compensation as may be determined by
the SC; and
(f) The initial terms of each of the 3 members
shall be 5, 4 and 3 years respectively.
Bar Matter No. 2012: Mandatory Legal Aid
Service ( MALAS)
Purpose: To enhance the duty of lawyers to society as
agents of social change and to the courts as offices
thereof by helping improve access to justice by the less
privileged members of society and expedite the
resolution of cases involving them.
Notes:
The Mandatory Free Legal Aid extended by
members of the bar will aid in the effective and efficient
administration of justice, especially those that involved
indigent and pauper litigants. (Encarnacion I., Assisting
the Cause of Justice , Far Eastern LR Vol. XLI, 2010)
Mandatory free legal aid services in all cases
shall be required for practicing lawyers involving
indigent and pauper litigants needing the assistance of
a lawyer and when the Integrated Bar of the Philippines
refers the same. (Sec. 3, B.M. 2012)
CANON 6 - THESE CANONS SHALL APPLY TO
LAWYERS IN GOVERNMENT SERVICES IN THE
DISCHARGE OF THEIR TASKS.
Rule 6.01 – The primary duty of a lawyer engaged in
public prosecution is not to convict but to see that
justice is done. The suppression of facts or the
concealment of witnesses capable of establishing the
innocence of the accused is highly reprehensible and
is cause for disciplinary action.
Rule 6.02 – A lawyer in the government service shall
not use his public position to promote or advance his
private interests, nor allow the latter to interfere with
his public duties.
Rule 6.03 – A lawyer shall not, after leaving
government service, accept engagement or
employment in connection with any matter in which
he had intervened while in said service.
Case Law:
A lawyer cannot allow his name to appear in such
pleading by itself or as part of firm under the
signature of another qualified lawyer because the
signature of an agent amounts to signing of a non-
qualified senator or congressman, the office of an
attorney being originally an agency, and because
he will, by such act, be appearing in court or quasi-
judicial or administrative body in violation of the
constitutional restriction. “ He cannot do indirectly
what the Constitution prohibits directly.” ( In re:
David, A.C. No. 98, 1954)
The word “appearance” includes not only arguing
case before any such body but also filing a
pleading on behalf of a client as “by simply filing a
formal motion plea or answer.”(Ramos vs.
Manalac, 89 Phil 270)
Notes:
1. The canons and the rules in the code of professional
responsibility are not intended to private practitioners
alone. A lawyer does not shed his professional
obligations upon assuming public office.
2. Public officials include elective and appointive
officials and employees, permanent or temporary
whether in the career or non-career service, including
military and police personnel, whether or not they
receive compensation, regardless of the amount. [Sec.
3(b), R.A. 6713]
3. Lawyers who are incumbent judges and magistrates
shall be governed by the Code of Judicial Conduct.
4. Lawyers in the government are also prohibited to
engage in the private practice of their profession unless
authorized by the Constitution or law, provided that
such practice will not conflict or tend to conflict with
their official functions.
5. A prosecutor is a quasi-judicial officer and as such, he
should seek equal and impartial justice. The interest of a
prosecutor in a criminal prosecution is not to win a case
but to see that justice is done. He should present
evidence in their true and proper significance. He should
see to it that the accused is given a fair and impartial
trial and not deprived of any of his statutory or
constitutional rights.
6. Government lawyers who are public servants owe
utmost fidelity to the public service. For a public service
is a public trust.
7. Sec. 7 of RA 6713 prohibits former public official or
employee for a period of 1 year after retirement or
separation from office to practice his profession in
connection with any other matter before the office he
used to be with.
8. A lawyer shall not, after leaving the government
service, accept engagement or employment in
connection with any matter in which he had intervened
while in said service.
16 | LEGAL ETHICS MEMORY AID
THE LAWYER AND
THE LEGAL PROFESSION
CANON 7 – A LAWYER SHALL AT ALL TIMES
UPHOLD THE INTEGRITY AND DIGNITY OF THE
LEGAL PROFESSION AND SUPPORT THE
ACTIVITIES OF THE INTEGRATED BAR.
Rule 7.01 – 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.
Rule 7.02 – A lawyer shall not support the application
for admission to the bar of any person known by him
to be unqualified in respect to character, education,
or other relevant attribute.
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.
THE INTEGRATED BAR
OF THE PHILIPPINES
Q: What is Integrated Bar of the Philippines?
A: It is an official national body composed of all
persons whose names now appear or may
hereafter be included in the Roll of Attorneys of
the Supreme Court. (Sec. 1, Rule 139-A, RRC)
It is a national organization of lawyers created on
January 16, 1973 under Rule 139-A, Rules of Court and
constituted on May 4, 1973 into a body corporate by
P.D. No.181
It is the national organization of lawyers in the
Philippines and a mandatory bar association for Filipino
lawyers.
Notes:
1. There is no such thing as retirement in the IBP as
understood in labor law. A lawyer, however, may
terminate his bar membership after filing the required
verified notice of termination with the Secretary of the
Integrated Bar (In re: Atty. Jose Principe, Bar Matter
No. 543, September 20, 1990 )
2. The IBP is strictly non-political..
3. It is the investigating arm of the Supreme Court in the
investigation of disbarment cases.
Q: What are the fundamental purposes of the IBP?
A:
1. To elevate the standards of the legal
profession;
2. Improve the administration of justice; and
3. Enable the Bar to discharge its public
responsibility more effectively (Sec. 2, Rule
139-A, RRC)
Notes:
1. The Philippines is divided into 9 Regions of the
Integrated Bar. (Sec.3, Rule 139-A, RRC)
2. A Chapter of the Integrated Bar shall be organized in
every province. (Sec. 4, Rule 139-A, RRC)
3. Each Chapter shall have its own local government as
provided for by uniform rules to be prescribed by the
Board of Governors and approved by the Supreme
Court. (Sec. 4, Rule 139-A, RRC)
The IBP Board of Governors
Q: Who governs the Integrated Bar of the
Philippines?
A: The Integrated Bar shall be governed by a Board of
Governors. (Sec. 6, Rule 139-A, RRC)
Q: How many and what is the procedure in the
selection of the Board of governors?
A: Nine (9) Governors shall be elected by the House of
Delegates from the nine Regions on the representation
basis of one Governor from each Region. Each Governor
shall be chosen from a list of nominees submitted by
the Delegates from the Region, provided that not more
than one nominee shall come from any Chapter. The
President and the Executive Vice President, if chosen by
the Governors from outside of themselves as provided
in section 7 of this Rule, shall ipso facto become
members of the Board. (Sec. 6, Rule 139-A, RRC)
Membership and Dues
The IBP Constitution and By-Laws considers the
following, “automatically and without exception”, as
members of the IBP:
 All lawyers whose names were in the Roll of
Attorneys of the Supreme Court on January
16, 1973.
 All lawyers whose names were included or are
entered therein after the said date.
Case Law:
Q: Is the compulsory membership in the IBP
violative of the lawyer’s constitutional freedom
to associate or corollary right not to associate?
A: Integration does not make a lawyer a member of
any group of which he is already a member. He
became a member of the bar when he passed the
Bar examinations. All that integration actually does
is provide an official national organization for the
well-defined but unorganized and incohesive group
 of which every lawyer is already a member. (In re:
Edillion A.M. 1928)
Notes:
1. Mandatory membership is not violative of a lawyer’s
freedom to associate. Lawyer may choose however the
Chapter he wants to join.
2. The Supreme Court has not granted full
independence to the IBP. Attorneys in the government
service should be understood as not including members
of the Court of Appeals, the Sandiganbayan, the Court
of Tax Appeals and judges of other courts.
Upholding the Dignity and Integrity of the Profession
1. Lawyers, as officers of the court, must not only in fact
be a good moral character but also seen to be of good
moral character and leading lives in accordance with the
highest moral standards of the community.
2. The act of supporting the application to the Bar of
any person known to him to be unqualified constitutes
gross misconduct in office. (Rule 138, Sec. 27, RPC)
3. A lawyer shall make no recommendation or
endorsement of any applicant for admission to the bar,
if he knows that the applicant is not qualified to become
a member of the bar for lack of good moral character,
lack of educational requirements or other relevant
attribute.
Case Law:
A lawyer brings honor and integrity to the legal
profession by faithfully performing his duties to society,
to the Bar, to the courts and to his clients. (Nunga vs.
Viray, Adm. Case No. 4758, April 30, 1999)
When the applicant concealed a charge of a crime
against him, 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 unfit to
become a lawyer. (In re: Galang, 66 SCRA 282)
CANON 8 – A LAWYER SHALL CONDUCT HIMSELF
WITH COURTESY, FAIRNESS AND CANDOR
TOWARDS HIS PROFESSIONAL COLLEAGUES, AND
SHALL AVOID HARASSING TACTICS AGAINST
OPPOSING COUNSEL.
Rule 8.01 – A lawyer shall not, in his professional
dealings, use language which is abusive, offensive or
otherwise improper.
Rule 8.02 – A lawyer shall not, directly or indirectly,
encroach upon the professional employment of
another lawyer, however, it is the right of any lawyer,
without fear or favor, to give proper advice and
assistance to those seeking relief against unfaithful
or neglectful counsel.
Courtesy, Fairness and Candor Towards Professional
Colleagues
Case Law:
A lawyer’s language should be forceful but dignified,
emphatic but respectful as befitting an advocate and in
keeping with the dignity of the legal profession.
(Surigao Mineral Reservation Board vs. Cloribel, 31
SCRA 1)
Any kind of language which attacks without foundation
and integrity of the opposing counsel or the dignity of
the court may be stricken off the records or may subject
a lawyer to disciplinary action. (Report of IBP
Committee, p. 41 )
A lawyer shall refrain from all offensive personality and
advance no fact prejudicial to the honor or reputation of
a party or witness, unless required by the cause with
which he is charged.
Lack or want of intention is no excuse for the
disrespectful language employed. Counsel cannot
escape responsibility by claiming that his words did not
mean what any reader must have understood them as
meaning. At best, it extenuates liability (Rheem of the
Philippines vs. Ferrer, 20 scra 441)
When the use of strong language has been impelled by
the same language used by the judge, the lawyer
cannot be blamed. (Fernandez vs. Hon. Bello, 107 phil
1140)
Notes:
A lawyer shall not steal another’s client. It is highly
unethical for a lawyer to exert efforts directly or
indirectly, in any way, to encroach upon professional
employment of another. There is however no
encroachment when the previous lawyer was already
dismissed.
A lawyer must avoid everything that may tend to
mislead a party not represented by a counsel.
Any advice or assistance extended after proper
verification is not encroachment upon the business of
another lawyer for such act is justified under the
circumstances
Lawyers should expose without fear or favor, before the
proper tribunals, corrupt or dishonest conduct in the
profession and should accept without hesitation
employment against the member of the Bar who has
wronged his client. (Canon 29, CPE)
18 | LEGAL ETHICS MEMORY AID
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
unqualified person the performance of any task which
by law may only be performed by a member of the
bar in good standing.
Rule 9.02 – A lawyer shall not divide or stipulate to
divide a fee for legal services with persons not
licensed to practice law, except:
Where there is a pre-existing agreement with a
partner or associate that, upon the latter's death,
money shall be paid over a reasonable period of time
to his estate or to persons specified in the
agreement; or
Any kind of language which attacks without
foundation and integrity of the opposing counsel or
the dignity of the court may be stricken off the
records or may subject a lawyer Where a lawyer
undertakes to complete unfinished legal business of a
deceased lawyer; or
Where a lawyer or law firm includes non-lawyer
employees in a retirement plan even if the plan is
based in whole or in part, on a profit sharing
agreement.
NO ASSISTANCE IN UNAUTHORIZED PRACTICE OF
LAW
A lawyer must not make a partner or an associate one
who:
1. Has been suspended from the practice of
law;
2. is not a lawyer;
3. is a foreign lawyer although knowledgeable
in the law, unless authorized by the SC; and
4. is disbarred.
Purpose: To protect the public, the court, the client
and the bar from the incompetence or dishonesty of
those unlicensed to practice law and still not subject to
the disciplinary control of the court.
Note:
The rule on non-delegation of work is absolute. A
lawyer cannot delegate his work even to a qualified
person without the consent of his client because it is
against public policy.
A lawyer can employ lay secretaries, lay investigators,
lay detectives, lay researchers, accountants or non-
lawyer draftsmen, to undertake any task not involving
practice of law. He may also avail himself of the
assistance of law students in many of the fields of the
lawyer’s work, such as the examination of a case law,
finding and interviewing witness, examining court
records, delivering papers, and similar matters.
(Comments of IBP Committee, pp. 47-48)
General Rule: An agreement providing for the division
of attorney’s fees to a non-lawyer is condemned by the
code.
Rationale: It would leave the public in
hopeless confusion as to whom to consult in
case of necessity (Harriman vs. Straham,
33p. 2d. 1067, 47 Wyo. 208, PAFLU vs.
Binalbagan Isabela Sugar Company, 42 scra
302)
Exceptions: Those enumerated under Rule 9.02
Case Law:
A person who is not a lawyer but authorized to appear
before the NLRC is not entitled to attorney’s fees.(Five
J taxi vs. NLRC, 235 scra 556)
Case Law:
Q: Atty. B’s forged signature was found in
different documents and communications for his client.
He permitted that the pleadings and communications
be signed in his name by the secretary of the law office
due to some lapses. Did Atty. B violate canon 9 of CPR?
A: Yes, the lawyer’s duty to prevent, or at the
very least not to assist in, the unauthorized practice of
law is founded on public interest and policy. Public
policy requires that the practice of law be limited to
those individuals found duly qualified in education and
character. Atty. B act of permitting a non-lawyer to
perform a lawyers duty such as signing pleading is a
clear violation of this rule. (Tapay vs Bancolo, A.C. No.
9604, March 20, 2013)
Q: Atty. B has let DR non-lawyer to act as her
collaborating counsel in a case, to the extent that DR
signed the minutes of the court proceedings. Did Atty.
B violate canon 9 of CPR?
A: Yes. Atty. B misrepresented DR who is not a
member of the Bar, as her collaborating counsel in her
case, it clear that she violates rule 9, because it is an
unauthorized practice of law for DR has no right to
practice law. (Lacsamana vs Bustamante, A.C. No.
7269, November 23, 2011)
THE LAWYER AND
THE COURTS
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 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 been proved.
Rule 10.03 – A lawyer shall observe the rules of
procedure and shall not misuse them to defeat the
ends of justice.
Rationale: The burden cast on the judiciary would be
intolerable if it could not take at face value what is
asserted by counsel.
Cases of Falsehoods Which Merited Discipline
(Pineda, p. 143):
1. Lawyers falsely stating in a deed of sale that property
is free from all liens and encumbrances when it is not so
(Sevilla vs. Zoleta, 96 Phil. 979);
2. Lawyers making it appear that a person, long dead,
executed a deed of sale in his favour (Monterey vs.
Arayata, 61 Phil. 820);
3. Lawyer concealing the fact that he was charge with or
convicted of a crime, in an information sheet required
by law in connection with his employment (Calo vs.
Degamo, 20 scra 447)
4. Lawyer, encashing a check payable to a deceased
cousin by signing the latter’s name on the check (In re:
Samaniego, 90 Phil. 382);
5. Lawyer falsifying a power of attorney and used it in
collecting the money due to the principal and
appropriating the money for his own benefit (In re:
Rusina, 105 Phil. 1328);
6. Lawyer alleging in one pleading that his clients were
merely lessees of the property involved, and alleged in a
later pleading that the same clients were the owners of
the same property where there are false allegations in
pleadings. (Chavez vs. Viola, G.R. 2152, 19 April 1991)
7. Lawyer uttering falsehood in a Motion to Dismiss
(Martin vs. Moreno, 129 SCRA 315)
8. Lawyer denying having received the notice to file
brief which is belied by the return card
(Ragacejo vs. IAC, 153 SCRA 462).
9. Lawyer presenting falsified documents in court which
he knows to be false (Bautista vs. Gonzales, 182 SCRA
151) or introducing false evidence (Berrenguer vs.
Carranza, 26 SCRA 673).
10. Lawyer filing false charges or groundless suits
(Retuya vs. Gorduiz, 96 SCRA 526).
11. Lawyer falsifying Sheriff’s Return and seeking the
default of the defendant (Libit vs. Oliva, 237 scra 375)
12. Using in pleading the IBP number of another lawyer
(Bongolota vs. Castillo, CBD. No. 176, Jan. 1, 1995)
13. Using of fictitious residence certificate by a notary
public, (Roces vs. Aportadera, AC No. 2936, March 31,
1995)
Notes:
1. A lawyer is an officer of the court; his duty is to
uphold the dignity and authority of the courts to which
he owes fidelity and not to promote distrust in the
administration of justice.
2. To undermine the judicial edifice is disastrous to the
continuity of government and to the attainment of the
liberties of the people.
3. Refiling of a case which was already litigated is not
forum shopping but nevertheless a violation of Canon
10.
4. A lawyer must be truthful; he must be a minister of
truth. He is expected to act in good faith just as
anybody especially in his dealings with the court.
5. The act of offering in evidence a false testimony is
punishable under Art. 184 of the RPC.
6. When a lawyer makes a quotation of a decision, he
should quote the same verbatim.
7. A mere typographical error in the citation, however, is
not contemptuous unless the misquotation is intended.
8. Any lawyer who misuses the rules to frustrate the
ends of justice deserves stern condemnation.
Procedural rules are instruments in the speedy and
efficient administration of justice. They should be used
to achieve such end and not to derail it.
9. A lawyer should not abuse his right of recourse to the
courts for the purpose of arguing a cause that had been
repeatedly rebuffed. While a lawyer owes fidelity to the
cause of his client, it should not be at the expense of
truth and the administration of justice.
CANON 11 – A LAWYER SHALL OBSERVE AND
MAINTAIN THE RESPECT DUE TO THE COURTS AND
TO JUDICIAL OFFICERS AND SHOULD INSIST ON
SIMILAR CONDUCT BY OTHERS.
Rule 11.01 – A lawyer shall appear in court properly
attired.
Rule 11.02 – A lawyer shall punctually appear at court
hearings.
Rule 11.03 – A lawyer shall abstain from scandalous,
offensive or menacing language or behavior before
the Courts.
20 | LEGAL ETHICS MEMORY AID
Rule 11.04 – A lawyer shall not attribute to a Judge
motives not supported by the record or have no
materiality to the case.
Rule 11.05 – A lawyer shall submit grievances against
a Judge to the proper authorities only.
RESPECT FOR COURTS AND JUDICIAL
OFFICERS
1. The public duties of a lawyer take precedence
over his private duties. His first duty is to the
courts.
2. A lawyer’s duty to the court is not secondary to
that of his client.
3. He shall not destroy unnecessarily that high
esteem and regard toward the court which is
essential in the administration of justice.
4. The highest sign of respect to the courts is the
lawyer’s obedience to the court orders and
processes. If lawyer wants to assail court’s orders,
it should be done within the walls of decency and
propriety.
5. A lawyer must come properly attired to maintain
the dignity and respectability of the legal
profession.
6. Lack of punctuality interferes in the speedy
administration of justice.
7. A lawyer’s argument, whether oral or written,
should be gracious to both court and opposing
counsel and be of such words as may be properly
addressed by one gentleman to another.
8. While lawyers are prohibited to attribute motives
to a judge not supported by the record, lawyers
must be courageous enough to expose
arbitrariness and injustices of courts and judges.
9. A lawyer has the duty to defend a judge from
unfounded criticism or groundless personal
attack. Such duty, however, does not prevent a
lawyer from filing administrative complaints
against erring judges or from accepting cases of
clients who have legitimate grievances against
them.
10. Complaints must be filed with the Supreme Court
(Office of the Court Administrator).
11. If the complaint is against justices of the Supreme
Court, and is based on impeachable offenses, it
must be filed to the House of Representatives in
accordance with the rules on impeachment.
12. Criminal complaints against judges in connection
with their duties must be filed with the Supreme
Court and not with the Ombudsman.
NOTE: Rule 11.03 has the same objectives as Rule
8.01.
CANON 12 – A LAWYER SHALL EXERT EVERY
EFFORT AND CONSIDER IT HIS DUTY TO ASSIST IN
THE SPEEDY AND EFFICIENT ADMINISTRATION OF
JUSTICE.
Rule 12.01 – A lawyer shall not appear for trial unless
he has adequately prepared himself on the law and
the facts of his case, the evidence he will adduce and
the order of its profference. He should also be ready
with the original documents for comparison with the
copies.
Rule 12.02 – A lawyer shall not file multiple actions
arising from the same cause.
Rule 12.03 – 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.
Rule 12.04 – A lawyer shall not unduly delay a case,
impede the execution of a judgment or misuse Court
processes.
Rule 12.05 – A lawyer shall refrain from talking to his
witness during a break or recess in the trial, while the
witness is still under examination.
Rule 12.06 – A lawyer shall not knowingly assist a
witness to misrepresent himself or to impersonate
another.
Rule 12.07 – A lawyer shall not abuse, browbeat or
harass a witness nor needlessly inconvenience him.
Rule 12.08 – A lawyer shall avoid testifying in behalf
of his client, except:
on formal matters, such as the mailing,
authentication or custody of an instrument, and the
like; or
on substantial matters, in cases where his testimony
is essential to the ends of justice, in which event he
must, during his testimony, entrust the trial of the
case to another counsel.
ASSISTANCE IN THE SPEEDY AND EFFICIENT
ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE
1. All persons shall have the right to a speedy
disposition of their cases before all judicial,
quasi-judicial, or administrative bodies (Art.
III, Sec. 16, 1987 Constitution)
2. Acts which obstruct the administration of
justice are condemned.
FORUM SHOPPING
Forum Shopping – the practice of filing several actions
or petitions in the same or different tribunals arising
from the same cause and seeking substantially identical
reliefs in the hope of winning in one of them.
There is forum shopping when as a result of an adverse
opinion in one forum:
1. A party seeks a favorable opinion (other than
by appeal or certiorari) in another or;
2. He institutes two or more actions or
proceedings grounded on the same cause, on
the gamble that one or the other court would
make a favorable disposition.
Sworn certification of non-forum shopping
To prevent forum shopping, Supreme Court requires
the attachment to all initiatory pleadings a sworn
certification that:
1. The initiating party has not commenced any
action or filed any claim involving the same
issues in any court, tribunal or quasi-judicial
agency and to the best of his knowledge, no
such other action or claim is pending therein;
2. If there is such other pending action or claim,
a complete statement of its present status,
and;
3. If he should learn that the same or similar
action or claim has been filed or is pending, he
shall report that fact within five days from
learning, to the court where his complaint or
initiatory pleading has been filed.
Q: Who shall sign the certificate?
A: THE CERTIFICATE AGAINST FORUM SHOPPING
MUST BE SIGNED BY THE CLIENT, not the
lawyer.
CONSEQUENCES OF DELIBERATE FORUM
SHOPPING
If the act constitutes deliberate forum shopping,
the same shall be ground for summary dismissal
with prejudice and shall constitute direct
contempt, as well as a cause for administrative
sanctions for the lawyer concerned.
Bar Question (2002):
Q: On June 28, 2001, X filed with the Supreme
Court a petition for prohibition, with a prayer for
a temporary restraining order/ preliminary
injunction, to forestall his removal as chairman
and general manager of a government agency.
He believed he had a fixed term until January 31,
2004, but there were indications that a new
President would replace him. As he had
apprehended, an Administrative Order was
issued by the Chief Executive on July 2, 2001
recalling X’s appointment. Shortly thereafter, Z
was appointed to the position in question.
On July 31, 2001, X filed a motion to withdraw
his petition. On the same day, without waiting for
the resolution of his motion, he filed another petition
with the Regional Trial Court seeking to prevent his
removal as chairman and general manager of the
government agency. On July 8, 2001, his motion to
withdraw the first petition was granted by the
Supreme Court without prejudice to his liability, if
any, for contempt for engaging in forum-shopping. Is
he guilty of forum shopping?
A: Yes. X is guilty of forum shopping. Forum
shopping is the practice of filing multiple actions from
the same cause (Rule 12.02, Code of Professional
Responsibility). It is clear that X’s petition for
prohibition was still pending in the Supreme Court
when he filed the same petition in the Regional Trial
Court. He should have waited for the resolution of
his motion to withdraw before filing the second
petition because he cannot assume that the motion
will be granted.
Q: May a lawyer talk to his witness during recess in
trial?
A: A lawyer should refrain from talking to his witness
during a break or recess in the trial while the
witness is still under examination.
Reason: to uphold and maintain fair play with the
other party and to prevent the lawyer from being
tempted to coach his witness to suit his purposes
Q: What is the liability of a lawyer who induces a
witness to commit false testimony?
A: A witness who commits a misrepresentation is
criminally liable for offering false testimony in
evidence under the Revised Penal Code. The
lawyer who induces a witness to commit false
testimony is equally guilty as the witness.
Q: May a lawyer testify for his client?
A: General Rule: A lawyer cannot testify for his client.
Reason: The function of the witness is to tell the
facts as he recalls them in answer to questions. The
function of an advocate is that of a partisan. It is
difficult to distinguish between the zeal of an
advocate and the impartiality of a witness.
CANON 13 – 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 – A lawyer shall not extend extraordinary
attention or hospitality to, nor seek opportunity for
cultivating familiarity with Judges.
Rule 13.02 – A lawyer shall not make public
statements in the media regarding a pending case
tending to arouse public opinion for or against a
party.
Rule 13.03 – A lawyer shall not brook or invite
interference by another branch or agency of the
government in the normal course of judicial
proceedings.
22 | LEGAL ETHICS MEMORY AID

Reliance on Merits of His Cause and Avoidance of Any 1. A lawyer shall not refuse his services to the
Impropriety which Tends to Influence or Gives the needy;
Appearance of Influence upon the Courts 2. He shall not decline to represent a person
solely on account of the latter’s race, sex,
1. It is highly improper to discuss a case privately creed or status of life or because of his own
with the judge, or for the judge to meet opinion regarding the guilt of said person;
privately with an accused. 3. He shall not decline except for serious and
efficient cause.
Reason: to maintain impartiality, Judges
should not only impartial but should appear Criminal Cases Civil Cases
impartial A lawyer cannot decline The rules and ethics of the
to represent an accused profession enjoin a lawyer
2. Newspaper publication by a lawyer as to because of his opinion from taking a bad case.
pending or anticipated litigation may interfere that such person is guilty
with a fair trial in the courts and otherwise of the charge, because Reason: It is the lawyer’s
prejudice the due administration of justice. an accused is innocent duty “to counsel or
until his guilt is proven maintain such action only
beyond reasonable as appear to him to be
THE LAWYER AND doubt; as such, the just, and such defenses
THE CLIENT lawyer must see to it only as he believes to be
that due process is honestly debatable under
Nature of Relationship: accorded to his client. the law.” (Sec. 20, Rule
1. Strictly personal; 138)
2. Highly confidential; and
3. Fiduciary

CANON 14 - A LAWYER SHALL NOT REFUSE HIS

SERVICES TO THE NEEDY. II. Services as Counsel de Oficio

Rule 14.01 – 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.
Rule 14.02 – A lawyer shall not decline, except for
serious and sufficient cause, an appointment as
counsel de officio or as amicus curiae, or a request
from the Integrated Bar of the Philippines or any of
its chapters for rendition of free legal aid.
COUNSEL DE OFICIO – an attorney appointed by the
court to defend an indigent defendant in a criminal
action.
Who may be appointed as counsel de oficio:
1. Members of the bar in good standing;
2. Any person, resident of the province and of
good repute for probity and ability, in
localities without lawyer.

