U.P.

LAW BOC LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS

U.P. LAW BOC LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
U.P. LAW BOC LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
 U.P. LAW BOC LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS

TABLE OF CONTENTS

LEGAL ETHICS .........................................................1

FORMS .................................................................... 94
A. PRACTICE OF LAW .......................................2
A. DEMAND AND AUTHORIZATION LETTERS ............. 95
1. Concept ..........................................................2
B. CONTRACT OF SALE ........................................ 97
2. Qualifications ..................................................3
C. CONTRACT OF LEASE .................................... 102
3. Continuing requirements for membership in
D. SPECIAL POWER OF ATTORNEY ....................... 103
the bar ..........................................................6
E. VERIFICATION AND CERTIFICATE OF NON-FORUM
4. Appearance of non-lawyers .......................7
SHOPPING .................................................... 106
5. Sanctions for practice or appearance without
F. NOTICE OF HEARING AND EXPLANATION IN MOTIONS
authority ......................................................12
.................................................................. 108
6. Public officials and practice of law ...........12
G. JUDICIAL AFFIDAVIT ....................................... 110
7. Lawyers authorized to represent the
H. NOTARIAL CERTIFICATES: JURAT AND
government ................................................13
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT .................................... 112
8. Lawyer’s oath ...........................................13
I. MOTIONS FOR EXTENSION OF TIME, TO DISMISS,
B. DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF A LAWYER
AND TO DECLARE IN DEFAULT ......................... 115
.....................................................................14
J. QUITCLAIMS IN LABOR CASES ......................... 120
1. Society (Canons 1-6) ...............................14
K. PROMISSORY NOTE ....................................... 121
2. The legal profession .................................23
L. INFORMATION IN CRIMINAL CASES ................... 122
a. Integrated Bar of the Philippines (Rule
M. RETAINER AGREEMENT .............................. 127
139-A) .........................................................23
b. Membership and dues .........................24
c. Upholding the dignity and integrity of the
profession ...................................................25
d. Courtesy, fairness, and candor towards
profesional colleagues ................................26
3. The courts ...................................................30
a. Candor, fairness, and good faith towards
the courts .................................................30
b. Respect for courts and judicial officers
.................................................................32
4. To the Clients ..........................................38
C. SUSPENSION, DISBARMENT, AND
DISCIPLINE OF LAWYERS .........................60
D. READMISSION TO THE BAR ................................65
E. MANDATORY CONTINUING LEGAL EDUCATION
.....................................................................66
F. NOTARIAL PRACTICE ........................................70
G. DUTIES OF LAWYERS UNDER SPECIFIC PROVISIONS
IN THE RULES OF COURT ...................................75

JUDICIAL ETHICS ...................................................80

A. SOURCES .......................................................81
B. QUALITIES (CODE OF JUDICIAL CONDUCT) ...........81
C. ADMINISTRATIVE JURISDICTION OVER JUDGES AND
JUSTICES ........................................................83
D. DISQUALIFICATION OF JUDICIAL OFFICERS ..........85
E. DISCIPLINE OF MEMBERS OF THE JUDICIARY
.....................................................................87
U.P. LAW BOC LEGAL ETHICS LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS

LEGAL ETHICS
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL
ETHICS

Page 1 of 129
 U.P. LAW BOC LEGAL ETHICS
A. PRACTICE OF LAW
1. Concept
The practice of law is any activity, in or out of
court, which requires the application of law,
legal procedure, knowledge, training and
experience. It is to give notice or render any
kind of service, which device or service
requires the use in any degree of legal
knowledge or skill [Cayetano v. Monsod, G.R.
No. 100113 (1991)].
According to Justice Padilla, in his dissent in
Cayetano v. Monsod, the following factors are
considered in determining whether there is
practice of law:
1. Habituality – implies customarily or
habitually holding one's self out to the
public as a lawyer.
2. Application of law, legal principles,
practice or procedure – calls for legal
knowledge, training and experience.
3. Compensation – implies that one must
have presented himself to be in the active
and continued practice of the legal
profession and that his professional
services are available to the public for
compensation, as a service for his
livelihood or in consideration of his said
services.
4. Attorney-client relationship
The test is the activity, NOT who/what he or
she is.
When lawyers teach law, they are considered
engaged in the practice of law. Their actions as
law professors must be measured against the
same canons of professional responsibility as
the fact of their being law professors is
inextricably entwined with the fact that they are
lawyers. [Re: Letter of the UP Law Faculty:
“Restoring Integrity: A statement by the Faculty
of the UP College of Law on the allegations of
plagiarism and misrepresentation in the SC”,
A.M. No. 10-10-4-SC (2011)].
Page 2 of 129
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
a. Privilege, not right
The right to practice law is not a natural or
constitutional right but is a privilege. It is
limited to persons of good moral character with
special qualifications duly ascertained and
certified. The exercise of this privilege
presupposes possession of integrity, legal
knowledge, educational attainment, and even
public trust since a lawyer is an officer of the
court. A bar candidate who is morally unfit
cannot practice law even if he passes the bar
examinations [Aguirre v. Rana, B.M. No. 1036
(2003)].
While the practice of law is not a right but a
privilege, the Court will not unwarrantedly
withhold this privilege from individuals who
have shown mental fitness and moral fiber to
withstand the rigors of the profession [In re:
Michael Medado, B.M. No. 2540 (2013)].
Respondent falsely used complainant's name,
identity, and school records to gain admission
to the Bar. Since complainant — the real
"Patrick A. Caronan" never took the Bar
Examinations, the IBP correctly recommended
that the name "Patrick A. Caronan" be stricken
off the Roll of Attorneys. The Court does not
discount the possibility that respondent may
later on complete his college education and
earn a law degree under his real name.
However, his false assumption of his brother's
name, identity, and educational records
renders him unfit for admission to the Bar. The
practice of law, after all, is not a natural,
absolute or constitutional right to be
granted to everyone who demands it.
Rather, it is a privilege limited to citizens of
good moral character [Caronan v. Caronan,
A.C No. 11316 (2016)].
b. Profession, not business
Lawyering is not a business; it is a profession
in which duty to public service, not money,
is the primary consideration. The practice of
law is a noble calling in which emolument is a
byproduct, and the highest eminence may be
attained without making much money [Burbe v.
Magulta, A. C. No. 99-634 (2002)].
 U.P. LAW BOC LEGAL ETHICS
Atty. Ancheta should have advised
complainants to accept the judgment of the
Court of Appeals and accord respect to the just
claim of the opposite party. He should have
tempered his clients' propensity to litigate and
save them from additional expense in pursuing
their contemplated action. Instead, he gave
them confident assurances that the case could
still be reopened and even furnished them a
copy of his prepared "motion to reopen case."
Despite receipt of the P30,000 acceptance fee,
he did not act on his client's case. Moreover,
he prevailed upon complainants to give him
P200,000.00 purportedly to be used to bribe
the Justices of the Court of Appeals in order to
secure a favorable ruling, palpably showing
that he himself was unconvinced of the merits
of the case. Atty. Ancheta's misconduct
betrays his lack of appreciation that the
practice of law is a profession, not a money-
making trade [Spouses Tolentino v. Atty.
Ancheta, A.C. No. No. 6387 (2016)].
2. Qualifications
Section 1, Rule 138, Rules of Court. Who may
practice law. – 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.
Sec. 2, Rule 138. Requirements for all
applicants for admission to the bar. – Every
applicant for admission as a member of the bar
must be a citizen of the Philippines, at least
twenty-one years of age, of good moral
character, and a resident of the Philippines; and
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.
Page 3 of 129
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
Requisites for admission to the bar:
a. Citizenship;
b. Residence: his/her duties to his client and
to the court will require that he/she be
readily accessible and available;
c. Age (at least 21 years old): maturity and
discretion are required in the practice of
law;
d. Good moral character and no charges
involving moral turpitude;
The purposes for this requirement are:
1. To protect the public;
2. To protect the public image of lawyers;
3. To protect prospective clients; and
4. To protect errant lawyers from
themselves [Dantes v. Dantes, A.C.
No. 6486 (2004)].
e. Legal education (consisting of pre-law and
law proper);
f. Pass the bar examinations;
g. Take the lawyer’s oath;
h. Sign the roll of attorneys.
Legal education
Pre-law [Sec. 6, Rule 138]
Applicant must present a certificate that he or
she had pursued and satisfactorily completed
in an authorized and recognized university or
college, the course of study prescribed therein
for a bachelor's degree in arts or sciences.
• The university or college must require for
admission the completion of a 4-year high
school course.
If a Filipino citizen completed and obtained his
or her Bachelor of Laws degree or its
equivalent in a foreign law school, he must also
present proof of completion of a separate
bachelor’s degree course.
Law Proper [Sec. 5, Rule 138]
Must satisfactorily show that they completed all
the prescribed courses for a degree of
Bachelor of Laws (or its equivalent)
• In a law school or university recognized by
the government or the proper authority in
the foreign jurisdiction where the degree
has been granted
Prescribed courses for a Bachelor of Laws
degree:
 U.P. LAW BOC LEGAL ETHICS
a. Civil law
b. Commercial law
c. Remedial law
d. Criminal law
e. Public and private international law
f. Political law
g. Labor and social legislation
h. Medical jurisprudence
i. Taxation
j. Legal ethics
A Filipino citizen who graduated from a foreign
law school must submit to the SC certifications
showing:
a. Completion of all courses leading to the
degree of Bachelor of Laws or its
equivalent degree;
b. Recognition or accreditation of the law
school by the proper authority; and
c. Completion of all the fourth year subjects in
the Bachelor of Laws academic program in
a law school duly recognized by the
Philippine Government.
Legal Education Board
Under R.A. No. 7662 (Legal Education Reform
Act of 1993), the Legal Education Board (LEB)
was created in order to uplift the standards of
legal education by undertaking appropriate
reforms in the legal education system,
requiring proper selection of law students,
maintaining quality among law schools, and
requiring legal apprenticeship and continuing
legal education.
In Dec. 2016, LEB promulgated LEB
Memorandum Order No. 7, Series of 2016
which required the Philippine Law School
Admission Test (PhilSAT) as a prerequisite for
admission to the basic law courses leading
either to a Bachelor of Laws or Juris Doctor
degree beginning school year 2017-2018.
However, the SC declared LEB Memorandum
Order No. 7 as unconstitutional, as it “usurps
the right and duty of the law school to
determine for itself the criteria for the
admission of students and thereafter, to apply
such criteria on a case-to-case basis.”
[Pimentel v. Legal Education Board, G.R. Nos.
230642 & 242954 (2019)]
Page 4 of 129
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
The following powers of the LEB were also
declared unconstitutional:
● The authority over continuing legal
education;
● The authority over increasing awareness
among members of the legal profession of
the needs of the poor, deprived and
oppressed sectors of society;
● The authority to establish a law practice
internship as a requirement for taking the
Bar;
● The authority to adopt a system of
mandatory continuing legal education;
● The act and practice of excluding,
restricting, and qualifying admissions to
law schools;
● The act and practice of dictating the
qualifications and classification of faculty
members and deans;
● The act and practice of dictating the
policies on the establishment of legal
apprenticeship and legal internship
programs.
Bar examinations
All applicants for admission shall file with the
clerk of the Supreme Court the evidence
required under Sec. 2 at least 15 days before
the beginning of the examination. If the
applicant is not covered by Secs. 3 and 4, they
shall also file within the same period the
affidavit and certificate required by Sec. 5 [Sec.
7, Rule 138, RoC].
The clerk of the Supreme Court shall publish
the notice of applications for admission in
newspapers published in Filipino, English and
Spanish, for at least 10 days before the
beginning of the examination [Sec. 8, Rule 138,
RoC].
Examinees shall not bring papers, books or
notes into the examination rooms. The
questions shall be the same for all examinees
and a copy thereof, in English or Spanish, shall
be given to each examinee. Examinees shall
answer the questions personally without help
from anyone.
 U.P. LAW BOC LEGAL ETHICS LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS

Upon verified application made by an The relative weights of the subjects used in
examinee stating that his penmanship is so determining the average are as follows:
poor that it will be difficult to read his answers Subject %
without much loss of time, the Supreme Court
may allow such examinee to use a typewriter in Civil Law 15%
answering the questions. Only noiseless
typewriters shall be allowed to be used. Labor and Social Legislation 10%

The committee of bar examines shall take such Mercantile Law 15%
precautions as are necessary to prevent the Criminal Law 10%
substitution of papers or commission of other
frauds. Examinees shall not place their names Political and International Law 15%
on the examination papers. No oral
examination shall be given [Sec. 10, Rule 138, Taxation 10%
RoC].
Remedial Law 20%
Examination for admission to the bar of the
Legal and Ethics and Practical 5%
Philippines shall take place annually in the City
Exercises
of Manila. They shall be held in 4 days to be
designated by the chairman of the committee
on bar examiners [Sec. 11, Rule 138, RoC]. Examinations shall be conducted by a
committee of bar examiners to be appointed by
the Supreme Court. This committee shall be
Political and
Morning composed of a Justice of the Supreme Court
First International Law
as chairman, and 8 members of the bar, who
Day Labor and Social shall hold office for a period of one year. The
Afternoon names of the members of this committee shall
Legislation
be published in each volume of the official
Morning Civil Law reports [Sec. 12, Rule 138, RoC].
Second
Day Afternoon Taxation Pursuant to B.M. No. 1161 (2004), 2 examiners
are designated per bar subject.
Morning Mercantile Law
Third
Day The Bar Confidant acts as a sort of liaison
Afternoon Criminal Law officer between the court and the Bar Chairman
on one hand, and the individual members of the
Morning Remedial law committee on the other. He is at the same time
Fourth
Legal Ethics and a deputy clerk of court.
Day Afternoon
Practical Exercises
Not later than February 15th after the
examination, or as soon thereafter as may be
A candidate is deemed to have passed his practicable, the committee shall file its report
examinations successfully if he obtained a on the result of such examination. The
general average of 75% in all subjects, without examination papers and notes of the
falling below 50% in any subject [Sec. 14, Rule committee shall be filed with the clerk and may
138, RoC]. there be examined by the parties in interest,
after the court has approved the report [Sec.
15, Rule 138, RoC].

Candidates who have failed the bar

examinations 3 times shall be disqualified from

Page 5 of 129
 U.P. LAW BOC LEGAL ETHICS
taking another examination, provided that they
may take a 4th and 5th examination if they
show to the satisfaction of the court that they
have enrolled in and passed regular 4th year
review classes as well as attended a pre-bar
review course in a recognized law school for
each examination [Sec. 16, Rule 138, RoC, as
amended by B.M. No. 1161 (2004)].
No candidate shall endeavor to influence any
member of the committee, and during
examination, the candidates shall not
communicate with each other nor shall they
give or receive any assistance. Any violator
shall be barred from the examination, and the
same to count as a failure against him, and
further disciplinary action may be taken in the
discretion of the court [Sec. 13, Rule 138,
RoC].
Under R.A. No. 1080 (An Act Declaring the Bar
and Board Examinations as Civil Service
Examinations), as amended by R.A. No. 1844,
the Bar examinations is declared as civil
service examinations equivalent to:
1. First grade regular examination for
appointment to a position which requires
proficiency in law; and
2. Second grade regular examination for
appointment to a position which does not
require proficiency in law.
3. Continuing requirements for
membership in the bar
a. Good moral character
Absence of a proven conduct or act which has
been historically and traditionally considered
as a manifestation of moral turpitude. The act
or conduct need not amount to a crime; and
even if it does constitute an offense, a
conviction upon a criminal charge is not
necessary to demonstrate bad moral character
although it may show moral depravity [“Legal
and Judicial Ethics” by Agpalo (2004)].
This requirement is not only a condition
precedent to admission to the practice of
law, its continued possession is also
Page 6 of 129
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
essential for remaining in the practice of
law. Good moral character is what a person
really is, as distinguished from good reputation,
the estimate in which he is held by the public in
the place where he is known [In the Matter of
the Disqualification of Bar Examinee Haron S.
Meling In The 2002 Bar Examinations and For
Disciplinary Action As Member of The
Philippine Shari’a Bar, B.M. No. 1154 (2004)].
All aspects of moral character and behavior
may be inquired into in respect of those
seeking admission to the Bar. The scope of
such inquiry is, indeed, said to be properly
broader than inquiry into the moral proceedings
for disbarment. The requirement of good
moral character to be satisfied by those
who would seek admission to the bar must
of necessity be more stringent than the
norm of conduct expected from members of
the general public. The Supreme Court may
deny lawyer’s oath-taking based on a
conviction for reckless imprudence resulting in
homicide (hazing case). But after the expiry of
the original period of probation granted by the
trial court, he may be allowed to submit, for the
Court’s examination and consideration,
relevant evidence to show that he is a different
person now, that he has become morally fit for
admission to the ancient and learned
profession of the law [In re: Argosino, A.M. No.
712 (1997)].
Question of moral turpitude is for the Supreme
Court to decide, which is why applicants are
required to disclose any crime which they have
been charged. Concealment or withholding
from the Court information about charges and
indictments is a ground for disqualification of
applicant or for revocation of license [Agpalo
2004].
By concealing pending criminal cases, the
applicant (in a petition to take the Bar
Examinations) then flunks the test of fitness
even if the cases are ultimately proven to be
unwarranted or insufficient to impugn or affect
the good moral character of the applicant [In
the Matter of the Disqualification of Bar
Examinee Haron S. Meling In The 2002 Bar
Examinations and For Disciplinary Action As
 U.P. LAW BOC LEGAL ETHICS
Member of The Philippine Shari’a Bar, B.M.
No. 1154 (2004)].
As officers of the court, lawyers must not only
in fact be of good moral character but must also
be seen to be of good moral character and
leading lives in accordance with the highest
moral standards of the community. As
keepers of public faith, lawyers are burdened
with a high degree of social responsibility and,
hence, must handle their personal affairs with
great caution. [Dela Fuente Torres v. Dalangin,
A.C. No. 10758 (2017)].
b. Citizenship; reacquisition of the
privilege to practice law in the
Philippines
The practice of all professions in the
Philippines shall be limited to Filipino citizens
save in cases prescribed by law [Sec. 14, Art.
XII, 1987 Constitution].
Ratio: Citizenship ensures allegiance to the
Republic and its laws.
Filipino citizenship is a requirement for
admission to the bar and is, in fact, a
continuing requirement for the practice of
law. The loss thereof means termination of the
petitioner’s membership in the bar; ipso jure
the privilege to engage in the practice of law…
Thus, a Filipino lawyer who becomes a
citizen of another country and later re-
acquires his Philippine citizenship under
R.A. No. 9225, remains to be a member of
the Philippine Bar. However, the right to
resume the practice of law is not automatic.
R.A. No. 9225 provides that a person who
intends to practice his profession in the
Philippines must apply with the proper authority
for a license or permit to engage in such
practice [In re: Petition to re-acquire the
privilege to practice law in the Philippines of
Muneses, B.M. No. 2112 (2012)].
In In re: Petition to re-acquire the privilege to
practice law in the Philippines of Muneses, in
pursuance to the qualifications laid down by the
Court for the practice of law, the Office of the
Bar Confidant required Muneses to submit the
Page 7 of 129
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
original or certified true copies of the following
documents in relation to his petition:
1. Petition for Re-Acquisition of Philippine
Citizenship;
2. Order (for Re-Acquisition of Philippine
citizenship);
3. Oath of Allegiance to the Republic of the
Philippines;
4. Identification Certificate issued by the
Bureau of Immigration;
5. Certificate of Good Standing issued by the
IBP;
6. Certification from the IBP indicating
updated payments of annual membership
dues;
7. Proof of payment of professional tax; and
8. Certificate of compliance issued by the
MCLE office.
These documents will be submitted to the OBC
and will be reviewed by the Court en banc for
resolution.
Before a lawyer who reacquires Filipino
citizenship pursuant to R.A. No. 9225 can
resume his law practice, he must first secure
from this Court the authority to do so,
conditioned on:
1. the updating and payment in full of the
annual membership dues in the IBP;
2. the payment of professional tax;
3. the completion of at least 36 credit hours of
mandatory continuing legal education; this
is especially significant to refresh the
applicant/petitioner’s knowledge of
Philippine laws and update him of legal
developments; and
4. the retaking of the lawyer’s oath which will
not only remind him of his duties and
responsibilities as a lawyer and as an
officer of the Court, but also renew his
pledge to maintain allegiance to the
Republic of the Philippines.
Compliance with these conditions will restore
his good standing as a member of the
Philippine bar [Petition for Leave to Resume
Practice of Law of Dacanay, B.M. No. 1678
(2007)].
 U.P. LAW BOC LEGAL ETHICS
4. Appearance of non-lawyers
General rule: Only members of the bar can
appear and handle cases in court
Exceptions: The following are also allowed in
exceptional circumstances:
a. Law students;
b. By an agent/friend;
c. By the litigant himself.
a. Law student practice [Revised
Law Student Practice Rule
(Rule 138-A)]
The limited practice of law covers
appearances, drafting and submission of
pleadings and documents before trial and
appellate courts and quasi-judicial and
administrative bodies, assistance in mediation
and other alternative modes of dispute
resolution, legal counselling and advice, and
such other activities that may be covered by the
Clinical Legal Education Program of the law
school. [Sec. 1, Rule 138-A, RoC].
Clinical Legal Education Program is an
experiential, interactive and reflective credit-
earning teaching course with the objectives of
providing law students with practical
knowledge, skills and values necessary for the
application of the law, delivery of legal services
and promotion of social justice and public
interest, especially to the marginalized, while
inculcating in the students the values of ethical
lawyering and public service. It consists of
learning activities covered by this Rule
undertaken in either 1) law clinic or an 2)
externship, which shall incorporate the
teaching of legal theory and doctrines, practical
skills, as well as legal ethics [Sec. 2(a), Rule
138-A, RoC].
Externship is part of the clinical legal
educational program if: (a) it allows students to
engage in legal work for the marginalized
sectors or for the promotion of social justice
and public interest, and (b) it is undertaken with
any of the following: (i) the courts, the
Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP),
Page 8 of 129
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
government offices; and (ii) law school-
recognized non-governmental organizations
(NGOs) [Sec. 2(b), Rule 138-A, RoC].
Law Clinic refers to an office or center which is
a component of the law school's clinical legal
education program that renders legal
assistance and services as herein provided to
eligible persons, groups, and/or communities
[Sec. 2(c), Rule 138-A, RoC].
Law Student Practitioner is a law student
certified under Section 3 of this Rule [Sec. 2(d),
Rule 138-A, RoC].
Law students are required to apply for and
secure the following certifications to engage in
activities under the Clinical Legal Education
Program:
a. Level 1 certification, for law students who
have successfully completed their first-year
law courses; and/ or
b. Level 2 certification, for law students
currently enrolled for the second semester
of their third-year law courses: Provided
however, where a student fails to complete
all their third-year law courses, the Level 2
certification shall be deemed automatically
revoked.
The certification issued shall be valid until the
student has completed the required number of
courses in the clinical legal education program
to complete the law degree, unless sooner
revoked for grounds stated herein [Sec. 3, Rule
138-A, RoC].
A certified law student practitioner may:
1. For Level 1 Certification
a. Interview prospective clients;
b. Give legal advice to the client;
c. Negotiate for and on behalf of the
client;
d. Draft legal documents such as
affidavits, compromise agreements,
contracts, letter, position papers, and
the like;
e. Represent eligible parties quasi-judicial
or administrative bodies;
f. Provide public legal orientation; and
 U.P. LAW BOC LEGAL ETHICS
g. Assist in public interest advocacies for
policy formulation and implementation.
2. For Level 2 Certification
a. Perform all activities under Level 1
Certification;
b. Assist in the taking of depositions
and/or preparing judicial affidavits of
witnesses;
c. Appear on behalf of the client at any
stage of the proceedings or trial, before
any court, quasi-judicial or
administrative body;
d. In criminal cases, subject to the
provisions Section 5, Rule 110 of the
Rules of Court, to appear on behalf of
a government agency in the
prosecution of criminal actions; and
e. In appealed cases, to prepare the
pleadings required in the case [Sec. 4,
Rule 138-A, RoC].
The law student must submit:
1. A duly accomplished application form,
2. Under oath,
3. In three copies,
4. Accompanied by proof of payment of the
necessary legal and filing fees.
The law school shall submit to the Office of the
Executive Judge of the proper RTC the
application form with endorsement under oath.
The Executive Judge evaluates, approves, and
issues the certification within 10 days from
receipts, and, for Level 2 Certification, s/he
recommends to the OCA the approval and
issuance of the certification.
The Level 1 Certification is valid before all
courts, quasi-judicial and administrative bodies
within the judicial region where the law school
is located, while the Level 2 Certification is valid
before all such courts and bodies in the
Philippines [Sec. 5, Rule 138-A, RoC].
The duties of law student practitioners are:
1. To observe Sec. 24(b), Rule 130, RoC
2. To be prohibited from using information
acquired in one’s capacity as law student
practitioner for personal or commercial
gain
Page 9 of 129
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
3. To perform the duties and responsibilities
to the best of one’s abilities as a law
student practitioner, and
4. To strictly observe the Canons of the CPR
[Sec. 6, Rule 138-A, RoC].
A law student practitioner may sign briefs,
pleadings, letters, and other similar documents
which the student has produced under the
direction of the supervising lawyer, indicating
the law student practitioner's certificate number
[Sec. 7, Rule 138-A, RoC].
The Law Student Practitioner’s
Oath/Affirmation is to be taken before
performing the activities allowed in the
certification [Sec. 8, Rule 138-A, RoC].
Unauthorized practice of law shall be a ground
for revocation of the law student practitioner's
certification and/or disqualification for a law
student from taking the bar examination for a
period to be determined by the Supreme Court.
Supervising Lawyer refers to a member of the
Philippine Bar in good standing who is
authorized by the law school to supervise the
law student practitioner under this Rule [Sec.
2(e), Rule 138-A, RoC].
A supervising lawyer shall be a member of the
bar in good standing [Sec. 10, Rule 138-A,
RoC].
The duties of a supervising lawyer are:
1. Supervise such number of certified law
student practitioners as far practicable;
2. Personally appear with the law student
practitioner in all cases pending before the
second- courts and in all other cases the
lawyer determines that his or her presence
is required;
3. Assume personal professional
responsibility for any work performed by
the certified law student practitioner while
under his or her supervision;
4. Assist and advise the certified law student
practitioner in the activities authorized by
these rules and review such activities with
the certified law student practitioner, all to
the extent required for the proper practical
 U.P. LAW BOC LEGAL ETHICS
training of the certified law student
practitioner and the protection of the client;
5. Read, approve, and personally sign any
pleadings, briefs or other similar
documents prepared by the certified law
student practitioner prior to the filing
thereof, and read and approve any
documents which shall be prepared by the
certified law student practitioner for
execution by the eligible party; and
6. Provide the level of supervision to the
certified law student practitioner required
by these rules [Sec. 11, Rule 138-A. RoC].
Without prejudice to existing laws, rules,
regulations, and circulars, the following shall be
considered as unauthorized practice of law by
a certified law student practitioner—
1. Engaging in any of the acts provided in
Section 4 of this Rule without the
necessary certification or without the
consent and supervision of the supervising
lawyer;
2. Making false representations in
certification;
3. Using an expired legal scope of the
practice areas allowed under Section 4 of
this Rule;
4. Rendering legal services outside the scope
of the practice areas allowed under Section
4 of this Rule;
5. Asking for or receiving payment or
compensation for services rendered under
the Clinical Legal Education Program as
provided in this Rule; and
6. Such other analogous circumstances.
The above provisions notwithstanding, any act
constituting a violation of the CPR shall subject
the supervising lawyer, Clinical Legal
Education Program Head, and/or law school
dean to disciplinary action, as the
circumstances may warrant [Sec. 12, Rule
138-A. RoC].
Sec. 34, Rule 138, RoC is clear that
appearance before the inferior courts by a non-
lawyer is allowed, irrespective of whether or not
he is a law student. Thus, a law student may
appear under the circumstances of Sec. 38, as
an agent or a friend of a party litigant, without
Page 10 of 129
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
complying with the requirements of Rule 138-
A, e.g., supervision of a lawyer [Cruz v. Mina,
G.R. No. 154207 (2007)].
b. Non-lawyers in courts
Pursuant to Sec. 34, Rule 138, RoC, in any
court, a party may conduct his litigation in
person.
Before the MTC – A party may conduct his
case or litigation in person with the aid of an
agent or friend appointed by him.
! The agent or friend is not engaged in the
practice of law, since there is no habituality
in the activity and no attorney-client
relationship exists.
In any other court – A party may conduct his
litigation personally.
A non-lawyer conducting his own litigation is
bound by the same rules in conducting the trial
of his case. He cannot, after judgment, claim
that he was not properly represented [Agpalo
(2004)].
An attorney who is otherwise disqualified to
practice law, or has been disbarred or
suspended from practice, can validly prosecute
or defend his own litigation, he having as much
right as that of a layman [Danforth v. Egan, 119
N.W. 1021 (1909)].
When a person conducts his litigation in
person, he is not engaged in the practice of law
[Agpalo (2004)].
Sec. 34, Rule 138, RoC does not distinguish
between civil and criminal cases. However,
in criminal cases, the rule is qualified:
1. Under Sec. 1(c), Rule 115, RoC, the
accused may defend himself in person
“when it sufficiently appears to the court
that he can properly protect his rights
without the assistance of counsel.”
2. Under Sec. 7, Rule 116, RoC, in
determining whether a counsel de officio
should be appointed, or, for that matter,
whether a counsel de parte should be
required (conversely, whether the accused
 U.P. LAW BOC LEGAL ETHICS
should be allowed to defend himself in
person), the gravity of the offense and the
difficulty of the questions that may arise
should be considered.
While the right to be represented by
counsel is immutable, the option to secure
the services of counsel de parte is not
absolute. The court may restrict the accused’s
option to retain a counsel de parte if:
1. He insists on an attorney he cannot afford;
2. He chooses a person not a member of the
bar;
3. The attorney declines for a valid reason
(e.g., conflict of interest) [People v. Serzo,
G.R. No. 118435 (1997)].
In criminal cases, in localities where members
of the bar are not available, the court may
appoint any person (i.e., non-lawyer), who is a
resident of the province and of good repute for
probity and ability to defend the accused, in lieu
of a counsel de officio [Sec. 7, Rule 116, RoC].
In relation to Sec. 34, Rule 138, this is only
allowed in the municipal trial court.
A juridical person must always appear in court
through a duly licensed member of the bar,
except in the MTC where it may be represented
by a non-lawyer agent.
c. Non-lawyers in administrative
tribunals and labor tribunals
There are laws which allow representation of
another by non-lawyers before such bodies:
1. Art. 222, Labor Code allows non-lawyers to
appear before the NLRC or any Labor
Arbiter if (a) they represent themselves, or
(b) they represent their organizations
members.
The 2011 NLRC Rule of Procedure,
promulgated pursuant to Art 225(a), Labor
Code, allows (a) non-lawyers, who are not
necessarily a party to the case, to
represent a union or members thereof, (b)
non-lawyers who are duly-accredited
members of any legal aid office recognized
by the Department of Justice or IBP, and
Page 11 of 129
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
(c) non-lawyer owners of establishments,
to appear before it.
2. Under Sec. 9, Act 2259 (Cadastral Act), a
claimant may appear by himself, or by
some person on his behalf, before a
cadastral court.
3. Under Sec. 50, R.A. No. 6657
(Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law), as
amended by R.A. No. 9700, responsible
farmer leaders shall be allowed to
represent themselves, their fellow farmers,
or their organizations in any proceedings
before the DAR: provided, however, that
when there are two or more
representatives for any individual or group,
the representatives should choose only
one among themselves to represent such
party or group before any DAR
proceedings.
In order that these laws will not infringe upon
the power of the Supreme Court to regulate the
practice of law, the following limitations must
be observed:
1. The non-lawyer should confine his work to
non-adversary contentions and should not
undertake purely legal work (i.e.,
examination of witness, presentation of
evidence);
2. The services should not be habitual;
3. Attorney’s fees should not be charged
[Agpalo (2004)].
d. Proceedings where lawyers are
prohibited from appearing
1. In small claims cases, no attorney shall
appear on behalf of or represent a party at
the hearing, unless the attorney is the
plaintiff or defendant. If the court
determines that a party cannot properly
present his/her claim or defense and needs
assistance, the court may, in its discretion,
allow another individual who is not an
attorney to assist that party upon the
latter's consent [Sec. 17, Rules of
Procedure in Small Claims Cases].
2. In all katarungang pambarangay
proceedings, the parties must appear in
 U.P. LAW BOC LEGAL ETHICS
person without the assistance of the
counsel or representative, except for
minors and incompetents who may be
assisted by their next of kin who are not
lawyers [Sec 415, R.A. No. 7160 (Local
Government Code)].
5. Sanctions for practice or
appearance without authority
a. Lawyers without authority
Under Sec. 27, Rule 138, RoC, corruptly or
willfully appearing as an attorney for a party to
a case without authority to do so is a ground
for disbarment or suspension.
b. Persons not lawyers
For BOTH persons who are not lawyers
AND lawyers who appear without authority,
the following may be availed of:
1. Petition for injunction
2. Declaratory relief
3. Contempt of court [Sec. 3 (e), Rule 71,
RoC]
4. Administrative complaint against the erring
lawyer or government official
5. Criminal complaint for estafa against the
person who falsely represented himself as
a lawyer to the damage of another
6. Public officials and practice
of law
a. Prohibition or disqualification
of former government attorneys
General Rule: The appointment or election of
an attorney to a government office disqualifies
him from engaging in the private practice of
law.
Page 12 of 129
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
Under Sec. 7(b), R.A. No. 6713 (Code of
Conduct and Ethical Standards for Public
Officials and Employees), public officials and
employees during their incumbency shall not:
1. Own, control, manage or accept
employment as officer employee,
consultant, counsel, broker, agent, trustee
or nominee in any private enterprise
regulated, supervised or licensed by their
office, unless expressly allowed by law;
2. 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;
3. Recommend any person to any position in
a private enterprise which has a regular or
pending official transaction with their office.
These prohibitions shall continue to apply for a
period of 1 year after resignation, retirement or
separation from public office, except in case of
the second.
The 1-year prohibition also applies to practice
of profession in connection with any matter
before the office he used to be with.
Absolute prohibition on public officials who
cannot practice law
1. Judges and other officials or employees of
superior courts as [Sec. 35, Rule 148,
RoC];
2. Officials and employees of the Office of the
Solicitor General [Sec. 35, Rule 148, RoC];
3. Government prosecutors [Lim-Santiago v.
Sagucio, A.C. No. 6705 (2006)];
4. President, vice-president, cabinet
members, their deputies and assistants
[Sec. 15, Art. VII, 1987 Constitution];
5. Chairmen and members of constitutional
commissions [Sec. 2, Art. IX-A, 1987
Constitution];
6. Members of the Judicial and Bar Council
[Sec. 2, Art. IX-A, 1987 Constitution];
7. Ombudsman and his deputies [par. 2, Sec.
8 (2), Art. X, 1987 Constitution];
8. All governors, city and municipal mayors
[Sec. 90(a), R.A. No. 7160];
9. Civil service officers or employees whose
duties require them to devote their entire
 U.P. LAW BOC LEGAL ETHICS
time at the disposal of the government
[Catu v. Rellosa, A.C. No. 5738 (2008)];
10. Those who, by special law, are prohibited
from engaging in the practice of their legal
profession.
Relative prohibition on public officials who
can practice law with restrictions
1. No senator or member of the House of
Representatives may personally appear
as counsel before any court of justice or
before the Electoral Tribunals, or quasi-
judicial and other administrative bodies
[Sec. 14, Art. VI, 1987 Constitution]
! The word “appearance” includes not
only arguing a case before any such
body, but also filing a pleading on
behalf of a client [Ramos v. Manalac,
G.R. No. L-2610 (1951)].
! Neither can he allow his name to
appear in the pleading as part of a firm
name, because the office of an
attorney being originally of agency,
amounts to the signing of a non-
qualified senator or congressman [In
Re: David, AM No. 98 (1953)].
2. Sanggunian members may practice law
except during session hours and provided
they shall not:
a. Appear as counsel before any court in
any civil case wherein a local
government unit or any office, 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 [Sec. 90(b), R.A. No.
7160].
3. Under Sec. 1, R.A. No. 910, the pension of
justices therein is provided with a condition
Page 13 of 129
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
that no retiring justice, during the time
that he is receiving said pension shall:
a. Appear as counsel before any court in
any civil case wherein the Government
or any subdivision or instrumentality
thereof is the adverse party;
b. In any criminal case wherein and
officer or employee of the government
is accused of an offense committed in
relation to his office; or
c. Collect any fee for his appearance in
any administrative proceedings to
maintain an interest adverse to the
Government, insular, provincial or
municipal, or to any of its legally
constituted officers.
4. There are civil employees whose duty do
not require that their entire time be at the
disposal of the government. Absent any
express prohibition in law, they can
practice law, provided they secure a written
permit from their department head [Zeta v.
Malinao, AM. No P-220(1978)].
7. Lawyers authorized to
represent the government
Any official or other person appointed or
designated in accordance with law to
appear for the Government of the
Philippines shall have all the rights of a duly
authorized member of the bar to appear in any
case in which said government has an interest
direct or indirect [Sec. 33, Rule 138, RoC].
8. Lawyer’s oath
An applicant who has passed the required
examination, or has been otherwise found to
be entitled to admission to the bar, shall take
and subscribe before the Supreme Court the
corresponding oath of office [Sec. 17, Rule
138, RoC].
The lawyer's 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: Argosino, supra].
 U.P. LAW BOC LEGAL ETHICS
I, ____________________ do solemnly swear
that I will maintain allegiance to the Republic
of the Philippines; I will support the
Constitution and obey the laws as well as the
legal orders of the duly constituted
authorities therein; I will do no falsehood, nor
consent to the doing of any in court; I will not
wittingly or willingly promote or sue any
groundless, false or unlawful suit, nor 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 as to courts as to my clients;
and I impose upon myself this voluntary
obligation without any mental reservation or
purpose of evasion. So help me God.
B. DUTIES AND
RESPONSIBILITIES OF
A LAWYER
Under the Sec. 20, Rule 138, RoC, it is the duty
of an attorney:
1. To maintain allegiance to the Republic of
the Philippines and to support the
Constitution and obey the laws of the
Philippines;
2. To observe and maintain the respect due
to the courts of justice and judicial officers;
3. To counsel or maintain such actions or
proceedings only as appear to him to be
just, and such defenses only as he believes
to be honestly debatable under the law;
4. To employ, for the purpose of maintaining
the causes confided to him, such means
only as are consistent with truth and honor,
and never seek to mislead the judge or any
judicial officer by an artifice or false
statement of fact or law;
5. To maintain inviolate the confidence, and
at every peril to himself, to preserve the
secrets of his client, and to accept no
compensation in connection with his
client’s business except from him or with
his knowledge and approval;
6. To abstain from all offensive personality
and to advance no fact prejudicial to the
honor or reputation of a party or witness,
Page 14 of 129
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
unless required by the justice of the cause
with which he is charge;
7. 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;
8. Never to reject, for any consideration
personal to himself, the cause of the
defenseless or oppressed;
9. In the defense of a person accused of
crime, by all fair and honorable means,
regardless of his personal opinion as to the
guilt of the accused, to present every
defense that the law permits, to the end
that no person may be deprived of life or
liberty, but by due process of law.
1. Society (Canons 1-6)
a. Respect for law and legal
processes
CANON 1. A lawyer shall uphold the
Constitution, obey the laws of the land and
promote respect for law and legal process.
Note: Canon 1 is the 4th top source of
Questions on the CPR. It was asked 21 times
in the last 25 years as of 2017 [Lex Pareto
(2017)].
Freedom of speech and of expression, like all
constitutional freedoms, is not absolute and
that freedom of expression needs on occasion
to be adjusted to and accommodated with the
requirements of equally important public
interests. One of these fundamental public
interests is the maintenance of the integrity and
orderly functioning of the administration of
justice [Zaldivar v. Gonzales, G.R. No. Nos.
79690-707 and 80578 (1988)].
The responsibility of a ‘public’ lawyer (such as
Special Prosecutor), who owes duties of fidelity
and respect to the Republic and to the
Supreme Court as the embodiment and the
repository of the judicial power in the
government of the Republic, to uphold the
dignity and authority of the Supreme Court and
not to promote distrust in the administration of
 U.P. LAW BOC LEGAL ETHICS LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS

justice is heavier than that of a private Examples of Grossly Immoral Acts

practicing lawyer [Zaldivar v. Gonzales, supra]. ! Wanton disregard for the sanctity of
marriage as shown when the lawyer
Rule 1.01. A lawyer shall not engage in unlawful, pursued a married woman and thereafter
dishonest, immoral or deceitful conduct. cohabited with her [Guevarra v. Eala, A.C.
No. No. 7136 (2007)]
An unlawful conduct is act or omission which ! Rape of a neighbor’s wife, which
is against the law. It is a transgression of any constitutes serious moral depravity, even if
provision of law, which need not be penal. [Re: his guilt was not proved beyond reasonable
Report on the Financial Audit Conducted on doubt in the criminal prosecution for rape
the Books of Accounts of Atty. Kho, A.M, P-06- [Calub v. Suller, A.C. No. No. 1474 (2000)]
2177 (2007)] ! Obtaining money from a client, without
rendering proper legal services, and
Dishonesty involves lying or cheating. It is a appropriating the proceeds of the
disposition to cheat, deceive, defraud. [Agpalo insurance policies of the client’s deceased
(2004)] husband [Freeman v. Zenaida, A.C. No.
6246 (2011)]
Grossly Immoral ! Falsifying documents [Cobalt Resources,
Immoral Conduct Inc. v. Aguado, A.C. No. 10781, (2016)]
Conduct
! The issuance of checks without sufficient
Acts that are willful, When it is so corrupt funds to cover the same. [Aca v. Salvado,
flagrant, or as to constitute a A.C. No. No. 10952, (2016)]
shameless, and that criminal act, or so
show a moral unprincipled as to be Examples of Acts Not Considered Grossly
indifference to the reprehensible to a Immoral
opinion of the upright high degree, or when ! Mere intimacy between a man and a
and respectable committed under woman, both of whom possess no
members of the such scandalous or impediment to marry, voluntarily carried
community revolting and devoid of deceit on the part of the
circumstances as to respondent, even if a child was born out of
shock the wedlock of such relationship; it may
community’s sense of suggest a doubtful moral character but not
decency grossly immoral [Figueroa v. Barranco,
SBC Case No. 519 (1997)]
Penalty of
! Stealing a kiss from a client [Advincula v.
disbarment
Macabata, A.C. No. No. 7204 (2007)]
! Making sexual advances towards a client,
[Perez v. Catindig, A.C. No. No. 5816 (2015)] but stopping right after the client refused
such advances [Roa v. Moreno, A.C. No.
Immoral conduct has been defined as that 8382 (2010)].
conduct which is willful, flagrant, or ! Although siring a child with a woman other
shameless, and which shows a moral than his legitimate wife constituted
indifference to the opinion of the good and immorality, he committed the immoral
respectable members of the community. conduct when he was not yet a lawyer. The
For such conduct to warrant disciplinary action, degree of his immoral conduct was not as
the same must be "grossly immoral," that is, it grave than if he had committed the
must be so corrupt and false as to constitute a immorality when already a member of the
criminal act or so unprincipled as to be Philippine Bar [Advincula v. Advincula A.C.
reprehensible to a high degree. [Ui v. No. 9226 (2016)].
Bonifacio, A.M. No. 3319 (2000)].

Page 15 of 129
 U.P. LAW BOC LEGAL ETHICS
Moral turpitude includes everything which
is done contrary to justice, honesty,
modesty, or good morals. It involves an act
of baseness, vileness, or depravity in the
private duties which a man owed his
fellowmen, or to society in general [Barrios v.
Martinez, A.C. No. No. 4585 (2004)].
Murder, estafa, rape, violation of Batas
Pambansa Blg. 22 (Bouncing Checks Law),
bribery, bigamy, adultery, seduction,
abduction, concubinage and smuggling,
falsification of a public document, are
considered crimes involving moral turpitude.
In order to hold the lawyer amenable to
disbarment by reason of his or her having
committed a crime involving moral turpitude, it
is not enough to show that there is a pending
case involving moral turpitude against him or
her because Section 27 of Rule 138
expressly requires that he or she must have
been found by final judgment guilty of the
crime involving moral turpitude [Interadent
Zahntechnik Phil., Inc. v. Atty. Rebecca S.
Francisco-Simbillo, A.C. No. 9464, (2016)].
Rule 1.02. A lawyer shall not counsel or abet
activities aimed at defiance of the law or at
lessening confidence in the legal profession.
The Supreme Court does not claim infallibility;
it will not denounce criticism made by anyone
against the Court for, if well-founded, can truly
have constructive effects in the task of the
Court, but it will not countenance any
wrongdoing nor allow the erosion of our
people’s faith in the judicial system, let alone
by those who have been privileged by it to
practice law in the Philippines [Estrada v.
Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 159486 (2003)].
A lawyer should advise his client to uphold
the law, not to violate or disobey it.
Conversely, he should not recommend to his
client any recourse or remedy that is contrary
to law, public policy, public order, and public
morals [Coronel v. Cunanan, A.C. No. 6738
(2015)].
Page 16 of 129
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
Rule 1.03. A lawyer shall not, for any corrupt
motive or interest, encourage any suit or delay
any man’s cause.
Barratry or “Maintenance”
The offense of inciting or stirring up quarrels,
litigation or groundless lawsuits, either at law or
otherwise [Bouvier].
Ambulance-chasing
Unethical practice of inducing personal injury
victims to bring suits. The practice of lawyers in
frequenting hospitals and homes of the injured
to convince them to go to court [Lex Pareto
(2014)].
Accident-site solicitation of any kind of legal
business by laymen employed by an attorney
for the purpose or by the attorney himself.
Supports perjury, the defrauding of innocent
persons by judgments, upon manufactured
causes of actions and the defrauding of injured
persons having proper causes of action but
ignorant of legal rights and court procedure.
A lawyer’s conduct of vindictiveness is a
decidedly undesirable trait especially when one
resorts to using the court not to secure justice
but merely to exact revenge warrants his
dismissal from the judiciary. [Saburnido v.
Madrono, A.C. No. No. 4497 (2001)]
Ambulance Barratry
Chasing
Refers to personal Refers to any action
injury
Refers to cases Refers to suits before
brought before judicial or non-judicial
judicial bodies bodies
Other prohibited acts include:
! Volunteering advice to bring lawsuits,
except where ties of blood, relationship or
trust make it a duty to do so
! Hunting up defects in titles or other causes
of action in order to be employed to bring
suit or breed litigation [Agpalo (2004)]
 U.P. LAW BOC LEGAL ETHICS
Rule 1.04. A lawyer shall encourage his clients to
avoid, end or settle a controversy if it will admit of
a fair settlement.
The function of a lawyer is not only to conduct
litigation but to avoid it where possible, by
advising settlement or withholding suit. He
must act as mediator for compromise rather
than an instigator of controversy and a predator
of conflict [Agpalo (2004)].
It is the duty of a counsel to advise his client,
ordinarily a layman to the intricacies and
vagaries of the law, on the merit or lack of merit
of his case. If he finds that his client's cause is
defenseless, then it is his bounden duty to
advise the latter to acquiesce and submit,
rather than traverse the incontrovertible. A
lawyer must resist the whims and caprices of
his client and temper his client’s propensity to
litigate. A lawyer's oath to uphold the cause
of justice is superior to his duty to his
client; its primacy is indisputable
[Castañeda v. Ago, G.R. No. L-28546 (1975)]
b. Efficient and convenient legal
services
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.
Free access to the courts and quasi-judicial
bodies and adequate legal assistance shall not
be denied to any person by reason of poverty.
[Sec. 11, Art. III, 1987 Constitution]
A person in need of legal services should be
able to find a lawyer who is qualified to provide
them. It is the responsibility of the bar to make
such services available [Agpalo (2004)].
Rule 2.01. A lawyer shall not reject, except for
valid reasons, the cause of the defenseless or the
oppressed.
Membership in the bar is a privilege burdened
with conditions. It could be that for some
lawyers, especially the neophytes in the
profession, being appointed counsel de
Page 17 of 129
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
officio is an irksome chore. For those holding
such belief, it may come as a surprise that
counsel of repute and of eminence welcome
such an opportunity. It makes even more
manifest that law is indeed a profession
dedicated to the ideal of service and not a mere
trade. It is understandable then why a high
degree of fidelity to duty is required of one so
designated. [Ledesma v. Climaco, G.R. No. L-
23815 (1974)]
Legal aid is not a matter of charity. It is a means
for the correction of social imbalance that may
and often do lead to injustice, for which reason
it is a public responsibility of the bar [Sec. 1,
Art. 1, IBP Handbook, Guidelines Governing
the Establishment and Operation of the Legal
Aid Office].
Lawyers covered by the Rule on Community
Legal Aid Service are required to render 120
hours of pro bona legal aid services to qualified
parties enumerated in Section 4(b) thereof,
within the first year of the covered lawyers'
admission Bar, counted from the time they
signed the Roll of Attorneys. For this purpose,
covered lawyers shall report to the chairperson
of the IBP Chapter Legal Aid Committee of their
choice or the chairperson, director, or
supervising partner or lawyer from the
Accredited Legal Aid Service Provider of their
choice for their compliance with this Rule [Sec.
5(a), Rule on Community Legal Aid Service].
Exemptions:
! Covered lawyers in the executive and
legislative branches of government,
provided that the covered lawyer must
already be in government service at least
six (6) months before admission into the
Bar; however, those employed upon
admission into the Bar with the judiciary,
the Public Attorney's Office, the National
Prosecution Service, the Office of the
Solicitor General, the Office of the
Government Corporate Counsel, and
Office of the Ombudsman shall be exempt
with this Rule;
! Those who have already undergone and
completed the clinical legal education
program duly organized and accredited
 U.P. LAW BOC LEGAL ETHICS
Rule 138-A (The Law Student Practice
Rule);
! Covered lawyers who have worked for at
least 1 year in law firms offering pro bono
legal services or regularly accepting
counsel de oficio appointments;
! Covered lawyers who have previously
worked for more than 1 year as staff of a
Law School Legal Aid Office, a Public
Interest Law Group, or an alternative or
developmental law group; and
! Covered lawyers who have worked with
lawyers for Public Interest Law Groups or
alternative or law groups for more than one
(1) year and have filed public interest cases
[Sec. 5(a), Rule on Community Legal Aid
Service].
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.
Although no lawyer-client relationship is
created when a lawyer categorically refuses to
accept a case, a lawyer is still bound to give
legal advice to the defenseless and oppressed
to protect their rights.
Advice may be on what preliminary steps to
take until the client has secured the services of
counsel. But he shall refrain from giving legal
advice if the reason for not accepting the case
is that there is a conflict of interest between him
and a prospective client or between a present
client and a prospective client. [Agpalo (2004)]
Rule 2.03. A lawyer shall not do or permit to be
done any act designed to primarily solicit legal
business.
A well-known lawyer has been engaged to run
a program in which he encourages indigent
party litigants to consult him free of charge
about their legal problems over a radio and
television network. Has he violated any ethical
rules? – YES, as it involves indirect advertising
and solicitation and is likewise violative of the
confidentiality of lawyer-client relationship. His
act may also be considered as a form of self-
praise hence subject to discipline [In re:
Page 18 of 129
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
Tagorda, G.R. No. 32329, (1929), cited in Lex
Pareto (2014); Linsangan v. Tolentino, A.C.
No. 6672 (2009)].
Law is not a business but a profession. Unlike
a businessman, the lawyer has:
1. Relation to the administration of justice
involving sincerity, integrity and reliability
as an officer of the court;
2. Duty of public service;
3. Relation to clients with the highest degree
of fiduciary; and
4. Relation to colleagues at the bar
characterized by candor, fairness and
unwillingness to resort to business
methods of advertising and encroachment
on their practice, or dealing directly with
their clients [Agpalo (2004)].
The practice of soliciting cases at law for the
purpose of gain, either personally or through
paid agents or brokers, constitutes malpractice
[Sec. 27, Rule 138, RoC].
A lawyer is not prohibited from engaging in
business or other lawful occupation.
Impropriety arises, though, 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 [Villatuya v. Tabalingcos, A.C. No. 6622
(2012)].
The best advertising possible for a lawyer is a
well-merited reputation for professional
capacity and fidelity to trust, which must be
earned as the outcome of character and
conduct. Good and efficient service to a client
as well as to the community has a way of
publicizing itself and catching public attention.
That publicity is a normal by-product of
effective service which is right and proper. A
good and reputable lawyer needs no artificial
stimulus to generate it and to magnify his
 U.P. LAW BOC LEGAL ETHICS LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS

success [Ulep v. The Legal Clinic, Inc., B.M. e. Branches of law practiced;
No. 553 (1993)]. f. Birthday;
g. Day admitted to the bar;
Rule 2.04. A lawyer shall not charge rates lower h. Schools and dates attended;
than those customarily prescribed unless the i. Degrees and distinctions;
circumstances so warrant. j. Public or quasi-public offices;
k. Posts of honor;
l. Legal authorships;
Ratio: The practice of law is a profession and
m. Teaching positions;
not a trade. It is improper to lower legal rates
n. Associations;
just because another lawyer has offered a
o. Legal fraternities and societies;
lower legal fee. [Lex Pareto (2014)]
p. References and regularly represented
clients must be published for that
This rule prohibits the competition in the matter
purpose [Ulep v. The Legal Clinic, Inc.,
of charging professional fees for the purpose of
supra].
attracting clients in favor of the lawyer who
3. Publication of simple announcement of
offers lower rates. The rule does not prohibit a opening of law firm, change of firm;
lawyer from charging a reduced fee or none at
4. Listing in telephone directory but not under
all to an indigent or to a person who would have designation of special branch of law;
difficulty paying the fee usually charged for
5. If acting as an associate (specializing in a
such services [Agpalo (2004)].
branch of law), may publish a brief and
dignified announcement to lawyers (law
c. True, honest, fair, dignified, and list, law journal);
objective information on legal 6. If in media, those acts incidental to his
services practice and not of his own initiative;
7. Writing legal articles;
8. Activity of an association for the purpose of
CANON 3. A lawyer in making known his legal
services shall use only true, honest, fair,
legal representation.
dignified and objective information or statement
of facts. The law list must be a reputable law list
published primarily for that purpose; it cannot
be a mere supplemental feature of a paper,
Note: Canon 3 is 5th top source of Questions on magazine, trade journal or periodical which is
CPR; it was asked 16 times in the last 25 years published primarily for other purposes.
as of 2017 [Lex Pareto (2017)].
Prohibited Advertisements [Sec. 27, Canon
Rule 3.01. A lawyer shall not use or permit the of Professional Ethics (hereinafter, CPE)]
use of any false, fraudulent, misleading, 1. Through touters of any kind whether allied
deceptive, undignified, self-laudatory or unfair real estate firms or trust companies
statement or claim regarding his qualifications or advertising to secure the drawing of deeds
legal services. or wills;
2. Offering retainers in exchange for
Allowable advertisement executorships or trusteeships to be
1. Ordinary simple professional card; influenced by the lawyer;
2. Publication in reputable law list with brief 3. Furnishing or inspiring newspaper
biographical and other informative data comments concerning the manner of their
which may include: conduct, the magnitude of the interests
a. Name; involved, the importance of lawyer’s
b. Associates; position, and all other like self-laudation.
c. Address;
d. Phone numbers;

