Case: Advincula vs Macabata (A.C. No.

7204 March 7, 2007)

FACTS:
● 1st week December 2004. Cynthia Advincula hired Atty. Ernesto Macabata for legal
advice in collecting payment from Queensway Travel and Tours. To discuss the filing of
complaint, plaintiff and respondent met at a restaurant in Tomas Morato Quezon City.
After the dinner the responded offered Advincula a ride home. When she was about to
step out of the car, responded held her arm and kissed her on the cheek and hugged her
very tightly.
● February 10, 2005. They met at Starbucks (Quezon City) to finalize the draft of the
complaint. Macabanta offered Advincula again a ride, which he usually do every
meeting. Respondent was wondering why she suddenly felt sleepy when in fact she just
got out of the bed. When she was almost restless, respondent stopped the car and
forcefully held her face and kissed her lips, while the other hand was holding her breast.
Even in a state of shock, she resisted his criminal attempt and immediately manage to
get out of the car.
● She texted Atty. Macabata about referring the case to a different lawyer and that she
needs to get the documents back. Respondent tried to persuade her to stay with him
and let him handle the case. He asked for sorry but complainant was firm with her
decision and informed him to talk with her lawyer in due time. All these conversation
transpired thru text messages.
● Complainant filed a criminal case for Act of Lasciviousness against respondent. The
defendant that the place where he dropped complainant (corner of Cooper Street and
Roosevelt Avenue), is a busy street with a lot of people, thus, it’s impossible to commit
the acts imputed to him.
● Defendant admitted that he but he asked for permission. There was no forced used. No
breast holding was done. Everything happened spontaneously and there was no
reaction from.
● IBP passed a resolution date 20 March 2006 - Atty. Ernesto Macabata is suspended
from the practice of law for three (3) months.

ISSUE:
WON responded committed acts that are grossly immoral or which constitute serious moral
depravity that would warrant his disbarment or suspension from the practice of law.

RULING:
Disbarment case is dismissed. Respondent is reprimanded to be more prudent and cautious in
his dealing with his clients with a Stern Warning that a a more severe sanction will be imposed
on him for any repetition of the same or similar offense in the future.
HOLDING:
● The power to disbar or suspend ought always to be exercised on the preservative
and not on the vindictive principle, with great caution and only for the most weighty
reasons and only on clear cases of misconduct which seriously affect the standing
and character of the lawyer as an office of the court and member of the Bar.

● Only those acts which cause loss of moral character should merit disbarment or
suspension, while those acts which neither affect nor erode the moral character of
the lawyer should only justify a lesser sanction unless they are of such nature and to
such extent as to clearly show the lawyer's unfitness to continue in the practice of
law. The dubious character of the act charged as well as the motivation which
induced the lawyer to commit it must be clearly demonstrated before suspension or
disbarment is meted out. The mitigating or aggravating circumstances that attended
the commission of the offense should also be considered.

● Based on the circumstances of the case as discussed and considering that this is
respondent's first offense, reprimand would suffice. We laud complainant's effort to
seek redress for what she honestly believed to be an affront to her honor. Surely, it
was difficult and agonizing on her part to come out in the open and accuse her
lawyer of gross immoral conduct. However, her own assessment of the incidents is
highly subjective and partial, and surely needs to be corroborated or supported by
more objective evidence.

Principles Involved:

● Code of Professional Responsibility

○ Rule 1.01 - A lawyer shall not engage in unlawful, dishonest, immoral or deceitful
conduct
○ 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 7.03 - A lawyer shall not engage in conduct that adversely reflects on his
fitness to practice, nor shall he, whether in public or private life, behave in a
scandalous manner to the discredit of the legal profession.

“​Lawyers have been repeatedly reminded that their possession of good moral
character is a continuing condition to preserve their membership in the Bar in good
standing. The continued possession of good moral character is a requisite condition
for remaining in the practice of law”