Rule 14.03 – A lawyer may not refuse to accept

representation of an indigent client if: Notes:
He is not in a position to carry out the work
effectively or competently; 1. In appointing a counsel de oficio, the gravity
of the offense, difficulty of the questions that
He labors under a conflict of interest between him may arise, and the experience and ability of
and the prospective client or between a present client the appointee are considered. (Sec. 7, Rule
and the prospective client. 116, Rules of Court)
2. Judges are cautioned not to frequently
Rule 14.04 – A lawyer who accepts the cause of a appoint the same lawyer as counsel de oficio.
person unable to pay his professional fees shall
observe the same standard of conduct governing his
Reasons:
relations with paying clients.
a. It is unfair to the lawyer concerned since he
AVAILABILITY OF SERVICE will be burdened with too many de oficio cases.
WITHOUT DISCRIMINATION
b. The compensation provided by the Rules of
I. Services Regardless of Person’s Status Court might be considered as a regular source of
income.
General Rule: A lawyer is not bound to accept every
case that is referred to him.
NOTE: AMICUS CURIAE – (“friend of the court”) He is
known to be an expert or knowledgeable on certain
Exceptions:
matters of law in regard to which the judge may be
doubtful or wrong.

An amicus curiae is not a party to the action BUT he
may petition the court for permission to file a brief on
behalf of a party or if accompanied by the written
consent of all parties or at the request of the court.
Such briefs are commonly filed in appeals concerning
matters of a broad public interest.
If a lawyer accepts a case for a client who is unable to
pay, he must still represent the client with utmost
fidelity, competence and diligence.
Valid Grounds for Refusal
General Rule:
The rule involves indigent clients who come to a
lawyer for legal services. Under Rule138,
Section 31 of the Rules of Court, a judge may
assign a lawyer to render a professional
service free of charge to any party in a case, if
upon investigation, it appears that the party is
destitute and unable to employ an attorney. The lawyer
assigned must render the required legal service unless
he is excused there from by the court for sufficient of
cause shown.
Exceptions:
1. Lack of Competence – If the lawyer is
inexperienced on the nature of the case for
which he is being engaged, he must be open
and candid enough to tell the prospective
client about it.
2. Conflict of Interests – If the lawyer would be
confronted with possible conflict of interests
in accepting a case, he is excused from the
directive of the Rule.
3. Another Rule (Rule 15.03) prohibits
representation of conflicting interests. It must
be noted, the prohibited acts is also an
offense under Article 209 of the Revised Penal
Code.
Notes:
1. Lawyer who pretends to be disqualified under the
Rule is committing grave misconduct.
2. A lawyer who pretends to be incompetent when he is
not, to evade his obligation under the Rule or who
falsely claims the presence of conflict of interests when
there is none, will be liable administratively.
CANON 15 – A LAWYER SHALL OBSERVE CANDOR,
FAIRNESS AND LOYALTY IN ALL HIS DEALINGS
AND TRANSACTIONS WITH HIS CLIENTS.
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.
Rule 15.02 – A lawyer shall be bound by the rule on
privilege communication in respect of matters
disclosed to him by a prospective client.
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.
Rule 15.04 – A lawyer may, with the written consent
of all concerned, act as mediator, conciliator or
arbitrator in settling disputes.
Rule 15.05 – A lawyer when advising his client, shall
give a candid and honest opinion on the merits and
probable results of the client's case, neither
overstating nor understating the prospects of the
case.
Rule 15.06 – A lawyer shall not state or imply that he
is able to influence any public official, tribunal or
legislative body.
Rule 15.07 – A lawyer shall impress upon his client
compliance with the laws and the principles of
fairness.
Rule 15.08 – A lawyer who is engaged in another
profession or occupation concurrently with the
practice of law shall make clear to his client whether
he is acting as a lawyer or in another capacity.
CANDOR, FAIRNESS AND LOYALTY TO
CLIENTS
Q: Juan, who is charged in Court with estafa for
misappropriating funds entrusted to him by Carlo,
consulted Atty. Johnny about the case with the
intention of engaging his services as defense counsel.
Because Juan could not afford to pay the fee that
Atty. Johnny was charging him, Juan engaged the
services of another counsel, Atty. Panopio. At the
trial of the case for estafa against Juan, witness was
Atty. Johnny, whom he was calling to the witness
stand. Counsel for Juan, Atty. Panopio, vigorously
opposed the prosecutor’s move on the ground that
Atty. Johnny 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. Johnny’s
testimony, the prosecutor answered it has something
to do with how Juan obtained from Carlo the funds
that the latter received from the former but failed to
account for. Thereupon, Atty. Panopio vigorously
opposed the prosecutor’s motion. If you were the
Judge, how would you rule on the matter?
A: I would not allow Atty. Johnny to take the
witness stand. When Juan consulted Atty. Johnny
about his case, a lawyer-client relationship was
established between them. It does not matter that Juan
24 | LEGAL ETHICS MEMORY AID
did not eventually engage his services because of his
fees; such relationship has already been created.
(Hilado vs. David, 84 Phil 569)
Confidentiality Rule
The mere establishment of a client-lawyer relationship
does not raise a presumption of confidentiality.
(Hiltpold v. Stern, 26 ALR 2d 1418). There must be an
intention that the communication relayed by the client
to the lawyer be treated as confidential.
The communication may be verbal, written or through
any other means (State v. Dawson, 90 Mo. 149, 1 SW
827).
Rule on Privileged Communication
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)
Sec. 24 (b), Rule 130, Rules of Court
“An attorney cannot, without the consent of his client,
be examined as to any communication made by the
client to him, or his advice given thereon in the course
of, or with a view to, professional employment, nor can
an attorney's secretary, stenographer, or clerk be
examined, without the consent of the client and his
employer, concerning any fact the knowledge of which
has been acquired in such capacity.”
Requisites of Privileged Communication
1. There exists an attorney and client
relationship or a kind of consultancy
relationship with a prospective client. That is,
legal advice is what is sought ;
2. the communication was made by the client to
the lawyer in the course of the lawyer’s
professional employment;
3. the communication must be intended to be
confidential.
Case Law:
The protection afforded upon the privileged
communication ceases only when waived by the client
himself or after his death by his heir or legal
representative, after his death (Baldwin vs. Comm. Of
Internal Revenue, 125 F. 2d 812, 141 ALR 548).
Notes:
1. Privileged communication applies even to a
mere prospective client.
2. The privilege continues to exist even after the
attorney-client relation is terminated.
INSTANCES WHEN COMMUNICATION IS NOT
PRIVILEGED
1. When communication is made to a person
who is not a lawyer even if such person
committed himself to render legal services
2. When communication is made to a lawyer for
some other purpose (such as lease) other than
on account of the lawyer-client relationship.
When the advice sought from the attorney is
not legal but involves accounting services or
business assistance
Persons entitled to invoke the Privilege:
1. The client, who is primarily intended to be
protected by the privilege
2. The lawyer himself or the client’s employee
may claim the privilege in the absence of any
waiver on the part of the client
3. The attorney’s secretary, stenographer, or
clerk, who acquired confidential
communication in such capacity, save only
when the client and the attorney jointly
consent thereto
4. Under Rule 138-A, Section 1 of the Rules of
Court, the student allowed to appear in
court for indigent clients accepted by the
legal clinic of the law school where he is
enrolled, is also required to keep the secrets
and confidences of the clients.
Two-fold Purpose of the Rule:
1. To encourage a client to make a full disclosure
of the facts of the case to his counsel without
fear;
2. To allow the lawyer freedom to obtain full
information from his client
Note: The privilege is limited only to communications
which are within the ambit of lawful employment and
does not extend to those transmitted in contemplation
of future crimes.
When a lawyer is allowed to reveal the secrets of his
client:
1. When authorized by the client after
acquainting him of the consequences of the
disclosure;
2. When required by law;
3. When necessary to collect his fees or to
defend himself, his employees or associates or
by judicial action.
General Rule: A lawyer cannot invoke privileged
communication to refuse revealing a client’s identity.
Exceptions:
 The identity is privileged if it would implicate the
client in the very activity for which he sought the
lawyer’s advice;
 Where disclosure would open the client to civil
liability.
Case Law:
The disclosure of such identity will provide for the only
link in order to convict the accused, otherwise the
government has no case. [Regala vs Sandiganbayan,
262 SCRA 122 (1996)]
CONFLICT OF INTEREST
General Rule:
A lawyer cannot represent a party whose interest is
adverse to that of his client.
Except:
1. By written consent of all concerned;
2. Such written consent must be given after a
full disclosure of the facts. (Rule 15.03, CPR)
Tests to Determine Conflicting Interests:
1. Whether or not in behalf of one client, it is the
lawyer’s duty to fight for an issue or claim but
it is his duty to oppose it for the other client.
2. Will the attorney be required to contest for
that which his duty to another client requires
him to oppose? (conflicting duties)
3. Will the acceptance of a new relation invite
suspicion and/or actually lead
unfaithfulness or double-dealing towards
another client? (Invitation of suspicion)
4. Will the attorney be called upon in his new
relation to use against his first client any
knowledge acquired in the previous
employment? (use of prior knowledge
obtained)
Note: If a lawyer is disqualified from appearing as
counsel because of conflict of interests, the law firm of
which he is a member is similarly disqualified or
prohibited from so acting.
Q: Atty. A, a practicing lawyer, was employed by
ABC Bank as its bank attorney and notary public
in three of its branches in Manila. While thus
employed, B, who was unaware of Atty. A’s
employment in the bank, engaged Atty. A’s
services as a lawyer in a case that was filed by
ABC Bank for collection of sum of money
involving one of its branches in Quezon City
which Atty. A was not a notary public. Atty. A
accepted. The Quezon City Regional Trial Court,
after due proceeding and hearing, rendered
judgment in favor of ABC Bank and against B
who wanted to appeal the adverse judgment.
But upon advice of Atty. A, the adverse
judgment was not appealed. Thereafter, B
learned Atty. A was employed by ABC Bank as
one of its attorneys. She now consults with you
and asks you to take legal steps against Atty. A
for his apparent misconduct. What do you think
of what Atty. A did? Is there a valid and legal
basis to discipline him?
A: In agreeing to represent B in a case which ABC
Bank filed against her, Atty. A 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 ABC Bank branch in
Quezon City is not one of the branches he serves in
Manila. The bank itself is his client.
This constitutes malpractice for which Atty. A
can be disciplined.
Note: The lawyer may appear against his own client
only on condition that the client has given his written
consent thereto and after a full disclosure of the facts to
him.
Candid and Honest Advice to Clients
Lawyer’s duties when giving advice to his client
1. he must give a candid and honest opinion on
to the merits and probable results of the client’s
case;
2. he shall not state nor imply that he is able to
influence any public official, tribunal or
legislative body;
3. he shall impress upon his client compliance
with the laws and principles of fairness.
Compliance with laws
The lawyer must promote respect for the law. Rule
15.07 carries more or less the same intendment as rule
1.02(CPR) which provides that, “A lawyer shall not
counsel or abet activities aimed at defiance of the law or
at lessening confidence in the legal system.”
The lawyer must impress upon his client, that
everybody, including them, must respect the laws and
observe the principles of fairness in their dealings as
aptly enunciated in Art. 19 of the Civil Code- “every
person must, in the exercise of his rights and in the
performance of his duties, act with justice, give
everyone his due and observe honesty and good faith.”
Concurrent Practice of another Profession
1. Being a lawyer does not preclude him from
engaging in business as such is not necessarily
improper.
2. The lawyer must, in such case, make it clear in
what capacity he is acting.
3. Ethical considerations governing client-
lawyer relationship may be inoperative in
one’s case and not in the other.
4. To avoid breach of legal ethics, the lawyer
should keep any business, in which he is
26 | LEGAL ETHICS MEMORY AID
engaged in concurrently with the practice of
law, entirely separate and apart from the
latter. A lawyer must keep paramount the
protection of the legal profession even when
he is engaged in any other legitimate
profession.
CANON 16 – A LAWYER SHALL HOLD IN TRUST ALL
MONEYS AND PROPERTIES OF HIS CLIENT THAT
MAY COME INTO HIS PROFESSION.
Rule 16.01 – A lawyer shall account for all money or
property collected or received for or from the client.
Rule 16.02 – A lawyer shall keep the funds of each
client separate and apart from his own and those of
others kept by him.
Rule 16.03 – 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.
Rule 16.04 – A lawyer shall not borrow money from
his client unless the client's interests are fully
protected by the nature of the case or by
independent advice. Neither shall a lawyer lend
money to a client except, when in the interest of
justice, he has to advance necessary expenses in a
legal matter he is handling for the client.
A lawyer’ s responsibility as to his client’s money and
properties
A lawyer is a trustee of client’s money and properties.
The moneys collected by an attorney for his client
belong to the client (Malcolm, Legal and Judicial
Ethics,p.156).
Consequently, the lawyer is under obligation to hold in
trust all moneys and properties of his client that may
come in his possession.
A lawyer who unjustly retains money of his client after it
has been demanded may be punished for contempt as
an officer of the court.
Fiduciary Relationship
The prohibition rests on considerations of public policy
and interest.
Case Law:
It is intended to curtail any undue influence of the
lawyer upon his client on account of his fiduciary and
confidential relation with him. (Sotto vs Samson, 115
Phil 710, 1962)
A lawyer cannot acquire the properties of his client.
Reason: “A lawyer shall hold in trust all
moneys and properties of his client that may
come into his possession.”
Case Law:
The prohibition rests on considerations of public policy
and interest. It is intended to curtail any undue influence
of the lawyer upon his client on account of his fiduciary
and confidential relation with him. (Sotto vs. Samson,
115 Phil 710, 1962)
Furthermore, Art. 1491 of the New Civil Code states
that: “The following persons cannot acquire or
purchase, even at a public or judicial action, either in
person or through the mediation of another: xxx (5)
lawyers, with respect to the property and rights which
may be the object of any litigation in which they take
part by virtue of their profession.”
Notes:
1. The prohibition includes mortgage of property and
assignment of property.
2. The nullity of such prohibited contract is definite and
permanent and cannot be cured by ratification.
Elements of Prohibition
1. There is an attorney-client relationship;
2. The property is in litigation;
3. The attorney is the counsel of record in the
case;
4. The attorney, by himself or through an agent,
purchases such property during the pendency
of said case. (Art. 1491 of the Civil Code)
Instances where prohibition does not apply
1. When the property purchased by a lawyer was
not involved in litigation;
2. When the sale took place before it became
involved in the suit;
3. When the attorney at the time of the purchase
was not counsel in the case;
4. Purchaser of the property in litigation was a
corporation even though the attorney was an
officer thereof;
5. Sale took place after the termination of the
litigation.
6. A lawyer may accept an assignment from his
client of a money judgment rendered in the
latter’s favor in a case in which he was not
counsel, in payment of his professional
services performed in another case.
7. A contract for attorney’s fees contingent upon
the outcome of the litigation.
CHAMPERTOUS CONTRACT
Champertous contract – a contract wherein the lawyer
assumes all expenses and reimbursement is contingent
on the outcome of the case. It is void because it tends a
lawyer to take advantage of his influence over the client
and acquire financial interest in the outcome of the the attorney gets claim for attorney’s fees had
case. possession of the papers, been entered into the
documents, or property. records of the case.
ATTORNEY’S LIEN Client need not be Notice must be served upon
notified to make it client and adverse party.
Attorney’s Retaining Lien – the right of an attorney to effective.
retain the funds, documents and papers of his client It may be exercised Generally, exercisable only
which have lawfully come into his possession and retain before judgment or when the attorney had
the same until his lawful fees and disbursements have execution or regardless already secured a favorable
been paid, and may apply such funds to the satisfaction thereof. judgment for his client.
thereof. It is extinguished when It is extinguished when
possession lawfully ends client loses action as lien
Requisites: as voluntary parting with may be enforced only
1. A client-lawyer relationship; funds, documents, and against judgment awarded
2. That the claims for attorney’s fees are not papers of client. in favor of client or to
satisfied; and proceeds executed thereon.
3. That counsel is in possession of the subject
papers, documents and funds. It is still Co-mingling of Funds
required that
4. His possession be lawful. General Rule: The lawyer is not relieved of the
obligation to make a proper accounting even if he has
Otherwise, the lawyer cannot exercise his right as a an attorney’s lien over the client’s money or funds in his
retaining lien. possession.

Attorney’s Charging Lien – the right of an attorney to Exception: However, he is allowed to apply so much of
the same extent upon all judgments for the payment of the funds as may be necessary to satisfy his lawful fees
money, and executions issued in pursuance of such and disbursements provided that he shall notify his
judgments which he has secured in a litigation of his client, client.
from and after the time when he shall have caused a
statement of his claim of such lien to be entered upon the Case Law:
records of the court rendering such judgment, or issuing
such execution, and shall have caused written notice The relationship between a lawyer and a client is highly
thereof to be delivered to his client and to the adverse fiduciary; it requires a high degree of fidelity and good
party; and he shall have the same right and power over faith. Hence in dealing with trust property, a lawyer
such judgments and executions as his client would have to should be very scrupulous. Money or other trust
enforce his lien and secure the payment of his fees and property of the client coming into the possession of the
disbursements. (Sec.37, Rule 138, Rules of Court) lawyer should be reported by the latter and accounted
for promptly and should not under any circumstances,
Requisites: be commingled with his own or be used by him.
1. Existence of a client-lawyer relationship; (Espiritu vs Cabredo IV, 395 SCRA 19)
2. Favorable judgment secured by the counsel
for his client which judgment is a money Delivery of Funds
judgment;
3. Noting into the records of the case through Client’s funds and properties shall be delivered to the
the filing of an appropriate motion of the client when:
statement of the lawyer’s claim for attorney’s 1. they become due or
fees with copies furnished to the client and 2. upon demand.
the adverse party
Failure to deliver: gives rise to the presumption that he
Retaining Lien vs. Charging Lien has misappropriated the funds for his own use to the
prejudice of the client and in violation of the trust
RETAINING LIEN CHARGING LIEN reposed in him.
It is a general lien. It It is a special lien. It can be
cannot be actively enforced by execution. General Rule: A lawyer cannot be compelled to
enforced. surrender the documents without prior proof that his
The basis is lawful The basis is securing of a fees will be fully satisfied.
possession of papers, favorable money judgment
documents, property for the client. Exception: If the courts need to regain them, it must
belonging to the client. first require the claimant to file an adequate security for
It covers papers, It covers all judgments for the lawyer’s fees before it can require the surrender
documents, and the payment of money and thereof.
properties in the lawful execution issued in
possession of the pursuance of such Borrowing or Lending
attorney. judgments.
The effect is as soon as The effect is as soon as the I. Borrowing
28 | LEGAL ETHICS MEMORY AID
General Rule: Borrowing money by a lawyer from his
client is not allowed.
Ratio:
1. The rule against the borrowing of money by a
lawyer from his client is intended to prevent
the former from taking advantage of his
influence over the latter. The second part of
the rule is to assure the lawyer’s independent
professional judgment. If the lawyer acquires
a financial interest in the outcome of the case,
the free exercise of his judgment may be
adversely affected. (Report of IBP
Committee, p.90)
2. A lawyer, who as guardian, borrowed money
for his benefit using the property of the ward
as collateral without court approval is guilty of
misconduct. (see In re: Pelayo, 44 Phil. 569)
Exceptions:
The lawyer is allowed to borrow money from his client
provided the interests of the client are fully protected
by the nature of the case or by independent advice.
II. Lending
The lawyer may lend money to a client, when it is
necessary in the interest of justice to advance necessary
expenses in a legal matter he is handling for the client.
The advances shall be subject to reimbursement.
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.
CANON 18 – A LAWYER SHALL SERVE HIS CLIENT
WITH COMPETENCE AND DILIGENCE.
Rules 18.01 – A lawyer shall not undertake a legal
service which he knows or should know that he is not
qualified to render. However, he may render such
service if, with the consent of his client, he can obtain
as collaborating counsel a lawyer who is competent
on the matter.
Rule 18.02 – A lawyer shall not handle any legal
matter without adequate preparation.
Rule 18.03 – A lawyer shall not neglect a legal matter
entrusted to him, and his negligence in connection
therewith shall render him liable.
Rule 18.04 – A lawyer shall keep the client informed
of the status of his case and shall respond within a
reasonable time to the client's request for
information.
FIDELITY TO CLIENT’S CAUSE
It must always be maintained. Fidelity to the cause of
client is the essence of the legal profession. Without this
fidelity, the profession will not survive, for in the long
run, no one will engage any lawyer anymore.
In the case of Nadayag vs. Grageda, 237 SCRA 202, 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.”
COMPETENCE AND DILIGENCE
Diligence- “the attention and the care required of a
person in a given situation and is the opposite of
negligence.” It is axiomatic in the practice of law that
the price of success is eternal diligence to the cause of
the client. (Edquibal vs Ferrer, Jr., 450 SCRA 406)
Notes:
1. There is presumption of diligence on the part of the
lawyer.
2. Practice of law does not require extraordinary
diligence. All that is required is ordinary pater familias.
(Edquibal vs Ferrer, Jr., 450 SCRA 406)
Competence means maintaining or keeping abreast of
current legal matters, while Diligence means being
prepared to perform his duties and employ his best
efforts in the protection of his client’s interest.
Notes:
1. When a lawyer accepts a case, his acceptance is an
implied representation that he possesses the requisite
degree of knowledge, skill and ability in the practice of
his profession.
2.He is directed not to undertake legal services which he
knows or should know he is not qualified or competent
to render.
3. However if his client consents, the lawyer can take as
collaborating counsel, another lawyer who is competent
on the matter.
4. A lawyer must handle cases only as much as he can
efficiently handle. Otherwise, his clients will be
prejudiced. (Legarda vs. CA, 195 SCRA 418)
Adequate Protection
The adequate protection required of the lawyer in the
handling of a case covers a wide dimension in law
practice. It includes among other virtues, sufficient
knowledge of the law and jurisprudence, ability in trial
technique and high proficiency in the formulation of
pleadings.
Negligence
General Rule: Client is bound by the lawyer’s
negligence.
Exceptions:
1. When interest of justice so requires;
2. Where the error of the counsel is purely
technical;
3. Ignorance or incompetence of the lawyer is so
great and serious that the client is denied a
day in court;
4. Gross negligence of the lawyer.
Notes:
The client has the right to be fully informed of the
status of the case particularly on the important
movements or developments therein.
Case Law:
The client is entitled to the fullest disclosure of the
mode or manner by which his interest is defended or
why certain steps are taken or omitted. (Oparel vs.
Abaria, 40 SCRA 128 (1971)

1. If by reason of the lawyer’s negligence, actual loss has AUTHORITY OF A LAWYER

been suffered by the client, the latter has a cause of
action against him for damages. Presumption of Authority:

2. To be held liable, the lawyer’s failure to exercise 1. A lawyer is presumed to be properly

reasonable care, skill and diligence must be the
proximate cause of the loss.
Q: Diane approached Atty. Dodie and asked him
if it was all right to buy a piece of land which
Diding was selling. What was shown by
Diding to Diane was an Original Certificate of
Title with many annotations and old patches,
to which Diane expressed suspicion.
However, Atty. Dodie, desirous of pushing
through with the transaction because of the
high notarial fee promised to him, told Diane
that the title was alright and that she should
not worry since he is an attorney and that he
knew Diding well. He notarized the Deed of
Sale and Diane paid Diding P200,000.00. It
turned out that Diding had previously sold
the same property to another person. For the
injustice done to Diane, may Atty. Dodie be
disciplined?
A: YES. Atty. Dodie 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)
authorized to represent any cause in which he
appears in all stages of the litigation and no
written authority is required to authorize him
to appear.
2. A mere denial by a party that he has
authorized an attorney to appear for him, in
the absence of any compelling reason, is
insufficient to overcome the presumption
especially when the denial comes after the
rendition of an adverse judgment.
EFFECTS OF
UNAUTHORIZED APPEARANCE
1. A party is not bound by the lawyer’s
appearance in the case or by the judgment
rendered therein.
2. Court does not acquire jurisdiction over the
person.
3. If unauthorized appearance is willful, attorney
may be cited for contempt as an officer of the
court who has misbehaved in his official
transactions, and he may be disciplined for
professional misconduct.