Page 19 of 129
 U.P. LAW BOC LEGAL ETHICS
A lawyer may not properly publish his brief
biographical and informative data in a daily
paper, magazine, trade journal or society
program in order to solicit legal business. A
paid advertisement in the newspaper which
reads, “Annulment of Marriage Specialist” is
also prohibited [Khan v. Simbillo, A.C. No.
5299 (2003)].
The use of a card containing “As a notary
public, he can execute for you a deed of sale,
can renew lost documents and can make your
application for homestead and execute any
kind of affidavit. As a lawyer, he can help you
collect your loans as well as any complaint for
or against you.” is a form of prohibited
advertisement. [In re: Tagorda, supra]. Where
to draw the line is a question of good faith and
good taste.
Entering into other businesses
If entering into other businesses which are not
inconsistent with the lawyer’s profession, it is
advisable that they be entirely separate and
apart such that a layman could distinguish
between the two functions.
The lawyer must make it clear to his client
whether he is acting as a lawyer or in another
capacity.
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.
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 [Agpalo (2004)].
Ratio: All partners by their joint efforts over a
period of years contributed to the goodwill
attached to the firm name, and the removal of
the deceased partner’s name disturbs the
client goodwill built through the years.
Firms may not use misleading names showing
association with other firms to purport legal
Page 20 of 129
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
services of highest quality and ties with
multinational business enterprise especially
when such firm attached as an associate
cannot legally practice law in the Philippines
[Dacanay v. Baker and McKenzie, A.C. No.
2131 (1985)].
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 concurrently.
Purpose: To prevent the law firm from using his
name to attract legal business and to avoid
suspicion of undue influence.
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 the private practice of law without the
written permit from the head of the department
concerned [Agpalo (2004)].
It is unlawful for a public official or employee to,
among others, 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 official
functions. The inclusion or retention of the
public official’s name in the professional card
constitutes as an unlawful continuance of
engagement in private practice. [Samonte v.
Gatdula, A.M. No. P-99-1292 (1999)].
Absolute and relative prohibition of public
officials from practice of law
When any of those absolutely prohibited
officials is appointed/elected/qualified, he
ceases, as a general rule, to engage in the
private practice of law and his right to practice
is suspended during his tenure in office.
See also Public Officials and the Practice of
Law above.
 U.P. LAW BOC
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.
Purpose: To prevent some lawyers from
gaining an unfair advantage over others
through the use of gimmickry, press agentry or
other artificial means.
This rule prohibits making indirect publicity
gimmickry, such as furnishing or inspiring
newspaper comments, procuring his
photograph to be published in connection with
cases which he is handling, making a
courtroom scene to attract the attention of
newspapermen, or arranging for the purpose
an interview with him by the media [Agpalo
2004].
d. Participation in the
improvements and reforms in
the legal system
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.
This is a duty that flows from the lawyer’s sense
of public responsibility [Agpalo (2004)].
Examples:
● Presenting position papers or resolutions
for the introduction of pertinent bills in
Congress;
● Submitting petitions to the Supreme Court
for the of the RoC;
● Writing legal publications or books as an
avenue of improving the legal system
The Misamis Oriental Chapter of the IBP was
commended by the Supreme Court when it
promulgated a resolution requesting the IBP’s
National Committee on Legal Aid to ask for the
exemption from the payment of filing, docket
and other fees of clients of the legal aid offices
in the various IBP chapters [Re: Request of
Page 21 of 129
LEGAL ETHICS LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
NCLA to Exempt Legal Aid Clients from Paying
Filing, Docket and Other Fees (2009)].
e. Participation in legal education
program
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 information regarding the law
and jurisprudence.
Purpose: The lawyer’s life is one of continuous
and laborious study; otherwise, his skill and
knowledge of law and related disciplines will
lag behind and become obscure due to
obsoleteness.
Mandatory Continuing Legal Education
[hereinafter, MCLE] Program
A program which requires lawyers to show
proof of having undertaken improvement in
their knowledge as a precondition for renewing
their license to practice [Lex Pareto (2014)].
See also Mandatory Continuing Legal
Education below.
There is no doubt that Atty. Flores failed to
obey the trial court’s order to submit proof of his
MCLE compliance notwithstanding the several
opportunities given him. Court orders are to be
respected not because the judges who issue
them should be respected, but because of the
respect and consideration that should be
extended to the judicial branch of the
Government [Rodriguez-Manahan v. Flores,
A.C. No. 8954 (2013)].
Atty. Echanez’s acts of: (a) not complying with
two MCLEs for two compliance periods; (b)
repeatedly indicating false MCLE compliance
numbers in his pleadings before the trial courts;
and, (c) repeatedly failing to obey legal orders
of trial court, IBP Commission on Bar Discipline
and also the Supreme Court despite due
notice, taken together, constitute serious cases
 U.P. LAW BOC LEGAL ETHICS
that merit disbarment [Mapalad v. Atty.
Echanez; A.C. No. 10911 (2017)].
f. Lawyers in government service
discharging their tasks
CANON 6. These canons shall apply to lawyers
in government service in the discharge of their
official duties.
Generally speaking, 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. However, if said misconduct as a
government official also constitutes a
violation of his oath as a lawyer, then he
may be disciplined by this Court as a
member of the Bar… A member of the Bar
who assumes public office does not shed
his professional obligations. Hence, the
CPR… was not meant to govern the conduct of
private practitioners alone, but all lawyers
including those in government service. This is
clear from Canon 6 of said Code. Lawyers in
government are public servants who owe the
utmost fidelity to the public service. Thus, they
should be more sensitive in the performance of
their professional obligations, as their conduct
is subject to the ever-constant scrutiny of the
public. [Vitriolo v. Dasig, A.C. No. 4984 (2003)].
The ethical standards under the CPR are
rendered even more exacting as to
government lawyers because they have the
added duty to abide by the policy of the State
to promote a high standard of ethics,
competence, and professionalism in public
service [Liang Fuji v. Gemma Armi M. Dela
Cruz, A.C. No. 11043 (2017)].
May a former government lawyer appear in a
case against the government? – YES, he may
appear in a case unless there is a specific
ethical rule or provision of law which prohibits
him from doing so [Lex Pareto (2014)].
When may a former government lawyer be
prohibited from accepting a legal engagement?
Page 22 of 129
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
! 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;
! Retired members of the judiciary receiving
pensions from the government should not
practice law where the government is the
adverse party or in a criminal case
involving a government employee in the
performance of his duties as such [Lex
Pareto (2014)].
Sec. 4, R.A. No. 6713 provides the norms of
conduct of public officials and employees.
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.
Government employees are expected to
devote themselves completely to public
service. For this reason, the private practice of
profession is prohibited. Lawyers in
government service cannot handle private
cases for they are expected to devote
themselves full-time to the work of their
respective offices [Ramos v. Imbang, A.C. No.
6788 (2007)].
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.
How government lawyers may leave
government service:
1. Retirement;
2. Resignation;
3. Expiration of the term of office;
4. Abandonment;
5. Dismissal.
General rule: Practice of profession is allowed
immediately after leaving public service.
Exceptions: The lawyer cannot practice as to
matters with which he had connection during
his term. This prohibition lasts:
 U.P. LAW BOC LEGAL ETHICS
! For one year, if he had not intervened;
! Permanently, if he had intervened.
The “matter” contemplated are those that are
adverse-interest conflicts (substantial
relatedness and adversity between the
government matter and the new client’s matter
in interest) and congruent-interest
representation conflicts (prohibits lawyers from
representing a private practice client even if the
interests of the former government client and
the new client are entirely parallel).
“Intervention” should be significant and
substantial which can or have affected the
interest of others (i.e. an act of a person has
the power to influence the subject proceedings)
[PCGG v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. Nos. 151809-
12 (2005)].
Sec. 7 of R.A. No. 6713 generally provides for
the prohibited acts and transactions of public
officials and employees. Sec. 7(b)(2) prohibits
them from engaging in the private practice of
their profession during their incumbency. As an
exception, a public official or employee can
engage in the practice of his or her
profession under the following conditions:
● First, the private practice is authorized by
the Constitution or by the law; and
● Second, the practice will not conflict, or
tend to conflict, with his or her official
functions.
The prohibitions continue to apply for a period
of one year after the public official or
employee’s resignation, retirement, or
separation from public office, except for the
private practice of profession under subsection
(b)(2), which can already be undertaken even
within the one-year prohibition period. As an
exception to this exception, the one-year
prohibited period applies with respect to any
matter before the office the public officer or
employee used to work with. [Query of Karen
Silverio-Buffe, A.M. No. 08-6-352-RTC (2009)].
Sec. 3(d) of R.A. No. 3019 (Anti-Graft and
Corrupt Practices Act) also considers it an
unlawful and corrupt practice for a public
official to accept or have any member of his
family accept employment in a private
enterprise which has pending official business
Page 23 of 129
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
with him during the pendency of his office or
within one year after its termination.
In the case of Pasay Law and Conscience
Union, Inc. v. Paz, a former Legal Officer and
Legal Prosecutor of PARGO who participated
in the investigation of the Anti-Graft case
against Mayor Pablo Cuneta later on acted as
counsel for the said Mayor in the same anti-
graft case. The Court found the said counsel
guilty of representing clients with conflicting
interest and suspended him from the practice
of law for 2 months [A.M. No. 1008 (1980)].
2. The legal profession
a. Integrated Bar of the
Philippines (Rule 139-A)
Bar Integration
The Supreme Court may adopt rules of court to
effect the integration of the Philippine Bar
under such conditions as it shall see fit in order
to raise the standards of the legal profession,
improve the administration of justice, and
enable the bar to discharge its public
responsibility more effectively. [Sec. 1, R.A.
No. 6397 (An Act Providing for the Integration
of the Philippine Bar, and Appropriating Funds
Therefor)]
Integration does not make a lawyer a
member of any group of which he is not
already a member. He became a member of
the Bar when he passed the Bar Examinations.
All that integration actually does is to provide
an official national organization for the well-
defined but unorganized and incohesive group
of which every lawyer is already a member [In
the matter of the Integration of the Bar of the
Philippines, (1973)].
The IBP is essentially a semi-governmental
entity, a private organization endowed with
certain governmental attributes. While it is
composed of lawyers who are private
individuals, the IBP exists to perform certain
vital public functions and to assist the
government particularly in the improvement of
the administration of justice, the upgrading of
 U.P. LAW BOC LEGAL ETHICS
the standards of the legal profession, and its
proper regulation.
The basic postulate of the IBP is that it is non-
political in character and that there shall be
neither lobbying nor campaigning in the choice
of the IBP Officers. The fundamental
assumption is that the officers would be chosen
on the basis of professional merit and
willingness and ability to serve. The ardor with
which the candidates pursued the presidency
of the association detracted from the dignity of
the legal profession. The spectacle of lawyers
bribing or being bribed to vote did not uphold
the honor of the profession nor elevate it in the
public’s esteem [In re: 1989 Elections of the
IBP, A.M. No. 491 (1989)].
General Objectives of the IBP
1. To elevate the standards of the legal
profession;
2. To improve the administration of justice;
3. To enable the bar to discharge its public
responsibility more effectively [Sec. 2, IBP
By-Laws].
Purposes of the IBP
1. To assist in the administration of justice;
2. To foster and maintain on the part of its
members high ideals of integrity, learning,
professional competence, public service
and conduct;
3. To safeguard the professional interest of its
members;
4. To cultivate among its members a spirit of
cordiality and brotherhood;
5. To provide a forum for the discussion of
law, jurisprudence, law reform, pleading,
practice and procedure, and the relations
of the bar to the bench and to the public,
and publish information relating thereto;
6. To encourage and foster legal education;
7. To promote a continuing program of legal
research in substantive and adjective law
and make reports and recommendations
thereon. [Sec. 2, IBP By-Laws]
Page 24 of 129
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
b. Membership and dues
Sec. 9, Rule 139-A. Membership Dues. –
Every member of the IBP shall pay such annual
dues as the Board of Governors shall determine
with the approval of the Supreme Court. A fixed
sum equivalent to 10% of the collection from
each Chapter shall be set aside as a Welfare
Fund for disabled members of the Chapter and
the compulsory heirs of deceased members
thereof.
Sec. 10, Rule 139-A. Effect of non-payment
of dues. – Subject to the provisions of Sec. 12
of this Rule, default in the payment of annual
dues for 6 months shall warrant suspension of
membership in the IBP, and default in such
payment for 1 year shall be a ground for the
removal of the name of the delinquent member
from the Roll of Attorneys.
A membership fee in the IBP is an exaction for
regulation, while the purpose of a tax is
revenue. If the Court has inherent power to
regulate the bar, it follows that as an
incident to regulation, it may impose a
membership fee for that purpose. It would
not be possible to push through an Integrated
Bar program without means to defray the
concomitant expenses. The doctrine of implied
powers necessarily includes the power to
impose such an exaction [In the matter of the
IBP, supra].
A lawyer can engage in the practice of law only
by paying his dues, and it does not matter if his
practice is “limited.” The exemption granted to
senior citizens in R.A. No. 7432 (Seniors
Citizen Act) does not include payment of
membership or association dues [Santos v.
Llamas, A.C. No. 4749 (2000)].
In a case involving a Filipino lawyer staying
abroad, the Supreme Court said that there is
nothing in the law or rules, which allows his
exemption from payment of membership dues.
At most, he could have informed the Secretary
of the IBP of his intention to stay abroad before
he left. In such case, his membership in the IBP
could have been terminated and his obligation
 U.P. LAW BOC LEGAL ETHICS
to pay dues discontinued [Letter of Atty.
Arevalo, B.M. No. 1370 (2005)].
c. Upholding the dignity and
integrity of the 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.
The bar has to maintain a high standard of legal
proficiency, honesty, and fair dealing to be an
effective instrument in the proper
administration of justice. In order to do so, it is
necessary that every lawyer should strive to
uphold the honor and dignity of the legal
profession and to improve not only the law, but
the administration of justice as well [Agpalo
(2004)].
A lawyer should actively support the activities
of the IBP and not limit himself to paying dues
[Agpalo (2004)].
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.
A lawyer must be a disciple of truth. While a
lawyer has the solemn duty to defend his
client’s rights and is expected to display the
utmost zeal in defense of his client’s cause,
his conduct must never be at the expense
of truth [Young v. Batuegas, A.C. No. 5379
(2003)].
A student aspiring to be a lawyer must study
and observe the duties and responsibilities of a
lawyer. He cannot claim that the CPR does not
apply to him [Agpalo (2004)].
Penalties for knowing suppression or false
representation of a material fact in the
application for admission to the bar:
1. Disqualification of the applicant from taking
the bar, if the concealment is discovered
before he takes the bar examinations;
Page 25 of 129
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
2. Prohibition from taking the lawyer’s oath, if
the concealment is discovered after the
candidate has taken the bar examinations;
3. Revocation of license to practice, if the
concealment was discovered after he has
taken his lawyer’s oath [In re: Petition to
Take the Lawyer’s Oath, Caesar Z. Distrito,
petitioner, B.M. No. 1209 (2003)].
If what the applicant concealed is a crime which
does not involve moral turpitude, it is the fact of
concealment and not the commission of the
crime itself that makes him morally unfit to
become a lawyer. It should be noted that the
application was made under oath, which he
lightly took when he made the concealment [In
re: Petition to Take the Lawyer’s Oath, Caesar
Z. Distrito, petitioner, supra].
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.
A lawyer should volunteer information or
cooperate in any investigation concerning
alleged anomalies in the bar examination so
that those candidates who failed therein can be
ferreted out and those lawyers responsible
therefor can be disbarred [In re: Parazo, G.R.
No. 82027 (1948)].
A lawyer should not readily execute an affidavit
of good moral character in favor of an applicant
who has not lived up to the standard set by law
[Agpalo (2004)].
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.
Public confidence in the law and in lawyers
may be eroded by the irresponsible and
improper conduct of a member of the bar.
Every lawyer should act and comport
himself in a manner that promotes public
 U.P. LAW BOC LEGAL ETHICS
confidence in the integrity of the legal
profession [Catu v. Rellosa, supra.].
There is no distinction as to whether the
transgression is committed in the lawyer’s
professional capacity or in his private life or
in his private transaction because a lawyer
may not divide his personality so as to be an
attorney at one time and a mere citizen at
another. The moral turpitude for which an
attorney may be disbarred may consist of
misconduct in either his professional or non-
professional activities, in his professional and
private capacity. [Royong v. Oblena, A.C. No.
No 376 (1963); In Re: Pelaez (1923)].
Keeping a mistress, entering into another
marriage while a prior one still subsists, as well
as abandoning and mistreating complainant
and their children, show his disregard of family
obligations, morality and decency, the law and
the lawyers’ oath. Such gross misbehavior over
a long period of time clearly shows a serious
flaw in respondent’s character, his moral
indifference to scandal in the community, and
his outright defiance of established norms
[Tapucar v. Tapucar, A.C. No. 4148 (1998)].
Considering the length of time, the affair lasted,
it cannot be a mere moment of indiscretion.
Florendo had an illicit relationship with a
married woman who was not his wife but that
of his client. This shows his disrespect for the
laws on the sanctity of marriage and his own
marital vow for fidelity [Tiong v. Florendo, A.C
4428 (2011)]
Whether a lawyer’s sexual congress with a
woman not his wife or without the benefit of
marriage should be characterized as grossly
immoral conduct depends on the surrounding
circumstances. The case at bar involves a
relationship between a married lawyer and a
married woman who is not his wife. It is
immaterial whether the affair was carried out
discreetly [Guevarra v. Eala, A.C. No. 7136
(2007)].
See also Rule 1.01 above.
Page 26 of 129
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
d. Courtesy, fairness, and candor
towards profesional colleagues
CANON 8. A lawyer shall conduct himself with
courtesy, fairness and candor toward his
professional colleagues, and shall avoid
harassing tactics against opposing counsel.
Lawyer don’ts:
1. Take advantage of the excusable
unpreparedness or absence of counsel
during the trial of a case;
2. Make use, to his or to his client’s benefit,
the secrets of the adverse party acquired
through design or inadvertence;
3. Criticize or impute ill motive to the lawyer
who accepts what in his opinion is a weak
case;
4. Proceed to negotiate with the client of
another lawyer to waive all kinds of claims
when the latter is still handling the civil case
[Camacho v. Pangulayan, A.C. No. 4807
(2000)];
5. Steal another lawyer’s client;
6. Induce a client to retain him by promise of
better service, good result or reduced fees
for his services;
7. Disparage another lawyer, make
comparisons or publicize his talent as a
means to further his law practice;
8. In the absence of the adverse party’s
counsel, interview the adverse party and
question him as to the facts of the case
even if the adverse party was willing;
9. Sanction the attempt of his client to settle a
litigated matter with the adverse party
without the consent or knowledge of the
latter’s counsel.
Lawyers should treat their opposing
counsels and other lawyers with courtesy,
dignity and civility. Mutual bickering,
unjustified recriminations and offensive
behavior among lawyers not only detract from
the dignity of the legal profession, but also
constitute highly unprofessional conduct
subject to disciplinary action [Reyes v. Chiong,
A.C. No. 5148 (2003)].
 U.P. LAW BOC LEGAL ETHICS
Respondent's acts of repeatedly intimidating,
harassing, and blackmailing complainant with
purported administrative and criminal cases
and prejudicial media exposures were
performed as a tool to return the inconvenience
suffered by his client. His actions demonstrated
a misuse of the legal processes available to
him and his client. More significantly, the
foregoing showed respondent's lack of respect
and despicable behavior towards a colleague
in the legal profession, and constituted conduct
unbecoming of a member thereof [Roque v.
Balbin, A.C. No. 7088 (2018)].
Rule 8.01. A lawyer shall not, in his professional
dealings, use language, which is abusive,
offensive or otherwise improper.
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 v. Cloribel, G.R.
No. L-27072, (1970)].
The lawyer’s arguments, whether written or
oral should be gracious to both the court and
opposing counsel and should be of such words
as may be properly addressed by one
gentleman to another [National Security Co. v.
Jarvis, 278 US 610 (1928) as cited in Agpalo
(2004)].
Lawyers are always impressed with the duty to
represent their client’s cause, or as in this case,
to represent a personal matter in court, with
courage and zeal but that should not be used
as a license for the use of offensive and
abusive language [Sanchez v. Aguilos, A.C.
No. 10543 (2016)].
The Court has consistently reminded lawyers
that though they are entitled to present their
case with vigor and courage, such enthusiasm
does not justify the use of offensive and
abusive language [Mendoza v. Gadon, A.C.
No. 11810 (2019)].
Page 27 of 129
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
Examples of Improper Language
! Behaving without due regard for the trial
court and the opposing counsel and
threatening the court that he would file a
petition for certiorari [Bugaring v. Espanol,
G.R. No. 133090 (2001)].
! Calling an adverse counsel as “bobo” or
using the word “ay que bobo” in reference
to the manner of offering evidence [Castillo
v. Padilla, A.C. No. 2339 (1984)].
! Stating that “justice is blind and also deaf
and dumb” [In Re: Almacen, G.R. No. L-
27654 (1970)].
! Stating that the demand from a former
client’s counsel should be treated “as a
mere scrap of paper or should have been
addressed by her counsel…to the urinal
project of the MMDA where it may serve its
rightful purpose” [Sanchez v. Aguilos,
supra].
! Calling complainant a "quack doctor,"
"Reyna ng Kaplastikan," "Reyna ng
Payola," and "Reyna ng Kapalpakan," and
insinuating that she has been bribing
people to destroy respondent smacks of
bad faith and reveals an intention to
besmirch the name and reputation of
complainant, as well as BMGI. Respondent
also ascribed criminal negligence upon
complainant and BMGI by posting that
complainant disfigured ("binaboy") his
client Norcio, labeling BMGI a
"Frankenstein Factory," and calling out a
boycott of BMGI's services [Ma. Victoria G.
Belo-Henares vs. Atty. Roberto “Argee”
Guevarra, A.C. No. 11394, (2016)].
! Stating in an Answer to a complaint before
the IBP CBD the following excerpts:
“another outrageously funny and ridiculous
statement totally devoid of any logic and
reason... Who does she think she is -the
only qualified doctor in town?... From
where did she get this outrageously funny,
conceited and arrogant claim”; “…is again
outrageously funny... Where do they get
these twisted ideas and strange concepts?
Are these people suffering from
Alzheimer's or what have you? Where do
they get these gutter logic and reasoning?”
[Mendoza v. Gadon, A.C. No. 11810
(2019)].
 U.P. LAW BOC LEGAL ETHICS
Lack or want of intention is no excuse for
the disrespectful language employed
[Rheem of the Philippines v. Ferrer, G.R. No.
L-22979 (1967)].
Exceptions
! Utterances made out of impulse in the
course of an argument may be forgiven
and should not be penalized [Cruz v.
Cabrera, AC No. 5737 (2004)].
! Statements made in the course of judicial
proceedings are absolutely privileged
regardless of defamatory tenor and malice,
provided it is relevant, pertinent or material
to the cause of the subject or inquiry
[Tolentino v. Baylosis, G.R. No. 15742
(1961)].
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.
A lawyer may:
1. Accept employment to handle a matter
previously handled by another lawyer:
a. Provided the other lawyer has been
given notice of termination of service,
lest it amounts to an improper
encroachment upon the professional
employment of the original counsel
[Laput v. Remotigue, A.M. No. 219
(1962)]; or
b. In the absence of a notice of
termination from the client, provided he
has obtained the conformity of the
counsel whom he would substitute; or
c. In the absence of such conformity, a
lawyer must at least give sufficient
notice to original counsel so that
original counsel has the opportunity to
protect his claim against the client.
2. Give advice or assistance to any person
who seeks relief against an unfaithful or
neglectful lawyer;
3. Associate as a colleague in a case,
provided he communicate with the original
Page 28 of 129
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
counsel before making an appearance as
co-counsel:
a. Should the original lawyer object, he
should decline association but if the
original lawyer is relieved, he may
come into the case; or
b. Should it be impracticable for him,
whose judgment has been overruled by
his co-counsel to cooperate effectively,
he should ask the client to relieve him.
A person without a retained lawyer is a
legitimate prospective client for any lawyer.
But, as soon as he had retained one and had
not dismissed said counsel, efforts on the part
of another lawyer to take him as a client
constitutes as encroachment of employment. A
lawyer is encroaching when he promises better
service, lowers attorney’s fees, and
downgrades the qualifications or services of
the first attorney.
Although aware that the students were
represented by counsel, respondent attorney
proceeded, nonetheless, to negotiate with
them and their parents without at the very least
communicating the matter to their lawyer,
herein complainant. This failure of respondent,
whether by design or because of oversight, is
an inexcusable violation of the canons of
professional ethics and in utter disregard of a
duty owing to a colleague [Camacho v.
Pagulayan, A.C. No. 4807 (2000)].
e. No assistance in unauthorized
practice of law
CANON 9. A lawyer shall not, directly or
indirectly, assist in the unauthorized practice of
law.
In Cayetano v. Monsod, the Court held that
practice of law means any activity, in or out of
court, which requires the application of law,
legal procedure, knowledge, training and
experience. Generally, to practice law is to
render any kind of service which requires the
use of legal knowledge or skill [Aguirre v. Rana,
supra].
 U.P. LAW BOC LEGAL ETHICS
Examples of Practice of Law
! Legal advice and instructions to clients to
inform them of their rights and obligations
! Preparation for clients of documents
requiring knowledge of legal principles not
possessed by ordinary laymen
! Appearance for clients before public
tribunals, whether administrative, quasi-
judicial or legislative agencies
Examples of Unauthorized Practice of Law
! It is the signing of the Roll of Attorneys that
finally makes one a full-fledged lawyer.
Appearing as counsel even before taking
lawyer’s oath is unauthorized practice
[Aguirre v. Rana, B.M. No. 1036 (2003)]
! Using the title “Attorney” in his name even
though he is a Shari’a lawyer [Alawi v.
Alauya, A.M. No. SDC-97-2-P (1997)]
! Using a letterhead which listed as senior
partners those who are only paralegals due
to their investments in the law firm
[Cambaliza v. Cristal-Tenorio, AC No.
6290, (2004)]
! A lawyer who only signed the attendance
record at the PICC entrance and not the
Roll of Attorneys, after he realized his
mistake of fact and yet continued his
operations [In Re: Petition to Sign the Roll
of Attorneys Michael A. Medado, B.M. No.
2540 (2013)]
! A corporation cannot engage in the
practice of law directly or indirectly. It may
only hire in-house lawyers to attend to its
legal business. A corporation cannot
employ a lawyer to appear for others for its
benefit. A corporation cannot perform the
conditions required for membership to the
bar. In addition, the confidential and trust
relation between an attorney and his client
cannot arise if the attorney is employed by
a corporation [Agpalo (2004)].
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.
Purpose: The practice of law is limited only to
individuals who have the necessary
Page 29 of 129
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
educational qualifications and good moral
character. Moreover, an attorney-client
relationship is a strictly personal one. Lawyers
are selected on account of their special fitness
through their learning or probity for the work at
hand.
Unqualified person:
! Non-lawyers;
! Lawyers who are not in good standing;
! Lawyers who are not qualified.
Examples of acts that may only be done by a
lawyer
! The computation and determination of the
period within which to appeal an adverse
judgment [Eco v. Rodriguez, G.R. No. L-
16731 (1960)]
! The examination of witnesses or the
presentation of evidence [Robinson v.
Villafuerte, G.R. No. L-5346 (1911)].
Examples of acts that may be delegated to
non-lawyers:
! The examination of case law
! Finding and interviewing witnesses
! Examining court records
! Delivering papers and similar matters
[Agpalo, 2004].
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:
a) 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
b) Where a lawyer undertakes to complete
unfinished legal business of a deceased
lawyer; or
c) 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 profitable sharing arrangement.
Purpose: Allowing non-lawyers to get
attorney’s fees would confuse the public as to
whom they should consult. It would leave the
bar in a chaotic condition because non-lawyers
are also not subject to disciplinary action.
 U.P. LAW BOC LEGAL ETHICS
An agreement between a union lawyer and a
layman president of the union to divide equally
the attorney’s fees that may be awarded in a
labor case violates this rule and is illegal and
immoral [Amalgamated Laborers Assn. v. CIR,
G.R. No. L-23467 (1968)].
A donation by a lawyer to a labor union of part
of his attorney’s fees taken from the proceeds
of a judgment secured by him for the labor
union is improper because it amounts to a
rebate or commission [Halili v. CIR, G.R. No. L-
24864 (1965)].
While non-lawyers may appear before the
NLRC or any labor arbiter under Art. 222, Labor
Code, they are still not entitled to receive
attorney’s fees. The statutory rule that an
attorney shall be entitled to have and recover
from his client a reasonable compensation or
remuneration for the services they have
rendered presupposes the existence of an
attorney-client relationship. Such a relationship
cannot exist when the client’s representative is
a non-lawyer [Five J Taxi v. NLRC, G.R. No.
111474 (1994)].
A contract between a lawyer and a layman
granting the latter a percentage of the fees
collected from clients secured by the layman
and enjoining the lawyer not to deal directly
with said clients is null and void, and the lawyer
may be disciplined for unethical conduct [Tan
Tek Beng v. David, A.C. No. 1261 (1983)].
3. The courts
a. Candor, fairness, and good
faith towards the courts
CANON 10. A lawyer owes candor, fairness
and good faith to the court.
A lawyer is, first and foremost, an officer of
the court. Accordingly, should there be a
conflict between his duty to his client and that
to the court, he should resolve the conflict
against the former and in favor of the latter, his
primary responsibility being to uphold the
Page 30 of 129
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
cause of justice [Cobb Perez v. Lantin, G.R.
No. L-22320 (1968)].
Candor in all of the lawyer’s dealings is the very
essence of honorable membership in the legal
profession [Cuaresma v. Daquis, G.R. No. L-
35113 (1975)].
Obligations to Uphold Candor
1. Not to suppress material and vital facts
which bear on the merit or lack of in the
complaint or petition;
2. To volunteer to the court any development
of the case which renders issues moot and
academic;
3. To disclose to the court any adverse
decision to his position of which opposing
counsel is apparently ignorant and which
the court should consider in deciding the
case;
4. Not to represent himself as a lawyer for a
client, appear in court and present
pleadings, only to claim later that he was
not authorized to do so. [Agpalo, 2004]
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.
A lawyer should not conceal the truth from the
court, nor mislead the court in any manner no
matter how demanding his duties to clients
may be. His duties to his client should yield to
his duty to deal candidly with the court. For no
client is entitled to receive from the lawyer any
service involving dishonesty to the courts
[Comments of IBP Committee that drafted the
Code, hereinafter, IBP Committee].
Examples of Falsehood Committed by Lawyers
! Falsely stating in a deed of sale that
property is free from all liens and
encumbrances [Sevilla v. Zoleta, 96 Phil
979 (1955)]
! Falsifying a power of attorney to use in
collecting the money due to the principal
and appropriating the money for his own
benefit [In Re: Rusiana, A.C. No. 270
(1959)]
 U.P. LAW BOC LEGAL ETHICS
! Denying having received the notice to file a
brief which is belied by the return card
[Ragasajo v. IAC, G.R. No. L-69129
(1987)]
! Presenting falsified documents in court
which he knows to be false [Bautista v.
Gonzales, A.M. No. 1625 (1990)]
! Filing false charges or groundless suits
[Retia v. Gorduiz, A.M. No. 1388 (1980)]
! Knowingly alleging an untrue statement of
fact in a pleading [Young v. Batuegas,
supra]
! Allowing the use of a forged signature on a
petition filed before a court [Velasco-
Tamaray v. Daquis, A.C. No. 10868
(2016)].
! Anticipating that their Motion for Bail will be
denied by the court if it found that it had no
jurisdiction over the person of the accused,
respondents craftily concealed the truth by
alleging that accused had voluntarily
surrendered to a person in authority and
was under detention. [Young v. Batuegas,
AC No. 5379 (2003)]
Canon 32, CPE provides that, “A lawyer
should not render any service or advice to any
client–no matter how powerful or important is
the cause–which will involve disloyalty to the
laws of the country which he is bound to uphold
and obey.”
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.
In citing the Supreme Court’s decisions, and
rulings, it is the bounden duty of courts, judges
and lawyers to reproduce or copy the same
word-for-word and punctuation mark-for-
punctuation mark. Ever present is the danger
that if not faithfully and exactly quoted, the
decisions and rulings may lose their proper and
correct meaning, to the detriment of other
courts, lawyers and the public who may
thereby be misled [Insular Life Employees Co.
Page 31 of 129
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
v. Insular Life Association, G.R. No. L-25291
(1971)].
The legal profession demands that lawyers
thoroughly go over pleadings, motions and
other documents dictated or prepared by them,
typed or transcribed by their secretaries or
clerks, before filing them with the court. If a
client is bound by the acts of his counsel, with
more reason should counsel be bound by the
acts of his secretary who merely follows his
orders [Adez Realty, Inc. v. CA, G.R. No.
100643 (1992)].
A mere typographical error in the citation of an
authority is not contemptuous. But when
misquotation is intended, the lawyer is subject
to disciplinary action [COMELEC v. Nonay, GR
No. 144412 (2003)].
There is a difference between the academic
and judicial standards of writing. While the
academic publishing model is based on the
originality of the writer’s thesis, the judicial
system is based on the doctrine of stare
decisis, which encourages courts to cite
historical legal data, precedents, and related
studies in their decisions. The judge is not
expected to produce original scholarship in
every respect. The strength of a decision lies in
the soundness and general acceptance of the
precedents and long held legal opinions it
draws from. Justice, not originality, form and
style, is the object of every decision of a court
of law. The reason for individual judges not to
use original or unique language when
reinstating the laws involved in the cases they
decide is that it is their duty to apply the laws
as these are written.
A judge writing to resolve a dispute, whether
trial or appellate, is exempted from a charge of
plagiarism even if ideas, words or phrases from
a law review article, novel thoughts published
in a legal periodical or language from a party’s
brief are used without giving attribution. Thus,
judges are free to use whatever sources they
deem appropriate to resolve the matter before
them, without fear of reprisal. The same rule of
exemption from the charge of plagiarism
should apply as well to practicing lawyers.
 U.P. LAW BOC LEGAL ETHICS
They should not be exposed to charges of
plagiarism in what they write so long as they do
not depart, as officers of the court, from the
objective of assisting the Court in the
administration of justice. [In the Matter of
Charges of Plagiarism against Justice Del
Castillo, AM No. 10-7-17-SC (2011)].
Judges need to answer only to two standards–
diligence and honesty. By honesty here is
meant that good faith attempt to attribute to the
author his original words and analysis. Even if
a judge has to rely in large part on the drafts of
his legal researchers, the work of a diligent and
honest judge will never display the severe
plagiarism evident in the Vinuya Decision
published under the name of Justice del
Castillo. Analysis shows objective plagiarism
viewed through three lenses: 1) extent of
unattributed copying belying inadvertence, 2)
deliberateness shown by systematic
commission of plagiarism, and 3) effect
[Dissenting Opinion of Justice Sereno in In the
Matter of Charges of Plagiarism against Justice
Del Castillo, AM No. 10-7-17-SC (2011)].
Rule 10.03. A lawyer shall observe the rules of
procedure and shall not misuse them to defeat
the ends of justice.
Filing multiple actions constitutes an abuse of
the court’s processes. Those who file multiple
or repetitive actions subject themselves to
disciplinary action for incompetence or willful
violation of their duties as attorneys to act with
good fidelity to the courts, and to maintain only
such actions that appear to be just and
consistent with truth and honor [Olivares v.
Villalon, A.C. No. 6323 (2007)].
A lawyer should not abuse his right of recourse
to the courts for the purpose of arguing a cause
that had been repeatedly rebuffed [Garcia v.
Francisco, A.C. No. 3923 (1993)].
It is the duty of an attorney to employ, for
the purpose of maintaining the causes
confided to him, such means only as are
consistent with truth and honor, and never
seek to mislead the judge or any judicial officer
Page 32 of 129
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
by an artifice or false statement of fact or law
[Sec. 20 (d), Rule 138, RoC].
b. Respect for courts and judicial
officers
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.
Observing respect due to the courts means
that a lawyer should conduct himself toward
judges:
1. With the courtesy everyone is entitled to
expect [Paragas v. Cruz, G.R. No. L-24438
(1965)]
2. With the propriety and dignity required by
the courts [Salcedo v. Hernandez, G.R. No.
L-42992 (1935)].
Lawyers are duty bound to uphold the
dignity and authority of the Court, to which
they owe their fidelities, and to promote the
administration of justice. Respect to the
courts guarantees the stability of other
institutions [In re: Sotto, 82 Phil 595 (1949)].
If a pleading containing derogatory, offensive
and malicious statements is submitted in the
same court or judge in which the proceedings
are pending, it is direct contempt, equivalent to
a misbehavior committed in the presence of or
so near a court or judge as to interrupt the
administration of justice. Direct contempt is
punishable summarily [In re: Letter of Atty.
Sorreda, A.M. No. 5-3-04 (2006)].
Liberally imputing sinister and devious motives
and questioning the impartiality, integrity, and
authority of the members of the Court result in
the obstruction and perversion of the
dispensation of justice [Estrada v.
Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 148560 (2000)].
In Bueno v. Raneses, A.M. No. 8383 (2012) the
lawyer was disbarred because “he maligned
the judge and the Judiciary by giving the
impression that court cases are won, not on the
 U.P. LAW BOC LEGAL ETHICS
merits, but through deceitful means – a
decidedly black mark against the Judiciary.”
Rule 11.01. A lawyer shall appear in court
properly attired.
Respect begins with the lawyer’s outward
physical appearance in court. Sloppy or
informal attire adversely reflects on the lawyer
and demeans the dignity and solemnity of court
proceedings.
A lawyer who dresses improperly may be cited
with contempt [Agpalo (2004)].
Courts have ordered a male attorney to wear a
necktie and have prohibited a female attorney
from wearing a hat. However, the permission of
a dress with a hemline five inches above the
knee was held to be acceptable as such “had
become an accepted mode of dress even in
places of worship” [“Reviewer on Legal and
Judicial Ethics” by Aguirre (2006)].
Rule 11.02. A lawyer shall punctually appear at
court hearings.
Inexcusable absence from, or repeated
tardiness in, attending a pre-trial or hearing
may subject the lawyer to disciplinary action as
his actions show disrespect to the court and are
therefore considered contemptuous behavior
[Agpalo (2004)].
Non-appearance at hearings on the ground
that the issue to be heard has become moot
and academic is a lapse in judicial propriety [De
Gracia v. Warden of Makati, G.R. No. L-42032
(1976)].
Rule 11.03. A lawyer shall abstain from
scandalous, offensive or menacing language or
behavior before the courts.
Every citizen has the right to comment upon
and criticize the actuations of public officers.
This right is not diminished by the fact that the
criticism is aimed at a judicial authority, or that
it is articulated by a lawyer. Well-recognized
Page 33 of 129
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
therefore is the right of a lawyer, both as an
officer of the court and as a citizen, to
criticize in properly respectful terms and
through legitimate channels the acts of
courts and judges. But it is the cardinal
condition of all such criticism that it shall
be bona fide, and shall not spill over the
walls of decency and propriety. Intemperate
and unfair criticism is a gross violation of
the duty of respect to courts [In Re:
Almacen, supra].
It is human nature that there be bitter feelings
which often reach to the judge as the source of
the supposed wrong. A judge, therefore, ought
to be patient, and tolerate everything which
appears as but a momentary outbreak of
disappointment. Lawyers may not be held to
too strict an account for words said in the heat
of the moment, because of chagrin at losing
cases, and that the big way is for the court to
condone even contemptuous language. While
judges must exercise patience, lawyers must
also observe temperate language as well
[Soriano v. CA, G.R. No. 100633 and 101550
(2001)].
Cf. Rule 8.01 above.
c. Assistance in the speedy and
efficient administration of
justice
Canon 12. A lawyer shall exert every effort and
consider it his duty to assist in the speedy and
efficient administration of justice.
Note: asked 11 times in the last 25 years as of
2017 [Lex Pareto (2017)].
It is the duty of an attorney 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. [Sec.
20(g), Rule 138, RoC].
The filing of another action containing the same
subject matter, in violation of the doctrine of res
judicata, runs contrary to this canon [Siy Lim v.
Montano, A.C. No. 5653 (2006)].
 U.P. LAW BOC LEGAL ETHICS
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 preference. He
should also be ready with the original documents
for comparison with the copies.
This could be read in conjunction with Rule
18.02.
Without adequate preparation, the lawyer may
not be able to effectively assist the court in the
efficient administration of justice.
Consequences of Non-Preparation:
1. The postponement of the pre-trial or
hearing, which would thus entail delay in
the early disposition of the case;
2. The judge may consider the client non-
suited or in default;
3. The judge may consider the case
submitted for decision without client’s
evidence, to his prejudice [Agpalo (2004)].
A newly hired counsel who appears in a case
in the midstream is presumed and obliged to
acquaint himself with all the antecedent
processes and proceedings that have
transpired in the record prior to his takeover
[Villasis v. CA, G.R. No. L-34369 (1974)].
Examples of acts which amount to obstruction
in the administration of justice:
● Inadequate preparation;
● Instructing complaining witness in a
criminal action not to appear at the
schedule hearing so that the case against
the client would be dismissed;
● Asking a client to plead guilty to a crime
which the lawyer knows his client did not
commit;
● Advising a client who is detained for crime
to escape from prison;
● Employing dilatory tactics to frustrate
satisfaction of clearly valid claims;
● Prosecuting clearly frivolous cases or
appeals to drain the resources of the other
party and compel him to submit out of
exhaustion;
● Filing multiple petitions or complaints for a
cause that has been previously rejected in
Page 34 of 129
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
the false expectation of getting favorable
action;
● Other acts of similar nature [“Legal and
Judicial Ethics” by Funa (2009)].
Rule 12.02. A lawyer shall not file multiple actions
arising from the same cause.
Purpose: There is an affirmative duty of a
lawyer to check against useless litigations. His
signature in every pleading constitutes a
certificate by him that to the best of his
knowledge there is a good ground to support it
and that it is not to interpose for delay. The
willful violation of this rule may subject him to
appropriate disciplinary action or render him
liable for the costs of litigation [Agpalo (2004)].
This Rule prohibits forum shopping.
Forum Shopping
1. When, as a result or in anticipation of an
adverse decision in one forum, a party
seeks a favorable opinion in another forum
through means other than appeal or
certiorari by raising identical causes of
action, subject matter, and issues.
2. The institution of involving the same parties
for the same cause of action, either
simultaneously or successively, on the
supposition that one or the other court
would come out with a favorable
disposition [Araneta v. Araneta, G.R. No.
190814 (2013)].
3. An indicium of the presence of or the test
for determining whether a litigant violated
the rule against forum shopping is where
the elements of litis pendentia are present
or where a final judgment in one case will
amount to res judicata in the other case.
Requisites of litis pendentia
1. Identity of parties, or at least such parties
as represent the same interests in both
actions;
2. Identity of rights asserted and relief prayed
for, the relief being founded on the same
facts; and
3. Identity of the two preceding particulars is
such that any judgment rendered in the
pending case, regardless of which party is
 U.P. LAW BOC LEGAL ETHICS
successful, would amount to res judicata in
the other [HSBC v. Catalan, G.R. No.
159590 (2004)].
Requisites of res judicata
1. There be a decision on the merits;
2. It be decided by a court of competent
jurisdiction;
3. The decision is final; and
4. The two actions involved identical parties,
subject matter, and causes of action.
Sec. 5, Rule 7, RoC requires that a certificate
against forum shopping be executed that:
1. Plaintiff or principal party has not
theretofore 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; if there
is such other pending action or claim, a
complete statement of the present status
thereof;
2. If he should thereafter learn that the same
or similar action or claim has been filed or
is pending, he shall report that fact within
five days there from to the court wherein his
aforesaid complaint or initiatory pleading
has been filed.
Failure to comply with the foregoing
requirements shall not be curable by mere
amendment of the complaint or other initiatory
pleading but shall be cause for the dismissal of
the case without prejudice, unless otherwise
provided, upon motion after hearing.
Submission of a false certification or non-
compliance with any of the undertakings in a
certification of non-forum shopping shall
constitute indirect contempt of court, without
prejudice to the corresponding administrative
and criminal actions.
If acts of the party or his counsel constitute
willful and deliberate forum shopping:
1. Be a ground for summary dismissal with
prejudice;
2. Constitute direct contempt;
3. Be a cause for administrative sanctions.
Page 35 of 129
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
The rule against forum shopping and the
requirement that a certification to that effect be
complied with in the filing of complaints,
petitions or other initiatory pleadings in all
courts and agencies applies to quasi-judicial
bodies, such as the NLRC or Labor Arbiter
[Agpalo (2004)].
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.
The court censures the practice of counsels
who secures repeated extensions of time to
file their pleadings and thereafter simply let
the period lapse without submitting the
pleading on even an explanation or
manifestation of their failure to do so. There
exists a breach of duty not only to the court but
also to the client [Achacoso v. CA, G.R. No. L-
35867 (1973)].
Postponement is not a matter of right but of
sound judicial discretion. [Edrial v. Quilat-
Quilat, GR No. 133625 (2000)].
Rule 12.04. A lawyer shall not unduly delay a
case, impede the execution of a judgment or
misuse court processes.
It is one thing to exert to the utmost one’s ability
to protect the interest of one’s client. It is quite
another thing to delay if not defeat the recovery
of what is justly due and demandable due to
the misleading acts of a lawyer [Manila Pest
Control v. WCC, G.R. No. L-27662 (1968)].
Once a judgment becomes final and executory,
the prevailing party should not be denied the
fruits of his victory by some subterfuge devised
by the losing part. Unjustified delay in the
enforcement of a judgment sets at naught
the role of courts in disposing justiciable
controversies with finality [Aguilar v. Manila
Banking Corporation, G.R. No. 157911 (2006)].
If a lawyer is honestly convinced of the futility
of an appeal in a civil suit, he should not
hesitate to inform his client that mostly likely the
 U.P. LAW BOC LEGAL ETHICS
verdict will not be altered. A lawyer should
temper his client’s desire to seek appellate
review [Agpalo (2004)].
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.
Purpose: To prevent the suspicion that he is
coaching the witness what to say during the
resumption of the examination; to uphold and
maintain fair play with the other party and to
prevent the examining lawyer from being
tempted to coach his own witness to suit his
purpose [“Legal and Judicial Ethics Reviewer”
by Callanta].
Rule 12.06. A lawyer shall not knowingly assist a
witness to misrepresent himself or to impersonate
another.
While a lawyer may interview witnesses in
advance of trial or attend to their needs if
needed, the lawyer should avoid any action as
may be misrepresented as an attempt to
influence the witness what to say in court
[Agpalo (2004)].
The lawyer who presented a witness knowing
him to be a false witness is criminally liable for
offering false testimony in evidence. The
lawyer is both criminally and administratively
liable [Art. 184, Revised Penal Code
(hereinafter, RPC)].
Subornation of perjury is committed by a
person who knowingly and willfully procures
another to swear falsely and the witness
suborned [or induced] does testify under
circumstances rendering him guilty of perjury
[US v. Ballena, G.R. No. L-6294 (1911)].
Rule 12.07. A lawyer shall not abuse, browbeat
or harass a witness nor needlessly inconvenience
him.
Page 36 of 129
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
Rights of Witnesses [Sec. 3, Rule 132, RoC]
1. To be protected from irrelevant, improper
or insulting questions and from a harsh or
insulting demeanor;
2. Not to be detained longer than the interests
of justice require
3. Not to be examined except as to matters
pertinent to the issues before the court;
4. Not to give an answer which will tend to
subject him to a penalty for an offense
unless otherwise provided by law;
5. Not to give an answer which will tend to
degrade the witness’ reputation, but a
witness must answer the fact of any
previous final conviction for a criminal
offense.
It was highly inconsiderate for the prosecutor
and the defense counsel to trade quips at the
precise time the victim was reliving her
harrowing experience. Levity has no place in
the courtroom during the examination of the
victim of rape and at her expense. [People v.
Nuguid, GR No. 148991 (2004)]
Rule 12.08. A lawyer shall avoid testifying in
behalf of his client, except:
a) On formal matters, such as the mailing,
authentication or custody of an instrument,
and the like; or
b) 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.
Purpose: The underlying reason for the
impropriety of a lawyer acting in such dual
capacity lies in the difference between the
function of a witness and that of an advocate.
The function of a witness is to tell the facts as
he recalls then 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 fairness and impartiality of a
disinterested witness. The lawyer will find it
hard to disassociate his relation to his client as
an attorney and his relation to the party as a
witness [Agpalo (2004)].
 U.P. LAW BOC LEGAL ETHICS
When a lawyer may not testify as witness:
1. When such would adversely affect any
lawful interest of the client with respect to
which confidence has been reposed on
him;
2. When, having accepted a retainer, he is to
testify AGAINST his client;
3. When he will serve conflicting interests;
4. When he is to violate confidentiality;
5. When as an attorney, he is to testify on the
theory of the case.
When a lawyer may testify as witness:
1. Formal matters – mailing, authentication,
custody of an instrument;
2. As an expert on his fee;
3. Acting as an Arbitrator;
4. Deposition;
5. On substantial matters where his testimony
is essential to the ends of justice, in which
case he must entrust the trial of the case to
another counsel [PNB v. Uy Teng Piao,
G.R. No. L-35252 (1932)]
d. Reliance on merits of case, not
on impropriety tending to
influence the courts
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.
Note: asked 11 times in the last 25 years as of
2017 [Lex Pareto (2017)].
The judiciary, as the branch of government
tasked to administer justice, to settle
justiciable controversies or disputes
involving enforceable and demandable
rights, and to afford redress of wrongs for
the violation of said rights must be allowed
to decide cases independently, free of
outside influence or pressure [In Re:
Published Alleged Threats against Members of
the Court in the Plunder Law Case Hurled by
Atty. Leonard De Vera, A.M. No. 01-12-03-SC
(2002)].
Page 37 of 129
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
The Court will not hesitate in future similar
situations to apply the full force of the law and
punish for contempt those who attempt to
pressure the Court into acting one way or the
other in any case pending before it.
Grievances, if any, must be ventilated through
the proper channels, i.e., through appropriate
petitions, motions or other pleadings in keeping
with the respect due to the Courts as impartial
administrators of justice entitled to "proceed to
the disposition of its business in an orderly
manner, free from outside interference
obstructive of its functions and tending to
embarrass the administration of justice." The
right of petition is conceded to be an inherent
right of the citizen under all free governments.
However, such right, natural and inherent
though it may be, has never been invoked to
shatter the standards of propriety entertained
for the conduct of courts … Moreover, "parties
have a constitutional right to have their causes
tried fairly in court by an impartial tribunal,
uninfluenced by publication or public clamor.
Every citizen has a profound personal interest
in the enforcement of the fundamental right to
have justice administered by the courts, under
the protection and forms of law free from
outside coercion or interference" [Nestle
Philippines, Inc. v. Sanchez, G.R. No. 75209
(1987)].
Rule 13.01. A lawyer shall not extend
extraordinary attention or hospitality to, nor seek
opportunity for cultivating familiarity with Judges.
Marked attention and unusual hospitality on the
part of a lawyer to a judge, uncalled for by the
personal relations of the parties, subject both
the judge and the lawyer to misconstructions of
motive and should be avoided [Canon 3, CPE].
In order to not subject both the judge and the
lawyer to suspicion, the common practice of
some lawyers of making judges and
prosecutors godfathers of their children to
enhance their influence and their law practice
should be avoided by judges and lawyers alike
[IBP Committee].
It is improper for a litigant or counsel to see a
judge in chambers and talk to him about a
 U.P. LAW BOC LEGAL ETHICS
matter related to the case pending in the court
of said judge [Austria v. Masaquel, G.R. No. L-
22536 (1967)].
It is highly improper for a judge to meet
privately with an accused who has a pending
case before him, without the presence of other
party [Gallo v. Cordero, A.M. No. MTJ095-1035
(1995)].
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.
Purpose: Newspaper publications regarding a
pending or anticipated litigation may interfere
with a fair trial, prejudice the administration of
justice, or subject a respondent or an accused
to a trial by publicity and create a public
inference of guilt against him [Agpalo (2004)].
Making public statements in the media
regarding a pending case which tends to
arouse public opinion for or against a party may
constitute indirect contempt [Sec. 3, Rule 71,
RoC].
In the original decision of the Supreme Court in
Re: Request Radio-TV Coverage of the Trial in
the Sandiganbayan of the Plunder Cases
against Former President Joseph Estrada,
A.M. No. 01-4-03-SC (2001), it was held that
the propriety of granting or denying the petition
involves the weighing out of the constitutional
guarantees of freedom of the press and the
right to public information, on the one hand,
and the fundamental rights of the accused, on
the other hand, along with the constitutional
power of a court to control its proceedings in
ensuring a fair and impartial trial. It was held
that when these rights race against one
another, the right of the accused must be
preferred to win, considering the possibility of
losing not only the precious liberty but also the
very life of an accused.
In the resolution of the motion for
reconsideration, the Supreme Court allowed
the video recording of proceedings, but
provided that the release of the tapes for
Page 38 of 129
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
broadcast should be delayed. In so doing,
concerns that those taking part in the
proceedings will be playing to the cameras and
will thus be distracted from the proper
performance of their roles – whether as
counsel, witnesses, court personnel, or judges
– will be allayed.
In order to warrant a finding of prejudicial
publicity, there must be an allegation and proof
that the judges had been unduly influenced, not
simply that they might be [People v.
Teehankee Jr., G.R. No. 111206-08, (1995),
Martelino v. Alejandro, G.R. No. L-30894
(1970)].
In Foodsphere, Inc. v. Mauricio, the Supreme
Court found that the respondent lawyer
violated Rule 13.02 “for despite the pendency
of the civil case against him and the issuance
of a status quo order restraining/enjoining
further publishing, televising and broadcasting
of any matter relative to the complaint of CDO,
respondent continued with his attacks against
complainant and its products” [A.C. No. 7199
(2009)].
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.
Purpose: The rule is based upon the principle
of separation of powers [Aguirre (2006)]. It also
endangers the independence of the judiciary
[IBP Committee].
4. To the Clients (Canons 14-22)
The attorney-client relationship is:
a. Strictly personal;
b. Highly confidential;
c. Fiduciary.
A written contract, although the best evidence
to show the presence of an attorney-client
relationship, is not essential for the
employment of an attorney.
 U.P. LAW BOC LEGAL ETHICS
Documentary formalism is not an essential
element in the employment of an attorney;
the contract may be express or implied. To
establish the relation, it is sufficient that the
advice and assistance of an attorney is sought
and received in any matter pertinent to his
profession [Pacana v. Pascual-Lopez, A.C. No.
No. 8243 (2009)].
Retainer:
1. Either the act of a client by which he
engages the services of an attorney to
render legal advice or to defend and
prosecute his cause in court (general or
special) OR the fee which a client pays to
an attorney when the latter is retained
[Agpalo (2004)].
2. The relation of attorney to client begins
from the time an attorney is retained.
a. Availability of Service Without
Discrimination
CANON 14. A lawyer shall not refuse his services
to the needy.
Note: Canon 14 is the 2nd top source of
Questions on the CPR. It was asked 28 times
in the last 25 years as of 2017 [Lex Pareto
(2017)].
General Rule: A lawyer is not obliged to act as
legal counsel for any person who may wish to
become his client. He has the right to decline
employment.
A lawyer should decline employment
regardless of how attractive the fee offered
may be if its acceptance will involve:
1. A violation of any of the rules of the legal
profession
2. Nullification of a contract which he
prepared
3. Advocacy in any matter which he had
intervened while in government service
4. Employment which might easily be used as
a means of advertising his professional
services or skills
5. Employment with a collection agency
6. Any matter in which he knows or has
reason to believe that he or his partner will
Page 39 of 129
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
be an essential witness for the prospective
client. [Agpalo, 2004]
Exceptions:
1. A lawyer shall not refuse his services to the
needy. [Canon 14, CPR]
2. 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 14.01, CPR]
3. A lawyer may not refuse to accept
representation of an indigent client unless:
● He is in no position to carry out the
work effectively or competently;
● He labors under a conflict of interest
between him and the prospective client
or between a present client and the
prospective client. [Rule 14.03, CPR]
Purpose: It is a declared policy of the State to
value the dignity of every human person and
guarantee the rights of every individual,
particularly those who cannot afford the
services of counsel [R.A. No. 9999 (Free Legal
Assistance Act of 2010)].
R.A. No. 9999 provides incentives for free legal
service. Thus, a lawyer or professional
partnerships rendering actual free legal
services shall be entitled to an allowable
deduction from the gross income,
1. The amount that could have been collected
for the actual free legal services rendered
OR
2. Up to 10% of the gross income derived
from the actual performance of legal
profession, whichever is lower.
This is different from the 60-hour mandatory
legal aid services under Mandatory Legal Aid
Service for Practicing Lawyers, B.M. No. 2012
(2009).
Indigent
1. A person who has no visible means of
income or whose income is insufficient
for the subsistence of his family, to be
determined by the fiscal or judge, taking
into account the members of his family
dependent upon him for subsistence [Sec.
 U.P. LAW BOC LEGAL ETHICS
2, R.A. 6033 (An Act Requiring Courts to
Give Preference to Criminal Cases Where
the Party or Parties Involved are Indigents)]
2. A person who has no visible means of
support or whose income does not
exceed P300.00 per month or whose
income even in excess of P300.00 per
month is insufficient for the
subsistence of his family [Sec. 2, R.A. No.
6035 (An Act Requiring Stenographers to
Give Free Transcript of Notes to Indigent
and Low Income Litigants and Providing a
Penalty for the Violation Thereof)].
Laws on indigents or low income litigants:
1. All courts shall give preference to the
hearing and/or disposition of criminal cases
where an indigent is involved either as the
offended party or accused [Sec. 1, R.A. No.
6033]
2. Any indigent litigant may, upon motion, ask
the Court for adequate travel allowance to
enable him and his indigent witnesses to
attend the hearing of a criminal case
commenced by his complaint or filed
against him. The allowance shall cover
actual transportation expenses by the
cheapest means from his place of
residence to the court and back. When the
hearing of the case requires the presence
of the indigent litigant and/or his indigent
witnesses in court the whole day or for two
or more consecutive days, allowances
may, in the discretion of the Court, also
cover reasonable expenses for meal and
lodging [Sec. 1, R.A. 6034 (An Act
Providing Transportation and Other
Allowances for Indigent Litigants)].
This Canon could be read in conjunction with
Rule 2.01.
i. Services Regardless of a Person’s Status
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.
Page 40 of 129
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
It is the duty of an attorney, in the defense of a
person accused of a crime, by all fair and
honorable means, regardless of his personal
opinion as to the guilt of the accused, to
present every defense that the law permits, to
the end that no person may be deprived of life
or liberty, but by due process of law [Sec. 20(i),
Rule 138, RoC].
ii. Services as Counsel de Officio
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.
It is the duty of an attorney never to reject, for
any consideration personal to himself, the
cause of the defenseless or oppressed [Sec.
20(h), Rule 138].
A court may assign an attorney to render
professional aid 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, and that the services of counsel are
necessary to secure the ends of justice and to
protect the rights of the party. It shall be the
duty of the attorney so assigned to render the
required service, unless he is excused
therefrom by the court for sufficient cause
shown [Sec. 31, Rule 138].
Counsel de officio – One appointed or
assigned by the court.
Counsel de parte – One employed or retained
by the party himself.
Amicus Curiae – A friend of the court; a
person with strong interest in or views on the
subject matter of an action, but not a party to
the action. They commonly file briefs
concerning matters of broad public interest.
Who may be appointed as counsel de
officio in criminal cases:
1. A member of the bar in good standing who,
by reason of their experience and ability,
 U.P. LAW BOC LEGAL ETHICS
can competently defend the accused [Sec.
7, Rule 116, RoC]
2. In localities without lawyers:
a. Any person, resident of the province
and of good repute for probity and
ability [Sec. 7, Rule 116, RoC];
Note: In relation to Sec. 34, Rule 138,
RoC this is only allowed in the
municipal trial court.
b. A municipal judge or a lawyer
employed in any branch, subdivision or
instrumentality of the government
within the province [Sec. 1, PD 543
(Authorizing the Designation of
Municipal Judges and Lawyers in any
Branch of the Government Service to
Act as Counsel De Officio for the
Accused Who Are Indigent in Places
Where There Are No Available
Practicing Attorneys)].
Considerations in the appointment of a counsel
de officio:
1. Gravity of the offense;
2. Difficulty of the questions that may arise;
3. Experience and ability of the appointee.
When the court may appoint a counsel de
officio (in criminal actions):
1. Before arraignment, the court shall inform
the accused of his right to counsel and ask
him if he desires to have one. Unless the
accused is allowed to defend himself in
person or has employed counsel of his
choice, the court must assign a counsel de
officio to defend him, [Sec. 6, Rule 116,
RoC];
2. It is the duty of the clerk of the trial court,
upon filing of a notice of appeal, to
ascertain from the appellant, if confined in
prison, whether he desires the Regional
Trial Court, Court of Appeals or the
Supreme Court to appoint a counsel de
officio [Sec. 13, Rule 122, RoC];
3. The clerk of the CA shall designate a
counsel de officio if it appears from the
case record that:
a. The accused is confined in prison,
b. Is without counsel de parte on appeal,
or
Page 41 of 129
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
c. Has signed the notice of appeal
himself, the clerk of Court of Appeals
shall designate a counsel de officio.
d. An appellant who is not confined in
prison may, upon request, be assigned
a counsel de officio within ten days
from receipt of the notice to file brief
and he establishes his right thereto
[Sec. 2, Rule 124, RoC]
iii. Valid Grounds for Refusal to Serve
Rule 14.03. A lawyer may not refuse to accept
representation of an indigent client unless:
a) He is in no position to carry out the work
effectively or competently;
b) He labors under a conflict of interest between
him and the prospective client or between a
present client and the prospective client
Reason: One of the burdens of the privilege to
practice law is to render, when so required by
the court, free legal services to an indigent
litigant.
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
2.02, Canon 2, CPR]
Rule 14.04. A lawyer who accepts the cause of a
person unable to pay his professional fees shall
observe the same standard of conduct governing
his relations with paying clients.
Neither the amount of attorney's fees nor the
client's financial ability to pay such fees should
serve as the test to determine the extent of the
lawyer's devotion to his client’s cause [Agpalo
(2004)].
If a lawyer volunteers his services to a
client, and is therefore not entitled to
attorney’s fees, he is still bound to attend to
a client’s case with all due diligence and
zeal [Blanza v. Arcangel, A.C. No. 492 (1967)].
Pursuant to A.M. No. 08-11-7-SC IRR (2009),
clients of the National Legal Aid Committee
 U.P. LAW BOC LEGAL ETHICS LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS

and the IBP local chapter’s legal aid offices are i. Confidentiality Rule
exempted from the payment of legal fees.
Purpose: To protect the client from possible
Under Sec. 16-D, R.A. No. 9406 (An Act breach of confidence as a result of a
Reorganizing and Strengthening the Public consultation with a lawyer [Hadjula v.
Attorney's Office (PAO)), clients of the PAO are Madianda, A.C. No. 6711 (2007)]
exempted from paying docket and other fees
incidental to institution actions in court and Confidential communication – Information
other quasi-judicial bodies. transmitted by voluntary act of disclosure
between attorney and client in confidence and
See also: by means which so far as the client is aware,
1. R.A. No. 6033: AN ACT REQUIRING discloses the information to no third person
COURTS TO GIVE PREFERENCE TO other than one reasonably necessary for the
CRIMINAL CASES WHERE THE PARTY transmission of the information or the
OR PARTIES INVOLVED ARE accomplishment of the purpose for which it was
INDIGENTS given [Mercado v. Vitriolo, A.C. No. 5108
2. R.A. No. 6034: AN ACT PROVIDING (2005)].
TRANSPORTATION AND OTHER
ALLOWANCES FOR INDIGENT Confidence of
LITIGANTS Secrets of Clients
Clients
3. R.A. No. 6035: AN ACT REQUIRING
STENOGRAPHERS TO GIVE FREE Refer to information
TRANSCRIPT OF NOTES TO INDIGENT gained in the
Refer to
AND LOW INCOME LITIGANTS AND professional relationship
information
PROVIDING A PENALTY FOR THE that the client has
protected by
VIOLATION THEREOF requested to be held
attorney-client
4. R.A. No. 6036: AN ACT PROVIDING inviolate or the
privilege under
THAT BAIL SHALL NOT, WITH CERTAIN disclosure of which
the Rules of Court
EXCEPTIONS, BE REQUIRED IN CASES would be embarrassing
(i.e., information
OF VIOLATIONS OF MUNICIPAL OR or would likely be
pertinent to the
CITY ORDINANCES AND IN CRIMINAL detrimental to the client
case being
OFFENSES WHEN THE PRESCRIBED (i.e., information not
handled).
PENALTY FOR SUCH OFFENSES IS exactly pertinent to the
NOT HIGHER THAN ARRESTO MAYOR case).
AND/OR A FINE OF TWO THOUSAND
PESOS OR BOTH Communication may be transmitted by any
form of agency, such as a messenger, an
b. Candor, Fairness and Loyalty to interpreter or any other form of transmission. It
Clients is immaterial whether the agent is the agent of
the attorney, the client or both.
CANON 15. A lawyer shall observe candor,
fairness and loyalty in all his dealings and Question of privilege is determined by the
transactions with his clients. court. The burden of proof is on the party
who asserts the privilege.
Note: Canon 15 is the top source of Questions
on the CPR. It was asked 31 times in the last
25 years as of 2017 [Lex Pareto (2017)].

