ASERON,Kentfhil Mae R.

20170151754
LEGAL ETHICS REVIEW
Saturday 5:30 to 7:30PM
Midterm Exam submitted by: ​ASERON, KENTFHIL MAE R

1. A. The IBP of Makati may charge the Lawyer administratively for disbarment
proceeding.
The practice of law is not a natural property or constitutional right but a mere privilege. It
is not a right granted to anyone who demands it but a privilege to be extended or
withheld in the exercise of sound judicial discretion.The attorney’s continued enjoyment
of the privilege conferred depends upon his complying with the ethics and rules of the
profession.

B. The lawyer violated Canon 1 especifically Rule 1.01 of the Code of Professional
Responsibility which provides that It is the duty of all members of the bar to uphold the
Constitution and the laws. A lawyer shall not engage in unlawful, dishonest,immoral and
deceitful conduct.The court defined moral turpitude as “everything which is done contrary
to justice, modesty, or good morals; an act of baseness, vileness or depravity in the
private and social duties which a man owes his fellowmen, or to society in general,
contrary to justice, honesty, modesty, or good morals.

C. Yes, the IBP Disciplinary action is separate and distinct from the DFA’s
recommendation to the President to terminate the services of the Ambassador because
they are different entities thus their aim is different from each other. The iBP aims to
revoke his license as lawyer and the other aims to remove him from office.

D. Yes, the Ambassador may also be charged criminally by his victims of abuse. He may
be charged with grave or less grave offenses for abusing and maltreating the OFW’s
who were stranded in the Philippine Embassy.

2. A. As a practicing lawyer i would advise Mr. Ong to charge Atty Maya Kalapati for
violation of Canon 1 of the Code of Professional Responsibility which provides “A lawyer
shall uphold the constitution, obey the laws of the land and promote respect for law and
legal processes.” Atty. Maya Kalapati failed to obey the laws of the land through
dishonest, immoral and deceitful conduct. It denotes an absence of integrity a disposition
to cheat or defraud others.

B. Canon 1 especifically Rule 1.01 of the Code of Professional Responsibility which

provides that It is the duty of all members of the bar to uphold the Constitution and the
laws. A lawyer shall not engage in unlawful, dishonest,immoral and deceitful conduct.
ASERON,Kentfhil Mae R.
20170151754
C. She may be charged with Gross Immorality and BP 22 for
issuing an unfunded check. It is a conduct that is so corrupt and false as to constitute a
criminal act or so unprincipled. It need not be committed under scandalous
circumstances.

D.She may be charged for specific performance by Mr. Ong for the amount due to him
which Atty. Maya Kalapati failed to return because the check issued to him bounced by
reason of lack of deposits.

3. A. Judge Ali guilty for violating the Code of Professional Responsibility. Lawyers are
expected to conduct themselves with honesty and integrity. More specifically, lawyers in
government service are expected to be more conscientious of their actuations as they
are subject to public scrutiny. They are not only members of the bar but also public
servants who owe utmost fidelity to public service. Government employees are expected
to devote themselves completely to public service.

B. The lawyer violated Canon 6 of the Code of Professional Responsibility which

provides the Canons apply to lawyers in Government Service.Want of moral integrity is
to be more severely condemned in a lawyer who holds a responsible public office.

C. No, he cannot be excused for such a reason. The Code of Professional Responsibility
applies to lawyers in government service in the discharge of their official tasks. Just as
the Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards for Public Officials requires public officials
and employees to process documents and papers expeditiously and prohibits them from
directly or indirectly having a financial or material interest in any transaction requiring the
approval of their office, and likewise bars them from soliciting gifts or anything of
monetary value in the course of any transaction which may be affected by the functions
of their office.

D. Yes, Respondent’s conduct manifestly undermined the people’s confidence in the

public office he is occupying and cast doubt on the integrity of the legal profession. The
ill- conceived use of his connections by using the businessmen who has pending cases
in his sala calls for a criminal action.