He was negligent because he placed his own Ratification of Unauthorized Appearance

interest in receiving a high notarial fee over and
above the interest of his client.
Express Ratification Implied Ratification
COLLABORATING COUNSEL
Categorical assertion by Where a party with
client that he has knowledge of the fact
A collaborating counsel is one who is subsequently
authorized a lawyer or that a lawyer has been
engaged to assist a lawyer already handling a particular
that he confirms his representing him in a
case for a client.
authorization to case, accepts benefits of
represent him in the representation or fails to
Case Law: case. promptly repudiate the
assumed authority.
The same diligence required of the first counsel is
required of the collaborating counsel. The negligence of
the latter is also binding on the client (Sublay vs. NLRC,
324 SCRA 188) CANON 19 – A LAWYER SHALL REPRESENT HIS
CLIENT WITH ZEAL WITHIN THE BOUNDS OF THE
DUTY TO APPRISE CLIENT LAW.
30 | LEGAL ETHICS MEMORY AID
Rule 19.01 – 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.
Rule 19.02 – 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 19.03 – A lawyer shall not allow his client to
dictate the procedure in handling the case.
REPRESENTATION WITH ZEAL WITHIN LEGAL
BOUNDS
The lawyer owes “entire devotion to the interest of the
client, warm zeal in the maintenance and defense of his
rights and the exertion of his utmost learning and
ability,” to the end that nothing be taken or be withheld
from him, save the rules of law, legally applied. In the
judicial forum the client is entitled to the benefit of any
and every remedy and defense that is authorized by the
law, and he may expect his lawyer to assert every such
remedy or defense.
A lawyer shall employ only honorable and honest
means in the maintenance of his client’s cause. (Section
20, Rule 138)
Case Law:
“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
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 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 presentation.” (People vs. Bernas, 306
SCRA 293, 1999)
Negative Pregnant improper
Negative pregnant is condemned because it is pregnant
with alternative admissions to allegations of the
complaint
Case Law:
A denial in the form of a negative pregnant is an
ambiguous pleading, since it cannot be ascertained
whether it is the fact or only the qualification that is
intended to be denied. (Galofa vs. Nee Bon Sing, 22
scra 48)
Where a fact is alleged with some qualifying or
modifying language, and the denial is conjunctive, a
negative pregnant exist, and only the qualification or
modification is denied, while the fact itself is admitted.
(Ison vs. Ison, 115 SW 2d. 330, 272 ky. 836)
Use of Fair and Honest Means
A lawyer shall employ such means only as are consistent
with truth and honor. Thus, he should not offer
evidence any document which he knows is false nor
present any witness whom he knows will perjure. He
should make such defense only as he believes to be
honestly debatable under the law.
It is the duty of the attorney, in the defense of a person
accused of crime, by all fair and honorable means,
regardless of his personal opinion as to his guilt of the
accused, to 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.
Case Law:
A lawyer should use his best efforts to restrain and to
prevent his client from those things which he himself
ought not to do, particularly with reference to the
conduct toward the court, judicial officer, witness and
suitor; and IF the client persists in such wrongdoing, the
lawyer should terminate their relation. (Surigao
Mineral Resevation Board vs. Cloribel, 31 SCRA 1
(1970)
Client’s Fraud
A lawyer should not allow his client to perpetuate fraud.
However, the lawyer shall not volunteer the information
about the client’s commission of the fraud to anyone for
that will run counter to his duty to maintain at all times
the client’s confidences and secrets. (Canon 21, CPR)
Procedure in Handling the Case:
In the matters of law, it is the client who yields to the
lawyer and not the lawyer yielding to the client. The
basis of this rule is that the lawyer is better trained and
skilled in law. Cause of action, claim or demand, and
subject of litigation are within client’s control. Hence,
the attorney may not impair, settle or compromise
without client’s knowledge and consent. However,
proceedings to enforce the remedy are within the
exclusive control of the attorney. In fine, in the matters
of procedure, lawyer in control, and as to the subject
matter, the client is in control.
CANON 20 - A LAWYER SHALL CHARGE ONLY FAIR
AND REASONABLE FEES.
Rule 20.01 - A lawyer shall be guided by the following
factors in determining his fees:
a. The time spent and the extent of the service
rendered or required;
b. The novelty and difficulty of the questions
involved;
c. The importance of the subject matter;
d. The skill demanded;
e. The probability of losing other employment
as a result of acceptance of the proffered
case;
f. The customary charges for similar services
and the schedule of fees of the IBP chapter
to which he belongs;
g. The amount involved in the controversy and
the benefits resulting to the client from the
service;
h. The contingency or certainty of
compensation;
i. The character of the employment, whether
occasional or established; and
j. The professional standing of the lawyer.
Rule 20.02 - A lawyer shall, in case of referral, with
the consent of the client, be entitled to a division of
fees in proportion to the work performed and
responsibility assumed.
Rule 20.03 - A lawyer shall not, without the full
knowledge and consent of the client, accept any fee,
reward, costs, commission, interest, rebate or
forwarding allowance or other compensation
whatsoever related to his professional employment
from anyone other than the client.
Rule 20.04 - A lawyer shall avoid controversies with
clients concerning his compensation and shall resort
to judicial action only to prevent imposition, injustice
or fraud.
1. Basis for attorney’s fees per se: The fact of
employment of the lawyer. No formal
contract is necessary to effectuate
employment.
Note: A written contract is advantageous
because it is conclusive as to the amount of
the compensation and in case of unjustified
dismissal, the lawyer shall be entitled to
recover from the client full compensation
stipulated in the contract.
2. Rationale for adequate compensation: In
order for the lawyer to serve his client
effectively and to preserve the integrity and
independence of the profession.
Case Law:
A lawyer like all other human beings has a right to
livelihood (Stansell vs Roach, 29 ALR 143)
A contract of professional services may either be oral or
in writing.
In the absence of an express contract for attorney’s
fees, payment of attorney’s fees may be justified by
virtue of the innominate contract of facio ut des (I do
and you give) which is based on the principle that “no
one shall enrich himself at the expense of another”
(Corpuz v. CA, G.R. No. L-40424, June 30, 1980)
Acceptance of Fees
General Rule: A lawyer shall not accept any fee from any
person other than his client.
Exception: When the client has full knowledge and
approval thereof.

Reason: To secure the lawyer’s fidelity to the

ATTORNEY’S FEES cause of his client.

Concept of Attorney’s Fees Contingency Fee Arrangements

Ordinary Reasonable Contingent Fee is not per se prohibited by law. But

compensation paid to a
lawyer for the legal
services he has
rendered.
Extraordinary Indemnity for damages
ordered by the court to
be paid by the losing
party to the prevailing
party, payable to the
client.
Note: An unauthorized counsel is NOT entitled to
attorney’s fees.
when such contract for contingent fee was obtained by
undue influence by the attorney upon his client or is
clearly excessive, the court will protect the aggrieved
party.
CONTINGENT CHAMPERTOUS
CONTRACT CONTRACT
It is payable in cash. It is payable only in kind.
Lawyers do not Lawyers undertake to
undertake to pay all pay all expenses of
expenses of litigation. litigation.
The contract is valid. The contract is void.

Bases for attorney’s fees: Attorney’s Liens (see discussion on charging and
retaining lien, page 27)
32 | LEGAL ETHICS MEMORY AID
Retaining Fees – a preliminary fee paid to ensure and
secure a lawyer’s future services, to remunerate him for
being deprived, by being retained by one party, of the
opportunity of rendering services to the other party,
and of receiving pay from him.
FEES AND CONTROVERSIES WITH CLIENTS
Q: When a fee is considered reasonable?
A: A FEE IS CONSIDERED REASONABLE IF IT
IS WITHIN THE CAPACITY OF THE CLIENT TO PAY
AND IS DIRECTLY COMMENSURATE WITH THE
VALUE OF THE LEGAL SERVICES RENDERED.
Collaborative Works
General Rule: Lawyers jointly representing a client shall
receive equal fees.
Exceptions:
1. If there are specific contracts for the
payment of fees of each lawyer.
2. If the lawyers are engaged at different
stages, the lawyer who bore the brunt of
the prosecution to its successful end is
entitled to the full amount of his fees.
3. Collaborating counsel shall receive fees
in proportion to the work performed and
responsibility assumed.
Enforcement of Attorney’s Fees
General rule: A lawyer should avoid the filing of any
case against a client for the enforcement of attorney’s
fees.
Exceptions:
1. To prevent imposition
2. To prevent injustice
3. To prevent fraud
How to Recover Attorney’s Fees
1. in the same case – by filing a motion or
petition as an incident in the main action
where he rendered legal service
2. in a separate civil action – filed before the
judgment has been satisfied or before the
proceeds were delivered to the client
Notes:
1. The determination thereof is held in abeyance until
the main case has become final, otherwise the
determination of the court will be premature.
2. Attorney’s fee must be mentioned in the text of the
decision the reason for this is that the award of
attorney’s fees to a winning party is not general rule but
only exception.
3. Attorney’s fee must be specifically prayed for and
proven and justified in the decision itself. It is not
deemed incorporated in the general prayer for such
other relief and remedy as this court may deem just and
equitable.
Who are entitled to Attorney’s Fees?
General Rule: Only lawyers are entitled to attorney’s
fees. The same cannot be shared with a non-lawyer.
Exceptions: A lawyer may divide a fee for legal services
with persons not licensed to practice law.
1. A lawyer undertakes to complete the
unfinished legal business of a deceased
lawyer;
2. There is a pre-existing agreement with a
partner or associate that, upon the latter’s
death, money shall be paid over a reasonable
period of time to his estate or to persons
specified in the agreement;
3. A lawyer or law firm includes non-lawyer
employees in retirement plan, even if the plan
is based, in whole or in part, on a profit-
sharing agreement.
Kinds of payment which may be stipulated upon
1. Retainer’s Fee – payable regardless of the
result of the case
2. Contingent Fee – is conditioned to the
securing of a favorable judgment
3. Fixed or absolute Fee payable per
appearance
4. Fixed or absolute Fee computed by the
number of hours spent
5. Fixed or absolute Fee based on piece work
6. Fixed or absolute fee which is payable
regardless of the result of the case
Kinds of retainer agreements on attorney’s fees
General Retainer It is the fee paid to a
lawyer to secure his
future services as a
general counsel for any
ordinary legal problem
that may arise in the
routinary business of the
client and referred to
him for legal action;
Special Retainer It is a fee for a specific
case handled or special
service rendered by the
lawyer for a client.
QUANTUM MERUIT – “as much as deserved” or what
the lawyer’s services merit. It is a legal mechanism
which prevents an unscrupulous client from running
away with the fruits of the legal services of a counsel
without paying therefor.
Quantum meruit is resorted to when:
 1. There is no express contract for payment of
attorney’s fees agreed upon between the
lawyer and the client;
2. Although there is a formal contract, the fees
stipulated are found unconscionable or
unreasonable by the court;
3. The contract for attorney’s fees is void due to
purely formal defects of execution;
4. The lawyer for justifiable cause, was not able
to finish the case to its conclusion;
5. The lawyer and the client disregard the
contract for attorney’s fees; and
6. When the client dismissed his counsel before
the termination of the case or the latter
withdrew there from for valid reasons.
Circumstances when the counsel CANNOT recover
the full amount of attorney’s fees despite written
contract:
1. When the services were not performed as
when the lawyer withdrew before the case
was finished, he will be allowed reasonable
fees.
2. When there is a justified dismissal of the
attorney, the contract will be nullified and
payment will be on the basis of quantum
meruit only. A contrary stipulation will be
invalid.
3. When the stipulated attorney’s fees are
unconscionable, i.e. when it is
disproportionate as compared to the value of
services rendered and is revolting to human
conscience.
4. When the stipulated attorney’s fees are in
excess of what is expressly provided by law.
5. When the lawyer is guilty of fraud or bad faith
toward his client in the matter of his
employment.
6. When the counsel’s services are worthless
because of his negligence.
7. When contract is contrary to law, morals or
public policy.
8. Serving adverse interest unless the lawyer
proves that it was with the consent of both
parties.
Contract for Contingent Fee is NOT prohibited under
Article 1491 of the civil Code and the Canons.
Case Law:
Article 1491 prohibits only the sale or assignment
between the lawyer and his client, of property which is
the subject of litigation. In other words, for the
prohibition to operate, the sale or assignment of the
property must take place during the pendency of the
litigation involving the property. (Director of Land, vs.
Ababa, 88 scra 513)
CANON 21 – A LAWYER SHALL PRESERVE THE
CONFIDENCE AND SECRETS OF HIS CLIENT EVEN
AFTER THE ATTORNEY-CLIENT RELATION IS
TERMINATED.
Rule 21.01 – A lawyer shall not reveal the confidences
or secrets of his client except;
When authorized by the client after acquainting him
of the consequences of the disclosure;
When required by law;
When necessary to collect his fees or to defend
himself, his employees or associates or by judicial
action.
Rule 21.02 - A lawyer shall not, to the disadvantage
of his client, use information acquired in the course of
employment, nor shall he use the same to his own
advantage or that of a third person, unless the client
with full knowledge of the circumstances consents
thereto.
Rule 21.03 - A lawyer shall not, without the written
consent of his client, give information from his files to
an outside agency seeking such information for
auditing, statistical, bookkeeping, accounting, data
processing, or any similar purpose.
Rule 21.04 - A lawyer may disclose the affairs of a
client of the firm to partners or associates thereof
unless prohibited by the client.
Rule 21.05 - A lawyer shall adopt such measures as
may be required to prevent those whose services are
utilized by him, from disclosing or using confidences
or secrets of the clients.
Rule 21.06 - A lawyer shall avoid indiscreet
conversation about a client's affairs even with
members of his family.
Rule 21.07 - A lawyer shall not reveal that he has been
consulted about a particular case except to avoid
possible conflict of interest.
PRESERVATION OF CLIENT’S CONFIDENCES
Confidence and Secret, defined:
Confidence – refers to information protected by the
attorney-client privilege under the Revised Rules of
Court. (Report of IBP Committee, p. 117)
Secret – refers to the other information gained in the
professional relationship that the client has regulated to
be held inviolate or the disclosure of which would be
embarrassing or would likely be detrimental to the
client. (Report of IBP Committee, p. 117)
Bases for Canon 21:
1. It is the glory of the legal profession that its
fidelity to its client can be depended on and
that a man may safely go to a lawyer and
converse with him upon his rights or supposed
rights in any litigation with absolute assurance
that the lawyer’s tongue is tied from ever
disclosing it.
34 | LEGAL ETHICS MEMORY AID
2. The knowledge or information acquired by a
lawyer in his professional capacity from his
client may either be privileged or not
privileged within the meaning of the
evidentiary rule against compelling the
disclosure of privileged communications.
Communications must be INTENDED to be
Confidential : There must be an intention that the
communication relayed by the client to the lawyer be
treated as confidential. If the information is relayed to
third persons, the communication is not considered
privileged.
Note: Communication made by a prospective client is
covered.
General Rule: The duty to maintain inviolate the client’s
confidences and secrets is not temporary but
permanent.
Exception: those enumerated in Rule 21.01 and when
the client himself or in case of his death, his heir or legal
representative relieved the lawyer of his duty.
Prohibited Disclosures and Use
General Rule: Obligation to keep secrets should only be
for a lawful purpose:
1. The mere establishment of a lawyer-client
relationship does not raise a presumption of
confidentiality. There must be such intent or
the communication relayed by the client to
the lawyer be treated as confidential.
2. The prohibition applies even if the prospective
client did not actually engage the services of
the lawyer.
3. The confidentiality of the information is lost
when a third person obtains and releases the
same.
Exception: DISCLOSURE, when allowed:
1. Announcement of the client to commit a
crime.
2. Client jumped bail and the lawyer knows his
whereabouts or client is living somewhere
under an assumed name.
3. Communication involves the commission of
future fraud or crime except such crime or
frauds already committed which falls under
the privilege.
4. When such communications are made in
contemplation of a crime or the perpetuation
of fraud.
General Rule: A client’s identity is NOT PRIVILEGED.
Exception:
1. Where a strong probability exists that
revealing the client’s name would implicate
that client in the very activity for which sought
the lawyer’s advice
2. Where disclosure would open the client to civil
liability
3. Where the government’s lawyers have no case
against the client unless, by revealing the
client’s name, the said name would furnish the
only link that would form the chain of
testimony necessary to convict the client
Notes:
1. It is the duty of an attorney to “maintain inviolate the
confidence, and at every peril to himself, to preserve
the secret of his client.” He may, however, make
disclosures necessary to protect his right but that which
does not go beyond what is relevant and material.
2. An attorney suing a client for attorney’s fees may also
disclose or use the confidential communication of his
client, if such disclosure or use is necessary to enable
him to secure his rights. The client may not be
permitted to take advantage of the attorney-client
privilege to defeat the just claim of his lawyer growing
out of the attorney-client relationship.
3. The lawyer may disclose the affairs of a client of the
firm to the partners or associates unless prohibited by
the client.
4. In a law firm, partners or associates usually consult
each other involving their cases and some work as a
team. Thus, it cannot be avoided that some information
disclosed by the client about the case be disclosed to
the partners.
CANON 22 – A LAWYER SHALL WITHDRAW HIS
SERVICES ONLY FOR GOOD CAUSE AND UPON
NOTICE APPROPRIATE IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES.
Rule 22.01 – A lawyer may withdraw his services in
any of the following case:
When the client pursues an illegal or immoral course
of conduct in connection with the matter he is
handling;
When the client insists that the lawyer pursues
conduct violative of these canons and rules;
When his inability to work with co-counsel will not
promote the best interest of the client;
When the mental or physical condition of the lawyer
renders it difficult for him to carry out the
employment effectively;
When the client deliberately fails to pay the fees for
the services or fails to comply with the retainer
agreement;
When the lawyer is elected or appointed to public
office; and
Other similar cases.
Rule 22.02 – A lawyer who withdraws or is
discharged shall, subject to a retainer lien,
immediately turn over all papers and property to
which the client is entitled, and shall cooperate with
his successor in the orderly transfer of the matter,
including all information necessary for the proper
handling of the matter.
CONCEPT OF APPEARANCE
Appearance: It refers to the act of submitting or
presenting oneself to the court, either as plaintiff or
defendant, personally or through counsel, and seeking
general reliefs from the court.
Kinds of Appearance
General appearance Special appearance
It is the kind where the It is that kind where a
party comes to court defendant appears in
whether as plaintiff or court solely for the
defendant and seeks purpose of objecting to
general reliefs from the the jurisdiction of the
court for satisfaction of court over his person.
his claims or
counterclaims
respectively.
Notes:
An attorney who appears de parte in a case before a
lower court shall be presumed to continue representing
his client on appeal, unless he files a formal petition
withdrawing his appearance in the appellate court.
An attorney must make a notice of appearance in order
to be considered a counsel of record, served upon the
adverse party and filed with the court. The appearance
must be in writing. The reason for the requirement is to
enable the officers of the court concerned to effectively
served notices on the attorney of record.
Withdrawal of Services
The client has an absolute right to terminate the
employment of a lawyer, but a lawyer’s right to
withdraw his services is restricted.
Limitations of Client’s Right to Discharge His Counsel
1. Client cannot deprive counsel of his right to be
paid for services rendered if dismissal is
without cause.
2. Client cannot discharge counsel as an excuse
to secure repeated extensions of time.
3. Notice of discharge required in so far as court
and adverse party are concerned.
Cases When Lawyer May Withdraw
1. Client Pursuing an illegal or immoral course of
conduct
2. Client insistence that lawyer pursues acts
violative of the canons and rules
3. Inability of lawyer to work with co-counsel
4. Mental and physical inability of counsel to
handle case effectively
5. Client’s deliberate failure to pay attorney’s
fees agreed upon
6. Election or appointment of lawyer to public
office
7. Other similar cases
Notes:
1. A lawyer, by accepting a case, has impliedly
stipulated that he will prosecute the case up to its
termination.
2. An attorney may only retire from a case either by
written consent of his client or by permission of the
court after due notice and hearing.
3. The right to terminate the authority of the lawyer
includes the right to make a change or substitution at
any stage of the proceedings.
Conditions for Substitution of Counsel
1. Written application;
2. Written consent of the client;
3. Written consent of the lawyer to be
substituted or in the absence thereof, proof of
service of notice of said motion to the
attorney to be substituted.
Notes:
1. Notice of discharge is not necessary between
attorney and client.
2. Insofar as the court and adverse party is concerned,
the severance of the relation is not effective until:
(a) A notice of discharge by the client or a
manifestation indicating that purpose is filed with the
court.
(b) A copy thereof is served upon the adverse
party.
3. The relation does not terminate formally until there is
a withdrawal of the record.
Duties of a discharged lawyer or lawyer who
withdraws
1. Immediately turn over all papers and property
to which the client is entitled;
2. To cooperate with his successor in the orderly
transfer of the case.
TERMINATION OF ATTORNEY-CLIENT
RELATIONSHIP
Modes of Termination:
1. Withdrawal of the lawyer under Rule 22.01;
2. Death of the lawyer, unless it is a law firm, in
which case the other partners may continue
with the case;
3. Death of the client;
36 | LEGAL ETHICS MEMORY AID

4. Discharge or Dismissal of the lawyer by the
client;
5. Appointment or election of a lawyer to a
government position which prohibits private
practice of law;
6. Dull termination of the case;
7. Disbarment or suspension of the lawyer;
8. Intervening incapacity or incompetency of the
client during the pendency of the case, for
then the client loses his capacity to contract or
control the subject matter of the action;
9. Declaration of the presumptive death of the
lawyer;
10. Conviction for a crime and imprisonment of
the lawyer
LIABILITIES OF LAWYERS
litigation, then the court may adjudge the lawyer to pay
the costs of suit.
Criminal Liability
A lawyer may be held criminally liable if he commits any
of the following:
a. Causing prejudice to client thru malicious breach of
professional duty or thru inexcusable negligence or
ignorance.
b. Revealing client’s secrets learned in lawyer’s
professional capacity thru malicious breach of
professional duty or inexcusable negligence or
ignorance.

The power to discipline errant lawyers is judicial in CONTEMPT OF COURT

nature and can be exercised only by the courts.
Kinds of Contempt
The authority of the Supreme Court to discipline Consists of misbehavior
lawyers is rooted in its constitutional prerogative to in the presence of or so
regulate the practice of law and the admission of near a court or judge as
persons to engage therein. Direct to interrupt the
proceedings before the
Liability for Damages court or the
administration of justice.
Damages are recoverable where there is attorney-client
relationship, there is want of reasonable care and Committed away from
diligence by lawyer, and the injury sustained by client is Indirect the court involving
the proximate result of the lawyer’s negligence. disobedience of or
resistance to a lawful
Kinds of Damages writ, process, order,
judgment, or command
a. Nominal – where a client lost the litigation as a of the court, or tending
consequence of lawyer’s gross omission or negligence. to belittle, degrade,
b. Actual/ Compensatory obstruct, interrupt or
c. Moral embarrass the court.
d. Attorney’s Fees
Failure to do something
ordered by the court
Liability for Breach of Fiduciary Obligation Civil which is for the benefit of
a party.
Lawyers are obliged to make an accounting of the
client’s funds and properties that come to his Consists of any conduct
possession. directed against the
Criminal authority or dignity of
If lawyers fail to return the funds or property after the court.
demand, there is presumption that the lawyer
misappropriated the same.

Remedy of Client: recover property or funds from the Notes:

lawyer, together with its fruits, subject to client’s
returning to his lawyer the purchase price thereof and The power to punish for contempt and the power to
the legal interests thereon. disbar are separate and distinct, and that the exercise of
one does not exclude the exercise of the other.

Liability for Costs of Suit

Lawyers are not liable for the costs of the suit in favor of
the prevailing party for not being a party-litigant.
However, where the lawyer insisted on client’s patently
unmeritorious case or interposed an appeal to delay
The principle of res ipsa loquitor has been applied in the
discipline of members of the Bar.
Judges had been dismissed from the service without
need for a formal investigation because based on the
records, the gross misconduct or inefficiency of the d. Suspension – temporary withholding of a
judges clearly appears. lawyer’s right to practice his profession as a
lawyer for a certain period or for an indefinite
period of time.