Page 42 of 129
 U.P. LAW BOC LEGAL ETHICS
ii. Privileged Communications
Rule 15.02. A lawyer shall be bound by the rule
on privileged communication in respect of matters
disclosed to him by a prospective client.
Purpose: To make the prospective client free
to discuss whatever he wishes with the lawyer
without fear that what he tells the lawyer will not
be divulged nor used against him, and for the
lawyer to be equally free to obtain information
from the prospective client [IBP Committee].
Requisites:
1. The person to whom information is given is
a lawyer.
● However, if a person is pretending to
be a lawyer and client discloses
confidential communications, the
attorney-client privilege applies;
● This includes persons appointed as
counsel de officio.
2. There is a legal relationship existing,
except in cases of prospective clients;
3. Legal advice must be sought from the
attorney in his professional capacity with
respect to communications relating to that
purpose.
4. The client must intend that the
communication be confidential.
Persons entitled to privilege
1. The lawyer, client, and third persons who
by reason of their work have acquired
information about the case being handled,
including:
a. Attorney’s secretary, stenographer and
clerk;
b. Interpreter, messengers, or agents
transmitting communication;
c. Accountant, scientist, physician, or
engineer who has been hired for
effective consultation.
2. Assignee of the client’s interest as far as
the communication affects the realization
of the assigned interest.
Scope
1. Period to be considered is the date when
the privileged communication was made by
the client to the attorney in relation to either
Page 43 of 129
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
a crime committed in the past, or with
respect to a crime intended to be
committed in the future. If the crime was
committed in the past, the privilege applies.
If it is still to be committed, the privilege
does not apply because the
communication between a lawyer and his
client must be for a lawful purpose or in
furtherance of a lawful end to be privileged
[People v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No.
115439 (1996)].
2. Limited only to communications which are
legitimately and properly within the scope
of a lawful employment of a lawyer. It does
not extend to those made in contemplation
of a crime or perpetration of a fraud. It is
not within the profession of a lawyer to
advise a client as to how he may commit a
crime. [Genato v. Silapan, A.C. No. 4078
(2003)].
3. Embraces not only oral or written
statements but also actions, signs or other
means of communications.
4. 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
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 [Sec. 24(b), Rule
130].
General rule: As a matter of public policy, a
client’s identity should not be shrouded in
mystery. Thus, a lawyer may not invoke the
privilege and refuse to divulge the name or
identity of this client.
Exceptions: Client identity is privileged in the
following instances:
1. Where a strong probability exists that
revealing the client's name would implicate
that client in the very activity for which he
sought the lawyer's advice;
2. Where disclosure would open the client to
civil liability; or
3. Where the government's lawyers have no
case against an attorney's client unless, by
 U.P. LAW BOC LEGAL ETHICS
revealing the client’s name, the said name
would furnish the only link that would form
the chain of testimony necessary to convict
an individual of a crime [Regala v.
Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 105938 (1996)].
Purposes:
1. The court has a right to know that the client
whose privileged information is sought to
be protected is flesh and blood.
2. The privilege begins to exist only after the
attorney-client relationship has been
established. The attorney-client privilege
does not attach unless there is a client.
3. The privilege generally pertains to the
subject matter of the relationship.
4. Due process considerations require that
the opposing party should, as a general
rule, know his adversary [Regala v.
Sandiganbayan, supra].
Information relating to the identity of the client
may fall within the ambit of the privilege when
the client’s name itself has an independent
significance, such that disclosure would then
reveal client confidences [Regala v.
Sandiganbayan, supra].
General rule: The protection given to the client
is perpetual and does not cease with the
termination of the litigation, nor is it affected by
the client’s ceasing to employ the attorney and
retaining another, or by any other change of
relation between them. It even survives the
death of the client [Bun Siong Yao v. Aurelio,
A.C. No. 7023 (2006)]
Canon 21 enjoins a lawyer to preserve the
confidence and secrets of his client even after
the attorney-client relation is terminated. The
privilege continues even after the termination
of the attorney-client relationship. It outlasts the
lawyer’s engagement. It ceases only when
waived by the client himself or after his death,
by his heir or representative. [Baldwin v. CIR
(1942)]
Exception: Some privileged communications
lose their privileged character by some
supervening act done pursuant to the purpose
of the communication (e.g., a communication
Page 44 of 129
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
intended by the client to be sent to a third
person through his attorney loses confidential
character once it reaches the third party).
Examples of privileged matters:
● Work product of lawyer (his effort, research
and thought contained in his file);
● Report of a physician, an accountant, an
engineer or a technician, whose services
have been secured by a client as part of his
communication to his attorney or by the
attorney to assist him in rendering effective
legal assistance to his client;
● Records concerning an accident in which a
party is involved;
● Consultation which has to do with the
preparation of a client to take the witness
stand.
Betrayal of trust: revelation of secrets
Any attorney-at-law who, by any malicious
breach of professional duty or of inexcusable
negligence or ignorance shall prejudice his
client or reveal any of the secrets learned by
him in his professional capacity shall be
criminally liable [Art. 209, RPC].
iii. Conflict of Interest
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 15.03. A lawyer shall not represent
conflicting interests except by written consent of
all concerned given after a full disclosure of the
facts.
The rule prohibiting conflict of interest was
fashioned to prevent situations wherein a
lawyer would be representing a client whose
interest is directly adverse to any of his present
or former clients [Tulio v. Buhangin, A.C. No.
7110, (2016)].
It is explicit that a lawyer is prohibited from
representing new clients whose interests
oppose those of a former client in any manner,
whether or not they are parties in the same
 U.P. LAW BOC LEGAL ETHICS
action or in totally unrelated cases [Orola v.
Ramos, A.C. No. 9860 (2013)].
There is conflict of interest when a lawyer
represents inconsistent interests of two or
more opposing parties [Hornilla v. Salunat,
A.C. No. 5804 (2003)].
Lawyers are expected not only to keep
inviolate the client’s confidence, but also to
avoid the appearance of treachery and double-
dealing for only then can litigants be
encouraged to entrust their secrets to their
lawyers, which is of paramount importance in
the administration of justice [Gonzales v.
Cabucana, A.C. No. 6836 (2006)].
Where a lawyer is disqualified from appearing
as counsel in a case because of conflict of
interest with the law firm of which he is a
member, any member, associate, or assistant
therein is similarly disqualified or prohibited
from so acting. [Hilado v. David, G.R. No. L-961
(1949)].
Requisites:
1. There are conflicting duties;
2. The acceptance of the new relations invites
or actually leads to unfaithfulness or
double-dealing to another client; or
3. The attorney will be called upon to use
against his first client any knowledge
acquired in the previous employment.
Tests of conflict of interest
1. Whether the acceptance of a new relation
will prevent an attorney from the full
discharge of his duty of undivided fidelity
and loyalty to his client or invite suspicion
of unfaithfulness or double-dealing in its
performance.
2. If the acceptance of the new retainer will
require the attorney to perform an act which
will injuriously affect his first client in any
matter in which he represented him and
also whether he will be called upon in his
new relation to use against the first client
any knowledge acquired through their
connection.
3. Whether or not on behalf of one client, it is
the lawyer’s duty to fight for an issue or
Page 45 of 129
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
claim, but it is his duty to oppose it for the
other client [Hornilla v. Salunat, supra].
4. Whether the lawyer will be asked to use
against his former client any confidential
information acquired through their
connection or previous employment [Palm
v. Iledan, Jr., A.C. No. 8242 (2009)]
The test to determine whether there is a
conflict of interest in the representation is
probability, not certainty, of conflict.
General rule: Representing adverse interest
may result in:
1. Disqualification as counsel in the new
case;
2. If prejudicial to interests of latter client,
setting aside of a judgment;
3. Administrative and criminal (for betrayal of
trust) liability;
4. Forfeiture of attorney’s fees.
Exception: Representation of conflicting
interests is allowed where clients knowingly
consent to the dual representation.
Exception to the exception: A lawyer cannot
continue representing a client in an action even
with the client’s consent after the lawyer brings
suit in his own behalf, against the defendant if
it is uncertain whether the defendant will be
able to satisfy both judgments. A lawyer is not
authorized to have financial stakes in the
subject matter of the suit brought in behalf of
his client. [Gamilla v. Marino Jr, AC No. 4763,
(2003)]
Rule 15.04. A lawyer may, with the written
consent of all concerned, act as mediator,
conciliator or arbitrator in settling disputes.
An attorney’s knowledge of the law and his
reputation for fidelity may make it easy for the
disputants to settle their differences amicably.
However, he shall not act as counsel for any of
them. [Agpalo (2004)]
General rule: A lawyer may not represent two
opposing parties at any point in time. A lawyer
need not be the counsel-of-record of either
 U.P. LAW BOC LEGAL ETHICS
party. It is enough that the counsel had a hand
in the preparation of the pleading of one party.
Exception: When the parties agree AND when
such is for amicable settlement [Agpalo
(2004)].
iv. Candid and Honest Advice to Clients
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.
A lawyer is bound to give his candid and
honest opinion on the merit or lack of merit
of a client’s case, neither overstating nor
understating the prospect of the case. He
should also give an honest opinion as to the
probable results of the case [Agpalo (2004)].
Lawyers are not merely hired employees who
must unquestionably do the bidding of the
client, however unreasonable this may be,
when tested by their own expert appreciation of
the facts, applicable law and jurisprudence.
Counsel must counsel [Periquet v. NLRC, G.R.
No. 91298 (1990)].
v. Compliance with Laws
Rule 15.07. A lawyer shall impress upon his client
compliance with the laws and principles of
fairness.
It is the duty of an attorney to counsel or
maintain such actions or proceedings only as
appear to him to be just, and such defenses
only as he believes to be honestly debatable
under the law [Sec. 20(c), Rule 138, RoC].
A lawyer is required to represent his client
within the bounds of law. He is enjoined to
employ only fair and honest means to attain the
lawful objectives of his client and not to allow
his client to dictate the procedure in handling
the case.
Page 46 of 129
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
vi. Concurrent Practice with Another
Profession
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.
Exercise of dual profession is not prohibited but
a lawyer must make it clear when he is acting
as a lawyer or when he is acting in another
capacity, especially in occupations related to
the practice of law [In re: Rothman, 12 N.J. 528
(1953)].
Purpose: Certain ethical considerations may
be operative in one profession and not in the
other [Agpalo (2004)].
Impropriety rises only when the business is
conducted in a manner inconsistent with his
duties as a member of the bar [IBP Committee].
A lawyer is not barred from dealing with his
client, but the business transaction must be
characterized with utmost honesty and
good faith. Business transactions between an
attorney and his client are disfavored and
discouraged by policy of law because by virtue
of a lawyer’s office, he is in an easy position to
take advantage of the credulity and ignorance
of his client. Thus, there is no presumption of
innocence or improbability of wrongdoing in
favor of lawyers [Nakpil v. Valdez, A.C. No.
2040 (1998)].
c. Client’s Moneys and Properties
CANON 16. A lawyer shall hold in trust all
moneys and properties of his client that may
come into his possession.
Lawyers cannot acquire or purchase, even at a
public or judicial auction, either in person or
through the mediation of another, the property
and rights which may be the object of any
litigation in which they take part by virtue of
their profession [Art. 1491(5), Civil Code].
 U.P. LAW BOC LEGAL ETHICS
Purpose: The prohibition is based on the
existing relation of trust or the lawyer’s peculiar
control over the property.
The duty of a lawyer is derived from the law on
agency which requires separation, accounting,
notification and delivery by agents possessing
the principal’s property [Funa].
Requisites
1. There is an attorney-client relationship;
2. The property or interest of the client is in
litigation;
3. The attorney takes part as counsel in the
case;
4. The attorney purchases or acquires the
property or right, by himself or through
another, during the pendency of litigation
[Laig v. CA, G.R. No. L-26882 (1978)]
Any scheme which has the effect of
circumventing the law comes within the
prohibition [Agpalo (2004)].
Instances when prohibition in Art. 1491, Civil
Code applies:
● Even if the purchase or lease of the
property in litigation is in favor of a
partnership, of which counsel is a partner
[Mananquil v. Villegas, A.C. No. No. 2430
(1990)]
● If the purchase is made by the wife of the
attorney [In re: Calderon, G.R. No. L-2409
(1907)]
● Mortgage of property in litigation to the
lawyer. In this case, acquisition is merely
postponed until foreclosure but effect is the
same. It also includes assignment of
property [Ordonio v. Eduarte, A.M. No.
3216 (1992)].
● The purchase by a lawyer of the property in
litigation from his client is void and could
produce no legal effect [Art. 1409(7), Civil
Code]
Instances when prohibition in Art. 1491 does
not apply:
● When the attorney is not a counsel in the
case involving the same property at the
time of acquisition;
Page 47 of 129
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
● When purchaser is a corporation, even if
the attorney was an officer [Tuason v.
Tuason, G.R. No. L-3404 (1951)]
● When sale takes place after termination of
litigation, except if there was fraud or
use/abuse of confidential information or
where lawyer exercised undue influence;
● Where property in question is stipulated as
part of attorney’s fees, provided that the
same is contingent upon the favorable
outcome of litigation and, provided further,
that the fee must be reasonable.
i. Fiduciary Relationship
Rule 16.01. A lawyer shall account for all money
or property collected or received for or from the
client.
Purpose: The lawyer merely holds said money
or property in trust.
When a lawyer collects or receives money from
his client for a particular purpose (such as for
filing fees, registration fees, transportation and
office expenses), he should promptly account
to the client how the money was spent. If he
does not use the money for its intended
purpose, he must immediately return it to the
client [Belleza v. Macasa, A.C. No. 7815
(2009)].
The fact that a lawyer has a lien for fees on
money in his hands would not relieve him
from the duty of promptly accounting for
the funds received [Daroy v. Legaspi, A.C.
No. 936 (1975)].
Ethical and practical considerations make it
both natural and imperative for a lawyer to
issue receipts, even if not demanded, and to
keep copies of the receipts for his own records
[Tarog v. Ricafort, A.C. No. 8243 (2011)].
A lawyer's failure to return upon demand the
funds held by him on behalf of his client gives
rise to the presumption that he has
appropriated the same for his own use, in
violation of the trust reposed in him by his client
[Sison v. Camacho, A.C. No. 10910, (2016)].
 U.P. LAW BOC LEGAL ETHICS
A perusal of the Special Power of Attorney
issued by Camino and her husband to Atty.
Pasagui clearly shows that the loan application
was in their behalf and that the property
mortgaged was likewise their property. If it
were true that it was a personal loan to him,
Atty. Pasagui failed to explain why he used
Camino's property as collateral. Thus, by his
failure to make good of their agreement to use
the loan proceeds for the transfer of the title in
Camino's name, Atty. Pasagui not only
betrayed the trust and confidence reposed
upon him but he is also guilty of engaging in
dishonest and deceitful conduct. Atty.
Pasagui’s failure to inform Camino of the status
of the transfer of title despite the release of the
loan to finance the transfer of the title, is a clear
indicium that he converted the money for his
own use [Camino v. Pasagui, A.C. No. 11095
(2016)].
The actuations of respondent in retaining for
his personal benefit over a one-year period, the
amount of P5,220.00 received by him on behalf
of his client, the complainant herein, depriving
her of its use, and withholding information on
the same despite inquiries made by her, is
glaringly a breach of the Lawyer's Oath to
which he swore observance, and an evident
transgression of the [CPE] … substantially
reiterated in Rules 16.01. 16.02 and 16.03 of
the [CPR] [Licuanan v. Melo, A.M. No. 2361
(1989)].
ii. Commingling of Funds
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.
A lawyer should not commingle a client’s
money with that of other clients and with his
private funds, nor use the client’s money
for his personal purposes without the
client’s consent [Daroy v. Legaspi, A.C. No.
936 (1975)].
Page 48 of 129
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
iii. Delivery of Funds
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.
When an attorney unjustly retains in his hands
money of his client after it has been demanded,
he may be punished for contempt as an officer
of the Court who has misbehaved in his official
transactions; but proceedings under Sec. 25,
Rule 138 shall not be a bar to criminal
prosecution.
Money collected by a lawyer in pursuance of a
judgment in favor of his clients is held in trust
and must be immediately turned over to them
[Busiños v. Ricafort, A.C. No. 4349 (1997)]
An attorney has a lien upon the funds,
documents, and papers of his client which have
lawfully come into his possession and may
retain the same until his lawful fees and
disbursements have been paid and may apply
such funds to the satisfaction thereof [Sec. 37,
Rule 138, RoC]
But, a lawyer is not entitled to unilaterally
appropriate his client’s money for himself
by the mere fact alone that the client owes
him attorney’s fees. The fact alone that a
lawyer has a lien for fees on moneys in his
hands collected for his client does not relieve
him of his duty to promptly account for the
moneys received; his failure to do so
constitutes professional misconduct [Rayos v.
Hernandez, G.R. No. 169079 (2007)].
iv. Borrowing or Lending
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
 U.P. LAW BOC LEGAL ETHICS
justice, he has to advance necessary expenses
in a legal matter he is handling for the client.
A lawyer is prohibited from borrowing
money from his client.
Purpose: This rule is intended to prevent the
lawyer from taking advantage of his influence
over his client [Junio v. Grupo, A.C. No. 5020
(2001)].
The canon presumes that the client is
disadvantaged by the lawyer’s ability to use all
the legal maneuverings to renege on her
obligation [Frias v. Lozada, A.C. No. 6656
(2005)].
The profession demands from the attorney an
absolute abdication of every personal
advantage conflicting in any way, directly or
indirectly, with the interest of his client
[Barnachea v. Quiocho, A.C. No. 5925 (2003)].
A lawyer who borrows jewelry from his client in
order to obtain and appropriate for himself the
proceeds from a pledge is liable under this
canon [Yu v. Dela Cruz, A.C. No. 10912
(2016)].
A lawyer is prohibited from lending money
to his client.
Purpose: The canon intends to assure the
lawyer’s independent professional judgment,
for if the lawyer acquires a financial interest in
the outcome of the case, the free exercise of
his judgment may be adversely affected
[Agpalo (2004)].
Exception: When, in the interest of justice, he
has to advance necessary expenses in a legal
matter he is handling.
Prohibition against purchase of “property
in litigation”
The following persons cannot acquire by
purchase, even in a public action, either in
person or through the mediation of another,
property and rights in litigation, before the court
within whose jurisdiction, they exercise their
respective functions: [Art. 1491, Civil Code]:
Page 49 of 129
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
1. Justices, Judges, Prosecuting Attorneys
2. Clerks, officers and employees connected
with the administration of justice
3. Lawyers with respect to property rights
which may be the object of litigation, in
which they may take part by virtue of their
profession.
The prohibition is absolute and permanent
and rests on consideration of public policy.
The prohibition applies in the following:
● Redemption, compromise and
renunciation of the subject in litigation;
● Lease;
● Assignment of rights over a property in
consideration of legal service while the
case is pending [Ordonio v. Eduarte, AC
No. 3216, (1992)].
The prohibition does not apply in the following:
● Where the property purchased by the
lawyer was not involved in litigation;
● Where the sale took place before it became
involved in the suit;
● Where the attorney at the time of the
purchase was not the counsel in the case;
● Where the purchaser of the property in
litigation was a corporation, despite the
attorney being an officer thereof;
● Where the sale took place after the
termination of the litigation, the lawyer may
accept an assignment from his client of a
money judgment rendered in the client’s
favor in a case in which he was not the
counsel, as payment for professional
services performed in another case.
d. Fidelity to Client’s Cause
(See Part f., Canon 19 for i. Use of fair and
honest means, ii. Client’s fraud, iii. Procedure
in handling cases)
CANON 17. A lawyer owes fidelity to the cause
of his client and he shall be mindful of the trust
and confidence reposed in him.
The failure to exercise due diligence and the
abandonment of a client’s cause make such a
lawyer unworthy of the trust which the client
 U.P. LAW BOC LEGAL ETHICS
has reposed on him [Cantilller v. Potenciano,
A.C. No. 3195 (1989)].
Once he agrees to take up the cause of the
client, no fear or judicial disfavor or public
unpopularity should restrain him from the full
discharge of his duty [Santiago v. Fojas, A.M.
No. 4103 (1995)].
In the discharge of his duty of entire
devotion to the client's cause, a lawyer
should present every remedy or defense
authorized by law in support of his client’s
cause, regardless of his personal views. He
should not be afraid of the possibility that he
may displease the judge or the general public
[Agpalo (2004)].
e. Competence and Diligence
CANON 18. A lawyer shall serve his client with
competence and diligence.
A lawyer must exercise ordinary diligence
or that reasonable degree of care and skill
having reference to the character of the
business he undertakes to do, as any other
member of the bar similarly situated commonly
possesses and exercises [Pajarillo v. WCC,
G.R. No. L-42927 (1980)].
In the absence of evidence on the contrary,
however, a lawyer is presumed to be prompt
and diligent in the performance of his
obligations and to have employed his best
efforts, learning, and ability in the protection of
his client’s interests and in the discharge of his
duties as an officer of the court [Agpalo (2004)].
i. Adequate Preparation
Rule 18.02. A lawyer shall not handle any legal
matter without adequate preparation.
A lawyer should safeguard his client’s rights
and interests by thorough study and
preparation, mastering applicable law and facts
involved in a case, and keeping constantly
abreast of the latest jurisprudence and
developments in all branches of the law
[Agpalo (2004)].
Page 50 of 129
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
A lawyer should give adequate attention,
care and time to his cases. This is the reason
why a practicing lawyer should accept only so
many cases he can handle. [Legarda v. CA,
G.R. No. 94457 (1991)]
The lawyer’s diligence and dedication to his
work and profession not only promote the
interest of his client, it likewise helps attain the
ends of justice by contributing to the proper and
speedy administration of cases, bring prestige
of the bar and maintain respect to the legal
profession [Endaya v. Oca, A.C. No. 3967
(2003)].
ii. Negligence
Rule 18.03. A lawyer shall not neglect a legal
matter entrusted to him, and his negligence in
connection therewith shall render him liable.
If by reason of the lawyer’s negligence, actual
loss has been caused to his client, the latter
has a cause of action against him for damages
[Callanta].
General rule: A client is bound by the
attorney’s conduct, negligence and mistake
in handling the case or in management of
litigation and in procedural technique, and
he cannot be heard to complain that the result
might have been different had his lawyer
proceeded differently.
● Doctrine of Imputed Knowledge: Notice
to counsel is notice to client.
Exceptions: The client is not so bound where
the ignorance, incompetence or inexperience
of a lawyer is so great and error so serious that
the client, who has good cause, is prejudiced
and denied a day in court [People v.
Manzanilla, G.R. No. L-17436 (1922); Alarcon
v. CA, G.R. No. 126802 (2000)]
Examples of lawyer’s negligence:
● Failure of counsel to ask for additional time
to answer a complaint resulting in a default
judgment against his client (Mapua v.
Mendoza, G.R. No. L-19295 (1923)]
 U.P. LAW BOC LEGAL ETHICS
● Failure to ascertain date of receipt from the
post office of notice of decision resulting in
the non-perfection of the appellant’s appeal
[Joven-De Jesus v. PNB, G.R. No. L-19299
(1964)]
● Failure to file briefs within the reglementary
period [People v. Cawili, G.R. No. L-30543,
(1970)]
● Failure to attend a trial without filing a
motion for postponement or without
requesting either of his two partners in the
law office to take his place and appear for
the defendants [Gaerlan v. Bernal, G.R.
No. L-4039 (1952)]
● Failure to appear at pre-trial [Agravante v.
Patriarca, G.R. No. L-48324 (1990)]
● Failure of counsel to notify clients of the
scheduled trial which prevented the latter
to look for another lawyer to represent them
while counsel was in the hospital [Ventura
v. Santos, 59 Phil. 123 (1993)]
iii. Collaborating Counsel
Rule 18.01. A lawyer shall not undertake a legal
service which he knows or should know that he is
not qualified to tender. 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.
When a lawyer accepts a case, whether for a
fee or not, his acceptance is an implied
representation:
1. That he possesses the requisite degree of
academic learning, skill and ability
necessary in the practice of his profession;
2. That he will exert his best judgment in the
prosecution or defense of the litigation
entrusted to him;
3. That he will exercise ordinary diligence or
that reasonable degree of care and skill
demanded of the business he undertakes
to do, to protect the client’s interests and
take all steps or do all acts necessary
thereof [Uy v. Tansinsin, A.C. No. 8252
(2009)]; and
4. That he will take steps as will adequately
safeguard his client’s interests. [Islas v.
Platon, G.R. No. L-23183 (1924)]
Page 51 of 129
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
A collaborating counsel is a lawyer who is
subsequently engaged to assist another lawyer
already handling a particular case for a client.
He cannot just enter his appearance as
collaborating counsel without the conformity of
the first counsel.
The same diligence of the first counsel is
required of the collaborating counsel [Sublay v.
NLRC, G.R. No. 130104 (2000)].
iv. Duty to Apprise Client
Rule 18.04. A lawyer shall keep the client
informed of the status of his case and shall
respond within a reasonable period of time to
client’s request for information.
Duty to Keep the Client Fully Informed
1. The client must receive from the lawyer, full
and periodic updates on the developments
affecting the case;
2. The lawyer should apprise the client of the
mode and the manner which he is utilizing
to defend the clients’ interests;
3. The lawyer must advise the client of the
risks, alternatives and their consequences;
and
4. The client must be informed within the
period to appeal to enable him to decide
whether or not he will still seek appellate
review of an adverse decision.
Even if the lawyer was honestly and sincerely
protecting the interests of his client, he still
does not have the right to waive the appeal
without the knowledge and consent of his client
[Abay v. Montesino, A.C. No. 5718 (2003)].
The client should not, however, sit idly by. It is
also his duty to make proper inquiries from his
counsel concerning his case, in keeping with
that standard of care which an ordinarily
prudent man bestows upon his important
business [Agpalo (2004)].
 U.P. LAW BOC LEGAL ETHICS LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS

f. Representation with Zeal Within event the latter fails or refuses to rectify the
Legal Bounds fraud. The lawyer may not volunteer the
information concerning the client’s commission
of fraud to anyone, as it will violate his
CANON 19. A lawyer shall represent his client
obligation to maintain the client’s secrets
with zeal within the bounds of the law.
undisclosed [Agpalo (2004)].
A lawyer’s duty is not to his client but to the
iii. Procedure in Handling a Case
administration of justice; To that end, his
client’s success is wholly subordinate and
Rule 19.03. A lawyer shall not allow his client to
his conduct ought to and must always be
dictate the procedure on handling the case.
unscrupulously observant of law and ethics
[Magsalang v. People, G.R. No. 90083,
(1990)]. Within client’s Within counsel’s
control control
i. Use of Fair and Honest Means
Substantial Aspect Procedural Aspect
Rule 19.01. A lawyer shall employ only fair and All the proceedings
honest means to attain the lawful objectives of his in court to enforce
client and shall not present, participate in the remedy, to bring
presenting or threaten to present unfounded the claim, demand,
criminal charges to obtain an improper advantage cause of action, or
in any case or proceeding. The cause of action,
subject matter of the
the claim or demand
suit to hearing, trial,
It is the duty of an attorney to employ, for the sued upon, and the
determination,
purpose of maintaining the causes confided to subject matter of the
judgment, and
him, such means only as are consistent with litigation are all within
execution, are within
truth and honor, and never seek to mislead the the exclusive control
the exclusive control
judge or any judicial officer by an artifice or of a client.
of the attorney
false statement of fact or law [Sec. 20(d), Rule [Belandres v. Lopez
138, RoC]. Sugar Central Mill,
G.R. No. L-6869
A lawyer should not file or threaten to file any (1955)].
unfounded or baseless criminal case or cases
against the adversaries of his client designed
to secure a leverage to compel adversaries to An attorney may not impair, compromise,
yield or withdraw their own cases against the settle, surrender, or destroy rights without
lawyer’s client [Pena v. Aparicio, A.C. No. 7298 his client's consent. A lawyer has no implied
(2007)]. authority to waive his client’s right to appeal or
to withdraw a pending appeal.
ii. Client’s Fraud
If a lawyer believes that the appeal of his client
Rule 19.02. A lawyer who has received is frivolous, he cannot move to dismiss the
information that his client has, in the course of the appeal, without the consent of his client. His
representation, perpetrated a fraud upon a remedy is to withdraw from the case People v.
person or tribunal, shall promptly call upon the Pagarao, G.R. No. 930026-27 (1991)].
client to rectify the same, and failing which he
shall terminate the relationship with such client in Presumption of Authority
accordance with the Rules of Court. An attorney is presumed to be properly
authorized to represent any cause in which he
This rule merely requires the lawyer to appears in all stages of the litigation and no
terminate his relationship with the client in the written authority is required to authorize him to

Page 52 of 129
 U.P. LAW BOC LEGAL ETHICS
appear. A mere denial by a party that he has
authorized an attorney to appear, in the
absence of compelling reason, is insufficient to
overcome the presumption especially when the
denial comes after an adverse judgment.
[Agpalo (2004)].
g. Attorney’s Fees
CANON 20. A lawyer shall charge only fair and
reasonable fees.
Note: Canon 20 is the 3rd
top source of
Questions on the CPR. It was asked 22 times
in the last 25 years as of 2017 [Lex Pareto
(2017)].
Any counsel worthy of his hire is entitled to
be fully recompensed for his services. With
his capital consisting solely of his brains and
with his skill, acquired at tremendous cost not
only in money but in the expenditure of time
and energy, he is entitled to the protection of
any judicial tribunal against any attempt of the
part of the client to escape payment of his fees
[Albano v. Caloma, A.C. No. 528 (1967)].
An attorney is entitled to have and to recover
from his client no more than a reasonable
compensation for his services with a view to:
1. The importance of the subject matter of the
controversy;
2. The extent of the services rendered; and
3. The professional standing of the attorney.
No court shall be bound by the opinion of
attorneys as expert witnesses as to the proper
compensation and may disregard such
testimony and base its conclusion on its own
professional knowledge.
A written contract for services shall control the
amount to be paid therefore unless found by
the court to be unconscionable or
unreasonable [Sec. 24, Rule 138, RoC].
Subject to the availability of funds, the court
may, in its discretion, order an attorney
employed as counsel de officio to be
compensated in such a sum as the court may
Page 53 of 129
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
fix in accordance with Sec. 24, Rule 138, RoC
[Sec. 32, Rule 138, RoC].
The mere fact that an agreement had been
reached between attorney and client fixing the
amount of the attorney’s fees, does not insulate
such agreement from review and modification
by the Court where the fees clearly appear to
be excessive or unreasonable [Tanhueco v.
De Dumo, A.M. No. 1437 (1989)].
When a lawyer cannot recover the full
amount stipulated in the contract
1. When the services were not performed,
and if the lawyer withdrew before the case
was finished, he will be allowed only
reasonable fees;
2. When there is justified dismissal of an
attorney, the contract will be nullified and
payment will be on quantum meruit basis;
3. When the stipulated fees are
unconscionable or unreasonable;
4. When the stipulated fees are in excess of
what is expressly provided by law;
5. When the lawyer is guilty of fraud or bad
faith in the manner of his employment;
6. When the counsel’s services are worthless
because of negligence;
7. When the contract is contrary to laws,
morals, and good policies.
When there is no express contract
The absence of a formal contract will not
negate the payment of attorney’s fees because
the contract may be express or implied. In the
absence of an express contract, 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” [Corpus v. CA, G.R. No. L-40424
(1980)].
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 services
rendered or required;
b) The novelty and difficulty of the questions
involved;
c) The importance of the subject matter;
d) The skill demanded;
 U.P. LAW BOC LEGAL ETHICS LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS

e) The probability of losing other employment as a rebate or commission from another in

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.
connection with the client’s cause may interfere
with the full discharge of his duty to his client
[Agpalo (2004)].
It is the duty of an attorney to accept no
compensation in connection with his client’s
business except from him or with his
knowledge and approval [Sec. 20(e), Rule 138,
RoC].
i. Acceptance Fees

Acceptance of money from a client

Manners by which attorneys may be paid
establishes an attorney-client relationship
● A fixed or absolute fee which is payable
and gives rise to the duty of fidelity to the
regardless of the result of the case; A fixed
client’s cause [Emiliano Court Townhouses
fee payable per appearance;
Homeowners Association v. Dioneda, A.C. No.
● A fixed fee computed by the number of
5162 (2003)].
hours spent;
● A fixed fee based on a piece of work;
Failure to render the legal services agreed
● A contingent fee that is conditioned upon
upon, despite receipt of an acceptance fee, is
the securing of a favorable judgment and
a clear violation of the CPR [Macarulay v.
recovery of money or property and the
Seriña, A.C. No. 6591 (2005)].
amount of which may be on a percentage
basis;
ii. Contingency Fee Arrangements
● A combination of any of the above
stipulated fees.
iii. Champertous Contracts
Rule 20.02. A lawyer shall, in cases of referral,
with the consent of the client, be entitled to a Champertous Contingent Contract
division of fees in proportion to work performed Contract
and responsibility assumed.
A contingent contract is
an agreement in which
The referral of a client by a lawyer to another A champertous
lawyer does not entitle the former to a the lawyer’s fee,
contract is one where
commission or to a portion of the attorney’s usually a fixed
the lawyer stipulates
percentage of what
fees. It is only when, in addition to the referral, with his client that he
he performs legal service or assumes may be recovered in
will bear all the
the action, is made to
responsibility in the case that he will be entitled expenses for the
to a fee [Agpalo (2004)]. depend upon the
prosecution of the
success in the effort to
case, the recovery of
enforce or defend the
Rule 20.03. A lawyer shall not, without the full things or property
knowledge and consent of the client, accept any client’s right. The
being claimed, and the
fee, reward, costs, commission, interest, rebate lawyer does not
latter pays only upon
or forwarding allowance or other compensation undertake to shoulder
successful litigation.
whatsoever related to his professional the expenses of
employment from anyone other than the client. litigation.
This contract is void
Purpose: The rule is designed to secure the for being against It is a valid agreement.
lawyer’s fidelity to the client’s cause and to public policy
prevent that situation in which receipt by him of

Page 54 of 129
 U.P. LAW BOC LEGAL ETHICS LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS

Contingent fee contracts are subject to the Retaining lien Charging lien
supervision and close scrutiny of the court in
order that clients may be protected from unjust Nature
charges. A much higher compensation is
allowed as contingent fees because of the risk Passive lien. It Active lien. It can be
that the lawyer may get nothing if the suit fails cannot be actively enforced by
[Masmud v. NLRC, G.R. No. 183385 (2009)]. enforced. It is a execution. It is a
general lien. special lien.
iv. Attorney’s Liens Basis
RETAINING LIEN Lawful possession of Securing of a
An attorney shall have a lien upon the funds, funds, papers, favorable money
documents and papers of his client which have documents, property judgment for client
lawfully come into his possession. Thus: belonging to client
1. He may retain the same until his lawful fees
and disbursements have been paid; Coverage
2. May apply such funds to the satisfaction Covers only funds, Covers all judgments
thereof. [Sec. 37, Rule 138, RoC] papers, documents, for the payment of
and property in the money and
Requisites: lawful possession of executions issued in
1. Attorney-client relationship; the attorney by pursuance of such
2. Lawful possession by lawyer of the client’s reason of his judgment
funds, documents and papers in his professional
professional capacity; and employment
3. Unsatisfied claim for attorney’s fees or
disbursements. Effectivity

CHARGING LIEN As soon as the As soon as the claim

He shall also have a lien to the same extent lawyer gets for attorney’s fees had
upon all judgments for the payment of money, possession of the been entered into the
and executions issued in pursuance of such funds, papers, records of the case
judgments, which he has secured in a litigation documents, property
of his client. This lien exists from and after the Applicability
time when he shall have caused:
1. A statement of his claim of such lien to be May be exercised Generally, it is
entered upon the records of the court before judgment or exercisable only when
rendering such judgment, or issuing such execution, or the attorney had
execution; and regardless thereof already secured a
2. Written notice thereof to be delivered to his favorable judgment for
client and to the adverse party. his client

Requisites: Notice
1. Attorney-client relationship;
Client need not be Client and adverse
2. The attorney has rendered services;
notified to make it party need to notified
3. A money judgment favorable to the client
effective to make it effective
has been secured in the action; and
4. The attorney has a claim for attorney’s fees
or advances statement of his claim has
been recorded in the case with notice
served upon the client and adverse party.

Page 55 of 129
 U.P. LAW BOC LEGAL ETHICS
v. Fees and Controversies with Clients
(Quantum Meruit)
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.
A lawyer should avoid controversies with
clients concerning compensation so far as shall
be compatible with self-respect and with his
right to receive a reasonable recompense for
his services, and he should resort to lawsuits
with clients only to prevent injustice, imposition
or fraud. Lawyers thus seldom, if ever, file
judicial actions for the recovery of their fees
unless righteous and well founded and unless
forced by the client's intolerable attitude
because such lawsuits cannot fail to create the
impression, however, wrong it may be, that
those instituting them are mercenaries [Agpalo
(2004)].
Judicial actions to recover attorney’s fees:
1. An appropriate motion or petition as an
incident in the main action where he
rendered legal services;
2. A separate civil action for collection of
attorney’s fees.
QUANTUM MERUIT: “as much as a lawyer
deserves.”
Essential requisite: Acceptance of the
benefits by one sought to be charged for
services rendered under circumstances as
reasonably to notify him that lawyer expects
compensation.
When authorized:
1. The agreement as to counsel fees is invalid
for some reason other than the illegality of
the object of performance;
2. There is no express contract for attorney’s
fees agreed upon between the lawyer and
the client;
3. When although there is a formal contract of
attorney’s fees, the stipulated fees are
found unconscionable or unreasonable by
the court;
Page 56 of 129
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
4. When the contract for attorney’s fees is
void due to purely formal matters or defects
of execution;
5. When the counsel, for justifiable cause,
was not able to finish the case to its
conclusion;
6. When lawyer and client disregard the
contract of attorney’s fees;
7. When there is a contract, but no stipulation
as to attorney’s fees.
Quantum Meruit Guidelines
1. Time spent and extent of the services
rendered. A lawyer is justified in fixing
higher fees when the case is so
complicated and requires more time and
efforts to finish it.
2. Nature and importance of subject matter.
The more important the subject matter or
the bigger value of the interest or property
in litigation, the higher the attorney’s fee.
3. Novelty and difficulty of questions involved.
When the questions in a case are novel
and difficult, greater efforts, deeper study,
and research are bound to burn the
lawyer’s time and stamina considering that
there are no local precedents to rely upon.
4. Skill demanded of the lawyer. The totality
of the lawyer’s experience provides him the
skill and competence admired in lawyers.
5. Loss of opportunity for other employment
on the part of the lawyer who accepts the
retainer. It is only but fair that a client
should compensate his lawyer for being
deprived of the chance to earn legal fees
from others by reason of his employment
as his counsel.
6. Results secured. The importance to a client
of his lawyer’s services depends upon the
successful outcome of his litigation.
7. Whether the fee is contingent.
8. Capacity of client to pay.
A determination of all these factors would
indispensably require nothing less than a full-
blown trial where private respondent can
adduce evidence to establish its right to lawful
attorney's fees and for petitioner to oppose or
refute the same [Metrobank v. CA, G.R. No.
86100 (1990)].
 U.P. LAW BOC LEGAL ETHICS LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS

The above rules apply in the case of a counsel
de parte. A counsel de officio may not demand
from the accused attorney’s fees even if he
wins the case. However, subject to availability
of funds, the court may, in its discretion, order
an attorney employed as counsel de officio to
be compensated in such sum as the court may
fix.
vi. Concepts of Attorney’s Fees
affecting his rights or obligations [Agpalo
(2004)].
It is the duty of an attorney to maintain inviolate
the confidence, and at every peril to himself to
preserve, the secrets of his client and to accept
no compensation in connection with his client’s
business except from him or with his
knowledge and approval [Sec. 20(e), Rule 138,
RoC].

Ordinary Imposition of Criminal Liability

Extraordinary concept 1. Upon any lawyer who, by any malicious
concept
breach of professional duty or of
An attorney’s fee is an inexcusable negligence or ignorance,
indemnity for damages reveals any of the secrets of the latter
An attorney’s ordered by the court to learned by him in his professional capacity.
fee is the be paid by the losing 2. Upon a lawyer who, having undertaken the
reasonable party to the prevailing defense of a client or having received
compensation party in litigation. The confidential information from said client in
paid to a lawyer basis of this is any of the a case, undertakes the defense of the
for the legal cases authorized by law opposing party in the same case, without
services he has and is payable not to the the consent of his first client. [Art. 209,
rendered to a lawyer but to the client – RPC]
client. Its basis unless they have agreed
of this that the award shall pertain The protection given to the client is perpetual
compensation is to the lawyer as additional and does not cease with the termination of the
the fact of compensation or as part litigation, nor is it affected by the party’s
employment by thereof [Traders Royal ceasing to employ the attorney and retaining
the client. Bank Employees Union- another, or by any other change of relation
Independent v. NLRC, between them. It even survives the death of the
G.R. No. 120592 (1997)]. client [Genato v. Silapan, supra].

i. Prohibited Disclosures and Use

h. Preservation of Client’s
Confidences
CANON 21. A lawyer shall preserve the
confidence and secrets of his client even after the
attorney-client relation is terminated.
Purposes
● Unless the client knows that his attorney
cannot be compelled to reveal what is told
to him, he will suppress what he thinks to
be unfavorable and the advice which
follows will be useless if not misleading
● To encourage a client to make full
disclosure to his attorney and to place
unrestricted confidence in him in matters
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.

Page 57 of 129
 U.P. LAW BOC LEGAL ETHICS
The work and product of a lawyer, such as his
effort, research, and thought, and the records
of his client, contained in his files are privileged
matters. Neither the lawyer nor, after his death,
his heir or legal representative may properly
disclose the contents of such file cabinet
without client’s consent [Agpalo (2004)].
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 client.
The client’s secrets which clerical aids of
lawyers learn of, in the performance of their
services are covered by privileged
communication. It is the duty of lawyer to
ensure that this is being followed (e.g.,
execution of confidentiality agreements)
[Agpalo (2004)].
Rule 21.06. A lawyer shall avoid indiscreet
conversation about a client’s affairs even with
members of his family.
A lawyer must also preserve the confidences
and secrets of his clients outside the law office,
including his home. He should avoid
committing calculated indiscretion, that is,
accidental revelation of secrets obtained in his
professional employment [Agpalo (2004)].
Rule 21.07. A lawyer shall not reveal that he has
been consulted about a particular case except to
avoid possible conflict of interest.
See also Rules 15.01 and 14.03.
The privileged communication rule applies
even to prospective clients.
The disclosure and the lawyer’s opinion
thereon create an attorney-client relationship,
even though the lawyer does not eventually
accept the employment or the prospective
client did not thereafter actually engage the
lawyer. By the consultation, the lawyer already
learned of the secrets of prospective client.
This rule, of course, is subject to the exception
of representation of conflicting interests
[Agpalo (2004)].
Page 58 of 129
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
ii. Disclosures, When Allowed
Rule 21.01. A lawyer shall not reveal the
confidences or secrets of his client except:
a) When authorized by the client after
acquainting him of the consequences of the
disclosure;
b) When required by law;
c) When necessary to collect his fees or to
defend himself, his employees or associates
or by judicial action.
Rule 21.01(a) refers to a waiver by the client.
Since the attorney-client privilege against
disclosure of the client's confidence is intended
primarily for the client's protection, only the
client as a rule can waive the privilege.
Rule 21.01 (b) and (c) are for the protection of
the attorney’s rights. The privileged relation
cannot be used as a shield against wrongdoing
nor can it be employed as an excuse to deny a
lawyer the right to protect himself against
abuse by the client or false charges by third
persons [Agpalo (2004)].
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.
The professional employment of a law firm is
equivalent to the retainer of the members
thereof even though only one of them is
consulted; conversely, the employment of one
member of a law firm is generally considered
as employment of the law firm [Agpalo (2004)].
i. Withdrawal of Services
CANON 22. A lawyer shall withdraw his services
only for good cause and upon notice appropriate
in the circumstances.
An attorney-client relationship may be
terminated by the client, the lawyer, or by
the court for reasons beyond the parties’
control. The termination entails certain duties
on the part of the client and his lawyer. [Agpalo
(2004)].
 U.P. LAW BOC LEGAL ETHICS LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS

Causes of termination of attorney-client c) When his inability to work with co-counsel will
relationship not promote the best interest of the client;
1. Withdrawal of the lawyer; d) When the mental or physical condition of the
2. Death of the lawyer; lawyer renders it difficult for him to carry out
3. Disbarment or suspension of the lawyer the employment effectively;
from the practice of law; e) When the client deliberately fails to pay the
4. Declaration of presumptive death of the fees for the services or fails to comply with
lawyer; the retainer agreement;
f) When the lawyer is elected or appointed to
5. Conviction of a crime and imprisonment of
public office; and
the lawyer;
g) Other similar cases.
6. Discharge or dismissal of the lawyer by the
client;
A lawyer may retire at any time from any action
7. Appointment or election of a lawyer to a
or special proceeding:
government position which prohibits
● With the written consent of his client filed in
private practice of law;
court and copy thereof served upon the
8. Death of the client;
adverse party; or
9. Intervening incapacity or incompetence of
● Without the consent of his client, should the
the client during pendency of case;
court, on notice to the client and attorney,
10. Full termination of the case.
and on hearing, determine that he ought to
be allowed to retire [Sec. 26, Rule 138,
General rule: The client has the right to
RoC].
discharge his attorney at any time with or
without just cause or even against his consent.
General rule: The withdrawal in writing, with the
client’s conformity, does not require the
Exceptions:
approval of the court to be effective.
1. The client cannot deprive his counsel of
right to be paid services if the dismissal is
Exception: If no new counsel has entered his
without cause.
appearance, the court may, in order to prevent
2. The client cannot discharge his counsel as
a denial of a party’s right to the assistance of
an excuse to secure repeated extensions
counsel require that the lawyer’s withdrawal be
of time.
held in abeyance until another lawyer shall
3. Notice of discharge is required for both the
have appeared for the party [Villasis v. CA,
court and the adverse party [Agpalo
G.R. No. L-34369 (1974)].
(2004)].
Although a lawyer may withdraw his services
A client may at any time dismiss his attorney or
when the client deliberately fails to pay the fees
substitute another in his place, but if the
for the services, withdrawal is unjustified if
contract between the client and the attorney
client did not deliberately fail to pay [Montano
has been reduced to writing and the dismissal
v. IBP, A.C. No. 4215 (2001)].
was without justifiable cause, he shall be
entitled to recover from the client the full
compensation stipulated in the contract [Sec. j. Duties of Lawyers in Case of
26, Rule 138, RoC]. Death of Parties Represented

Rule 22.01. A lawyer may withdraw his services
in any of the following cases:
a) When the client pursues an illegal or immoral
course of conduct in connection with the
matter he is handling;
b) When the client insists that the lawyer pursue
conduct violative of these canons and rules;
Rule 22.02. A lawyer who withdraws or is
discharged shall, subject to a retaining 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.