4. A. She may file against Judge Juliet Bulito for violation of Canon 7 of the Code of
Professional Responsibility which provides the duty to uphold the dignity of legal
profession. Specifically Rule 7.03 that states that A lawyer shall not engage in conduct
that adversely reflects on his fitness to practice law, nor shall he, whether in public or
private life, behave in a scandalous manner to the discredit of the legal profession.
Canon 7 of the Code of Professional Responsibility commands all lawyers to at all times
uphold the dignity and integrity of the legal profession.

B. Gross immorality reflective of unfitness to practice. A grossly immoral act is one that is
as corrupt and false as to constitute a criminal act or so unprincipled or disgraceful as to
ASERON,Kentfhil Mae R.
20170151754
be reprehensible to a high degree. A lawyer may be disciplined
for any conduct, in his professional or private capacity that renders him unfit to continue
to be an officer of the court.

C.Ria Alonso Anderson may file for Petition for declaration of nullity of marriage or for
legal separation on the grounds that his husband, Jonald is no longer fit to perform all
the obligations a husband must exercise for his wife.

D. Jonald can raise the defense of presumption of innocence, wherein he shall not be
declared guilty inder proven otherwise.

5. A. Atty. Bong cannot exculpate himself from the consequences of his recklessness and
his failure to comply with the requirements of the law by relying on his confidential
secretary. Section 2(b) of Rule IV of the Rules on Notarial Practice of 2004 reads: A
person shall not perform a notarial act if the person involved as signatory to the
instrument or document -
(1) is not in the notary’s presence personally at the time of the notarization; and
(2) 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. The physical
presence of the affiants enables the notary public to verify the genuineness of the
signatures of the acknowledging parties and to ascertain that the document is the
parties’ free act and deed.

Atty Bong is negligent in his duty for allowing office secretaries to perform his notarial
functions, i.e., safekeeping of his notarial dry seal and notarial register. The Court held
that “considering that the responsibility attached to a notary public is sensitive,
respondent should have been more discreet and cautious in the execution of his duties
as such and should not have wholly entrusted everything to the secretaries; otherwise
he should not have been commissioned as notary public.”

B. They can be charged as co-conspirator if it can be established that they wittingly and
willingly did theses acts with complete knowledge that they are not following the
standard procedure which is required for a notary public.

C. This is a ground for disbarment for Atty. Bong because his actions constituted a
violation of the Notarial Law. Notarization is not an empty, meaningless, routinary act. It
is invested with substantive public interest, such that only those who are qualified or
authorized may act as notaries public. Notarization converts a private document into a
public document thus making that document admissible in evidence without further proof
of its authenticity. A notarial document is by law entitled to full faith and credit upon its
face. Courts, administrative agencies and the public at large must be able to rely upon
the acknowledgment executed by a notary public and appended to a private instrument.
ASERON,Kentfhil Mae R.
20170151754
Failure to perform these duties would result in the revocation of
their commission as notaries public.

These formalities are mandatory and cannot be simply neglected, considering the
degree of importance and evidentiary weight attached to notarized documents. Notaries
public entering into their commissions are presumed to be aware of these elementary
requirements.

The others may be given stern warning and shall be abreast with the standard
procedure as well as the requisites.

D. They may be charged with Criminal actions for grave or light offenses for the
execution of documents they are vested with power to do so.

The Notarial Law is explicit on the obligations and duties of notaries public. They are
required to certify that the party to every document acknowledged before them has
presented the proper residence certificate (or exemption from the residence tax); and to
enter its number, place of issue and date as part of such certification. They are also
required to maintain and keep a notarial register; to enter therein all instruments
notarized by them; and to “give to each instrument executed, sworn to, or acknowledged
before [them] a number corresponding to the one in [their] register [and to state therein]
the page or pages of [their] register, on which the same is recorded.”
ASERON,Kentfhil Mae R.
20170151754