 Definite
Acts of a Lawyer Constituting Contempt:
 Indefinite – qualified disbarment; lawyer
determines for himself for how long or
1. Misbehavior as an officer of the court
how short his suspension shall last by
2. Disobedience or resistance to court order
proving to court that he is once again fit
3. Abuse or interference with judicial
to resume practice of law.
proceedings
4. Obstruction in administration of justice
5. Misleading courts e. Censure – official reprimand.
6. Making false allegations, criticisms,
insults, veiled threats against the court f. Disbarment – act of withdrawing from an
7. Aiding in unauthorized practice of law attorney the right to practice law. The name
8. Unlawful retention of client’s funds of the lawyer is stricken out from the roll of
9. Advise client to commit contemptuous attorneys.
acts

Case Law: The SUPREME COURT has the full authority and
power to: (WARDS)
Q: When is a person guilty of indirect contempt?
 Warn
A: Under Section 3(e), Rule 71 of the 1997 Rules  Admonish
of Civil Procedure, a person “[a]ssuming to be an  Reprimand
attorney or an officer of a court, and acting as such  Suspend, and
without authority,” is liable for indirect contempt of  Disbar a lawyer (Section 27, Rules 138, Rules
court. Under Section 7 of the same rules, a respondent of Court)
adjudged guilty of indirect contempt committed
against a Regional Trial Court or a court of equivalent
orhigher rank “may be punished by a fine not exceeding
The COURT OF APPEALS and the REGIONAL TRIAL
thirty thousand pesos or imprisonment not exceeding
COURTS are also empowered to: (WARS)
six (6) months, or both.” If a respondent is adjudged
guilty of contempt committed against a lower court, he
“may be punished by a fine not exceeding five thousand  Warn
pesos or imprisonment not exceeding one (1) month, or  Admonish
both.” (Concion-Reer vs Lumbao, A.M. OCA I.P.I. No. 09-  Reprimand, and
3210RTJ)  Suspend

NOTE: But NOT to disbar a lawyer

SUSPENSION, DISBARMENT AND The inferior courts (MTC’s) are not empowered to
DISCIPLINE OF LAWYERS suspend an attorney but they may cite them in
contempt.
Forms of Disciplinary Measures:
(WARS-CD)
NATURE AND CHARACTERISTICS OF
a. Warning – an act or fact of putting one on his DISCIPLINARY
guard against an impending danger, evil ACTIONS AGAINST LAWYERS
consequences or penalties.
1. Neither civil nor a criminal proceeding (sui
b. Admonition – a gentle or friendly reproof, generis: A class of its own, does not need
mild rebuke, warning or reminder, counseling, proof beyond reasonable doubt; may proceed
on a fault, error or oversight, an expression of despite criminal action against a lawyer.);
authoritative advice. 2. Double jeopardy cannot be availed of;
3. Can be initiated motu propio by the
c. Reprimand – a public and formal censure of 4. SC or IBP;
severe reproof, administered to a person in 5. Imprescriptible;
fault by his superior officer or a body to which 6. Conducted confidentially;
he belongs. 7. Can proceed regardless of the interest or the
lack thereof on the part of the complainant;
8. Constitutes due process;
38 | LEGAL ETHICS MEMORY AID
9. Cannot be a source of a right that may be
enforced in another action.
Notes:
Considering the serious consequences of disbarment or
suspension, it has been consistently held that clearly
preponderant evidence is required to justify the
imposition of either penalty.
The burden of proof rests upon the complainant. The
lawyer enjoys the legal presumption of innocence.
The penalty imposed upon a lawyer cannot be in the
alternative nor be subject to a condition.
Disbarment should never be decreed where any lesser
penalty would accomplish the end desired.
Disbarment is not intended as a punishment but is
rather intended to protect the administration of justice
by requiring that those who exercise this important
function shall be competent, honorable, and reliable.
Main Objectives of Disbarment and Suspension
1. To compel the attorney to deal fairly and
honestly with his clients;
2. To remove from the profession a person
whose misconduct has proved him unfit to
been trusted with the duties and
responsibilities belonging to the office of the
attorney;
3. To punish the lawyer although not so much so
as to safeguard the administration of justice;
4. To set an example or a warning for the other
members of the bar;
5. To safeguard the administration of justice
from incompetence and dishonesty of
lawyers;
6. To protect the public.
Grounds for Suspension or Disbarment
1. Deceit;
2. Malpractice or other gross misconduct in
office;
3. Grossly Immoral Conduct;
4. Conviction of a crime involving moral
turpitude;
5. Violation of oath of office;
6. Willful disobedience of any lawful order of a
superior court;
7. Corrupt or willful appearance as an attorney
for a party to a case without authority to do so
Notes:
1. The above statutory enumeration of the grounds for
disbarment or suspension is not exclusive.
2. Any gross misconduct of a lawyer, whether in his
professional or private capacity which puts his moral
character in serious doubt as a member of the Bar, will
render him unfit to continue in the practice of law.
3. Deceit – consists in a misrepresentation or a positive
assertion of a falsehood by words or acts.
4. Malpractice – any malfeasance or dereliction of duty
committed by a lawyer.
5. Immoral conduct involves acts that are willful,
flagrant, or shameless, and that show a moral
indifference to the opinion of the upright and
respectable members of the community.
6. Grossly Immoral Conduct – one that is so corrupt
and false as to constitute a criminal act or so
unprincipled or disgraceful as to be reprehensible to a
high degree.
7. Sexual intimacy of two consenting adults with no
impediment to marry each other is not grossly immoral
to warrant disciplinary action.
Case Law:
Immoral conduct is gross when it is so corrupt as to
constitute a criminal act, or so unprincipled as to be
reprehensible to a high degree, or when committed
under such scandalous or revolting circumstances as
to shock the community’s sense of decency. (Perez vs
Catindig, A.C. No. 5816)
Moral turpitude is an act of which a man owes to his
fellow men or to society in general, contrary to justice,
honesty, modesty, or good morals. (Garcia vs. Sesbreno,
2015).
In Toledo vs. Abalos (1999), the Supreme Court held
that a lawyer may not be disciplined for failure to pay
her loan obligation. The remedy is to file an action for
collection against her in the regular courts.
However, unwarranted obstinacy in evading the
payment of a debt has been considered as gross
misconduct. (Constantino vs. Saludares, 1993)
Case Law:
Q: Atty. A was guilty of gross misconduct for
abandoning her client’s cause in bad faith and
persistent refusal to comply with the lawful orders
directed at her without any explanation for doing so.
She was suspended for five years. While the
suspension was still in effect, she appeared in three
cases and misrepresented herself to be another
person. She was found by the Court unfit to continue as
a member of the Bar.
W/N the disbarment is proper?
A: YES. As an officer of the court, it is a the cases are reached. (Garcia vs Sesbreno , A.C. No.
lawyer’s duty to uphold the dignity and authority of 7973 & A.C. No. 10457),February 3, 2015)
the court. The highest form of respect for judicial
authority is shown by a lawyer’s obedience to court
orders and processes. She willfully disobeyed the
Court when she continued her law practice despite the PROCEEDINGS
suspension order and even misrepresented herself to be
another person. When she was twice ordered to Disciplinary Proceedings
comment on her continued law practice while still
Complaint
suspended, nothing was heard from her despite receipt
of two Resolutions from this Court. Neither did she pay
the P30,000.00 fine imposed. It has been held that
1. By SC,
failure motu with Court directives constitutes
to comply IBP Board of
propio; Governors
gross misconduct, insubordination or disrespect
2.By IBP Board
which merits a lawyer’s suspension or even Chairman,
of Governors, CBD
disbarment. (Santeco vs. Avance , A.C. No. 5834, Feb.
motu propio;
22,
3.2011)
Upon referral
by SC; and
4. Upon
Case Law:referral
by the
Q:IBPChapter
Atty. V knew that his first marriage with
wife R was still existing when he contracted his Commissioner
second marriage. Wife R knew of this fact. It was
alleged that he left R and had an affair with Atty. U
which was denied by the latter. Does he committed
gross immorality? 1. NO MR is allowed before the
Commissioner;
ANSWER: YES. Section 27, Rule 138 of the Rules of 2. MR is ALLOWED before the Board
Court provides that a lawyer may be removed or of Governors;
suspended from the practice of law, inter alia, for 3. Decision of the Board of Governors
grossly immoral conduct. The Supreme Court’s (SC’s) (reviewed by SC) must be in writing
finding of gross immoral conduct is hinged not on and supported by facts and evidence
Atty. Catindig’s desertion of Dr. Perez, the second presented during hearing and
wife, but on his contracting of a subsequent marriage applicable provision of the Code of
during the subsistence of his previous marriage to Professional Responsibility.
Gomez. (Perez vs Catindig (A.C. No . 5816, March 10,
2015) Proceedings:

1. Proceedings for disbarment, suspension and

Q: Atty. T is practicing law despite his previous
discipline of attorneys may be taken by the
conviction for homicide and despite the facts that he
Supreme Court motu proprio or by the IBP
is only on parole and that he has not fully served his
upon the verified complaint of any person.
sentence. Garcia alleged that Sesbreo violated Section
27, Rule 13 of the Rules of Court by continuing to
2. IBP Board of Governors may motu proprio or
engage in the practice of law despite his conviction of a
upon referral by the SC or by a Chapter Board
crime involving moral turpitude. Whether conviction for
of Officers or at the instance of any person,
the crime of homicide involves moral turpitude.
initiate and prosecute proper charges against
erring attorneys including those in
A: Homicide may or may not involve moral
government.
turpitude depending on the degree of the crime.
Moral turpitude is not involved in every criminal act and
3. The complaint shall estate clearly and
is not shown by every known and intentional violation
concisely the facts complained of and shall be
of statute, BUT WHETHER ANY PARTICULAR
supported by affidavits of persons having
CONVICTION INVOLVES MORAL TURPITUDE MAY
personal knowledge of the facts therein
BE A QUESTION OF FACT AND FREQUENTLY
alleged and/or by such documents as may
DEPENDS ON ALL THE SURROUNDING
substantiate such facts.
CIRCUMSTANCES. While x x x generally but not
always, crimes mala in se involve moral turpitude,
4. Six copies of the verified complaint shall be
while crimes mala prohibita do not, it cannot always
filed with the Secretary of IBP or Secretary of
be ascertained whether moral turpitude does or does
any of its Chapters who shall forthwith
not exist by classifying a crime as mala in se or as
commit the same to the IBP Board of
mala prohibita. Moral turpitude is somewhat a vague
Governors for assignment to an investigator.
and indefinite term, the meaning of which must be
left to the process of judicial inclusion or exclusion as
5. Administrative offenses do not prescribe. No
matter how much time has elapsed from the
40 | LEGAL ETHICS MEMORY AID
time of the commission of the act complained
of and the time of the institution of the
complaint, erring members of the bench and
bar cannot escape the disciplining arm of the
Court. (Catalan vs Silvosa, 2012)
6. Disbarment proceedings may be initiated by
any interested person.(Catalan vs Silvosa,
AC No. 7360, July 24, 2012)
Procedure in Disbarment and Other
Disciplinary Proceedings
1. Complaint, in writing and duly sworn to, is
filed with the Supreme Court (sec.1)
2. If found meritorious, a copy thereof shall be
served on the respondent and he shall be
required to comment within 10 days of service
(sec. 6)
3. Upon filing of respondent’s comments or
expiration of the period for filing comment,
the Supreme Court either refers to matter to
the Office of the Court Administrator (OCA)
for evaluation, report, and recommendation,
or assigns a Justice of the Court of Appeals (if
respondent is an RTC judge) or a judge of the
RTC (if respondent is a judge of an inferior
court) to investigate and hear the charges
(sec.7)
4. After hearings, the investigating justice or
judge submits a report of findings of fact,
conclusions of law and recommendations to
the Supreme Court (sec.8)
5. The Supreme Court takes action as the facts
and the law may warrant (sec. 9)
Proceedings shall be private and confidential
but a copy of the decision or resolution of the
Court shall be attached to the record of the
judge in the Office of the Court Administrator.
(sec. 11)
Officers authorized to investigate
disbarment cases
1. Supreme Court;
2. IBP through its Commission on Bar
Discipline; and
3. Office of the Solicitor General.
No investigation shall be terminated by reason of the
desistance of the complainant to prosecute except if
there is nothing more which could substantiate the
charge, then the affidavit of desistance will cause the
dismissal of the case.
Case Law:
In complaints for disbarment, formal investigation is
necessary. (Nava vs. Sorongan, 421 SCRA 1, January
26,2004)
Ex parte investigation may only be conducted when
respondent fails to appeal despite reasonable notice.
(Cottan vs. Laysa, 326 SCRA 614, February 29,2000)
Mitigating Circumstance
1. Good faith;
2. Absence of prior disciplinary record
3. Personal or emotional problems
4. Character or reputation
5. Physical or mental disability or impairment
6. Delay in disciplinary proceedings
7. Inexperience of the lawyer;
8. Age;
9. Apology;
10. Remorse
11. Remoteness of prior offenses
12. Lack of intention to slight or offend the court.
Aggravating Circumstances
1. Abuse of Authority;
2. Multiple offenses
3. Prior disciplinary offenses
4. Dishonest or selfish motive
5. Refusal to acknowledge wrongful nature of
the conduct
6. Charge of gross immorality;
7. Vulnerability of the victim
8. Substantial experience in the practice of law
9. Previous dismissal as member of the Bar
PRINCIPLE OF RES IPSA LOQUITOR
(“The thing speaks for itself”)
This principle applies to both judges and lawyers.
Judges had been dismissed from the service without
need of a formal investigation because based on the
records, the gross misconduct or inefficiency of judges
clearly appears. (Uy vs. Mercado, A.M No. R-368-MTJ,
September 1987)
If on the basis of the lawyer’s comment, it appears that
he has so conducted himself in a manner which exhibits
his blatant disrespect to the court, or his want of good
moral character or his violation of the attorney’s oath,
the lawyer may be suspended or disbarred without need
of a trial-type proceeding.
Discipline of Filipino Lawyers Practicing Abroad:
If a Filipino lawyer is disbarred or suspended in a foreign
jurisdiction under the same grounds as provided by the
Rules of Court, such disbarment or suspension is a
ground for disbarment or suspension in the Philippines.
The judgment or resolution of the foreign court shall be
prima facie evidence of the ground for disbarment or
suspension. 1. Republic Act No. 9225 or the “Citizenship
Retention and Re-acquisition Act of 2003”
says that a dual citizen is fully restored of all
READMISSION TO THE BAR his civil and political rights, including the right
to resume the practice of one’s profession.
Q: What is reinstatement?
2. Section 5 of RA 9225 says that “Those
A: It is the RESTORATION TO A DISBARRED intending to practice their profession in the
LAWYER, THE PRIVILEGE TO PRACTICE LAW. It is Philippines shall apply with the proper
the readmission to membership in the Bar. authority for a license or permit to engage in
such practice.”
The SC alone has the authority to reinstate:
SC’s Constitutional prerogative to promulgate rules on 3. In the case of a lawyer, he may resume his law
the admission of applicants to the practice of law practice in the Philippines, but he must first be
(Const. Art. VIII, Sec. 5(5)) re-admitted by the Philippine Supreme Court.
He loses his standin g as a lawyer once he
becomes a foreigner because the practice of a
CRITERIA FOR REINSTATEMENT
profession in the Philippines is reserved only
for Filipinos.
1. Applicant’s character and standing prior to the
disbarment;
4. Reassuming Filipino citizenship as a dual
2. Nature and character of the charge for which
citizen does not by itself brings back his right
he was discharged;
to practice law. The Supreme Court will
3. Conduct subsequent to the disbarment;
consider the merits of each petition based on
4. Time that has elapsed between disbarment
the attorney’s record. The application will be
and application for reinstatement.
in the form of a formal petition filed in the
5. Applicant’s appreciation of the significance of
Supreme Court.
his dereliction and the assurance that he now
possesses the requisite probity and integrity
IV. Executive Pardon
6. Favorable endorsement of the IBP and pleas
of his loved ones
The executive pardon for a conviction of a crime alone
does not automatically reinstate a disbarred lawyer.
Effects of Reinstatement:
To be reinstated, there is still a need for the filing of an
a. Wipes out the restrictions and disabilities
appropriate petition with the SC.
resulting from a previous disbarment.
b. Recognition of moral rehabilitation and
The dismissal of the case on the basis of Executive
mental fitness to practice law
Pardon during the pendency of a disbarment
c. Lawyer shall be subjected to the same
proceeding will depend on whether the executive
law, rules and regulations as those
pardon is absolute or conditional. If:
applicable to any lawyer.
d. Lawyer must comply with the conditions
imposed on his readmission.
Absolute Pardon Case Dismissal
Conditional Pardon Dismissal will not
I. Suspended Lawyers necessarily follow

Case Law: 2004 RULES ON NOTARIAL PRACTICE

The suspension of a lawyer from the practice of law,
especially when the suspension is indefinite, requires
strong proofs of rehabilitation. (Artiaga Jr. v.
Villanueva, 175 SCRA 237)
II. Disbarred Lawyers
(A.M. No. 02-8-13-SC)
Notary Public / Notary – refer to any person
commissioned to perform official acts.
General Rule: Only those admitted to the practice of
law are qualified to be notaries public.

Exception: when there are no persons with the

Case Law:
necessary qualifications or where there are qualified
persons but they refuse appointment, the following
To be reinstated, there is still a need of filing of an
persons may be appointed as notaries:
appropriate petition with the Supreme Court. (In re:
a. Those who have passed the studies of law in a
Rovero, 101 SCRA 803; In re: Quinciano D. Vailoces,
reputable university
117 SCRA 1)

III. Repatriated Lawyers b. A clerk or deputy clerk of court for a period of

not less than two years.
42 | LEGAL ETHICS MEMORY AID
Commission
1. The grant of authority to perform
notarial acts.
2. The written evidence of the authority.
Q: Who issues notarial commission?
A: Executive Judge of the RTC of the city or
province.
Qualifications of Notary Public
1. Must be a citizen of the Philippines;
2. Must be OVER twenty-one (21) years of
age;
3. A resident in the Philippines for at least
one (1) year and maintains a regular place
of work or business in the city or province
where the commission is to be issued;
4. A member of the Philippine Bar in good
standing with clearances from the Office
of the Bar Confidant of the Supreme
Court and the Integrated Bar of the
Philippines; and
5. Must not have been convicted in the first
instance of any crime involving moral
turpitude.
Term of office of Notary Public
A person commissioned as notary public may perform
notarial acts in any place within the territorial
jurisdiction of the commissioning court for a period of
two (2) years commencing the first day of January of
the year in which the commissioning is made, unless
earlier revoked or the notary public has resigned under
these Rules and the Rules of Court.
PETITION FOR A NOTARIAL COMMISSION
1. Form
(a) Must be in writing
(b )Must be verified
(c) Must include:
i. Statement of petitioner’s personal
qualifications (including date of birth,
residence, telephone number, PTR
receipt, Roll number, IBP Membership
number)
ii. Certification of good moral character by
2 executive officers of the local chapter of
the IBP Chapter where he is applying.
iii. Proof of payment for the filing of petition
iv. 3 passport-size color photographs
2. Hearing on the Petition
(a) Summary hearing
i. Notice of which shall be published in a
newspaper of general circulation in the
city or province
ii. Posted in a conspicuous place in the
offices of the Exec. Judge and of the clerk
of court
(b) Conducted by the Executive Judge
3. Opposition to Petition
(a) Made by any person who has a cause or reason
to object
(b) Must be in writing and verified
(c) Must be received by the Executive Judge before
the date of the summary hearing
4. When Granted?
A notarial commission shall be issued if:
(a)The petition is sufficient in form and substance,
(b)The petitioner proves the allegations contained
therein,
(c)The petitioner establishes to the satisfaction of
the Executive Judge that he has read and fully
understood the rules.
5. Purchasing of Notarial Seal
(a) Must be made 3 months from the date of
issuance of a certificate of Authorization to
purchase a Notarial seal, unless extended by the
Exec. Judge
(b) Maintain 1 official seal only
6. Renewal of Commission
(a) File a written application for renewal of
commission with the Exec. Judge
(b) Must be done within 45 days before the
expiration thereof
(c) Failure to file = deletion of the name of the notary
in the register of notaries public
Powers and Limitations : A notary public is
empowered to perform the following notarial acts:
1. Acknowledgments;
2. Oaths and affirmations;
3. Jurats;
4. Signature witnessings;
5. Copy certifications; and
6. Any other act authorized by these Rules.
A notary public is authorized to certify the affixing of a
signature by thumb or other mark on an instrument or
document presented for notarization if:
1. The thumb or other mark is affixed in the
presence of the notary public and of two
(2) disinterested and unaffected
witnesses to the instrument or
document;
 2. Both witnesses sign their own names in
addition to the thumb or other mark;
3. The notary public writes below the
thumb or other mark: "Thumb or Other
Mark affixed by (name of signatory by
mark) in the presence of (names and
addresses of witnesses) and undersigned
notary public"; and
4. The notary public notarizes the signature
by thumb or other mark through an
acknowledgment, jurat, or signature
witnessing.
A notary public is authorized to sign on behalf of a
person who is physically unable to sign or make a mark
on an instrument or document if:
1. The notary public is directed by the
person unable to sign or make a mark to
sign on his behalf;
2. The signature of the notary public is
affixed in the presence of two
disinterested and unaffected witnesses
to the instrument or document;
3. Both witnesses sign their own names ;
4. The notary public writes below his
signature: “Signature affixed by notary in
presence of (names and addresses of
person and two [2] witnesses)”; and
5. The notary public notarizes his signature
by acknowledgment or jurat.
Prohibitions
General Rule: A notary public shall not perform a
notarial act outside his regular place of work or
business;
Exception: a notarial act may be performed at the
request of the parties in the following sites located
within his territorial jurisdiction, public offices,
convention halls, and similar places where oaths of
office may be administered;
1. public function areas in hotels and similar
places for the signing of instruments or
documents requiring notarization;
2. hospitals and other medical institutions
where a party to an instrument or
document is confined for treatment; and
3. any place where a party to an instrument
or document requiring notarization is
under detention.
A person shall NOT perform a notarial act
1. If the person involved as signatory to the
instrument or document
2. Is not in the notary's presence personally at
the time of the notarization; and
3. Is not personally known to the notary public or
otherwise identified by the notary public
through competent evidence of identity as
defined by these Rules.
A notary public is disqualified from performing a
notarial act if he:
1. Is a party to the instrument or document that
is to be notarized;
2. Will receive, as a direct or indirect result, any
commission, fee, advantage, right, title,
interest, cash, property, or other
consideration, except as provided by these
Rules and by law; or
3. Is a spouse, common-law partner, ancestor,
descendant, or relative by affinity or
consanguinity of the principal within the
fourth civil degree.
Grounds for Refusal to Notarize
1. If the notary knows or has good reason to
believe that the notarial act or transaction is
unlawful or immoral;
2. If the signatory shows a demeanor which
engenders in the mind of the notary public
reasonable doubt as to the former's
knowledge of the consequences of the
transaction requiring a notarial act; and
3. If the notary's judgment, the signatory is not
acting of his or her own free will.
Notarial Register:
1. A notary public shall keep, maintain, protect
and provide for lawful inspection as provided
in these Rules, a chronological official notarial
register of notarial acts consisting of a
permanently bound book with numbered
pages.
2. The register shall be kept in books to be
furnished by the Solicitor General to any
notary public upon request and upon payment
of the cost thereof. The register shall be duly
paged, and on the first page, the Solicitor
General shall certify the number of pages of
which the book consists.
Inspection, Copying and Disposal of Notarial Register
1. In the notary’s presence, any person may
inspect an entry in the notarial register, during
regular business hours, provided:
a. The person’s indentity is personally
known to the notary public or
proven through competent evidence
of identity as defined in these Rules;
44 | LEGAL ETHICS MEMORY AID

duties, as may be required by the

b. Reorganized indentifier, in notarial
register in a seperate, dated entry;
c. The person specifies the month,
year type of instrument or
document, and name of the
principal in the notarial act or acts
sought; and
d. The person is shown only the entry
or entries specified by him;
2. The notarial register may be examined by a
law enforcement officer in the course of an
official investigation or by virtue of court
order.
judge;
g. Require the presence of a principal
at the time of the notarial act;
h. Identify a principal on the basis of
personal knowledge or competent
evidence;
2. Executes a false or incomplete certificate
under Section 5, Rule IV;
3. Knowingly performs or fails to perform
any other act prohibited or mandated by
these Rules; and
4. Commits any other dereliction or act
which in the judgment of the Executive
Judge constitutes good cause for
revocation of commission or imposition
of administrative sanction.
Competent Evidence of Identity

3. If the notary public has a reasonable ground to The phrase “competent evidence of identity” refers to
believe that a person has a criminal intent or the identification of an individual based on:
wrongful motive in requesting information
from the notarial registe, the notary shall 1. At least one current identification document
deny access to any entry or entries therein. issued by an official agency bearing the
photograph and signature of the individual,
such as but not limited to:
Loss, Destructon or Damage of Notarial Register
i. Passport
1. In case the notarial register is stolen, lost, destroyed, ii. Drivers license
damage, or otherwise rendered unusable or illegible as iii. PRC ID
a record of notarial acts, the notary public shall, within iv. NBI Clearance
ten (10) days after informing the appropriate law v. Police Clearance
enforcement agency in the case of theft or vandalism, vi. Postal ID
notify the Executive Judge by any means providing a vii. Voter’s ID
proper receipt or acknowledgment, including registered viii. Brgy. Certification
mail and also provide a copy or number of any pertinent ix. GSIS e-card
police report. x. SSS Card
xi. Philhealth Card
2. Upon revocation or expiration of a notarial xii. Senior Citizen Card
commission, or death of the notary public, the notarial xiii. OWWA ID
records shall immediately be delivered to the office of xiv. OFW ID
the Executive Judge. xv. Seaman’s Book

Revocation of Commission 2. the oath or affirmation of one credible witness

The Executive Judge may revoke the commission of, or
impose appropriate administrative sanctions upon, any
notary public who:
1. Fails to :
a. Keep a notarial register;
b. Make the proper entry or entries in
his notarial register concerning his
notarial acts;
c. Send the copy of the entries to the
Executive Judge within the first ten
(10) days of the month following
d. Affix to acknowledgments the date
of expiration of his commission;
e. Submit his notarial register, when
filled, to the Executive Judge;
f. Make his report, within a reasonable
time, to the Executive Judge
concerning the performance of his
not privy to the instrument, document or
transaction who is personally known to the
notary public and who personally knows the
individual, or of two credible witnesses neither
of whom is privy to the instrument, document
or transaction who each personally knows the
individual and shows to the notary public
documentary identification.
Punishable Acts
The Executive Judge shall cause the prosecution of any
person who:
1.
2. Knowingly acts or otherwise impersonates a
notary public;
3. Knowingly obtains, conceals, defaces, or
destroys the seal, notarial register, or official
records of a notary public; and

4. Knowingly solicits, coerces, or in any way
influences a notary public to commit official
misconduct.
Case law on the Rules on Notarial Practice:
Heirs of Pedro Allilano vs. Atty. Examen,
A.C.No.10132, March 24, 2015
Facts: Atty. E notarized a document wherein the one
of the parties were his brother. He was charged for
violation of notarial law since a notary public is
prohibited from notarizing a document when one of the
parties is a relative by consanguinity within the fourth
civil degree or affinity within the second civil degree. It
is also alleged that Atty. E notarized the documents
knowing that the cedula or residence certificate number
used by his brother was not actually his but the
residence certificate number of another.
In his defense, Atty. E pointed out that there was no
longer any prohibition under the Revised Administrative
Code for a notary public to notarize a document where
one of the parties is related to him by consanguinity and
affinity. With regard to the use of another residence
certificate, Atty. E said that he was in good faith and
that it was office practice that the secretary type details
without him personally examining the output. W/N
Atty. E violated the notarial code.
Ruling: YES.
PROHIBITION: At the time of notarization, the
prevailing law governing notarization was Sections 231-
259, Chapter 11 of the Revised Administrative Code and
there was no prohibition on a notary public from
notarizing a document when one of the interested
parties is related to the notary public within the fourth
civil degree of consanguinity or second degree of
affinity. Atty. E was not incompetent to act as a notary
public was not incompetent to notarize the document
even if one of the parties to the deed was a relative, his
brother.
USE of OTHER CEDULA: It is clear that the residence
certificate number used and as notarized by Atty. E in
the document was not in fact the residence certificate
of his brother. Atty. E interposes that he was in good
faith in that it was office practice to have his secretary
type up the details of the documents and requirements
without him checking the correctness of same.
A notary public must discharge his powers and duties,
which are impressed with public interest, with accuracy
and fidelity. Good faith cannot be a mitigating
circumstance in situations since the duty to function as
a notary public is personal. The error could have been
prevented had Atty. E diligently performed his
functions: personally checked the correctness of the
documents. To say that it was his secretary’s fault
reflects disregard and unfitness to discharge the
functions of a notary public for it is he who personally
acknowledges the document. He was behooved under
Section 251, Chapter 11 of the Revised Administrative
Code to check if the proper cedulas were presented and
inspect if the documents to be acknowledged by him
reflected the correct details.
Dizon vs Cabucana, A.C. No. 10185, March 12, 2014/
Talisic vs Rinen, A.C. No. 8761, February 12, 2014
Q: Can a notary public notarize a document
without the presence of all the
signatories/affiants?
A: As a notary public, they should not notarize
a document unless the person who signs it is the
same person executing it and personally appearing
before him to attest to the truth of its contents. This
is to enable him to verify the genuineness of the
signature of the acknowledging party and to
ascertain that the document is the party’s free and
voluntary act and deed. They also has to personally
verify the proof of identity of the parties.
Metrobank vs Arguelles G.R. No. 176984. August 29,
2012
Q: Can the presumption of regularity of a public
document be destroyed when the notary
public cannot remember the faces of the
person presented before him during the
acknowledgement of the document?
A: No, it is too much to expect a notary public
who had but a brief time with the persons
presented to him during the notarial
ceremony to remember their faces especially
of there is a long lapse of time. What matters
is that the notary public’s testimony
respecting the ritual of notarization that he
invariably followed. If he gave unbending
assurance that he ascertained the identities of
the parties to documents who appeared
before him, by requiring them to show
documentary proofs of the same and to sign
the documents in his presence.
Espinosa vs. Omana, A. C. No. 9081, October 12, 2011
Q: Atty. O notarized an affidavit allowing for a
spouse to extrajudicially terminate their marriage
and dissolve their CPG. Atty. O alleged that it was her
staff that notarized such affidavit without her approval.
Is Atty. liable for a violation for her CPR?
A: Yes, she violated rule 1.01 of Canon 1, for
notarizing an affidavit that has no legal effect and is
against public policy. Morever even if it were true that it
was her part time staff that notarized the contract, it
only showed Atty. O negligence in doing her notarial
duties. A notary public is personally responsible for the
entries in his notarial register and he could not relieve
himself of this responsibility by passing the blame on his
secretaries or any member of his staff.
Nunga v. Viray, 306 SCRA, April 30, 1999
46 | LEGAL ETHICS MEMORY AID
Facts: N accused V of notarizing documents without a
commission. In two separate occasions, he notarized
deeds of sale of property between the bank he works
for and his minor son. At those times he was not
commissioned as a notary public.
Ruling:
1. Notarization is invested with public interest because
it converts private documents to public documents,
making such documents admissible in evidence without
further proof of the authenticity thereof.
2. Notarizing without a commission is a violation of the
lawyer’s oath to obey the laws (Notarial Law) and by
making it appear that he is so authorized is a deliberate
falsehood which violates the lawyer’s oath and Rule 1.01
(CPR) that a lawyer shall not engage in unlawful,
dishonest, immoral or deceitful conduct.
Remember:
1. Certification of a Deed (is a proclamation to
the world that:)
2. All the parties therein personally appeared
before him
3. They are all personally known to him
4. That they were the same persons who
executed the instruments
5. He (notary public) inquired into the
voluntariness and due execution of the instrument; and
6. That they acknowledged personally before
him that they voluntarily and freely executed the same.
Arrieta v. Llosa, 282 SCRA 248, November 28, 1997
Facts: Atty. X notarized a deed of sale making it appear
that some of the vendors were signatories and parties
when in fact these people were already dead prior to
the execution of the document.
Ruling:
1. Notarization is not empty, meaningless, routinary
act; it is infested with substantial public interest such
that only those who are qualified or authorized may act
as notaries public.
2. Notaries public must observe with the utmost care
the basic requirements in the performance of their
duties. Otherwise, the confidence of the public in the
integrity of this form of conveyance would be
undermined.
3. Faithful observance with utmost respect of the legal
solemnity of an oath in an acknowledgment or jurat is
sacrosanct.
Flores vs. Chua, 306 SCRA 465
Facts: Atty. Rodrigo, a notary public, notarized a forged
deed of sale. In that notarized document he solemnly
declared that the alleged vendor appeared before him
and acknowledged to him that the document was the
vendor’s free act and deed despite the fact that the
vendor did not do so as his signature was forged.
Ruling:
A notary public cannot plead good faith when
notarizing documents without the presence of
signatories thereto as this would be a mockery of what
the Jurat and Acknowledgment requires.
Where the notary public is a lawyer, a graver
responsibility is placed upon his shoulder by reason of
his solemn oath to obey the laws and to do no
falsehood nor consent to the doing of any. The C.P.R.
also commands him not to engage in unlawful,
dishonest, immoral, deceitful conduct and to uphold at
all times the integrity and dignity of the legal
profession.
New Rule: EFFICIENT USE OF PAPER RULE
A.M. No. 11-9-4-SC, November 13, 2012
Purpose: There is a need to cut the judicial system’s
use of excessive quantities of costly paper, save our
forests, avoid landslides, and mitigate the worsening
effects of climate change that the world is experiencing.
Applicability:
This Rule shall apply to ALL COURTS and QUASI-
JUDICIAL BODIES under the administrative supervision
of the Supreme Court. (Section 1)
Format and Style:
1. All pleadings, motions , and similar paper
intended for the court and quasi-judicial
body’s consideration and action ( court-bound
papers) shall be written in SINGLE SPACE
with a 1 and ½ space between paragraphs,
using an easily readable font style of the
party’s choice, of 14-size font , and on a 13
inch by 8.5 inch white bond paper; and
2. All decisions, resolutions and orders issued by
the courts and by quasi-judicial bodies shall
comply with the requirements. Similarly
covered are the reports submitted to the
courts and transcript of stenographic notes.
3. Parties shall maintain the following margin on
all court-bound papers: a left hand margin of
1.5 inches from the edge; an upper margin of
1.2 inches from the edge; a right hand margin
of 1.0 ; and a lower margin of 1.0 inch from the
edge. Every page must be consecutively
numbered.
Copies to be filed:
Unless otherwise directed by the court, the number of
court-bound papers that a party is required to file shall
be as follows:
Supreme Court One original (properly
marked) and 4 copies,
unless is referred to
 Court En Banc, parties
shall file 10 additional COURTS AND JUDGES
copies.
For En Banc: Parties 1. Court – is a board or other tribunal, which decides
need to submit 2 sets of a litigation or contest.
annexes, one attached
to original and an extra 2. Judge – public officer who, by virtue of his office, is
copy. clothed with judiciary authority.
All members of the
Court shall share extra (a) De jure judge – one who is exercising the
copies of the annexes office of a judge as a matter of right; an
in the interest of officer of a court who has been duly and
economy of paper. legally elected or appointed.
Court of Appeals and One original (properly (b) De facto judge – an officer who is not fully
Sandiganbayan marked) and 2 copies invested with all the powers and duties
with their annexes. conceded to judges, but exercising the office
Court of Tax Appeals One original (properly of a judge under some color of right.
marked) and 2 copies
with their annexes. QUALIFICATIONS OF JUSTICES AND JUDGES; TERM
On appeal to En Banc: OF OFFICE
One original (properly
marked) and 8 copies Supreme Court and 1. Natural-born
with annexes. Court of Appeals citizen of the
In other courts One original (properly Justices (under the Philippines;
marked) with stated Judiciary Organization 2. Must have been
annexes attached to it. Act of 1980 or BP129) for 15 years or
more a judge of
Annexes Served on Adverse Party a lower court or
engaged in the
A party required to serve a copy of court-bound paper practice of law;
on the adverse party need NOT enclose copies of those 3. At least 40
annexes that based on the record of the court. years of age;
and
In the event a party requests for the annexes actually 4. Must be a
filed in court , the party who filed the paper shall comply person of
with the request within 5 days from receipt. proven
competence,
integrity,
probity and
independence.

JUDICIAL ETHICS RTC Judges 1. Citizen of the

Philippines (
JUDICIAL ETHICS Sec.7 (1), Art.
VIII, 1987
Judicial Ethics – branch of moral science which treats of Constitution);
the right and proper conduct to be observed by all Note:(The Congress
judges and magistrates in trying and deciding shall prescribe the
controversies brought to them for adjudication, which qualifications of judges
conduct must be demonstrative of impartiality, of lower courts, BUT NO
integrity, competence, independence, and freedom PERSON MAY BE
from improprieties. APPOINTED JUDGE
THEREOF UNLESS HE
IS A CITIZEN OF THE
BASIS FOR EXISTENCE OF A CODE OF
PHILIPPINES and a
JUDICIAL ETHICS member of the
Philippine Bar. Sec. 7
Case Law: ( 2), Art. VIII, 1987
Constitution)
Courts and judges are not sacrosanct. They should and 2. At least 35 years
expect critical evaluation of their performance. For like of age;
the executive and the legislative branches, the judiciary 3. For at least 10
is rooted in the soil of democratic society, nourished by years has been
the periodic appraisal of the citizen’s whom it is engaged in the
expected to serve. (In re: Almacen, 31 SCRA 578) practice of law
48 | LEGAL ETHICS MEMORY AID

in the (a) Representative of the IBP

Philippines or
has held a (c)
public office in
the Philippines
requiring
admission to
the practice of
law as an
indispensable
requisite.
MTC Judges 1. Citizen of the
Philippines ( conformity .
Sec.7 (1), Art.
VIII, 1987
Constitution);
Note: (The Congress shall
prescribe the qualifications
of judges of lower courts,
BUT NO PERSON MAY
BE APPOINTED JUDGE
THEREOF UNLESS HE IS
A CITIZEN OF THE
PHILIPPINES and a Judiciary do not need any confirmation by the
member of the Philippine
Bar. Sec. 7 ( 2), Art. VIII,
1987 Constitution)
2. At least 30 years
of age;
For at least 5 years has
been engaged in the
practice of law in the
Philippines or has held
public office in the
Philippines requiring
admission to the practice
of law as an indispensable
requisite.
Note: Members of the judiciary shall hold office during
good behavior until (a) they reach 70 years old; or (b)
they become incapacitated to discharge the duties of
their office. (Section 11, Article VIII, 1987 Constitution)
MANNER OF SELECTION AND APPOINTMENT;
THE JUDICIAL AND BAR COUNCIL
The Judicial and Bar Council (JBC) is a constitutionally-
created body which is primarily tasked to recommend
appointees to the Judiciary and the Office of the
Ombudsman for the President’s perusal. (Section 8,
Article VIII, 1987 Constitution)
(b) Professor of law
Retired member of the SC
(d) Representative from private
sector
Selection Process:
1. Where there is a vacancy in the judiciary , the
JBC causes its publication and sets a deadline
for submission of applications;
2. A lawyer who meets the qualifications may
either apply or be nominated to the post , if
nominated , the lawyer must affix his
3. The applicant/nominee must submit all the
requirements with the JBC
4. The JBC validates all the submitted
documents and conducts a background
information check on the applicant/nominee
5. The JBC causes the publication of the names
of applicant/ nominees and the schedule of
their interviews.
Appointment:
1. Appointments made by the President in the
COA. ( Section 9, Article VIII, 1987 Constitution)
2. Any vacancy in the Supreme Court must be
filled within ninety (90) days from the
occurrence thereof. (Section 4(1), Article VIII,
1987 Constitution)
3. For lower courts, the President shall issue the
appointments within 90 days from the
submission of the list. (Section 9, Article VIII,
1987 Constitution)
Case Law:
Q: What composes the Judicial Bar
Council?
A: Chief Justice as ex officio Chairman,
the Secretary of Justice, and a representative
of the Congress as ex officio Members, a
representative of the Integrated Bar, a
professor of law, a retired Member of the
Supreme Court, and a representative of the
private sector.
THE CONGRESS NEEDS ONLY ONE
REPRESENTATIVE, EITHER FROM THE
SENATE OR THE HOUSE OF
REPRESENTATIVES. THE PRACTICE OF
HAVING TWO (2) REPRESENTATIVES
FROM EACH HOUSE OF CONGRESS WITH
ONE (1) VOTE EACH IS
UNCONSTITUTIONAL.

Membership of the JBC: Only one representative from the Congress is

needed because...
1. Chief Justice of the Supreme Court as ex 1. They are not performing legislative
officio chair; functions
2. Ex officio members: 2. There is no interaction between the
(a) Secretary of Justice Senate and HR in JBC
(b) A representative of Congress
3. Regular members:
 3. Two (2) representatives from the
Legislative Dept. will be against the
equality of powers
4. One (1) representative represents the
whole Congress
The composition of the JBC reflects the
Commission's desire to have in the Council a
representation for the major elements of the
community.
(Chavez v. JBC, et al., G.R. No. 202242, July 17,
2013)
REQUIREMENTS IN THE DISCHARGE OF
RESPONSIBILITIES OF MEMBERS OF THE
JUDICIARY
1. Jurisprudence: No decision shall be rendered
by any court without expressing therein
clearly and distinctly, the facts and the law on
which it is based. ( Section 14, Article VIII, 1987
Constitution)
2. Dedicated service to the Judiciary: Members
of the judiciary shall not be designated to any
agency performing quasi-judicial or
administrative functions. ( Section 12, Article
VIII, 1987 Constitution)
3. SALN Requirement: Members of the SC shall
not only report all their assets, liabilities and
net worth upon assumption to duty but they
must disclose such to the PUBLIC in the
manner provided by law. ( Section 17, Article
XI, 1987 Constitution)
4. Allegiance to the Philippine government:
Any public officer owes allegiance to the
Philippine government and its Constitution
and a public officer who seeks to change
citizenship or acquire the status of immigrant
of another country during his tenure shall be
dealt with by law. ( Section 18, Article VIII,
1987 Constitution
CODE OF JUDICIAL
CONDUCT
SOURCES
1. New Code of Judicial Conduct for the
Philippine Judiciary (Bangalore Draft)
2. New Code of Judicial Conduct for the
Philippine Judiciary (effectivity date: June 1,
2004)
3. In case of deficiency or absence of specific
provisions in the New Code, the Canons of
Judicial Ethics and the Code of Judicial
Conduct shall be applicable in a suppletory
character.
6 CANONS UNDER THE NEW CODE OF
JUDICIAL CONDUCT ( III-PECD)
1. Independence
2. Integrity
3. Impartiality
4. Propriety
5. Equality
6. Competence and Diligence
The Bangalore Draft
It is intended to be a Universal Declaration of Judicial
Standards applicable in all judiciaries. It is founded on
the following principles:
1. A competent, independent and impartial
judiciary is essential if the courts are to
fulfill their rule in upholding
constitutionalism and the rule of law.
2. Public confidence in the judicial system
and in the moral authority and integrity
of the judiciary is of utmost importance
in a modern democratic society.
3. It is essential that judges, individually and
collectively, respect and honor judicial
office as a public trust and strive to
enhance and maintain confidence in the
judicial system.
The New Code of Judicial Conduct for the Philippine
Judiciary
It did not completely repeal the old Canons of Judicial
Ethics adopted in the Philippines and Code of Judicial
Conduct of 1989. It is only when the New Code (inspired
by the Bangalore Draft) has specific provisions or
concepts covering those found in the Canons of Judicial
Ethics and Code of Judicial Conduct that the latter are
considered superseded to that extent. This means that
the provisions of the existing Canons and the Code
which have not been embraced in the New Code will not
be considered subsisting and effective.
Code of Judicial Conduct (A.M. 03-05-01-SC)
The Code of Judicial Conduct was promulgated on
September 5, 1989 and became effective on October
20, 1989. This Administrative Matter contains the
Supreme Court’s Adoption of the New Code of Judicial
Ethics.
QUALITIES OF JUDGES AND JUSTICES
CANON 1. INDEPENDENCE
Judicial independence is a prerequisite to the rule of
law and a fundamental guarantee of a fair trial. A judge
shall therefore uphold and exemplify judicial
independence in both its individual and institutional
aspects.
Sec. 1. Judges shall exercise the judicial function
independently on the basis of their assessment of the
50 | LEGAL ETHICS MEMORY AID
facts and in accordance with a conscientious
understanding of the law, free of any extraneous
influence, inducement, pressure, threat or
interference, direct or indirect, from any quarter or
for any reason.
Sec. 2. In performing judicial duties, Judges shall be
independent from judicial colleagues in respect of
decisions which the judge is obliged to make
independently.
Sec. 3. Judges shall refrain from influencing in any
manner the outcome of litigation or dispute pending
before another court or administrative agency.
Sec. 4. Judges shall not allow family, social, or other
relationships to influence judicial conduct or
judgment. The prestige of judicial office shall not be
used or lent to advance the private interests of
others, nor convey or permit others to convey the
impression that they are in a special position to
influence the judge.
Sec. 5. Judges shall not only be free from
inappropriate connections with, and influence by, the
executive and legislative branches of government,
but must also appear to be free therefrom to a
reasonable observer.
Sec. 6. Judges shall be independent in relation to
society in general and in relation to the particular
parties to a dispute which he or she has to adjudicate.
Sec. 7. Judges shall encourage and uphold safeguards
for the discharge of judicial duties in order to
maintain and enhance the institutional and
operational independence of the judiciary.
Sec. 8. Judges shall exhibit and promote high
standards of judicial conduct in order to reinforce
public confidence in the judiciary which is
fundamental to the maintenance of judicial
independence.
Judicial independence means judges should:
1. Act independently on the basis of their
assessment of the facts and in accordance
with a conscientious understanding of the
law, free of any extraneous influence;
2. Be independent from judicial colleagues in
respect of decisions he is obliged to make
independently;
3. Refrain from influencing the outcome of
litigation pending before any other court;
4. Not allow family, social, or other relationships
to influence judicial conduct or judgment;
5. Be free from inappropriate connections with,
and influence by, the executive and legislative
branches of government;
6. Be independent in relation to society in
general and in relation to the particular parties
to a dispute which he has to adjudicate;
7. Encourage and uphold safeguards for the
discharge of judicial duties; and
8. Exhibit and promote high standards of judicial
conduct in order to reinforce public
confidence in the judiciary.
NOTE: If the personal view of the judge contradicts the
doctrine promulgated by the Supreme Court, he should
nonetheless decide the case in accordance with the
doctrine and not in accordance with his personal view.
He may, however, state his own opinion on the matter if
he wants to invite constructive attention thereto.
Case Law:
Judges are required to rule fairly regardless of public
clamor. (Libarios vs Dabalos A.M. No. RTJ- 89-286,
July 11, 1991)
A judge in the performance of his duties should strive at
all times to be “wholly free, disinterested, impartial and
independent.” (Geotina vs. Gonzales, G. R. No. L-
26310, September 30, 1971)
A judge should not only render a just , correct and
impartial decision but should do so in such a manner as
to be free from any suspicion as to its fairness and
impartiality and as to his integrity. (Martinez vs.
Gironella, G.R. No. L-37635, July 22, 1975)
Judges Must Reject Pressure from any source by
maintaining independence:
1. Independence from Public Officials- The public laid
their confidence on the fact that the official is mentally
and morally fit to pass upon the merits of their varied
intentions.
2. Independence from government as a whole- Avoid
inappropriate connections, as well as any situation that
would give rise to the impression of the existence of
such inappropriate connections.
3. Independence from family, social, or other
relationships- Do not sit in litigation where a near
relative is a part of or counsel.
4. Independence from public opinion- only guide is the
mandate of the law.
Her (The Judge’s) confessed act of succumbing to this
pressure on the telephone is a patent betrayal of the
public trust reposed on respondent as an arbiter of the
law and a revelation of her weak moral character. By her
appointment, the public has laid respondent fit to pass
upon the merits of their varied contentions. They
expect her to be unafraid to displease any person,
interest or power and to be equipped with a moral fiber
strong enough to resist the temptations lurking in the
office. Respondent Judge has dismally failed to exhibit
the qualities required of those holding such office.
Judge is dismissed. (Ramirez v. Corpus-Macandog,
A.M. No. R-359 RTJ , September 26, 1986)
The discretion of the Court to grant bail must be based
on the Court’s determination as to whether or not the
evidence of guilt is strong. This discretion may be
exercised only after the evidence has been submitted at
the summary hearing conducted pursuant to Sec. 7 of
Rule 114 of the Rules. Respondent’s admission that he
granted bail to an accused upon the request of a
Congressman, despite his belief that the evidence of
guilt against said is strong, is indeed reprehensible.
(Tahil v. Eisma, A.M. No. 276-MJ , June 27, 1975)
An Executive Judge was requested by a party involved
in a barangay conciliation proceeding where he
introduced himself as the Executive Judge of the area,
which act is an obvious demonstration of support for
said party. The SC held that the actuations of the judge
are improper and censurable. A judge should refrain
from interfering in any manner in the outcome of a
litigation before any court or another administrative
agency. (Marces, Sr. v. Arcangel, A.M. No. RTJ -91-
712, July 9, 1996)
Constant company with a lawyer tends to breed
intimacy and camaraderie to the point that favors in the
future may be asked from respondent judge which he
may find hard to resist. The actuation of respondent
Judge of eating and drinking in public places with a
lawyer who has pending cases in his sala may well
arouse suspicion in the public mind, thus tending to
erode the trust of the litigants in the impartiality of the
judge. (Padilla v. Zantua, A.M. No. MTJ-93-888,
October 24, 1994)
CANON 2. INTEGRITY
Integrity is essential not only to the proper discharge of
the judicial office but also to the personal demeanor of
judges.
Sec. 1. Judges shall ensure that not only is their
conduct above reproach, but that it is perceived to be
so in the view of a reasonable observer.
Case Law:
A judge’s personal behavior, both in the performance of
his duties and his daily life, must be free from any
appearance of impropriety as to be beyond reproach
(Tan v. Rosete A.M. No. MJT -04-1563, September
2004)
A judge was admonished for not wearing the judicial
robe in the performance of judicial functions. A judge
must take care not only to remain true to the high ideals
of competence and integrity his robe represents, but he
wears one in the first place. (Chan v. Majaducan A.M.
No. RTJ -02 -1697, October 15, 2003)
Sec. 2. The behavior and conduct of judges must
reaffirm the people's faith in the integrity of the
judiciary. Justice must not merely be done but must
also be seen to be done.
Case Law:
A judge has a duty to not only render a just and
impartial decision but also render it in such a manner as
to be free from any suspicion as to its fairness and
impartiality, and also as to the judge’s impartiality.
While judges should possess proficiency in law in order
that they can completely construe and enforce the law,
it is more important that they should act and behave in
such a manner that the parties before them should have
confidence in their impartiality. (Sibayan-Joaqin v.
Javellana A.M. No. RTJ-00-1601 November 13, 2001)
Case Law:
Q: Is a faulty legal strategy by an applicant for
a vacant seat for Justice of the Supreme Court reflect
doubtful integrity?
A: NO. WITHOUT A CLEAR SHOWING OF
GROSS NEGLECT, INIQUITY, OR IMMORAL
PURPOSE, A STRATEGY OF A LEGAL MIND
REMAINS A LEGAL TACTIC ACCEPTABLE TO SOME
AND DEPLORABLE TO OTHERS. It has no direct
bearing on his moral choices. (Jardeleza v. Sereno , G.
R. No. 213181, August 19, 2014)
Q: Sec.2, Rule 10 of JBC-009 states that:
Votes required when integrity of a qualified applicant
is challenged – In every case where the integrity of an
applicant who is not otherwise disqualified for
nomination is raised or challenged, the affirmative
vote of all the Members of the Council must be
obtained for the favorable consideration of his
nomination.
Are issues concerning extra-marital affairs and insider
trading valid questions on integrity?
A: Yes. A lawyer who engages in extra-marital
affairs is deemed to have failed to adhere to the
exacting standards of morality and decency which
every member of the Judiciary is expected to
observe. Moral character is not a subjective term but
one that corresponds to objective reality.
The element of “willingness” to linger in indelicate
relationships imputes a weakness in one’s values, self-
control and on the whole, sense of honor, not only
because it is a bold disregard of the sanctity of marriage
and of the law, but because it erodes the public’s
confidence in the Judiciary.
Insider trading involves the trading of securities based
on knowledge of material information not disclosed to
the public at the time. Clearly, an allegation of insider
trading involves the propensity of a person to engage in
fraudulent activities that may speak of his moral
character. (Jardeleza v. Sereno ,supra)
Sec. 3. Judges should take or initiate appropriate
disciplinary measures against lawyers or court
personnel for unprofessional conduct of which the
judge may have become aware.
Judicial integrity means judges should:
1. Ensure that not only is their conduct above
reproach, but that it is perceived to be so in
the view of a reasonable observer;
52 | LEGAL ETHICS MEMORY AID
2. Must reaffirm the people’s faith in the
integrity of the judiciary; and
3. Take or initiate appropriate measure against
lawyers or court personnel for unprofessional
conduct.
Case Law:
Judges should not be lenient in the administrative
supervision of employees. As an administrator, the
judge must ensure all court personnel perform
efficiently and promptly in the administration of justice.
(Ramirez v. Corpuz-Macandag, supra)
A judge’s official conduct and his behaviour in the
performance of judicial duties should be free from the
appearance of impropriety and must be beyond
reproach. ( Alazas vs. Reyes,G. R. No. L-55808, August
28, 1984)
Because appearance is as important as reality in the
performance of judicial functions, like Ceasar’s wife, a
judge must not only be pure but beyond suspicion.
(Palang vs. Zosa, G. R. No. L- 38229, August 30, 1974)
Justice must not merely be done but must also be seen
to be done. (Panaligan vs. Judge Ibay, A.M. RTJ-06-
1972, June 21, 2006)
Constant company with a lawyer tends to breed
intimacy and camaraderie to the point that favors in the
future may be asked from the judge which he may find
hard to refuse. Xxx This eventuality may undermine the
people’s faith in the administration of justice. (Padilla
v. Zantua, Jr., Adm. Matter No. MTJ-93-888, October
24, 1994)
A judge may recommend for appointment court
personnel however he has no power to dismiss them.
The power to dismiss a court employee is vested in the
Supreme Court. (Dailay-Papa vs. Almora, AM Nos.
543-MC & 1525-MJ, 110 SCRA 376, December 19, 1981)
Integrity is essential not only to the proper discharge of
the judicial office, but also to the personal demeanor of
the judges.
Integrity is a steadfast adherence to a strict moral or
ethical code. It is honesty and honourableness put into
one. When a judge has integrity, it is presumed that he
has the virtues of impartiality, propriety, equality and
independence. Moral integrity is more than a cardinal
virtue. It is a necessity. (Catbagan v. Barte , A.M. No.
MTJ-02-1452, April 6, 2005)
A judge’s official conduct and behavior in the
performance of judicial duties should be free from the
appearance of impropriety and must be beyond
reproach. (Alazas v. Reyes, supra)
Judges are viewed as the visible representations of law
and justice, from whom the people draw the will and
inclination to obey the law. Their personal behavior, not
only on the bench and in the performance of judicial
duties but also in their everyday lives, should be beyond
reproach. (Jacinto v. Vallarta, A.M. No. RTJ- 04-1541,
March 10, 2005)
The imputation of illicit sexual acts upon the incumbent
judge must be proven by substantial evidence, which is
the quantum of proof required in administrative cases.
(Alfonso v. Juanson, A.M. No. RTJ-92-904, December
7, 1993)
People who run the judiciary, particularly judges and
justices, must not only be proficient in both the
substantive and procedural aspects of the law, but more
importantly, they must possess the highest integrity,
probity and unquestionable moral uprightness, both in
their public and private lives. A Judge should not only
possess proficiency in law, but should likewise possess
moral integrity for the people look up to him as a
virtuous and upright man. (Talens-Dabon v. Arceo,
A.M. No. RTJ-96-1336, July 25, 1996)
CANON 3. IMPARTIALITY
Impartiality is essential to the proper discharge of the
judicial office. It applies not only to the decision itself
but also to the process by which the decision is made.
Sec. 1. Judges shall perform their judicial duties
without favor, bias or prejudice.
Sec. 2. Judges shall ensure that his or her conduct,
both in and out of court, maintains and enhances the
confidence of the public, the legal profession and
litigants in the impartiality of the judge and of the
judiciary.
Case Law:
A judge should behave at all times in a way that
promotes public confidence in the integrity and
impartiality of the judiciary. The appearance of bias or
prejudice can be as damaging to public confidence and
the administration of justice as actual bias or prejudice
judges shall perform their judicial duties without favor,
bias or prejudice (Montemayor v. Bermejo A.M. No.
MTJ-04-1535, March 12, 2004)
Sec. 3. Judges shall, so far as is reasonable, so
conduct themselves as to minimize the occasions on
which it will be necessary for them to be disqualified
from hearing or deciding cases.
“Duty to sit “– means that it is imperative that judges
ensure that they would not be unnecessarily disqualified
from a case.
Judges may, in their exercise of sound discretion,
restrict themselves voluntarily from sitting in a case, but
such a decision should be based on good, sound or
ethical grounds, or for just and valid reasons. It is
enough that a party cast some tenuous allegations of
partiality at the judge.
Case Law:
The rule of disqualification of judges must yield to
demand of necessity. A judge is not disqualified to sit in
a case if there is no other judge available to hear and
decide the case. When all judges would be disqualified,
disqualification will not be permitted to destroy the only
tribunal with power in the premises. The doctrine
operates on the principle that a basic judge is better
than no judge at all. Under such circumstances, it is duty
of the disqualified judge to hear and decide the
controversy, however to disagreeable it may be.
(Parayno v. Meneses G.R. No. 112684, April 20, 1994)
Sec. 4. Judges shall not knowingly, while a
proceeding is before, or could come before, them
make any comment that might reasonably be
expected to affect the outcome of such proceeding or
impair the manifest fairness of the process. Nor shall
judges make any comment in public or otherwise that
might affect the fair trial of any person or issue.
Case Law:
Judges and justices are not disqualified from
participating in a case simply because they have written
legal article on the law involved in the case (Chavez v.
Public Estate Authority G.R. No. 133250, May 6, 2003)
Sec. 5. Judges shall disqualify themselves from
participating in any proceedings in which they are
unable to decide the matter impartially or in which it
may appear to a reasonable observer that they are
unable to decide the matter impartially. Such
proceedings include, but are not limited to, instances
where:
(a) The judge has actual bias or prejudice concerning
a party or personal knowledge of disputed
evidentiary facts concerning the proceedings;
(b) The judge previously served as a lawyer or was a
material witness in the matter in controversy;
(c) The judge, or a member of his or her family, has an
economic interest in the outcome of the matter in
controversy;
(d) The judge served as executor, administrator,
guardian, trustee or lawyer in the case or matter in
controversy, or a former associate of the judge
served as counsel during their association, or the
judge or lawyer was a material witness therein;
(e) The judge's ruling in a lower court is the subject of
review;
(f) The judge is related by consanguinity or affinity to
a party litigant within the sixth civil degree or to
counsel within the fourth civil degree; or
(g) The judge knows that his or her spouse or child
has a financial interest, as heir, legatee, creditor,
fiduciary, or otherwise, in the subject matter in
controversy or in a party to the proceeding, or any
other interest that could be substantially affected by
the outcome of the proceedings;
Litigants are entitled to a judge who will decide on the
merits of the facts presented.
Strict compliance with the rules on disqualification is
required. The petition to disqualify a judge must be filed
before rendition of the judgment, and cannot be raised
on appeal. Otherwise, the parties are deemed to have
waived any objection regarding the impartiality of the
judge.
Case Law:
A municipal judge who filled complaints in his own court
for robbery and malicious mischief against a party for
the purpose of protecting the property interest of the
judge’s co-heirs, and then issued warrants of arrest
against the party, was found guilty of serious
misconduct and ordered dismissed from the bench
before he was able to rescue himself (Oktubre v.
velasco A.M. No. MTJ-02-02-1444, July 20, 2004)
Sec. 6. A judge disqualified as stated above may,
instead of withdrawing from the
proceeding, disclose on the records the
basis of disqualification. If, based on such
disclosure, the parties and lawyers
independently of the judge's participation,
all agree in writing that the reason for the
inhibition is immaterial or unsubstantial,
the judge may then participate in the
proceeding. The agreement, signed by all
parties and lawyers, shall be incorporated in
the record of the proceedings
Requirements to continue hearing the case, despite
existence of reasons for disqualification:
1. Bona fide disclosure to the parties-in-
litigation; and
2. Express acceptance by all the parties of the
cited reason as not material or substantial.
Note: Absent any of these, the judge may not
continue to hear the case
To effectively remit disqualification, a judge
must disclose on the record the basis of the
disqualification and ask parties and lawyers to
consider, out of the presence of the judge
whether to waive disqualification. As long as
the disqualification is not based upon personal
bias or prejudice, the parties and lawyers may
all agree that the judge should not be
disqualified. If all parties and the judge argue
that the judge should participate, the judge
may participate and must incorporate the
agreement into the record of the proceeding.
Impartiality is not a technical conception. I t is a state of
mind. It applies not only to the decision itself but also to
the process by which the decision is made. Judges
54 | LEGAL ETHICS MEMORY AID
should not only be impartial but must also appear
impartial.
Judicial impartiality means judges should:
1. Perform their judicial duties without favor,
bias or prejudice;
2. Ensure that their conduct maintains and
enhances the confidence of the public, the
legal profession and litigants in the
impartiality of the judge and the judiciary;
3. Conduct themselves as to minimize the
occasions on which it will be necessary for
them to be disqualified from hearing or
deciding cases;
4. Not make any comment that might
reasonably be expected to affect the outcome
of the proceedings or impair the manifest
fairness of the process;
5. Disqualify themselves from participating in
any proceedings in which they are unable to
decide the matter impartially.
Inhibition – an act when the judge personally prevents
himself from taking cognizance of the case. This is
made through a written petition to inhibit stating the
grounds thereof.
If the judge inhibits himself, the same CANNOT BE
APPEALED.
Mandatory Inhibition or Compulsory Disqualification,
Instances
1. When he, his wife, or child is pecuniarily
interested as heir, legatee, creditor;
2. When he is related to either party within the
6th degree of consanguinity or affinity or to
counsel within the 4th civil degree;
3. When he has been an executor, guardian,
administrator, trustee or counsel;
4. When he has presided in an inferior court
where his ruling or decision is subject to
review.
Voluntary Inhibition
1. A judge, may in the exercise of his discretion,
disqualify himself, for just and valid reasons
other than those mentioned above.
2. A decision to disqualify himself is not
conclusive. His competency may be
determined on application for mandamus to
compel him to act.
Grounds for Disqualification
1. The judge has actual bias or prejudice
concerning a party or personal knowledge of
disputed evidentiary facts concerning the
proceedings;
2. The judge previously served as a lawyer or was
a material witness in the matter in
controversy;
3. The judge, or a member of his or her family,
has an economic interest in the outcome of
the matter in controversy;
4. 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;
5. The judge’s ruling in a lower court is the
subject of review;
6. 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
7. 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. (Sec. 5)
A judge may, in the exercise of his sound discretion,
disqualify himself from sitting in a case, for just or valid
reasons other than those mentioned above.
A judge disqualified may, instead of withdrawing from
the proceeding, disclose on the records the basis of
disqualification. 
If based on such disclosure, the parties and lawyers
independently of the judge’s participation, all agree in
writing that the reason for the inhibition is immaterial
or unsubstantial, the judge may then participate in the
proceeding.
DISQUALIFICATION INHIBITION
Specific and exclusive The Rule merely gives a
grounds under which any broad basis thereof
judge or judicial officer is
disqualified from acting
as such are enumerated
by the Rules
No discretion to try or sit Rule leaves the matter
in a case of inhibition to the
sound discretion of the
judge
Case Law:
The second paragraph of Section 1, Rule 137 does not
give the judge the unuttered discretion to decide
whether or not he will desist from hearing a case. The
inhibition must be for just and valid causes. The mere
imputation of bias or partiality is not enough ground for
a judge to inhibit, especially when the same is without
any basis (People v. Kho G.R. No. 139381, April 20,
2001)
The rule on disqualification of a judge, whether
compulsory or voluntary, to hear a case finds its
rationale in the salutary principle that no judge should
preside in a case which he is not wholly free,
disinterested, impartial and independent, which is
aimed at preserving the people’s faith and confidence in
the courts of justice. (Gutierrez vs. Santos, G.R. No. L-
15824, May 30, 1961)
Just like the lady who symbolizes the statute of justice
who is blindfolded, the judge does not look at the
persons of the parties but only on the weight of
evidence on the scale and applicable law; he must
evince the cold neutrality of a disinterested magistrate
with a duty to apply the law without fear or favor,
malice or prejudice to anyone.
The contempt power, however plenary it may seem,
must be exercised judiciously and sparingly. A judge
should never allow himself to be moved by pride,
prejudice, passion, or pettiness in the performance of
his duties.(Sison v. Caolbes, A.M. No. RTJ-03-1771,
May 27, 2004 )
NOTATU DIGNUM is the presumption of regularity in
the performance of a judge’s functions, hence, bias,
prejudice and even undue influence cannot be
presumed, especially weighed against a judge’s sacred
obligation under oath of office to administer justice
without respect to any person and do equal right to the
poor and the rich. (Datuin, Jr. v. Soriano, A.M. No.
RTJ-01-1640, October 15,2002)
Where a judge is not legally disqualified from sitting in a
litigation, but suggestion is made of record that he
might be induced to act in favor of 1 party or with bias
or prejudice against a litigant arising out of
circumstances reasonable capable of inciting such a
state of mind, he should exercise his discretion in a way
that the people’s faith in the courts of justice should not
be impaired. (Pimentel v. Salanga, G. R. No. L- 27934,
September 18, 1967)
The integrity of the Judiciary rests not only upon the
fact that it is able to administer justice but also upon the
perception and confidence of the community that the
people who run the system have done justice. Hence, in
order to create such confidence, the people who run the
judiciary, particularly judges and justices, must not only
be proficient in both the substantive and procedural
aspects of the law, but more importantly, they must
possess the highest integrity, probity, and
unquestionable moral uprightness, both in their public
and private lives. Only then can the people be reassured
that the wheels of justice in this country run with
fairness and equity, thus creating confidence in the
judicial system. (Talens-Dabon v. Arceo, supra)
CANON 4. PROPRIETY
Propriety and the appearance of propriety are essential
to the performance of all the activities of a. judge.
Sec. 1. Judges shall avoid impropriety and the
appearance of impropriety in all of their activities.
Reason: The public holds judges to higher standards of
integrity and ethical conduct that lawyers and other
person not invested with public trust.
Sec. 2. As a subject of constant public scrutiny,
judges must accept personal restrictions that might
be viewed as burdensome by the ordinary citizen and
should do so freely and willingly. In particular, judges
shall conduct themselves in a way that is consistent
with the dignity of the judicial office.
Sec. 3. Judges shall, in their personal relations with
individual members of the legal profession who
practice regularly in their court, avoid situations
which might reasonably give rise to the suspicion or
appearance of favoritism or partiality.
Sec. 4. Judges shall not participate in the
determination of a case in which any member of their
family represents a litigant or is associated in any
manner with the case.
Sec. 5. Judges shall not allow the use of their
residence by a member of the legal profession to
receive clients of the latter or of other members of
the legal profession.
Sec. 6. Judges, like any other citizen, are entitled to
freedom of expression, belief, association and
assembly, but in exercising such rights, they shall
always conduct themselves in such a manner as to
preserve the dignity of the judicial office and the
impartiality and independence of the judiciary.
Judges in the exercise of their civil liberties, should be
circumspect and ever mindful of their continuing
commitment to uphold the judiciary and its value places
upon them certain implied restraints to their freedom.
Sec. 7. Judges shall inform themselves about their
personal fiduciary financial interests and shall make
reasonable efforts to be informed about the financial
interests of members of their family.
A judge shall refrain from financial and business
dealings tend to reflect adversely on the court’s
impartiality, interfere with the proper performance of
judicial activities or increase involvement with lawyers
or persons likely to come before the court.
Case Law:
When judge, along with other people acted as real
estate agents for the sale of a parcel of land for which
he agreed to give a commission of P100,000 to each of
his companions, and after the transaction was
completed only gave the complainants P25,000 each,
the high COURT held that the judge violated the section
of the prior Code of Judicial Conduct (Catbagan v.
Barte A.M. No. MTJ-02-1452 April 2005)
56 | LEGAL ETHICS MEMORY AID
Sec. 8. Judges shall not use or lend the prestige of the
judicial office to advance their private interests, or
those of a member of their family or of anyone else,
nor shall they convey or permit others to convey the
impression that anyone is in a special position
improperly to influence them in the performance of
judicial duties.
This rule has TWO (2) PARTS:
1. A judge may not use judicial office to advance
private interest.
2. A judge may not give the impression that he
or she can be influenced to use the judicial
office to advance the private interests of
others.
Ticket-fixing – is a misconduct in which judges
impermissibly take advantage of their position to avoid
punishment for traffic violation.
Sec. 9. Confidential information acquired by judges in
their judicial capacity shall not be used or disclosed
by for any other purpose related to their judicial
duties.
The judge may be liable for violation of Section 3(k) of
RA 3019- “divulging valuable information of a
confidential character, acquired by his office or by him
on account of his official position to unauthorized
persons or releasing such information in advance of its
authorized release due.
Violation of the rule may also lead to “revelation of
secrets by an officer” or to “revelation of the secrets of a
private individual” punishable by Article 229 and 230 of
the Revised Penal Code respectively.
Sec. 10. Subject to the proper performance of judicial
duties, judges may
(a) Write, lecture, teach and participate in activities
concerning the law, the legal system, the
administration of justice or related matters;
(b) Appear at a public hearing before an official body
concerned with matters relating to the
(c) law, the legal system, the administration of justice or
related matters;
(d) Engage in other activities if such activities do not
detract from the dignity of the judicial office or
otherwise interfere with the performance of judicial
duties.
Sec. 11. Judges shall not practice law whilst the holder
of judicial office.
Sec. 12. Judges may form or join associations of judges
or participate in other organizations representing the
interests of judges.
Sec. 13. Judges and members of their families shall
neither ask for, nor accept, any gift, bequest, loan or
favor in relation to anything done or to be done or
omitted to be done by him or her in connection with the
performance of judicial duties.
Sec. 14. Judges shall not knowingly permit court staff or
others subject to their influence, direction or authority,
to ask for, or accept, any gift, bequest, loan or favor in
relation to anything done or to be done or omitted to be
done in connection with their duties or functions.
Sec. 15. Subject to law and to any legal requirements of
public disclosure, judges may receive a token gift,
award or benefit as appropriate to the occasion on
which it is made provided that such gift, award or
benefit might not reasonably be perceived as intended
to influence the judge in the performance of judicial
duties or otherwise give rise to an appearance of
partiality.
Judicial propriety means judges should:
1. Avoid impropriety and the appearance of
impropriety in all of their activities;
2. Must accept personal restrictions that might
be viewed as burdensome by the ordinary
citizen and should do so freely and willingly;
3. Avoid situations which might reasonably give
rise to the suspicion or appearance of
favoritism or partiality;
4. Not participate in the determination of a case
in which any member of their family
represents a litigant or is associated in any
manner with the case;
5. Not allow the use of their residence by a
member of the legal profession to receive
clients of the latter;
6. Conduct themselves in such a manner as to
preserve the dignity of the judicial office in
their exercise of their freedom of expression,
belief, association and assemble;
7. Inform themselves about their personal
fiduciary financial interests and shall make
reasonable efforts to be informed about the
financial interests of members of their family;
8. Not use or lend the prestige of the judicial
office to advance their private interests or any
member of their family;
9. Not use confidential information for any other
purpose related to their judicial duties;
10. Subject to proper performance of judicial
duties:
11. Write, lecture, teach and participate in
activities concerning the law, the legal
system, the administration of justice or other
related matters;
12. Appear at a public hearing before an official
body concerning the law, the legal system,
the administration of justice or other related
matters; and
13. Engage in other activities if such activities do
not detract from the dignity of the judicial
office.
14. Not practice law while holding judicial office;
15. May form or join associations of judges;
 16. Neither ask for, nor accept, any gift, bequest,
loan or favor in relation to anything done or to
be done or omitted to be done by him in
connection with the performance of judicial
duties;
17. Neither permit court staff or others subject to
their influence, direction or authority, to ask or
accept such gift, bequest, loan, or favor; and
18. Be allowed, subject to law and to any legal
requirement of public disclosure, to receive a
token gift, award or benefit as appropriate to
the occasion on which it is made provided that
such might not be perceived as intended to
influence the judge.
Judges are not allowed to accept gifts. However, they
may receive tokens provided that such gift is not
reasonably perceived as intended to influence the judge
or give rise to an appearance of partiality.
A judge shall refrain from financial and business
dealings that tend to reflect adversely on the court’s
impartiality, interfere with the proper performance of
judicial activities, or increase involvement with lawyers
or persons likely to come before the court.
Prohibition under the Revised Penal Code
Art. 215. Prohibited Transactions. The penalty of
prision correccional. In its minimum period or a fine
ranging from P200 to P1,000 or both shall be imposed
upon any appointive public officer who, during his
incumbency, shall directly or indirectly become
interested in any transaction of exchange or speculation
within the territory subject to his jurisdiction.
Art. 216. Possession of Prohibited interest by public
officer. The penalty of arresto mayor in its medium
period to prision correccional in its minimum period, or
a fine ranging from P200 to P1,000 or both shall be
imposed upon a public officer who, directly or indirectly,
shall become interested in any contract or business
which it is his official duty to intervene.
Case Law:
It was highly improper for a judge to have wielded a
high-powered firearm in public and besieged the house
of a perceived defamer of character and honor in
warlike fashion and berated the object of his ire, with
his firearm aimed at the victim. (Saburnido v. Madrono,
A.C. No. 4497, September )
A judge’s official conduct should be free from any
appearance of impropriety; and his personal behavior,
not only in the bench and in the performance of his
duties, but also in his everyday life should be beyond
reproach. (Office of the Court Administrator v. Duque,
A.M. No. P-05-1958, February 7, 2005)
When a Member of the Judge’s Family Represents a
Litigant, he must disqualify himself.
A member of the Judge’s family include:
1. Spouse
2. Children
3. Children-in-law
4. Any relative within the 6th civil degree,
whether by affinity or consanguinity
5. Companion or employee of the judge
who lives in his household
Relatives Deemed Covered
1. Adopted Child
2. Recognized illegitimate child
3. First and second cousins by blood, and
first and second cousins-in-law
4. Uncles, aunts, nephews and nieces;
grandnephews and grandnieces
It is improper for a judge to allow a practitioner to
receive his clients in his residence - By entertaining a
litigant in his home and receiving benefits given by said
litigant, respondent miserably failed to live up to the
standards of judicial conduct. (J. King and Sons v.
Hontanosas, Jr., A.M. No. RTJ-03-1802, September 21,
2004)
Receiving money from a party litigant is the kind of
gross and flaunting misconduct on the part of the judge,
who is charged with the responsibility of administering
the law and rendering justice. Members of the judiciary
should display not only the highest integrity but must,
at all times, conduct themselves in such manner as to be
beyond reproach and suspicion. (Ompoc v. Torre, A.M.
No. MTJ-86-11, September 27, 1989))
CANON 5. EQUALITY
Ensuring equality of treatment to all before the courts
is essential to the due performance of the judicial
office.
Sec. 1. Judges shall be aware of, and understand,
diversity in society and differences arising from various
sources, including but not limited to race, color, sex,
religion, national origin, caste, disability, age, marital
status, sexual orientation, social and economic status
and other like causes.
Sec. 2. Judges shall not, in the performance of judicial
duties, by words or conduct, manifest bias or prejudice
towards any person or group on irrelevant grounds.
Sec. 3. Judges shall carry out judicial duties with
appropriate consideration for all persons, such as the
parties, witnesses, lawyers, court staff and judicial
colleagues, without differentiation on any irrelevant
ground, immaterial to the proper performance of such
duties.
Sec. 4. Judges shall not knowingly permit court staff or
others subject to his or her influence, direction or
control to differentiate between persons concerned, in a
matter before the judge, on any irrelevant ground.
Sec. 5. Judges shall require lawyers in proceedings
before the court to refrain from manifesting, by words
58 | LEGAL ETHICS MEMORY AID
or conduct, bias or prejudice based on irrelevant
grounds, except such as are legally relevant to an issue
in proceedings and may be the subject of legitimate
advocacy.
Judicial equality means judges should/ shall:
1. Be aware of, and understand, diversity in
society and difference arising from various
sources, including but not limited to race,
color, sex, religion, national origin, caste,
disability, age, marital status, sexual
orientation, social and economic status and
other like causes;
2. Not manifest bias or prejudice towards any
person or group on irrelevant grounds;
3. Shall carry out judicial duties with appropriate
consideration for all parties without
differentiation on any irrelevant ground,
immaterial to the proper performance of such
duties;
4. Shall not knowingly permit court staff or other
subjects under his influence to differentiate
between persons concerned on any irrelevant
ground; and
5. Refrain from manifesting bias or prejudice
based on irrelevant grounds, except such as
are legally relevant to an issue in proceedings
and may be the subject of legitimate
advocacy.
As guardians of justice, courts must adhere to the
principle of equality. People expect the courts to be
unaffected by differences in social status, degree of
education, and even physical abilities.
Case Law:
Calling the complainant a greedy and usurer Chinese
woman, tagging her lawyer as lazy and negligent while
branding her own clerk of court as equally lazy and
incompetent is not language befitting the esteemed
position of a magistrate of law. (Cua Shuk Yin v.
Perello, A.M. No. RTJ-05-1961, November 11, 2005)
The action of the judge in seizing the witness, Alberto
Angel, by the shoulder and turning him about was
unwarranted and an interference with that freedom
from unlawful personal violence to which every witness
is entitled while giving testimony in a court of justice.
Against such conduct the appellant had the right to
protest and to demand that the incident be made a
matter of record. That he did so was not contempt,
providing protest and demand were respectfully made
and with due regard for the dignity of the court. (In Re:
Aguas, G.R. No. 12, August 8, 1901)
CANON 6. COMPETENCE AND DILIGENCE
Competence and diligence are prerequisites to the due
performance of judicial office.
Sec. 1. The judicial duties of a judge take precedence
over all other activities.
Sec. 2. Judges shall devote their professional activity to
judicial duties, which include not only the performance
of judicial functions and responsibilities in court and the
making of decisions, but also other tasks relevant to the
judicial office or the court's operations.
Sec. 3. Judges shall take reasonable steps to maintain
and enhance their knowledge, skills and personal
qualities necessary for the proper performance of
judicial duties, taking advantage for this purpose of the
training and other facilities which should be made
available, under judicial control, to judges.
Sec. 4. Judges shall keep themselves informed about
relevant developments of international law, including
international conventions and other instruments
establishing human rights norms.
Sec. 5. Judges shall perform all judicial duties, including
the delivery of reserved decisions, efficiently, fairly and
with reasonable promptness.
A judge may be subject to an administrative fine for
inefficiency, neglect and unreasonable delay in
elevating the records of a civil case to the Court of
Appeals.
Case Law:
A delay of three years in the transmission of court
records to the appellate court where a period of 30 days
is required is inexcusable.
( Pateleon v. Gudez A.M. No. RTJ-00-1525, January
25,2000)
Sec. 6. Judges shall maintain order and decorum in all
proceedings before the court and be patient,
dignified and courteous in relation to litigants,
witnesses, lawyers and others with whom the judge
deals in an official capacity. Judges shall require
similar conduct of legal representatives, court staff
and others subject to their influence, direction or
control.
Case Law:
Respondent judge was guilty of committing acts
unbecoming of a judge and abuse of authority when he
shouted invectives and threw a chair at the
complainant, resulting in wrist and other injuries to the
complainant. (Briones v. Ante, A.M. No. MTJ-02-1411,
April 11, 2002)
Sec. 7. Judges shall not engage in conduct
incompatible with the diligent discharge of judicial
duties.
Judicial competence and diligence means judges
should:
1. Make sure that their judicial duties take
precedence over all other activities;
 2. Devote their professional activity to judicial As a matter of public policy, in the absence of fraud,
duties; dishonesty, or corruption, the acts of a judge in his
3. Maintain and enhance their knowledge, skills judicial capacity are not subject to disciplinary action,
and personal qualities necessary for the even though such acts are erroneous. Yet it is highly
proper performance of judicial duties; imperative that they should be controverted with basic
4. Keep themselves informed about relevant legal principles. They are called upon to exhibit more
developments of international laws; than just a cursory acquaintance with statutes and to
5. Perform judicial duties efficiently, fairly and keep themselves abreast of the latest laws, rulings,
with reasonable promptness; jurisprudence affecting their jurisdiction. Even in the
6. Maintain order and decorum and be patient in remaining years of his stay in the judiciary, he should
all proceedings before the court; and keep abreast with the changes in the law and with the
7. Not engage in conduct incompatible with the latest decisions and precedents. Although a judge is
diligent discharge of judicial duties. nearing retirement, he should not relax in his study of
Case Law: the law and court decisions. (Abad v. Bleza, A.M. No. R-
561-RTJ, October 13, 1986)
Judges are not, however, expected to be infallible; not
every error and irregularity committed by judges in the
performance of official duties is subject to DISCIPLINE OF MEMBERS OF THE JUDICIARY
administrative sanction. In the absence of bad faith,
OF THE JUDICIARY
fraud, dishonesty, or deliberate intent to do injustice,
Members of the SC : Impeachment
incorrect rulings do not constitute misconduct and may
(Section 2, Article XI, 1987 Constitution)
not give rise to a charge of ignorance of the law.(Cruz
vs. Itturalde, A.M. No. MTJ-03-1775, April 2003)
The President, the Vice-President, the Members of the
Supreme Court, the Members of the Constitutional
Failure to follow basic legal commands embodied in the
Commissions, and the Ombudsman may be removed
law and the rules constitutes gross ignorance of the law,
from office on impeachment for, and conviction of,
from which no one is excused, and surely not a judge.
culpable violation of the Constitution, treason, bribery,
(Tiongco vs. Judge Salao, A.M. RTJ-06-2009, July 27,
graft and corruption, other high crimes, or betrayal of
2006)
public trust. All other public officers and employees may
be removed from office as provided by law, but not by
A judge shall not engage in the private practice of law.
impeachment. (Art. 11, Sec. 2 of the 1987
Unless prohibited by the Constitution or law, a judge
Constitution)
may engage in the practice of any other profession
provided that such practice will not conflict or tend to
Grounds: Culpable violation of the Constitution,
conflict with judicial functions.
treason, bribery, graft and corruption, other higher
crimes, or betrayal of public trust.
A judge shall not accept appointment or designation to
any agency performing quasi-judicial or administrative
Proceedings:
functions.
1. Initiated in the House of Representatives by a
A judge is entitled to entertain personal views on
vote of at least one-third (1/3) of all members
political questions. But a judge shall not make political
if referral is considered by the Committee on
speeches, contribute to party funds, publicly endorse
Justice but a verified complaint or resolution
candidates or participate in other partisan political
filed by at least one-third (1/3) of all its
activities.
members is sufficient to transmit the Articles
of Impeachment.
The primary duty of judges is to hear and decide cases
2. The impeachment proceedings shall be
brought to them for trial and adjudication. As to Judges’
presided over by the Senate President.
other administrative assignments, including organizing
3. Two-thirds (2/3) vote of all members of the
special events, the respondent judge should only be
Senate is necessary to convict.
reminded that decision making is the primordial and
most important duty of a member of the judiciary. ( In
Effects: Shall not extend further than removal from
Re: Complaint Against Justice Asuncion of the Court of
office and disqualification to hold any other public office
Appeals, A.M. No. 06-44-CA-J, March 20, 2007)
but the convicted justice shall nevertheless be liable and
subject to prosecution, trial and punishment according
The loss of not one but eight records is indicative of
to law.
gross misconduct and inexcusable negligence
unbecoming of a judge. For true professionalism in the
bench to exist, judges whose acts demoralize the ethical Case Law:
standards of a judicial office and whose acts
demonstrate unfitness and unworthiness of the prestige A public officer, who under the Constitution is required
and prerequisites attached to the said office must be to be a Member of the Philippine Bar as a qualification
weeded out. (Longboan v. Polig, A.M. No. 704-RTJ, for the office held by him and who may be removed
June 14,1990) from office only by impeachment, cannot be charged
with disbarment during the incumbency of such public
60 | LEGAL ETHICS MEMORY AID
officer. Further, such public officer, during his
incumbency, cannot be charged criminally before the
Sandiganbayan or any other court with any offence
which carries with it the penalty of removal from office,
or any penalty service of which would amount to
removal from office. (In Re: First Indorsement From
Honorable Raul M. Gonzalez, A.M. No. 88-4-5433,
April 15, 1988)
A Legal Ethics Lesson Learned in the Corona
Impeachment:
Of the eight allegations against Chief Justice Corona in
the Articles of Impeachment, by a vote of 20-3, the
impeachment court rendered a guilty verdict. This
stems from Article 2 for “culpable violation of the
Constitution” due to failure to “disclose to the public a
statement of his assets, liabilities, and net worth” as
required by law. Section 17, Article XI of the 1987
Constitution requires:
Section 17. A public officer or employee shall,
upon assumption of office and as often
thereafter as may be required by law, submit a
declaration under oath of his assets, liabilities,
and net worth. In the case of the President,
the Vice-President, the Members of the
Cabinet, the Congress, the Supreme Court,
the Constitutional Commissions and other
constitutional offices, and officers of the
armed forces with general or flag rank, the
declaration shall be disclosed to the public in
the manner provided by law.
In the case of Galeos and Ong, the Supreme Court ruled
that an outright misdeclaration or even an omission –
by simply leaving a portion of the SALN blank – was
intended to mask an even bigger crime. (Galeos vs.
People of the Philippines; G.R. Nos. 174730-37
February 9, 2011)
Grounds and corresponding sanctions
1. Serious Misconduct- implies malice or a
wrongful intent, not a mere error of
judgment. For serious misconduct to exist,
there must be reliable evidence showing that
the judicial acts complained of were corrupt or
inspired by an intention to violate the law or
were in persistent disregard of well-known
legal rules.
2. Inefficiency- implies negligence,
incompetence, ignorance and carelessness. A
judge would be inexcusably negligent if he
failed to observe in the performance of his
duties that diligence, prudence and
circumspection which the law requires in the
rendition of any public service.
Judicial Immunity - As a matter of policy, in the
absence of fraud, dishonesty or corruption, the acts of a
judge in his judicial capacity are not subject to
disciplinary action even though such acts are erroneous.
He cannot be subjected to liability – civil, criminal,
administrative – for any of his official acts, no matter
how erroneous, so long as he acts in good faith. In such
a case, the remedy of the aggrieved party is not to file
an administrative complaint against the judge but to
elevate the error to the higher court for review and
correction. (Castanos vs. Escano, 251 SCRA 174 (1995)
RULE 140. Discipline of Judges of Regular and Special
Courts and Justices of the Court of Appeals and the
Sandiganbayan
I. Serious charges include:
1. Bribery, direct or indirect;
2. Dishonesty and violations of the Anti
Graft and Corrupt Practices Law (R.A.
No. 3019);
3.Gross misconduct constituting
violations of the Code of Judicial
Conduct;
4.Knowingly rendering an unjust
judgment or order as determined by a
competent court in an appropriate
proceeding;
5. Conviction of a crime involving moral
turpitude;
6. Willful failure to pay a just debt;
7. Borrowing money or property from
lawyers and litigants in a case pending
before the court;
8. Immorality;
9. Gross ignorance of the law or
procedure;
10. Partisan political activities; and
11. Alcoholism and/or vicious habits.(Sec.
8, Rule 140)
II. Less serious charges include:
1. Undue delay in rendering a decision or
order, or in transmitting the records of a
case;
2. Frequently and unjustified absences
without leave or habitual tardiness;
3. Unauthorized practice of law;
4. Violation of Supreme Court rules, directives, and
circulars;
5. Receiving additional or double compensation unless
specifically authorized by law;
6. Untruthful statements in the certificate of service;
7. Simple Misconduct.(Sec. 9, Rule 140)
III. Light charges include:
1. Vulgar and unbecoming conduct;
2. Gambling in public;
3. Fraternizing with lawyers and litigants with
pending case/cases in his court; and
4. Undue delay in the submission of monthly
reports. (Sec. 10, Rule 140)
Sanctions:
 1. If the respondent is guilty of a serious
charge, any of the following sanctions may
be imposed:
(a) Dismissal from the service, forfeiture of all
or part of the benefits as the Court may
determine, and disqualification from
reinstatement or appointment to any public
office, including government-owned or
controlled corporations. Provided, however,
that the forfeiture of benefits shall in no case
include accrued leave credits;
(b) Suspension from office without salary and
other benefits for more than three (3) but not
exceeding six (6) months; or
(c) A fine of more than P20,000.00 but not
exceeding P40,000.00
2. If the respondent is guilty of a less serious
charge, any of the following sanctions shall
be imposed:
(a)Suspension from office without salary and
other benefits for not less than one (1) nor
more than three (3) months; or
(b) A fine of more than P10,000.00 but not
exceeding P20,000.00.
3. If the respondent is guilty of a light charge,
any of the following sanctions shall be
imposed:
(a) A fine of not less than P1,000.00 but not
exceeding P10,000.00 and/or
(b) Censure;
(c) Reprimand;
(d) Admonition with warning.
Procedure for filing an administrative complaint (Rule
140, RRC):
1. Complaint in writing;
(a) Setting forth clearly the facts and circumstances
relied upon; AND
(b) Sworn to and supported by affidavits and
documents.
2. Service or dismissal;
(a) If the charge is WITH MERIT, a copy will be served
upon the respondent, requiring him to answer within
10 days from the date of service.
(b) If not or the answer shows to the satisfaction of
the court that the charges are NOT MERITORIOUS, it
will be dismissed which must followed by an answer
within 10 days from date of service.
3. Hearing;
Report filed with the Supreme Court of findings
accompanied by evidence and documents.
GROUNDS FOR DISCIPLINE OF JUDGE
1. Serious Misconduct – implies malice or a
wrongful intent, not a mere error of
judgment. For serious misconduct to exist,
there must be reliable evidence showing that
the judicial acts complained of were corrupt or
inspired by an intention to violate the law or
were in persistent disregard of well-known
legal rules.
2. Inefficiency – implies negligence,
incompetence, ignorance and carelessness. A
judge would be inexcusably negligent if he
failed to observe in the performance of his
duties that diligence, prudence and
circumspection which the law requires in the
rendition of any public service.
Case Law:
The failure of a judge to decide even a single case within
90- day period was considered gross inefficiency
warranting the imposition of the fine equivalent to his
one month salary (In Re: Judge Danillo Tenerife, A.M.
No. 94-5-42-MTC. March 20, 1996)
Case Law:
Q: Are judges allowed to issue legal opinions
outside the context of judicial proceedings?
A: NO. Judges do not, and are not allowed, to
issue legal opinions. Their opinions are always in the
context of judicial decisions, or concurring and
dissenting opinions in the case of collegiate courts, and
always in the context of contested proceedings.
(Office of the Court Administrator v. Atty. Liangco,
A.C. No. 5355 , December 11, 2011)
Q: Does the issuance of a legal opinion by a
judge constitute a violation of judicial
conduct?
A: YES. Issuance of a “legal opinion” without
due notice and hearing to all parties concerned
projects the image of partiality. Canon 3, particularly
Section 2 of the new code, exhorts judges not only to be
impartial in deciding the cases before them, but also to
project the image of impartiality.
Also, it constitutes gross ignorance of the law.
Displaying an utter lack of familiarity with the rules, he
in effect erodes the public’s confidence in the
competence of our courts. Moreover, he demonstrates
his ignorance of the power and responsibility that
attach to the processes and issuances of a judge, and
that he as a member of the bar should know. (Office of
the Court Administrator v. Atty. Liangco, supra)
Q: When a justice fails to attribute a quotation to
its author without malicious intent, is that plagiarism?
A: No. Never in the judiciary’s more than 100
years of history has the lack of attribution
been regarded and demeaned as plagiarism
(Bernas The 1987 Philippine Constitution: A
Comprehensive Reviewer, 2012 Supplement).
62 | LEGAL ETHICS MEMORY AID
On occasions judges and justices have
mistakenly cited the wrong sources, failed to use
quotation marks, inadvertently omitted necessary
information from footnotes or endnotes. But these do
not, in every case, amount to misconduct. Only errors
that are tainted with fraud, corruption, or malice are
subject of disciplinary action. (In Re Justice del Castillo
(2011))
Judicial Immunity - As a matter of policy, in the
absence of fraud, dishonesty or corruption, the acts of a
judge in his judicial capacity are not subject to
disciplinary action even though such acts are erroneous.
He cannot be subjected to liability – civil, criminal,
administrative – for any of his official acts, no matter
how erroneous, so long as he acts in good faith. In such
a case, the remedy of the aggrieved party is not to file
an administrative complaint against the judge but to
elevate the error to the higher court for review and
correction. (Castanos vs. Escano, 251 SCRA 174 (1995)
Fiduciary Activities
I. Prohibition to serve as executor, administrator,
etc.
General Rule: The judge shall NOT serve as (a)
executor, (b)administrator, (c) trustee, (d)
guardian, (e) fiduciary
Exception : When the estate, trust, ward or person
for whom he will act as executor, administrator,
trustee, guardian or fiduciary is a member of the
immediate family- which is limited to the spouse
and the relatives within second degree of
consanguinity- provided that the judge’s serices as
fiduciary shall not interfere with the performance
of his judicial functions. (Rule 5.06) (2005 BAR
EXAMS)
As a family fiduciary, a judge shall not :
1. Serve in proceedings that might
come before the court of said judge;
or
2. Act as such contraty to Rule 5.02 to
5.05
Note: The relationship mentioned is by
consanguinity and not by affinity.
II. Prohibition to be appointed in quasi-
judicial and administrative agencies
1. A judge shall not accept appointment or
designation to any agency performing
quasi-judicial or administrative functions
(Rule 5.09)
2. The prohibition is based on Section 12,
Art VIII of the Constitution which
provides: “the members of the Supreme
Court and of other courts established by
law shall not be designated to any
agency performing quasi-judicial or
administrative functions”.
Reason: The appointment to such positions
will likely interfere with the performance of
judicial functions of a judge.
III. Prohibition to engage in political
activities
A judge is entitled to entertain personal views on
political questions, but 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 ther partisan political activities (Rule
5.10)
LIABILITIES OF JUDGES
General Rule: a judge is not liable administratively,
civilly, or criminally when he acts within his legal powers
and jurisdiction, EVEN though such acts are erroneous.
Reason: To free the judge from apprehension of
personal consequences to himself and to preserve the
integrity and independence of the judiciary.
Exception: Where an error is gross or patents,
deliberate and malicious, or incurred with bad faith or
when there is fraud, dishonesty or corruption.
Civil Liabilities:
1. Art. 32, last par., New Civil Code
The responsibility for damages is not however
demandable of judges except when the act or
omission of the judge constitutes a violation of the
Penal Code or penal statute.
2. Art. 20, Civil Code
A judge who willfully or negligently renders a
decision causing damages to another, shall
indemnify the latter for the same.
3. Art. 27 Civil Code
A judge is also civilly liable for damages, if in
refusing or neglecting to decide a case without a
just cause, a person suffered material or moral loss
without prejudice to any administrative action that
may be taken against him.
Disabilities/Restrictions under the Civil Code:
1. Art 1491 (5) – Justices, judges, prosecuting
attorneys, clerk of court of superior and
inferior courts and other officers and
employees connected with the administration
of justice cannot acquire by purchase, even at
a public or judicial acyion, either in person or
through the mediation of another property
and rights in litigation or levied upon an
 execution before the court within whose
jurisdiction or territory they exercise their
respective functions.
(1996 BAR EXAMS)
This prohibition includes the acts of acquiring
by assignment and shall apply to lawyers, with
respect to the property and rights which may
be the object of any litigation in which they
may take part by virtue of their profession
2. Art 739 – Donations made to a judge, his wife,
descenedants and ascendants by reason of his
office are void.
Criminal Liabilities:
1. Misfeasance
(a) ART.204,RPC -Knowingly Rendering Unjust
Judgment Judgment Rendered Through
Negligence (Art. 205, RPC)
(b) Manifestly Unjust Judgement- in order that a
judge may be held liable for knowingly
rendering an unjust judgement, it must be
shown beyond doubt that his judgement is
unjust as it contrary to law or is not supported
by evidence and the same was made with
conscious and deliberate intent to do an
injustice. (In re: Climaco A.C. No. 134-J,
January 1974)
2. Art 205, RPC – Judgement Rendered through
Negligence – committed by reason of
inexcusable negligence or ignorance.
Case Law:
Negligence and Ignorance are inexcusable if
they imply a manifest injustice, which cannot
be explained by reasonable interpretation (In
Re: Climaco, supra)
3. Art. 206, RPC- Knowingly Rendering An
unjust Interlocutory Order
4. Art. 207, RPC -Maliciously Delaying the
Administration of Justice
5. Malfeasance Under Anti-Graft and Corrupt
Practices Act Section 3, (e) RA No. 3019
Administrative Liability
Discipline of Members of the Bench
The Supreme Court has exclusive administrative
supervision over all courts and the personnel thereof
(Section 6, Art VIII, and Constitution). The Court en
banc has the power to discipline all judges of lower
courts including justices of the Court of Appeals.
(Section 11, Art VIII, Constitution).
Effect of Resignation/ Retirement of a judge when
there is a pending administrative case against him:
Case Law:
The retirement of a judge or any judicial officer from the
service does not preclude the finding of nay
administrative liability to which he should still be
answerable. the withdrawal or recantation of the
complaint by the administrative charges does not
necessarily result in the dismissal of the case. (Atty.
Molina v. Judge Paz A.M. No. RTJ-01-1638, December
2003)
Impeachment proceedings against judges are penal in
nature and are governed by the rules applicable to
criminal cases. The charges must, therefore, be proved
beyond reasonable doubt.
Sanctions imposed by the Supreme Court on Erring
Members of the Judiciary
The Supreme Court has administrative supervision over
all courts and the personnel thereof (Section 6, Art. VIII,
1987 Constitution). The Court en banc has the power to
discipline all judges of lower courts including Justices of
the Court of Appeals. It may even dismiss them by a
majority vote of the members who actually took part in
the deliberations of the issues in the case and voted
thereon (Section 11, Art. VIII, 1987 Constitution).
DISQUALIFICATION OF JUSTICES
AND JUDGES
Section 1. Disqualification of judges. — No judge or
judicial officer shall sit in any case in which he, or his
wife or child, is pecuniarily interested as heir, legatee,
creditor or otherwise, or in which he is related to either
party within the sixth degree of consanguinity or
affinity, or to counsel within the fourth degree,
computed according to the rules of the civil law, or in
which he has been executor, administrator, guardian,
trustee or counsel, or in which he has been presided in
any inferior court when his ruling or decision is the
subject of review, without the written consent of all
parties in interest, signed by them and entered upon the
record.
Two kinds of Disqualification:
1. Compulsory
2. Voluntary
Mandatory or Compulsory Disqualification
1. When he or his wife or his child is pecuniarily
interested as heir, legatee, creditor or
otherwise;
2. When he is related to either party within the
sixth degree of consanguinity or affinity or to
counsel within the 4th civil degree;
64 | LEGAL ETHICS MEMORY AID
3. When he has been an executor, guardian,
administrator, trustee or counsel;
4. When he has presided in an inferior court
where his ruling or decision is subject to
review.
Case Law:
The relationship of the judge with one of the parties
may color the facts and distort the law to the prejudice
of a just decision. Where this is probable or even only
possible, due process demands that the judge inhibit
himself, if only out of a sense of delicadeza.
(Javier v. Commission on Elections, G.R. No. L- 68379-
81 1996)
The rationale behind Sec. 1, Rule 137 on disqualification
of judges is to preserve public faith in the judiciary’s
fairness and objectivity to ally suspicions and distrust as
to a possible bias and prejudice in favor or a party
coming into play. (Hacienda Benito, Inc. v. Court of
Appeals, August 12, 1987)
Voluntary Inhibition
1. A judge may, in the exercise of his sound
discretion disqualify himself, for just and valid
reasons other than those mentioned above.
2. In every instance, the judge shall indicate the
legal reason for inhibition.
Case Law:
A judge may not be legally prohibited from sitting in
litigation. But when 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
circumstance 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.
(Pimentel v. Salanga supra)
A litigant is entitled to no less than the cold neutrality of
an impartial judge. Due process cannot be satisfied in
the absence of that degree or objectivity on the part of
a judge sufficient to reassure litigants of his being fair
and just. When the judge has personal knowledge of
disputed evidentiary facts, he will lose that degree of
objectivity. The tendency will be for him to decide the
case based on his personal knowledge and not
necessarily on the basis of the evidence presented and
offered by the parties. His objectivity is therefore
impaired. Consequently, the rule of fairness demands of
him that he should take no part in the case and let
another judge hear and decide it. (Mateo vs. Villaluz,
G. R. No. L-34756, March 31, 1973; Castillo vs. Juan,
G.R. No. L-39516-17, January 28, 1975)
The rule on disqualification of a judge, whether
compulsory or voluntary, to hear a case finds its
rationale in the salutary principle that no judge should
preside in a case which he is not wholly free,
disinterested, impartial and independent, which is
aimed at preserving the people’s faith and confidence in
the courts of justice. (Gutierrez vs. Santos, supra)
The mere filing of an administrative case against a
judge is not a ground for disqualifying him from hearing
the case. For if on every occasion the party apparently
aggrieved would be allowed to either stop the
proceeding in order to await the final decision on the
desired disqualification, or demand the immediate
inhibition of the judge on the basis alone of his being so
charged, many cases would have to be kept pending or
perhaps there would not be enough judges to handle all
the cases pending in all courts. The Court has to be
shown, other than the filing of the administrative
complaint, acts or conduct of the judge clearly
indicative of arbitrariness or prejudice before the latter
can be branded the stigma of being biased or partial.
(Aparicio vs. Andal, G.R. Nos. 86587-93 ,July, 25,
1989)
POWERS AND DUTIES OF COURTS AND
JUDICIAL OFFICERS
Nature of office of the Judge
Justices and judges must ever realize that they have no
constituency, serve no majority or minority but serve
only the public interest as they see it in accordance with
their oath of office, guided only by the Constitution and
their own conscience and honor. (Galman v.
Sandiganbayan 1986 )
Section 1. Courts always open; justice to be promptly
and impartially administered. — Courts of justice shall
always be open, except on legal holidays, for the filing
of any pleading, motion or other papers, for the trial of
cases, hearing of motions, and for the issuance of
orders or rendition of judgments. Justice shall be
impartially administered without unnecessary delay.
General Rule: Courts of justice shall always be
open for:
1. Filing of any pleading, motion or
other papers
2. Trial of cases
3. Hearing of motions
4. Issuance of orders
5. Rendition of judgments
Exception : Legal Holidays
Sec 2. Publicity of proceedings and records. — The
sitting of every court of justice shall be public, but any
court may, in its discretion, exclude the public when the
evidence to be adduced is of such nature as to require
their exclusion in the interest of morality or decency.
The records of every court of justice shall be public
records and shall be available for the inspection of any
interested person, at all proper business hours, under
the supervision of the clerk having custody of such
records, unless the court shall, in any special case, have
forbidden their publicity, in the interest of morality or
decency.
General Rule: Sitting of every court of justice shall
be public
Exception : When the evidence is of such nature
as to require their exclusion in the
interest of morality or decency
General Rule: Records of every court of justice
shall be public records and shall be
available for the inspection of any
interested person provided that:
1. Inspection be done at all proper
business hours
2. Under the supervision of the clerk
having custody of such records
Exception : Forbidden by the court in the interest of
morality or decency
Section 3. Process of superior courts enforced
throughout the Philippines. — Process issued from a
superior court in which a case is pending to bring in a
defendant, or for the arrest of any accused person, or to
execute any order or judgment of the court, may be
enforced in any part of the Philippines.
Section 4. Process of inferior courts. — The process of
inferior courts shall be enforceable within the province
where the municipality or city lies. It shall not be served
outside the boundaries of the province in which they are
compromised except with the approval of the judge of
first instance of said province, and only in the following
cases:
(a) When an order for the delivery of personal property
lying outside the province is to be complied with;
(b) When an attachment of real or personal property
lying outside the province is to be made;
(c) When the action is against two or more defendants
residing in different provinces; and
(d) When the place where the case has been brought is
that specified in a contract in writing between the
parties, or is the place of the execution of such contract
as appears therefrom.
Writs of execution issued by inferior courts may be
enforced in any part of the part of the Philippines
without any previous approval of the judge of first
instance.
Criminal process may be issued by a justice of the peace
or other inferior court, to be served outside his province,
when the district judge, or in his absence the provincial
fiscal, shall certify that in his opinion the interest of
justice require such service.
General Rule:
1. Process of superior courts may be enforced
throughout the Philippines
2. Process of inferior courts shall be enforceable
within the province where the municipality or
city lies
Exceptions :
(a) When an order for the delivery of personal
property lying outside the province is to be
complied with;
(b) When an attachment of real or personal
property lying outside the province is to be
made;
(c) When the action is against two or more
defendants residing in different provinces;
and
(d) When the place where the case has been
brought is that specified in a contract in
writing between the parties, or is the place of
the execution of such contract as appears
therefrom
Writs of execution issued by inferior courts may be
enforced in any part of the part of the Philippines
PRESCRIPTIVE DUTY TO RESOLVE PENDING
MATTERS
1. All matters pending with the Supreme Court
must be resolved within 24-months .
2. Twelve months (12) for all collegiate appellate
courts.
3. Three (3) months for all other lower courts.
(Art., VIII, Sec. 15(1), 1987 Constitution)
INHERENT POWERS OF COURT
Every court shall have power:
1. To preserve and enforce order in its
immediate presence;
2. To enforce order in proceedings before it, or
before a person or persons empowered to
conduct a judicial investigation under its
authority;
3. To compel obedience to its judgments, orders
and processes, and to the lawful orders of a
judge out of court, in a case pending therein;
4. To control, in furtherance of justice, the
conduct of its ministerial officers, and of all
other persons in any manner connected with a
case before it, in every manner appertaining
thereto;
5. To compel the attendance of persons to
testify in a case pending therein;
6. To administer or cause to be administered
oaths in a case pending therein, and in all
other cases where it may be necessary in the
exercise of its powers;
7. To amend and control its process and orders
so as to make them conformable to law and
justice;
8. To authorize a copy of a lost or destroyed
pleading or other paper to be filed and used
66 | LEGAL ETHICS MEMORY AID
instead of the original, and to restore, and
supply deficiencies in its records and
proceedings.
COURT RECORDS AND GENERAL DUTIES OF
CLERKS AND STENOGRAPHER (Rule 136)
GENERAL DUTIES OF CLERKS
1. The clerk of a superior court shall issue all
ordinary writs and process incident to pending
cases and may, under the direction of the
court or judge, make out and sign letters of
administration, appointments of guardians,
trustees, and receivers, and all writs and
process issuing from the court.
2. In the absence of the judge, the clerk may
perform all the duties of the judge in receiving
applications, petitions, inventories, reports,
and the issuance of all orders and notices and
may also receive the accounts of executors,
administrators, guardians, trustees, and
receivers, and all evidence or to the
settlement of the estates of deceased
persons, or to guardianship, trusteeships, or
receiverships.
3. Clerk shall receive papers and prepare
minutes.
4. The clerk shall safely keep all records, papers,
files, exhibits and public property committed
to his charge.
5. The clerk shall keep a general docket and shall
enter therein all cases.
6. The clerk shall keep a judgment book
containing a copy of each judgment rendered
by the court.
7. The clerk shall keep an execution book in
which he or his deputy shall record at length in
chronological order each execution, and the
officer's return.
8. The clerk shall prepare a copy certified under
the seal of the court of any paper, record,
order, judgment, or entry in his office, proper
to be certified, for the fees prescribed by
these rules.
9. The clerk shall keep such other books and
perform such other duties as the court may
direct.
COURT RECORDS
The general docket, judgment book, entries book and
execution book shall each be indexed in alphabetical
order in the names of the parties the clerk shall keep
two or more of either or all of the books and dockets, if
the court directs civil cases be separated from criminal
cases, or actions from special proceedings, or otherwise
keeping cases separated by classes
DOCKET AND OTHER RECORDS
OF INTERIOR COURT
Every justice of the peace and municipal judge shall
keep a well-bound book labeled "docket" in which he
shall enter for each case:
1. The title of the case including the
names of all the parties;
2. The nature of the case, whether civil
or criminal, and if the latter, the
offense charged;
3. The date of issuing preliminary and
intermediate process including
orders of arrest and subpoenas, and
the date and nature of the return
thereon;
4. The date of the appearance or
default of the defendant;
5. The date of presenting the plea,
answer, or motion to quash, and the
nature of the same;
6. The minutes of the trial, including
the date thereof and of all
adjournments;
7. The names and addresses of all
witnesses;
8. The date and nature of the
judgment, and, in a civil case, the
relief granted;
9. An itemized statement of the coast;
10. The date of any execution issued,
and the date and contents of the
return thereon;
11. The date of any notice of appeal
filed, and the name of the party
filing the same.
STENOGRAPHER
The stenographer shall deliver to the clerk of court all
the notes he has taken, either in the morning or
afternoon session, immediately after the close of such
session.
Whenever requested by a party, any statement made
by a judge of first instance, or by a commissioner, with
reference to a case being tried by him, or to any of the
parties thereto, or to any witness or attorney, during
the hearing of such case, shall be made of record in the
stenographic notes.
LEGAL FEES (RULE 141)
MANNER OF PAYMENT
Section 1. Payment of fees. — Upon the filing of the
pleading or other application which initiates an action
or proceeding, the fees prescribed therefor shall be paid
in full.
FEES IN LIEN
Section 2. Fees in lien. — Where the court in its final
judgment awards a claim not alleged, or a relief
different from, or more than that claimed in the
pleading, the party concerned shall pay the additional
fees which shall constitute a lien on the judgment in
satisfaction of said lien. The clerk of court shall assess
and collect the corresponding fees.
Section 3. Persons authorized to collect legal fees. —
Except as otherwise provided in this rule, the officers
and persons hereinafter mentioned, together with their
assistants and deputies, may demand, receive, and take
the several fees hereinafter mentioned and allowed for
any business by them respectively done by virtue of
their several offices, and no more. All fees so collected
shall be forthwith remitted to the Supreme Court. The
fees collected shall accrue to the general fund.
However, all increases in the legal fees prescribed in
amendments to this rule as well as new legal fees
prescribed herein shall pertain to the Judiciary
Development Fund as established by law. The persons
herein authorized to collect legal fees shall be
accountable officers and shall be required to post bond
in such amount as prescribed by law.
The following are persons authorized to collect legal
fees:
1. Clerks of courts
2. Sheriffs and other persons serving processes
3. Stenographers
4. Notaries
5. Other officers taking depositions
6. Witnesses
7. Appraisers
8. Commissioners in eminent domain
9. Commissioners in proceedings for partition of
real estate
Case Law:
Q: What are the rules to be followed by
Sheriffs?
A: (1) Prepare an estimate of expenses to be
incurred in executing the writ, for which he must seek
the court’s approval; (2) render an accounting; and (3)
issue an official receipt for the total amount he received
from the judgment debtor. (Sanga v. Alcantara and
Bisnar, A.M. No. P -09-2657, January 25, 2010)
Q: Are sheriffs allowed to take voluntary
payments from parties in the course of the performance
of their duties?
A: NO. To do so would be inimical to the best
interests of the service, because even assuming
arguendo that the payments were indeed given and
received in good faith, this fact alone would not dispel
the suspicion that such payments were made for less
than noble purposes.
Corollary to this point, a sheriff cannot just unilaterally
demand sums of money from a party litigant without
observing the proper procedural steps; otherwise, such
act would amount to dishonesty or extortion. (Sanga v.
Alcantara and Bisnar, supra)
Exempted from payment of legal fees
1. Indigent litigants
2. The Republic of the Philippines, its agencies or
instrumentalities
Except: Local governments and government-
owned or controlled corporations
Requirements to be entitled to the exemption under
indigent-litigants
Litigant shall execute an affidavit that he and his
immediate family do not earn a gross income which
exceed four thousand (P4,000.00) pesos a month if
residing in Metro Manila, and three thousand
(P3,000.00) pesos a month if residing outside Metro
Manila nor they own any real property with an assessed
value of more than fifty thousand (P50,000.00) pesos;
and an affidavit of a disinterested person attesting to
the truth of the litigant'saffidavit.
COST (Rule 142)
Recovery of Costs
1. Cost in justice of the peace or municipal
courts. — In an action or proceeding pending
before a justice of the peace or municipal
judge, the prevailing party may recover the
following cost, and no other:
(a) For the complaint or answer, two pesos;
(b) For the attendance of himself, or his
counsel, or both, on the day of trial, five
pesos;
(c) For each additional day's attendance
required in the actual trial of the case, one
peso;
(d) For each witness produced by him, for
each day's necessary attendance at the trial,
one peso, and his lawful traveling fees;
(e) For each deposition lawfully taken by him
and produced in evidence, five pesos;
(f) For original documents, deeds, or papers of
any kind produced by him; nothing;
(g) For official copies of such documents,
deeds, or papers, the lawful fees necessarily
paid for obtaining such copies;
(h) The lawful fees paid by him for service of
the summons and other process in the action;
(i) The lawful fees charged against him by the
judge of the court in entering and docketing
and trying the action or proceeding. (Sec. 9,
Rule 142)
2. Cost in Court of First Instance/ Regional Trial Court.
— In an action or proceeding pending in a Court of First
Instance, the prevailing party may recover the following
costs, and no other:
68 | LEGAL ETHICS MEMORY AID
(a) For the complaint or answer, fifteen pesos;
(b) For his own attendance, and that of his
attorney, down to and including final
judgment, twenty pesos;
(c) For each witness necessarily produced by
him, for each day's necessary attendance of
such witness at the trial, two pesos, and his
lawful traveling fees;
(d) For each deposition lawfully taken by him,
and produced in evidence, five pesos;
(e) For original documents, deeds, or papers
of any kind produced by him, nothing;
(f) For official copies of such documents,
deeds, or papers, the lawful fees necessarily
paid for obtaining such copies;
(g) The lawful fees paid by him in entering and
docketing the action or recording the
proceedings, for the service of any process in
action, and all lawful clerk's fees paid by him.
(Sec. 10, Rule 142)
3. Costs in Court of Appeals and in Supreme Court. —
In an action or proceeding pending in the Court of
Appeals or in the Supreme Court, the prevailing party
may recover the following costs, and no other:
(a) For his own attendance, and that of his
attorney, down to and including final
judgment, thirty pesos in the Court of Appeals
and fifty pesos in the Supreme Court;
(b) For official copies of record on appeal and
the printing thereof, and all other copies
required by the rules of court, the sum
actually paid for the same;
(c) All lawful fees charged against him by the
clerk of the Court of Appeals or of the
Supreme Court, in entering and docketing the
action and recording the proceedings and
judgment therein and for the issuing of all
process;
(d) No allowance shall be made to the
prevailing party in the Supreme Court or Court
of Appeals for the brief or written or printed
arguments of his attorney, or copies thereof,
aside from the thirty or fifty pesos above
stated;
(e) If testimony is received in the Supreme
Court or Court of Appeals not taken in another
court and transmitted thereto, the prevailing
party shall be allowed the same cost for
witness fees, depositors, and process and
service thereof as he would have been allowed
for such items had the testimony been
introduced in a Court of First Instance;
(f) The lawful fees of a commissioner in an
action may also be taxed against the defeated
party, or apportioned as justice requires. (Sec.
11, Rule 142)
Prevailing party
The cost shall be allowed to the prevailing party as a
matter of course, but the court shall have power, for
special reasons, to adjudge that either party shall pay
the costs of an action, or that the same be divided, as
may be equitable. No costs shall be allowed against the
Republic of the Philippines unless otherwise provided by
law. (Sec. 1, Rule 142)
Dismissed appeal or action
If an action or appeal is dismissed for want of
jurisdiction or otherwise, the court nevertheless shall
have the power to render judgment for cost, as justice
may require. (Sec. 2, Rule 142)
Frivolous Appeal
Where an action or appeal is found to be frivolous,
double or treble cost may be imposed on the plaintiff or
appellant, which shall be paid by his attorney, if so
ordered by the court. (Sec. 3, Rule 142)
False Allegations
An averment in a pleading made without reasonable
cause and found untrue shall subject the offending
party to the payment of such reasonable expenses as
may have been necessarily incurred by the other party
by reason of such untrue pleading. The amount of
expenses so payable shall be fixed by the judge in the
trial, and taxed as costs. (Sec. 4, Rule 142)
Non Appearance of Witness
If a witness fails to appear at the time and place
specified in the subpoena issued by any inferior court,
the cost of the warrant of arrest and of the arrest of the
witness shall be paid by the witness if the court shall
determine that his failure to answer the subpoena was
willful or without just excuse. (Sec. 12, Rule 142)
DISCIPLINE OF COURT PERSONNEL
MISCONDUCT
Case Law:
Q: What is Misconduct? When is it Grave
Misconduct?
A: Misconduct has been defined as "a
transgression of some established and definite rule
of action, more particularly, unlawful behavior or
gross negligence by a public officer." The
misconduct is grave if it involves any of the
additional elements of corruption, willful intent to
violate the law, or to disregard established rules, all
of which must be established by substantial
evidence, and must necessarily be manifest in a
charge of grave misconduct. (Re: Theft of the Used
GI Sheets in the SC Compound, A.M. No. 2008-15-
SC, 31 May 2011)
Q: What is Grave Misconduct?
A: It is a transgression of some established and
definite rule of action, more particularly,
unlawful behavior as well as gross negligence
by a public officer. It is this kind of gross and
flaunting misconduct on the part of those who
are charged with the responsibility of
administering the law and rendering justice
 that so quickly and surely corrodes the respect
for law and the courts without which the
government cannot continue and that tears
apart the very bonds of our polity. Hence, the
act undertaken by a court personnel in her
authority to get the cash money for her
personal use is a clear case of Grave
Misconduct. (OCA v. Musngi, A.M. No. P-11-
3024, 17 July 2012)
Q: Is Corruption an element of Grave
Misconduct?
A: YES. Corruption consists in the act of an
official or fiduciary person who unlawfully and
wrongfully uses his station or character to
procure some benefit for himself or for
another person, contrary to duty and the
rights of others.  (Re: Theft of the Used GI
Sheets in the SC Compound, A.M. No. 2008-
15-SC, 31 May 2011)
Q: When does Grave Misconduct constitute as
an administrative offense?
A: The misconduct should relate to or be
connected with the performance of the official
functions and duties of a public officer. To
warrant dismissal from the service, the
misconduct must be grave, serious,
important, weighty, momentous, and not
trifling. The misconduct must imply wrongful
intention and not a mere error of judgment.
(OCA v. Musngi, A.M. No. P-11-3024, 17 July
2012)
DISHONESTY
Case Law:
Q: What is Dishonesty?
A: Dishonesty is the disposition to lie, cheat,
deceive, defraud or betray; untrustworthiness;
lack of integrity; lack of honesty, probity, or
integrity in principle; and lack of fairness and
straightforwardness. Hence, a law graduate
who ought to know that it is not appropriate
to utilize case evidence for court room repairs,
and who claims that cash evidences taken was
used for court room repairs without
substantiating her claims commits a serious
case of dishonesty. (OCA v. Musngi, supra)
ABSENTEEISM
Q: When can a court personnel be held for
habitual absenteeism?
A: An officer or employee in the government
shall be considered habitually absent only if
he incurs unauthorized absences exceeding
the allowable 2/5 days monthly leave credit
under the Civil Service Rules for at least three
months in a semester or at least
three consecutive months during the year.
(OCA v. Araya, A.M. No. P-12-3053, 11 April
2012)
Q: How does a court deal with absenteeism
and tardiness of court personnel?
A: According to A.C. No. 02-2007, even if they do
not qualify as habitual and frequent under the Civil
Service rules and regulations shall be dealt with
severely and any falsification of the daily time
record to cover up such absenteeism and/or
tardiness shall constitute gross dishonesty or serious
misconduct. (OCA v. Araya,supra)
Q: Can court personnel be held liable for
falsification in the keeping of time records
even if done in without malice or intent to
mislead?
A: Yes, every official and employee of each court
shall accomplish the Daily Time Record,
indicating therein truthfully and accurately
the time of arrival in and departure from the
office. It is a personal act of the holder and
should not be delegated to anyone else.
Falsification or irregularities in the keeping of
time records constitute dishonesty, which is a
grave offense punishable by dismissal from
the service. The basis of liability is the
Omnibus Civil Service Rules and Regulations
Implementing Book V of Executive Order No.
292. (OCA v. De Lemos, A.M. No. P-11-2953,
7 September 2011; Dayaon v. De Leon, A.M.
No. P-11-2926, 1 February 2012)
NEGLECT OF DUTY
Case Law:
Q: What is Simple Neglect of Duty?
A: Simple neglect of duty is defined as the failure
to give attention to a task or the disregard of a
duty due to carelessness or indifference.
(Memo of Judge Yu, A.M. No. P-12-3033, 15
August 2012)
Q: How is Simple Neglect of Duty constituted by
a court personnel?
A: Mistakes or errors in the contents of the
orders, subpoenas, and Minutes of the
Hearing could be attributed to the lack of
attention or focus on the task at hand. These
can easily be avoided by exercising greater
care and diligence in the performance of
duties. (Memo of Judge Yu, A.M. No. P-12-
3033, 15 August 2012)
TAKING MONETARY EVIDENCE
Case Law:
70 | LEGAL ETHICS MEMORY AID
Q: Can a court personnel be administratively
liable for taking monetary evidence?
A: Yes. Taking monetary evidence without
proper authority constitutes theft. Thievery,
no matter how petty, has no place in the
judiciary. Such act shows that she is unfit for
the confidence and trust demanded by her
work. Theft amounts to gross misconduct and
dishonesty, and violates the time-honored
constitutional principle that a public office is a
public trust. Theft is a disgrace to the judiciary
and erodes the people s faith in the judicial
system. Dishonesty and grave misconduct are
grave offenses punishable by dismissal for the
first offense. It carries with it the cancellation
of eligibility, forfeiture of retirement benefits,
and perpetual disqualification from re-
employment in the government service.
(OCA v. Musngi, A.M. No. P-11-3024, 17 July
2012)
Case for Lapse Securing Court Premises
Case Law:
Q: What is the quantum of evidence required in
administrative proceedings?
A: In administrative proceedings, only
substantial evidence, that is, that amount of
relevant evidence that a reasonable mind
might accept as adequate to support a
conclusion, is required. The standard of
substantial evidence is satisfied when there is
reasonable ground to believe that the person
indicted is responsible for the alleged
wrongdoing or misconduct. Hence, being a
back post duty guard at the scene of a crime,
and having an attire that matches the culprit
described by witnesses and with the
attendance of other circumstances forming
the same conclusion, an accused may be held
liable with the administrative charges against
him. (Re: Theft of the Used GI Sheets in the
SC Compound, A.M. No. 2008-15-SC, 31 May
2011)
AGGRAVATING AND MITIGATING
CIRCUMSTANCES
Case Law:
Q: Are there any aggravating circumstances in
administrative cases?
A: Yes, the administrative officer of the daily
time records, has a greater responsibility and
is personally accountable for any irregularities
of those who are under his administrative
control and supervision. (OCA v. De Lemos,
A.M. No. P-11-2953, 7 September 2011)
Q: Are there any mitigating circumstances in
administrative cases?
A: Yes. In several administrative cases involving
dishonesty, mitigating circumstances merited
the leniency of the Court. The presence of
factors such as length of service in the
judiciary, acknowledgment of infractions and
feeling of remorse, and family circumstances,
among other things, play an important role in
the imposition of penalties. (OCA v. De
Lemos, supra)
Q: What are possible mitigating
circumstances?
A: Facts such as the employees length of service,
acknowledgment of his or her infractions and
feelings of remorse for the same, advanced
age, family circumstances, and other
humanitarian and equitable considerations.
The Court also ruled that where a penalty less
punitive would suffice, whatever missteps
may be committed by the employee ought
not to be visited with a consequence so
severe. Section 53, Rule IV of the Revised
Rules on Administrative Cases in the Civil
Service grants the disciplining authority the
discretion to consider mitigating
circumstances in the imposition of the proper
penalty. (OCA v. Araya, A.M. No. P-12-3053,
11 April 2012)
Q: Can restitution of the amount taken excuse
a court personnel from liability?
A: NO. Though the amount was restituted after
repeated demands, such act does not
exculpate her from administrative liability,
more so when the amount taken was cash
evidence in a criminal case. Restitution, full or
otherwise, of the missing amount and
obviously misappropriated by her does not
absolve her from the offense of Dishonesty.
(OCA v. Musngi, A.M. No. P-11-3024, 17 July
2012)
Q: Are there any mitigating circumstances in
Simple Neglect of Duty?
A: YES. Simple neglect of duty is classified as a
less grave offense, punishable by suspension.
Considering the mitigating factors: (1) their
length of service in the judiciary; (2) the
mistakes or errors appearing not to have
prejudiced any public interest or private party;
and (3) the instant case being the first offense
for both of them in their long years of service
in the Judiciary. Instead of suspension, those
guilty of such offense with the attendance of
the mitigating circumstances may be
reprimanded and sternly warned that the
commission of the same or similar acts in the
future shall be dealt with more severely.
(Memo of Judge Yu, A.M. No. P-12-3033, 15
August 2012)