Page 59 of 129
 U.P. LAW BOC LEGAL ETHICS
Death of parties represented is a cause for
termination of the attorney-client relationship.
According to Rule 22.02, the duties of lawyers
in such a case, subject to a retaining lien, are:
1. To 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 matter. This includes
all information necessary for the proper
handling of the matter.
Requirements of a valid substitution of
counsel
1. The filing of a written application for
substitution;
2. The client’s written consent;
3. The written consent of the attorney to be
substituted.
At the discretion of the court, a lawyer, who has
been dismissed by a client, is allowed to
intervene in a case in order to protect the
client’s rights [Obando v. Figueras, G.R. No.
134854 (2000)].
The offensive attitude of a client is not an
excuse to just disappear and withdraw from a
case without notice to the court and to the
client, especially when attorney’s fees have
already been paid [Chang v. Hidalgo, A.C. No.
6934 (2016)].
C. SUSPENSION,
DISBARMENT, AND
DISCIPLINE OF LAWYERS
Rule 139-B as amended by B.M. No. 1645
1. Nature and Characteristics of
Disciplinary Actions against
Lawyers
a. Sui Generis
Disciplinary proceedings are sui generis, i.e.
they belong to a class of their own.
They are neither purely civil nor purely criminal;
they do not involve a trial of an action or a suit
Page 60 of 129
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
but are rather an investigation by the Court into
the conduct of its officers.
It is not meant to grant relief to a complainant
but is intended to cleanse the ranks of the legal
profession of its undesirable members in order
to protect the public and the courts [Tiong v.
Florendo, AC 4428, (2011)].
They may be initiated by the Court motu
proprio. The Court merely calls upon a
member of the Bar to account for his actuations
as an officer of the Court with the end in view
of preserving the purity of the legal profession
and the proper and honest administration of
justice in the exercise of its disciplinary powers.
Public interest is the primary objective, and the
real question for determination is whether or
not the attorney is still a fit person to be allowed
the privileges as such [In Re: Almacen supra.;
Itong v. Florendo, A.C. No. 4428 (2011)].
Any interested person or the court motu
proprio may initiate disciplinary
proceedings. The right to institute disbarment
proceedings is not confined to clients nor is it
necessary that the person complaining
suffered injury from the alleged wrongdoing.
Disbarment proceedings are matters of public
interest and the only basis for the judgment is
the proof or failure of proof of the charges
[Figueras v. Jimenez, supra].
The burden of proof in disbarment and
suspension proceedings always rests on the
shoulders of the complainant. The Court
exercises its disciplinary power only if the
complainant establishes that imposition of the
harsh penalty is warranted. As a rule, an
attorney enjoys the legal presumption that he
is innocent of the charges made against him
until the contrary is proved. [Joven and
Reynaldo C. Rasing v. Cruz and Magsalin,
A.C. No. 7686 (2013)].
 U.P. LAW BOC LEGAL ETHICS
The proof required is Substantial Evidence.
The evidentiary threshold of substantial
evidence as opposed to preponderance of
evidence is more in keeping with the primordial
purpose of and essential considerations
attending this type of cases. [xxx] Not being
intended to inflict punishment, it is in no sense
a criminal prosecution [Reyes v. Nieva, A.C.
No. 8560 (2016)].
b. Prescription of actions
In Frias v. Bautista-Lozada, A.C. No. 6656
(2006), the Supreme Court, citing Calo v.
Degamo, A.C. No. 516 (1967) and Heck v.
Santos, A.M. No. RTJ-01-1657 (2004),
declared that the defense of prescription does
not lie in administrative proceedings against
lawyers, for an administrative complaint
against a member of the bar does not
prescribe.
Thus, Sec. 1, Rule VIII of the Rules of
Procedure of the Commission on Bar
Discipline, which provided for a prescription
period of 2 years from the date of the
professional misconduct, was struck down for
being ultra vires.
However, in Isenhardt v. Real, A.C. No. 8254
(2012), the Supreme Court ruled that “the rule
[Sec. 1, Rule VIII, Rules of Procedure of the
Commission on Bar Discipline] should be
construed to mean two years from the date
of discovery of the professional
misconduct.”
OTHER CHARACTERISTICS
1. Investigation is not interrupted or
terminated by reason of the desistance,
settlement, compromise, restitution,
withdrawal of the charges, or failure of the
complainant to prosecute the same [par. 2,
Sec. 5, Rule 139-B, RoC].
The fact that the complainant manifested
that he is no longer interested to pursue,
after settling with the respondent-lawyer
would not render the case moot. The
withdrawal of the complaints cannot divest
Page 61 of 129
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
the Court of its jurisdiction to determine the
veracity of the charges and to discipline an
erring respondent [Chan v. Olegario, AM
No. P-09-2714, (2010)]
2. Proceedings against attorneys shall be
private and confidential. However, the final
order of the Supreme Court shall be
published like its decisions in other cases.
[Sec. 18, Rule 139-B, RoC]
● Purposes:
○ To enable the Court to make its
investigations free from any
extraneous influence or
interference;
○ To protect the personal and
professional reputation of attorneys
and judges from the baseless
charges of disgruntled, vindictive,
and irresponsible clients and
litigants;
○ To deter the press from publishing
administrative cases or portions
thereof without authority [Saludo,
Jr. v. CA, G.R. No. 121404 (2006)].
● Malicious and unauthorized publication
or verbatim reproduction of
administrative complaints and their
premature publication constitutes
contempt of court. [Saludo, Jr. v. CA,
supra].
● This is a privilege/right which may be
waived by the very lawyer in whom and
for the protection of whose personal
and professional reputation it is vested,
pursuant to the general principle that
rights may be waived unless the waiver
is contrary to public policy, among
others” [Villalon v. IAC, G.R. No. 73751
(1986)].
3. Laws dealing with double jeopardy, in pari
delicto, prescription or with procedure such
as verification of pleadings and prejudicial
questions have no application to
disbarment proceedings [Pimentel, Jr. v.
Llorente, A.C. No. 4680 (2000)].
4. Because the proceedings are distinct from
and proceed independently of civil or
criminal cases, whatever has been decided
in the disbarment case cannot be a source
of right that may be enforced in another
action. At best, such judgment may only be
 U.P. LAW BOC LEGAL ETHICS
given weight when introduced as evidence,
but in no case does it bind the court in the
civil action [Esquivias v. CA, G.R. No.
119714 (1997)].
5. The disbarment proceeding does not
violate the due process clause. The
proceeding itself, when instituted in proper
cases, is due process of law [In Re:
Montagne, G.R. No. 1107 (1904)].
6. The rule in criminal cases that the penalty
cannot be imposed in the alternative
applies in administrative disciplinary cases,
which also involve punitive sanctions
[Navarro v. Meneses III, CBD A.C. No. 313
(1998)].
7. Monetary claims cannot be granted except
restitution and return of monies and
properties of the client given in the course
of the lawyer-client relationship.
2. Grounds
Sec. 27, Rule 138. Attorneys removed or
suspended by Supreme Court on what
grounds. — A member of the bar may be
removed or suspended from his office as attorney
by the Supreme Court for any deceit, malpractice,
or other gross misconduct in such office, grossly
immoral conduct, or by reason of his conviction of
a crime involving moral turpitude, or for any
violation of the oath which he is required to take
before the admission to practice, or for a willful
disobedience of any lawful order of a superior
court, or for corruptly or willful appearing as an
attorney for a party to a case without authority so
to do. The practice of soliciting cases at law for
the purpose of gain, either personally or through
paid agents or brokers, constitutes malpractice.
Broadly speaking, the grounds for discipline of
a lawyer consist of those acts of misconduct
committed before and after his admission to
the practice [Agpalo (2004)].
Grounds for disbarment or suspension
a. Deceit, malpractice or other gross
misconduct in office
● Deceit is false representation of a
matter of fact whether by words or
conduct, by false or misleading
allegations, or by concealment of that
which should have been disclosed
Page 62 of 129
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
which deceives or is intended to
deceive another so that he shall act
upon it to his legal injury [Alcantara v.
CA, G.R. No. 147259 (2003)].
● Malpractice ordinarily refers to any
malfeasance or dereliction of duty
committed by a lawyer. It consists of a
failure of an attorney to use such skill,
prudence and diligence as lawyers of
ordinary skill and capacity commonly
possess and exercise in the
performance of tasks which they
undertake, and when such failure
proximately causes damage, it gives
rise to an action in tort [Tan Tek Beng
v. David, A.C. No. 1261 (1983)].
b. Grossly immoral conduct
c. Conviction of a crime involving moral
turpitude
● There must be a conviction. The mere
existence of criminal charges cannot
be a ground for suspension or
disbarment [Agpalo, 2004]
d. Any violation of the lawyer’s oath
e. Willful disobedience of any lawful order of
a superior court
f. Corruptly or willfully appearing as an
attorney without authority so to do
Other statutory grounds
a. Purchase by a lawyer of his client’s
property in litigation [Art. 1491, NCC;
Bautista v. Gonzales, A.M. No. 1625
(1990)].
b. Administrative and criminal sanctions may
be imposed upon any attorney-at-law or
solicitor who:
• By malicious breach of professional
duty or of inexcusable negligence or
ignorance, shall prejudice his client, or
reveal any of the secrets of the latter
learned by him in his professional
capacity [Art. 208, RPC];
• Having undertaken the defense of a
client or having received confidential
information from said client in a case,
shall undertake the defense of the
opposing party in the same case,
without the consent of his first client
[Art. 209, RPC]
 U.P. LAW BOC LEGAL ETHICS
The grounds are not exclusive. The
enumeration is not to be taken as a limitation to
the general power of courts to suspend or
disbar a lawyer. The inherent powers of the
court over its officers cannot be restricted
[Quingwa v. Puno, A.C. No. 389 (1967)]. A
lawyer may be removed from office or
suspended from the practice of law by the
Court on grounds not found in the statute as
when their acts are contrary to honesty or good
morals, or do not approximate the highest
degree of morality and integrity expected of
members of the bar [Sta. Maria v. Tuazon, A.C.
No. 396 (1964)].
Misconduct in private capacity
General rule: The Court will not assume
jurisdiction to discipline one of its members for
misconduct alleged to be committed in his
private capacity.
Exception: An attorney will be removed not
only for malpractice and dishonesty in his
profession, but also for gross misconduct not
connected with his professional duties, which
show him to be unfit for the office and unworthy
of the privileges which his license and the law
confer upon him [Piatt v. Abordo, supra.].
Misconduct before admission to the bar
A lawyer may be disbarred from
misrepresentation or false pretense relative to
the requirements for admission to practice. The
fact that he lacked any of the qualifications for
membership at the time he took his oath is a
ground for his disbarment [In Re: Diao, A.C.
No. 244 (1963)].
3. How Instituted
Proceedings for disbarment, suspension or
discipline of attorneys may be instituted by the
following:
1. The Supreme Court, motu propio; or
2. The IBP Board of Governors, motu propio,
or upon referral by a) the Supreme Court,
b) Chapter Board of Officers, or c) at the
instance of any person.
All charges against the following shall be filed
with the Supreme Court:
Page 63 of 129
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
a. Justices of the Court of Appeals;
b. Justices of the Sandiganbayan;
c. Judges of the Court of Tax Appeals; and
d. Judges of lower courts [Sec. 1 (2), Rule
139-B, RoC].
Charges filed against justices and judges
before the IBP shall immediately be forwarded
to the Supreme Court for disposition and
adjudication, including those filed prior to their
appointment in the Judiciary [Sec. 1 (2), Rule
139-B].
Contents of the complaint:
1. A clear and concise statement of the facts
complained of;
2. Supporting documents such as affidavits
or persons having personal knowledge of
the facts alleged in the complaint and/or by
such documents as may substantiate the
said facts [par 2, Sec. 1, Rule 139-B, RoC].
4. Proceedings
Institution by any of the following:
1. The Supreme Court, motu propio
2. The IBP Board of Governors, motu propio,
or upon referral by a) the Supreme Court, b)
Chapter Board of Officers, or c) at the
instance of any person
3. Upon verified complaint by any person
↓
6 copies of the verified complaint shall be filed
with the Secretary of the IBP or Secretary of any
of its chapter and shall be forwarded to the IBP
Board of Governors.
The complaint must allege specific acts which
constitute particular breaches of the law, the
CPR, or ethics. Otherwise, the complaint must
fail.
↓
Investigation by the National Grievance
Investigators within 3 months.
The respondent has the opportunity to defend
himself, but if he fails to appear, the investigation
will proceed ex parte.
↓
 U.P. LAW BOC LEGAL ETHICS
Submission of investigative report to the IBP
Board of Governors.
↓
The IBP Board of Governors reviews and
decides within 30 days.
The Board then transmits its decision to the
Supreme Court within 10 days from resolution.
↓ complaint is not essential to the
The Supreme Court reviews the decision of the
IBP Board of Governors and renders the final
decision for disbarment/suspension/dismissal.
The inherent power to discipline members
of the bar belong to the Supreme Court, not
the IBP. The power to disbar a lawyer is
exclusive to it. Thus, no decision of the IBP is
final. Such decisions are automatically
elevated to the Court for review [Maronilla v.
Jorda, A.C. No. 6973 (2007)].
The oral instruction to return the P80,000 given
to respondent in the IBP’s August 18, 2004
hearing was not a juridically binding order. The
competence of the IBP is only
recommendatory. Under Article VIll, Section
5(5) of the 1987 Constitution, only this Court
has the power to actually rule on disciplinary
cases of lawyers, and to impose appropriate
penalties. Rule 139-B merely delegates
investigatory functions to the IBP. With the
exercise of its delegated investigatory power,
the IBP refers proposed actions to this Court.
Recognizing its limited competence in
disciplinary cases impels a concomitant
recognition that, pending favorable action by
this Court on its recommendations, its
determinations and conclusions are only
provisional. Therefore, rulings on disciplinary
cases attain finality and are enforceable only
upon this Court's own determination that they
must be imposed [Anita Santos Murray v. Atty.
Felicito J. Cervantes, A.C. No. 5408 (2017)]
In BAR MATTER N0. 1645 (RE:
AMENDMENT OF RULE 139-B, dated
October 13, 2015, the Supreme Court issued
new rules governing administrative disciplinary
cases against lawyers:
Page 64 of 129
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
● Investigation by the Solicitor General is no
longer required.
● Only the Supreme Court can dismiss cases
against lawyers; it cannot be delegated to
the IBP. Thus, the provision in Rule 139-B
that the Board of Governors can dismiss
cases has been repealed.
● The motive of the complainant and his/her
in/action after the filing of the verified
proceedings.
5. Discipline of Filipino Lawyers who
Practice in Foreign Jurisdictions
The disbarment or suspension of a member of
the Philippine Bar by a competent court or
other disciplinary agency in a foreign
jurisdiction where he has also been admitted
as an attorney is a ground for his disbarment or
suspension if the basis of such action includes
any of the acts enumerated as grounds in Rule
138 [In re: Maquera, B.M. No. 793 (2004)].
A foreign court’s judgment ordering the
suspension of a Filipino lawyer in that
foreign country does not automatically
result in his suspension or disbarment in
the Philippines. The judgment, resolution or
order of the foreign court or disciplinary agency
shall be prima facie evidence of the ground for
disbarment or suspension. Due process
demands that he be given the opportunity to
defend himself and present testimonial or
documentary evidence on the matter, in an
investigation conducted in accordance with
Rule 139-B. [In re: Maquera, supra)].
6. Sanctions
Disciplinary Measures:
1. Warning, an act or fact of putting one on
his guard against an impending danger,
evil consequences or penalties.
2. Admonition, a gentle or friendly reproof,
mild rebuke, warning or reminder,
counseling, on a fault, error or oversight; an
expression of authoritative advice.
3. Reprimand, a public and formal censure or
severe reproof, administered to a person in
fault by his superior officer or a body to
 U.P. LAW BOC LEGAL ETHICS
which he belongs. It is imposed on a minor
infraction of the lawyer’s duty to the court
or client.
4. Suspension, a temporary withholding of a
lawyer’s right to practice his profession as
a lawyer for:
a. A definite period; or
b. An indefinite period, which amounts to
qualified disbarment, in which case, the
lawyer determines for himself for how
long or how short his suspension shall
last by proving to court that he is once
again fit to resume practice of law.
5. Censure, an official reprimand.
6. Disbarment, the act of the Philippine
Supreme Court in withdrawing from an
attorney the privilege to practice law and
striking out the name of the lawyer from the
roll of attorneys.
7. Interim suspension, the temporary
suspension of a lawyer from the practice of
law pending imposition of final discipline. It
includes:
a. Suspension upon conviction of a
serious crime.
b. Suspension when the lawyer’s
continuing conduct is likely to cause
immediate and serious injury to a client
or public.
8. Probation, a sanction that allows a lawyer
to practice law under specified conditions.
Other sanctions and remedies:
a. Restitution
b. Assessment of costs
c. Limitation upon practice
d. Appointment of a receiver
e. Requirement that a lawyer take the bar
examination or professional responsibility
examination
f. Requirement that a lawyer attend
continuing education courses
g. Other requirements that the Supreme
Court or disciplinary board deem
consistent with the purposes of sanctions.
Page 65 of 129
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
D. READMISSION TO THE
BAR
The Supreme Court has the exclusive authority
to reinstate a disbarred or indefinitely
suspended lawyer, stemming from its
constitutional prerogative to issue rules and
regulations concerning admission to the
practice of law [Agpalo, 2004].
1. Lawyers Who Have Been
Suspended
Guidelines in the lifting an order of
suspension
1. Upon expiration of the period of
suspension, respondent shall file a sworn
statement with the court, through the Office
of the Bar Confidant, stating therein that he
or she has desisted from the practice of law
and has not appeared in any court during
the period of his or her suspension;
2. Copies of the sworn statement furnished to
the local chapter of the IBP and to the
executive judge of the courts where the
respondent has pending cases handled by
him or her, and/or where he or she has
appeared as counsel;
3. The sworn statement shall be considered
as proof of respondent’s compliance with
the order of suspension
4. Any finding or report contrary to the
statements made by the lawyer under oath
shall be a ground for the imposition of a
more severe punishment or disbarment, as
may be warranted [Maniago v. De Dios,
A.C. No. 7472 (2010)].
2. Lawyers Who Have Been
Disbarred
Considerations for Reinstatement
● The applicant’s character and standing
prior to disbarment
● The nature or character of the misconduct
for which he is disbarred
● His conduct subsequent to disbarment [Cui
v. Cui, G.R. No. L-18727 (1964)]
 U.P. LAW BOC LEGAL ETHICS
● His efficient government service [In re:
Adriatico, G.R. No. L-2532 (1910)];
● The time that has elapsed between
disbarment and the application for
reinstatement and the circumstances that
he has been sufficiently punished and
disciplined [Prudential Bank v. Benjamin
Grecia, A.C. No. 2756 (1986)]
● Applicant’s appreciation of significance of
his dereliction and his assurance that he
now possesses the requisite probity and
integrity
● Favorable endorsement of the IBP and
local government officials and citizens of
his community, pleas of his loved ones
[Yap Tan v. Sabandal, B.M. No. 44 (1989)]
The sole objective is to determine whether or
not the applicant has satisfied and convinced
the court by positive evidence that the effort he
has made toward the rehabilitation of his
character has been successful [In re: Rusuina,
A.C. No. 270 (1974)].
The quantum of evidence necessary for
reinstatement is the same as that for admission
to the bar, except that the court, when
circumstances so warrant, may require an
applicant to present additional proof of his
qualifications [Cui v. Cui, supra.].
The Supreme Court may also require special
conditions to be fulfilled by the applicant, in
addition to the required rehabilitation, including
enrolling in and passing the required fourth
year review classes in a recognized law school
[Agpalo, 2004].
Prior to actual reinstatement, the applicant will
be required to take anew the lawyer’s oath and
sign once again the roll of attorneys after
paying the requisite fees [Funa].
Guidelines in resolving requests for judicial
clemency of disbarred lawyers
a. There must be proof of remorse and
reformation. These include testimonials of
credible institutions and personalities;
b. Sufficient time must have lapsed from the
imposition of the penalty to ensure a period
of reformation;
Page 66 of 129
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
c. The age of the person asking for clemency
must show that he still has productive years
ahead of him that can be put to good use
by giving him a chance to redeem himself;
d. There must be a showing of promise (e.g.,
intellectual aptitude, contribution to legal
scholarship), and potential for public
service;
e. Other relevant factors to justify clemency
[Re: Letter of Judge Diaz, A.M. No. 07-7-
17-SC (2007)].
Effect of Reinstatement
a. Lawyer must comply with the conditions
imposed upon readmission
b. The lawyer’s moral rehabilitation and
mental fitness to practice law is recognized
c. The lawyer shall be subject to the same
law, rules and regulations as those
applicable to any other lawyer
3. Lawyers who have been
Repatriated
Lawyers who reacquire their Philippine
citizenship should apply to the Supreme Court
for license or permit to practice their profession
[Sec. 5(4), R.A. No. 9225].
See also Reacquisition of the Privilege to
Practice Law in the Philippines under R.A.
No. 9225 or the Citizenship Retention and
Reacquisition Act of 2003 above.
E. MANDATORY
CONTINUING LEGAL
EDUCATION
1. Purpose
Continuing legal education is required of
members of the IBP to:
a. Ensure that throughout their career, they
keep abreast with law and jurisprudence;
b. Maintain the ethics of the profession; and
c. Enhance the standards of the practice of
law [Sec. 1, Rule 1, B.M. No. 850].
 U.P. LAW BOC LEGAL ETHICS
2. Requirements
Members of the IBP shall complete, every
three years, at least 36 hours of continuing
legal education activities approved by the
MCLE Committee. Of the 36 hours:
# of
Subject
Hours
Legal Ethics 6 hours
Trial and Pre-trial Skills 4 hours
Alternative Dispute Resolution 5 hours
Updates on substantive and 9 hours
procedural laws and Jurisprudence
International law and International 2 hours
Conventions
Legal Writing and Oral Advocacy 4 hours
Other MCLE prescribed subjects 6 hours
[Sec. 2, Rule 2, B.M. No. 850]
Participatory Legal Education [Sec. 2, Rule
5, B.M. No. 850]
a. Attending approved education activities
like seminars, conferences, conventions,
symposia, in-house education programs,
workshops, dialogues or round table
discussion;
b. Speaking or lecturing, or acting as
assigned panelist, reactor, commentator,
resource speaker, moderator, coordinator
or facilitator in approved education
activities;
c. Teaching in a law school or lecturing in a
bar review class.
Non-Participatory Legal Education [Sec. 3,
Rule 5, B.M. No. 850]
a. Preparing, as an author or co-author,
written materials published or accepted for
publication, e.g., in the form of an article,
chapter, book, or book review which
contribute to the legal education of the
author member, which were not prepared
in the ordinary course of the member’s
practice or employment;
Page 67 of 129
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
b. Editing a law book, law journal or legal
newsletter;
c. Other activities, such as rendering
mandatory legal aid services pursuant to
Sec. 8, B.M. No. 2012, may be credited as
MCLE activities.
3. Compliance
Lawyers, not otherwise exempted, are required
to complete their MCLE requirements every
three (3) years and within the compliance
periods set by the Rules.
The IBP members covered by the requirement
are divided into three compliance groups:
a. Compliance Group 1 consists of members
in the National Capital Region (NCR) or
Metro Manila;
b. Compliance Group 2 consists members in
Luzon outside NCR; and
c. Compliance Group 3 consists of members
in Visayas and Mindanao [Sec. 2, Rule 3,
B.M. No. 850].
The initial compliance period shall begin not
later than 3 months from the constitution of the
MCLE Committee. The compliance period shall
be for 36 months and shall begin the day after
the end of the previous compliance period
[Sec. 1, Rule 3, B.M. No. 850].
For those admitted or readmitted after the
establishment of the program, they will be
permanently assigned to the appropriate
compliance group based on their chapter
membership on the date of admission or
readmission.
The initial compliance period after admission or
readmission shall begin on the first day of the
month of admission or readmission and shall
end on the same day as that of all other
members in the same compliance group.
However:
● Where 4 months or less remain of the initial
compliance period after admission or
readmission, the member is not required to
comply with the program requirement for
the initial compliance;
 U.P. LAW BOC LEGAL ETHICS
● Where more than 4 months remain of the
initial compliance period after admission or
readmission, the member shall be required
to complete a number of hours of approved
continuing legal education activities equal
to the number of months remaining in the
compliance period in which the member is
admitted or readmitted. Such member shall
be required to complete a number of hours
of education in legal ethics in proportion to
the number of months remaining in the
compliance period. Fractions of hours shall
be rounded up to the next whole number
[Sec. 3, Rule 3, BM 850].
Forms of non-compliance
a. Failure to complete the educational
requirement within the compliance period
b. Failure to provide attestation of compliance
or exemption
c. Failure to provide satisfactory evidence of
compliance
d. Failure to satisfy the education requirement
and furnish evidence of non-compliance
within 60 days from receipt of non-
compliance notice
e. Failure to pay the 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 the MCLE
requirement [Sec. 1, Rule 12, B.M. No.
850].
The non-compliant member shall receive a
Notice of Non-Compliance and shall be given
60 days from receipt of notification to file a
response clarifying the deficiency or showing
compliance.
4. Exemptions
Exempted members from the MCLE
a. The President and the Vice President of
the Philippines, and the Secretaries and
Undersecretaries of Executives
Departments;
b. Senators and Members of the House of
Representatives;
c. The Chief Justice and Associate Justices
of the Supreme Court, incumbent and
Page 68 of 129
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
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;
d. The Chief State Counsel, Chief State
Prosecutor and Assistant Secretaries of
the Department of Justice;
e. The Solicitor General and the Assistant
Solicitor General;
f. The Government Corporate Counsel,
Deputy and Assistant Government
Corporate Counsel;
g. The Chairmen and Members of the
Constitutional Commissions;
h. The Ombudsman, the Overall Deputy
Ombudsman, the Deputy Ombudsmen and
the Special Prosecutor of the Office of the
Ombudsman;
i. Heads of government agencies exercising
quasi-judicial functions;
j. Incumbent deans, bar reviewers and
professors of law who have teaching
experience for at least ten years accredited
law schools;
k. The Chancellor, Vice-Chancellor and
members of the Corps of Professors and
Professorial Lectures of the Philippine
Judicial Academy;
l. Governors and Mayors;
m. Those who are not in law practice, private
or public;
n. Those who have retired from law practice
with the approval of the IBP Board of
Governors; and
o. Those granted exemption for good cause
in accordance with Sec 3, Rule 7 of the
MCLE Rules [Sec. 1 and 2, Rule 7, B.M.
No. 850]
A member may file a verified request setting
forth good cause for exemption (e.g.,
physical disability, illness, post graduate study
abroad, proven expertise in law) from
compliance with or modification of any of the
requirements, including an extension of time
for compliance, in accordance with a procedure
to be established by the MCLE Committee
[Sec. 3, Rule 7, B.M. No. 850].
 U.P. LAW BOC LEGAL ETHICS
Applications for exemption from or modification
of the MCLE requirement shall be under oath
and supported by documents [Sec. 5, Rule 7,
B.M. No. 850].
When a member ceases to be exempt, the
compliance period begins on the first day of the
month in which he ceases to be exempt and
shall end on the same day as that of all other
members in the same Compliance Group [Sec.
4, Rule 7, B.M. No. 850].
5. Sanctions
a. A member who, for whatever reason, is in
non-compliance at the end of the
compliance period shall pay a non-
compliance fee.
b. Any member who fails to satisfactorily
comply shall be listed as a delinquent
member by the IBP Board of Governors
upon the recommendation of the MCLE
Committee, in which case, Rule 139-A,
Rules of Court, governing the IBP, shall
apply. [Sec. 1 and 2, Rule 13, B.M. No.
850]
Membership fee shall continue to accrue at the
active rate against a member during the period
he/she is listed as a delinquent member [Sec.
3, Rule 13, B.M. No. 850].
The delinquent member shall not be permitted
to practice law until such time as adequate
proof of compliance is received by the MCLE
Committee. [Sec 7, Rule 13, B.M. No. 850].
When the member provides proof of
compliance with the MCLE requirement,
including the payment of the non-compliance
fee, the involuntary listing as a delinquent
member shall be terminated and the member
shall be reinstated [Rule 14, B.M. No. 850].
Under B.M. No. 1922 (2008), practicing
members of the bar are required to indicate in
all pleadings filed before the courts or quasi-
judicial bodies, the number and date of issue of
their MCLE Certificate of Compliance or
Certificate of Exemption, as may be applicable,
for the immediately preceding compliance
Page 69 of 129
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
period. BUT this has been amended, pursuant
to B.M. No. 850, as amended (Dated Feb. 15,
2015. Effective Mar. 1, 2015):
“xxx The Court Resolved to REQUIRE all
members of the IBP to file a written entry of
appearance indicating their MCLE
exemption or compliance number for the
current or immediately preceding compliance
period and date of issuance thereof before
appearing as counsel or engaging in oral
argument in open court or before a quasi-
judicial body. However, counsels who affixed
their signatures in their pleadings and indicated
their MCLE exemption or compliance number
in their pleadings need not file a separate entry
of appearance. Henceforth, all counsels,
including partners of law firms whose names
appear in the said pleadings, shall also indicate
their MCLE exemption or compliance number.”
Pursuant to Supreme Court Resolution dated
January 14, 2014, the phrase “failure to
disclose the required information would cause
the dismissal of the case and the expunction of
the pleadings from the records” in B.M. No.
1922 (2008) is repealed and amended to read,
“failure to disclose the required information
would subject the counsel to appropriate
penalty and disciplinary action.”
Penalties for non-disclosure of compliance or
exemption number in the pleadings:
1. The lawyer shall be imposed a fine of
P2,000, P3,000 and 4,000 for the first to
third offense successively.
2. In addition to the fine, counsel may be
listed as a delinquent member of the Bar
3. The non-compliant lawyer shall be
discharged from the case and the client
shall be allowed to secure the services of a
new counsel with the right to demand the
return of fees already paid to the lawyer
[B.M. No. 1922].
 U.P. LAW BOC
F. NOTARIAL PRACTICE
A.M. No. 02-8-13-SC is referred to as the 2004
Rules on Notarial Practice [hereinafter, Notarial
Rules]. In 2008, it was amended by the Court
en banc via 2 resolutions: Resolution dated
February 12, 2008 and Resolution dated
February 19, 2008.
A Notary Public is one appointed by the Court
whose duty is to attest to the genuineness of
any deed or writing in order to render them
available as evidence of the facts stated
therein and who is authorized by statute to
administer various oaths [E.O. 292].
1. Qualifications of a Notary Public
a. Must be a Filipino citizen;
b. Must be over 21 years old;
c. Must be a resident of the Philippines for
at least 1 year;
d. Must maintain a regular place of work or
business in the city or province where
commission is to be issued;
e. Must be a member of the Philippine Bar
in good standing, with clearances from:
The Office of the Bar Confidant of the
Supreme Court, and the IBP; and
f. Must not have been convicted in the first
instance of any crime involving moral
turpitude [Sec. 1, Rule III].
2. Term of Office of a Notary Public
Sec. 11, Rule III. 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 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.
Sec. 13, Rule III. A notary public may file a written
application with the Executive Judge for the
Page 70 of 129
LEGAL ETHICS LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
renewal of his commission within 45 days before
the expiration thereof.
3. Powers and Limitations
Notarization is not an empty, meaningless and
routinary act. It converts a private document
into a public instrument, making it admissible
as evidence without the necessity of
preliminary proof of its authenticity and due
execution [Sicat v. Ariola, A.C. No. 5864
(2005)].
Lawyers commissioned as notaries are
mandated to subscribe to the sacred duties
appertaining to their office, such duties being
dictated by public policy impressed with public
interest [Mondejar v. Rubia, A.C. No. 5907 and
5942 (2006)].
Powers
A notary public can 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 the Notarial
Rules [Sec. 1(a), Rule IV].
a. Certifying the affixing of signature by
thumb or other mark on an instrument
or document presented for notarization
[Sec. 1(b), Rule IV].
b. Signing on behalf of a person who is
physically unable to sign or make a
mark on an instrument or document
[Sec. 1(c), Rule IV].
 U.P. LAW BOC LEGAL ETHICS LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS

2. Copies or supervises the copying of the

instrument or document;
Basic Common 3. Compares the instrument or document
Definition requirements with the copy; and
4. Determines that the copy is accurate and
Represents 1. Appears in complete [Sec. 4, Rule II].
to the notary person before
public that the notary Certifying the Affixing of Signature by
the signature public and Thumb/ Other Mark
was presents an A notary public is authorized if:
voluntarily integrally 1. The thumb or other mark is affixed in the
affixed for the complete presence of the notary public and of two (2)
purposes instrument or disinterested and unaffected witnesses to
Acknow-
stated in the document the instrument or document;
ledgment 2. Both witnesses sign their own names in
instrument
AND 2. Is attested to addition to the thumb or other mark;
declares the be personally 3. The notary public writes below the thumb
instrument known to the or other mark: “Thumb or Other Mark
affixed by (name of signatory by mark) in
was notary public or
the presence of (names and addresses of
executed as identified by the
witnesses) and undersigned notary public”;
a free and notary public and
voluntary act through 4. The notary public notarizes the signature
competent by thumb or other mark through an
Avows under evidence of acknowledgment, jurat, or signature
Oath or penalty of law identity as witnessing. [Sec. 1(b), Rule IV]
Affirmation to the whole defined by the
truth Notarial Rules Signing on Behalf of a Person Who is
Signs the Physically Unable to Sign or Make a Mark
instrument A notary public is authorized if:
and takes an 1. The notary public is directed by the person
oath or unable to sign or make a mark to sign on
his behalf;
Jurat affirmation
2. The signature of the notary public is affixed
before the
in the presence of two disinterested and
notary public unaffected witnesses to the instrument or
as to such document;
instrument 3. Both witnesses sign their own names;
4. The notary public writes below his
Signs the
signature: “Signature affixed by notary in
instrument in presence of (names and addresses of
Signature
the presence person and two witnesses)”; and
Witnessing
of the notary 5. The notary public notarizes his signature
public by acknowledgment or jurat [Sec. 1(c),
Rule IV].
Copy Certification
A notarial act in which a notary public: “Physically unable to sign” does not include
1. Is presented with an instrument or the situation where a person is physically
document that is neither a vital record, a unable to sign because he is in another place.
public record, nor publicly recordable;

Page 71 of 129
 U.P. LAW BOC LEGAL ETHICS
Limitations
i. Relating to Notarial Acts
A notary public is bereft of power to perform
any notarial act outside his regular place of
work or business; provided, however, that on
certain exceptional occasions or situations, a
notarial act may be performed at the request of
the parties in the following sites located within
his territorial jurisdiction:
1. Public offices, convention halls, and similar
places where oaths of office may be
administered;
2. Public function areas in hotels and similar
places for the signing of instruments or
documents requiring notarization;
3. Hospitals and other medical institutions
where a party to an instrument or document
is confined for treatment; and
4. Any place where a party to an instrument
or document requiring notarization is under
detention [Sec. 2(a), Rule IV]
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 the
Notarial 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 [Sec. 3, Rule IV]
● Violation of this may disqualify a
person from being a notary public but is
insufficient ground for disbarment
[Jandoquile v. Revilla, A.C. No. 9514,
(2013)].
A person shall not perform a notarial act:
! If the person involved as signatory to the
instrument or document:
a. Is not in the notary's presence
personally at the time of the
notarization; and
b. Is not personally known to the notary
public or otherwise identified by the
Page 72 of 129
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
notary public through competent
evidence of identity as defined by the
Notarial Rules [Sec. 2(b), Rule IV].
! If the notary knows or has good reason to
believe that the notarial act or transaction
is unlawful or immoral;
! 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
! If in the notary's judgment, the signatory is
not acting of his or her own free will [Sec.
4, Rule IV]
A notary public shall not:
1. Execute a certificate containing information
known or believed by the notary to be false;
2. Affix an official signature or seal on a
notarial certificate that is incomplete [Sec.
5, Rule IV];
3. Notarize a blank or incomplete instrument
or document; or
4. Notarize an instrument or document
without appropriate notarial certification
[Sec. 6, Rule IV].
ii. Relating to Notarial Register
In the notary's presence, any person may
inspect an entry in the notarial register, during
regular business hours, provided:
1. The person's identity is personally known
to the notary public or proven through
competent evidence of identity as defined
in the Notarial Rules;
2. The person affixes a signature and thumb
or other mark or other recognized identifier,
in the notarial register in a separate, dated
entry;
3. The person specifies the month, year, type
of instrument or document, and name of
the principal in the notarial act or acts
sought; and
4. The person is shown only the entry or
entries specified by him.
The notarial register may be examined by a law
enforcement officer in the course of an official
investigation or by virtue of a court order.
 U.P. LAW BOC LEGAL ETHICS
If the notary public has a reasonable ground to
believe that a person has a criminal intent or
wrongful motive in requesting information from
the notarial register, the notary shall deny
access to any entry or entries therein [Sec. 4,
Rule VI].
4. Notarial Register
A notarial register refers to a permanently
bound book with numbered pages containing a
chronological record of notarial acts performed
by a notary public [Sec. 5, Rule II].
Rule VI, Secs. I and 2 of the Notarial Rules
require a notary public to keep and maintain a
Notarial Register wherein he will record his
every notarial act. His failure to make the
proper entry or entries in his notarial register
concerning his notarial acts is a ground for
revocation of his notarial commission [Agadan,
et al. v. Kilaan, A.C. No. 9385 (2013)].
Entries
By notary public
The following information must be recorded in
the register at the time of notarization:
1. The entry number and page number;
2. The date and time of day of the notarial act;
3. The type of notarial act;
4. The title or description of the instrument,
document or proceeding;
5. The name and address of each principal;
6. The competent evidence of identity as
defined by the Notarial Rules if the
signatory is not personally known to the
notary;
7. The name and address of each credible
witness swearing to or affirming the
person's identity;
8. The fee charged for the notarial act;
9. The address where the notarization was
performed if not in the notary's regular
place of work or business;
10. Any other circumstance the notary public
may deem of significance or relevance;
11. Reasons and circumstances for not
completing a notarial act;
12. Circumstances of any request to inspect or
copy an entry in the notarial register,
including the:
Page 73 of 129
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
a.
Requester’s name;
b.
Requester’s address;
c.
Requester’s signature;
d.
Requester’s thumbmark or other
recognized identifier;
e. Evidence of requester’s identity; and
f. Reasons for refusal to allow inspection
or copying of a journal entry;
13. Brief description of the substance of a
contract presented for notarization;
14. In case of a protest of any draft, bill of
exchange or promissory note, a full and
true record of all proceedings in relation
thereto and shall note therein:
a. Whether the demand for the sum of
money was made, by whom, when and
where;
b. Whether he presented such draft, bill or
note;
c. Whether notices were given, to whom
and in what manner; where the same
was made, when and to whom and
where directed; and
d. Of every other fact touching the same
[Sec. 2, Rule VI]
By Other Persons
At the time of notarization, the notary's notarial
register shall be signed or a thumb or other
mark affixed by each:
1. Principal;
2. Credible witness swearing or affirming to
the identity of a principal; and
3. Witness to a signature by thumb or other
mark, or to a signing by the notary public
on behalf of a person physically unable to
sign [Sec. 3, Rule VI].
Closing
At the end of each week, the notary public shall
certify in his notarial register the number of
instruments or documents executed, sworn to,
acknowledged, or protested before him; or if
none, this certificate shall show this fact. [Sec.
2(g), Rule VI]
Submission
A certified copy of each month’s entries and a
duplicate original copy of any instrument
acknowledged before the notary public shall,
within the first ten days of the month following,
 U.P. LAW BOC LEGAL ETHICS
be forwarded to the Clerk of Court and shall be
under the responsibility of such officer. If there
is no entry to certify for the month, the notary
shall forward a statement to this effect in lieu of
certified copies herein required. [Sec. 2(h),
Rule VI]
5. Jurisdiction of Notary Public and
Place of Notarization
A person commissioned as notary public may
perform notarial acts in any place within the
territorial jurisdiction of the commissioning
court [Sec. 11, Rule III].
The jurisdiction of a notary public in a province
shall be co-extensive with the province. The
jurisdiction of a notary public in the City of
Manila shall be co-extensive with said city. No
notary shall possess authority to do any act
beyond the limits of his jurisdiction [Sec. 274,
Art II, Revised Administrative Code].
General rule: A notary public shall not perform
a notarial act outside his regular place of work
or business
Exception: On certain exceptional occasions or
situations, a notarial act may be performed at
the request of the parties on the following sites
located within his territorial jurisdiction.
See also Limitations relating to Notarial
Acts above.
6. Revocation of Commission
a. The Executive Judge shall revoke a
notarial commission for any ground on
which an application for a commission may
be denied;
b. In addition, the Executive Judge may
revoke the commission of, or impose
appropriate administrative sanctions upon,
any notary public who:
1. Fails to keep a notarial register;
2. Fails to make the proper entry or
entries in his notarial register
concerning his notarial acts;
Page 74 of 129
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
3. Fails to send the copy of the entries to
the Executive Judge within the first ten
days of the month following;
4. Fails to affix to acknowledgments the
date of expiration of his commission;
5. Fails to submit his notarial register,
when filled, to the Executive Judge;
6. Fails to make his report, within a
reasonable time, to the Executive
Judge concerning the performance of
his duties, as may be required by the
judge;
7. Fails to require the presence of a
principal at the time of the notarial act;
8. Fails to identify a principal on the basis
of personal knowledge or competent
evidence;
9. Executes a false or incomplete
certificate under Sec. 5, Rule IV;
10. Knowingly performs or fails to perform
any other act prohibited or mandated
by these Rules; and
11. 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 [Sec. 1(a)
and (b), Rule XI].
If the notarial certificate is incomplete or
deficient, it is as if there is no acknowledgment
and the document remains a private document,
as if it had not been notarized [Spouses
Bautista v. Silva, G.R. No. 157434 (2006)].
A Deed of Donation, notarized without
determining the presence or qualification of
affiants, demonstrates gross negligence and
ignorance of the Rules on Notarial Practice
[Laquindanum v. Quintana, A.C. No. 7036
(2009)].
A notary public should not notarize a document
unless the person who signed the same is the
very same person who executed and
personally appeared before him to attest to the
contents and the truth of what are stated
therein. Without the personal appearance of
the person who actually executed the
document, the notary public would be unable to
verify the genuineness of the signature of the
 U.P. LAW BOC LEGAL ETHICS
acknowledging party and to ascertain that the
document is the party’s free act or deed.
When a lawyer commissioned as a notary
public fails to discharge his duties as such, he
is meted the penalties of revocation of his
notarial commission, disqualification from
being commissioned as a notary public for a
period of 2 years, and suspension from the
practice of law for 1 year [Agbulos v. Viray,
G.R. No. 7350 (2013)].
7. Competent Evidence of Identity
A notary public can identify an individual based
on either of the following sources:
a. At least one current identification document
issued by an official agency bearing the
photograph and signature of the individual
such as but not limited to: Passport,
Driver's License, Professional Regulation
Commission ID, NBI clearance, police
clearance, postal ID, voter’s ID, Barangay
certification, GSIS e-card, SSS card,
PhilHealth card, senior citizen card,
OWWA ID, OFW ID, seaman’s book,
alien’s certificate of registration/immigrant
certificate of registration, government office
ID, certification from the NCWDO, DSWD
certification; etc.
Note: A Community Tax Certificate has
been deleted as among the accepted proof
of identity because of its inherent
unreliability [Advance Paper Corporation v.
Arma Traders Corporation, G.R. No.
176897 (2013)].
b. The oath or affirmation of:
1. One credible witness not privy to the
instrument, document or transaction
who is personally known to the notary
public and who personally knows the
individual; or
2. 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 [Sec. 12,
Rule II, as amended by Resolution
dated Feb. 19, 2008].
Page 75 of 129
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
8. Sanctions
Administrative Sanctions
The Executive Judge may motu proprio initiate
administrative proceedings against a notary
public and impose the appropriate
administrative sanctions on the grounds for
revocation of commission mentioned [Sec.
1(d), Rule XI].
An order imposing disciplinary sanctions shall
be immediately executory pending appeal,
unless otherwise ordered by the Supreme
Court.
The names of notaries who have been
administratively sanctioned will be posted in a
conspicuous place in the offices of the
Executive Judge and the Clerk of Court [Sec.
3, Rule XI].
Criminal Sanctions
The Executive Judge shall cause the
prosecution of any person who:
1. Knowingly acts or otherwise impersonates
a notary public;
2. Knowingly obtains, conceals, defaces, or
destroys the seal, notarial register, or
official records of a notary public; and
3. Knowingly solicits, coerces, or in any way
influences a notary public to commit official
misconduct. [Sec. 1, Rule XI].
G. DUTIES OF LAWYERS UNDER
SPECIFIC PROVISIONS IN THE
RULES OF COURT
1. Judgments, Final Orders, and
Entry of Judgments
It is the duty of the clerk of court to enter the
judgment or final order in the book of entries of
judgments, if no appeal or motion for new trial
or reconsideration is filed within the time
provided in these Rules. The date of finality of
the judgment or final order shall be deemed to
be the date of its entry. The record shall contain
the dispositive part of the judgment or final
order and shall be signed by the clerk, within a
 U.P. LAW BOC LEGAL ETHICS
certificate that such judgment or final order has
become final and executory [Sec. 2, Rule 36,
RoC].
Judgment may be given for or against one or
more of several plaintiffs and for or against one
or more of several defendants. When justice so
demands, the court may require the parties
on each side to file adversary pleadings as
between themselves and determine their
ultimate rights and obligations [Sec. 3, Rule 36,
RoC].
2. Contempt
Direct Contempt
! Misbehavior in the presence of or so near
a court as to obstruct or interrupt the
proceedings before the same;
! Disrespect toward the court;
! Offensive personalities toward others;
! Refusal to be sworn or to answer as a
witness; or
! Refusal to subscribe an affidavit or
deposition when lawfully required to do so.
Direct contempt may be summarily
adjudged by such court.
Punishment for direct contempt:
1. If with RTC or a court of equivalent or
higher rank - a fine not exceeding two
thousand pesos or imprisonment not
exceeding ten (10) days, or both.
2. If with a lower court - a fine not exceeding
two hundred pesos or imprisonment not
exceeding one (1) day, or both [Sec. 1,
Rule 71, RoC].
Indirect Contempt
1. Misbehavior of an officer of a court in the
performance of his official duties or in his
official transactions;
2. Disobedience of or resistance to a lawful
writ, process, order, or judgment of a court,
including the act of a person who, after
being dispossessed or ejected from any
real property by the judgment or process of
any court of competent jurisdiction, enters
or attempts or induces another to enter into
Page 76 of 129
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
or upon such real property, for the purpose
of executing acts of ownership or
possession, or in any manner disturbs the
possession given to the person adjudged
to be entitled thereto;
3. Any abuse of or any unlawful interference
with the processes or proceedings of a
court not constituting direct contempt under
section 1 of this Rule;
4. Any improper conduct tending, directly or
indirectly, to impede, obstruct, or degrade
the administration of justice;
5. Assuming to be an attorney or an officer of
a court, and acting as such without
authority;
6. Failure to obey a subpoena duly served;
7. The rescue, or attempted rescue, of a
person or property in the custody of an
officer by virtue of an order or process of a
court held by him [Sec. 3, Rule 71, RoC].
Punishment for indirect contempt:
1. If with RTC or a court of equivalent or
higher rank - a fine not exceeding thirty
thousand pesos or imprisonment not
exceeding six (6) months, or both
2. If with a lower court - a fine not exceeding
five thousand pesos or imprisonment not
exceeding one (1) month, or both;
3. If the contempt consists in the violation of a
writ of injunction, temporary restraining
order or status quo order - complete
restitution to the party injured by such
violation of the property involved or such
amount as may be alleged and proved.
3. Arraignment and Plea
The court has the duty to inform the
accused of his right to counsel. Before
arraignment, the court shall inform the accused
of his right to counsel and ask him if he desires
to have one. The court must assign a counsel
de oficio to defend the accused, unless he is
allowed to defend himself in person or has
employed counsel of his choice [Sec. 6, Rule
116, RoC].
Rule 18.02 states that a lawyer shall not handle
any legal matter without adequate preparation.
Therefore, whenever a counsel de oficio is
 U.P. LAW BOC LEGAL ETHICS
appointed by the court to defend the accused
at the arraignment, he shall be given a
reasonable time to consult with the
accused as to his plea before proceeding with
the arraignment [Sec. 8, Rule 116, RoC].
The accused’s counsel may, before
arraignment, also move for a bill of
particulars to enable him properly to plead
and prepare for trial [Sec. 9, Rule 116, RoC].
Note: This could be read in conjunction with
Rule 14.02.
4. Attorney-Client Privilege
It is the duty of an attorney to maintain
inviolate the confidence, and at every peril to
himself, to preserve the secrets of his
clients, and to accept no compensation in
connection with his client’s business except
from him or with his knowledge and approval”
[Sec. 20 (3), Rule 138, RoC].
Once a lawyer accepts money from a client, an
attorney-client relationship is established,
giving rise to the duty of fidelity to the client’s
cause. He is expected to be mindful of the trust
and confidence reposed in him, and must serve
client with competence and diligence [Dalisay
v. Mauricio, A.C. No. 5655 (2006)].
The privilege is not confined to verbal or
written communications; it extends to
information communicated by the client to the
attorney by other means [People v.
Sandiganbayan, G.R. Nos. 115439-41 (1997)].
See also: Canon 15 on the Confidentiality Rule
and Rule 15.02 on Privileged
Communications.
5. Powers and Duties of Court and
Judicial Officers
Inherent powers of courts:
1. To preserve and enforce order in its
immediate presence;
2. To enforce order in proceedings before a
person or persons empowered to conduct
a judicial investigation under its authority;
Page 77 of 129
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
3. To compel obedience to its judgments,
orders and processes, and to the lawful
order of 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 copy of a lost or destroyed
pleading or other paper to be filed and used
instead of the original, and to restore, and
supply deficiencies in its records and
proceedings [Sec. 5, Rule 135, RoC].
Justice shall be impartially administered
with unnecessary delay.
Courts of justice shall always be open 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.
Exception: Legal holidays [Sec 1, Rule 135,
RoC].
6. Disqualification of Judicial
Officers/Inhibition
No judge or judicial officer shall sit in any case,
without the written consent of all parties in
interest and entered upon the record, in which:
a. He, or his wife or child, is pecuniarily
interested as heir, legatee, creditor or
otherwise; or
b. He is related to either party within the 6th
degree of consanguinity or affinity, or to
counsel within the 4th degree, computed
according to the rules of civil law;
c. He has been executor, administrator,
guardian, trustee or counsel; or
 U.P. LAW BOC LEGAL ETHICS
d. He has presided in any inferior court when
his ruling or decision is the subject of
review [Sec. 1 (1), Rule 137, RoC].
See also: Discussion in Judicial Ethics of Rule
137, RoC on Compulsory Disqualification and
Sec. 5, Canon 3 on Voluntary Inhibition.
7. Withdrawal from Case
A lawyer may withdraw his services in any
of the following cases:
a. When the client pursues an illegal or
immoral course of conduct in connection
with the matter he is handling;
b. When the client insists that the lawyer
pursue conduct violative of these canons
and rules;
c. When his inability to work with co-counsel
will not promote the best interest of the
client;
d. When the mental or physical condition of
the lawyer renders it difficult for him to
carry out the employment effectively;
e. When the client deliberately fails to pay the
fees for the services or fails to comply with
the retainer agreement;
f. When the lawyer is elected or appointed to
public office; and
g. Other similar cases [Rule 22.01, CPR]
Furthermore, an attorney may retire:
1. At any time from any special action or
special proceeding, by the written consent
of his client filed in court; or
2. At any time from an action or special
proceeding, without the consent of his
client, should the court, on notice to the
client and attorney, and on hearing,
determine that he ought to be allowed to
retire [Sec. 26, Rule 138, RoC].
It is the duty of a lawyer who withdraws or
is discharged, subject to a retaining lien, to:
1. Immediately turn over all papers and
property to which the client is entitled; and
2. Cooperate with his successor in the
orderly transfer of the matter, including all
information necessary for the proper
handling of the matter.
Page 78 of 129
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
See also: Canon 22 on Withdrawal of Services
8. Standing in Court of Persons
Authorized to Appear for the
Government
Any official or other person appointed or
designated in accordance with law to
appear for the Government of the
Philippines shall have all the rights of a duly
authorized member of the bar to appear in any
case in which said government has an interest,
direct or indirect [Sec. 33, Rule 138, RoC].
9. Government Lawyers and Private
Practice
A lawyer should not use his position to feather
his private law practice and accept any private
legal business that may conflict with his official
duties. In case of conflict, he should terminate
his professional relationship, and his official
duties must prevail [Agpalo (2004)].
Prohibition during incumbency
General Rule: Sec. 7(b)(2) of R.A. No. 6713
prohibits [public officials and employees] from
engaging in the private practice of their
profession during their incumbency.
Exception: A public official or employee can
engage in the practice of his or her profession
under the following conditions:
● The private practice is authorized by the
Constitution or by the law; and
● The practice will not conflict, or tend to
conflict, with his or her official functions.
Prohibition after leaving public service
General rule: Practice of profession is allowed
immediately after leaving public service.
Exceptions: The lawyer cannot practice as to
matters with which he had connection during
his term. This prohibition lasts:
● For one year, if he had not intervened.
Note: This one-year prohibition applies with
respect to any matter before the office
the public officer or employee used to
 U.P. LAW BOC LEGAL ETHICS LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS

work with. [Query of Karen Silverio-Buffe,

A.M. No. 08-6-352-RTC (2009)].
● Permanently, if he had intervened [PCGG
v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. Nos. 151809-12
(2005)].

See also: Rule 6.02 and Rule 6.03 on lawyers

in government service.

10. Amicus Curiae

Experienced and impartial attorneys may be

invited by the Court to appear as amicus curiae
to help in the disposition of issues
submitted to it [Sec. 36, Rule 138, RoC].

Furthermore, according to Rule 14.02, a

lawyer shall not decline an appointment as
amicus curiae except for serious and sufficient
cause.

Page 79 of 129
U.P. LAW BOC JUDICIAL ETHICS LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS

JUDICIAL ETHICS
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL
ETHICS
Page 80 of 129
 U.P. LAW BOC JUDICIAL ETHICS
A. SOURCES
1. New Code of Judicial Conduct for
the Philippine Judiciary
(Bangalore Draft)
In November 2002, at a Roundtable Meeting of
Chief Justices held at the Peace Palace in The
Hague, the Judicial Group on Strengthening
Judicial Integrity amended and approved the
Bangalore Draft of the Code of Judicial
Conduct, which is intended to be the Universal
Declaration of Judicial Standards. It is founded
on the following principles:
a. A universal recognition that a competent,
independent and impartial judiciary is
essential if the courts are to fulfill their role
in upholding constitutionalism and the rule
of law;
b. 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;
c. It is essential that judges, individually and
collectively, respect and honor the judicial
office as a public trust and strive to
enhance and maintain confidence in the
judicial system.
On April 27, 2004, the draft code was
promulgated as the New Code of Judicial
Conduct for the Philippine Judiciary through
A.M. No. 03-05-01-SC and given effect on
June 1, 2004.
Purpose: The New Code seeks to not only
update and correlate the Code of Judicial
Conduct and the Canons of Judicial Ethics
adopted for the Philippines, but also to stress
the Philippines’ solidarity with the universal
clamor for a universal code of judicial ethics.
Page 81 of 129
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
2. Code of Judicial Conduct
The New Code of Judicial Conduct
supersedes the Canons of Judicial Ethics
(1946) and the Code of Judicial Conduct
(1989). However, in case of deficiency or
absence of specific provisions, the Canons
of Judicial Ethics and the Code of Judicial
Conduct shall be applicable in a suppletory
character.
B. QUALITIES (CODE OF
JUDICIAL CONDUCT)
1. Independence (Canon 1)
Canon 1 mandates that judges should be free
from external influence, administer justice
impartially and without delay, and be vigilant to
any attempt to undermine the institutional
freedom of the judiciary.
Thus, the fact that the complainant and his
sympathizers had staged a rally demanding
that the judge issue a warrant of arrest against
the accused is not a sufficient excuse for the
judge’s haste in fixing bail without a hearing.
[Libarios v. Dabalos, A.M. No. RTJ-89-1286
(1991)]
In another case, it was held that the respondent
judge’s admission to have succumbed to
pressure from a national official in deciding the
case in favor of the complainant is a patent
betrayal of the public trust reposed on her as
an arbiter of the law. The judge should thus be
dismissed from the service with forfeiture of
retirement benefits and with prejudice to any
reinstatement in any branch of the government
or its instrumentalities. [Ramirez v. Corpus-
Macandong, A.M. Nos. R-351, 359, 621, 684
(1986)]
2. Integrity (Canon 2)
A judge shall ensure that their conduct is above
reproach and also perceived to be so in the
eyes of a reasonable observer.
 U.P. LAW BOC JUDICIAL ETHICS
Integrity applies not only to the proper
discharge of the judicial office but also extends
to the personal demeanor of the judge.
Judges must adhere to the highest standard of
conduct and must be the embodiment of
competence, integrity, and independence. A
judge’s private and official conduct must be
free from appearances of impropriety and
beyond reproach. Respondent judge violated
the code of judicial conduct when he was seen
socializing with the congresswoman-mother of
one of the accused and the accused’s counsel.
A judge is not only required to be impartial but
must also appear to be impartial. [Dela Cruz v.
Bersamira A.M. No. RTJ-00-567 (2000)]
3. Impartiality (Canon 3)
Impartiality is essential to the proper discharge
of the judicial office and applies not only to the
decision itself but also to the process by which
the decision is made. [Canon 3, Code of
Judicial Conduct]
Sec. 5, Canon 3 provides for the
disqualification of judicial officers (See
Disqualification of Judicial Officers for
discussion)
While the judge has misgivings on the
imposition of the death penalty due to religious
reasons, he is duty-bound to apply the law and
a court of law is not a place for a protracted
debate on the morality or propriety of a
sentence. [People v. Veneracion, G.R. Nos.
119987-88 (1995)]
4. Propriety (Canon 4)
Propriety and the appearance of propriety are
essential to the performance of all the activities
of a judge.
Judges must accept the personal restrictions
that come with the office freely and willingly.
Particularly, judges shall conduct themselves
in a way consistent with the dignity of their
office [Sec. 2].
Page 82 of 129
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
While judges are entitled to freedom of
expression, belief, association and assembly,
they must always conduct themselves in a
manner preserving the dignity, impartiality, and
independence of the judiciary [Sec. 6].
Subject to the performance of their judicial
duties, judges may:
! Write, lecture, teach, and participate in
activities concerning the law, the
administration of justice, and the legal
system;
! Appear at a public hearing concerned with
matters relating to the law, the legal
system, and the administration of justice;
! Engage in other activities if these do not
detract from the dignity of the judicial office
or interfere with the performance of judicial
duties [Sec. 10].
Canon 4 includes the appearance of propriety.
Thus, a judge’s act of posting seductive photos
in her social media account contravened the
ethical standard set forth under Canon 4. While
judges are allowed free expression, they must
remember that they do not shed their status as
judges. Their ethical responsibilities as a judge
are carried with them even in the cyberspace.
[Lorenzana v. Austria, A.M. No. RTJ-09-2200
(2014)]
Judges and court personnel who participate in
social media are enjoined to be cautious and
circumspect in posting photos, liking posts, and
making comments in public in social
networking sites. [OCA Circular No. 173-2017,
Proper Use of Social Media (2017)]
5. Equality (Canon 5)
Ensuring equality of treatment to all before the
courts is essential. Therefore, Judges should:
a) Be aware of, and understand diversity in
society and differences arising from various
sources, including but not limited to race,
color, age, sex, religion, nationality, sexual
orientation, marital status, and socio-
economic status [Sec. 1];
b) Not manifest bias in the performance of their
judicial duties on irrelevant grounds [Sec. 2];
 U.P. LAW BOC JUDICIAL ETHICS LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS

c) Carry out duties and responsibilities with

appropriate consideration to all parties
without differentiation on irrelevant grounds
[Sec. 3];
d) Not knowingly permit staff under his
influence, direction, or control, to
differentiate between persons concerned on
irrelevant grounds [Sec. 4];
e) Require lawyers in proceedings before their
courts, to refrain from manifesting bias or
prejudice based on irrelevant grounds
except those legally relevant to the issue
and are subject to legitimate advocacy [Sec.
5].
Thus, a judge claiming to be endowed with
“psychic powers” and who claims that such
powers aid him in the performance of his duties
indicate a lack of competence. Respondent
judge’s preoccupation with paranormal and
psychic phenomena may cloud his judgment
and hamper his role as a judge dispensing
justice. He must therefore be dismissed from
the service due to a medical disability of the
mind rendering him unfit to discharge the
functions of his office. [OCA v. Judge Floro,
A.M. Nos. RTJ-99-1460, 99-7-273-RTC, & 99-
1460 (2006)]

6. Competence and Diligence Further, the court has held that while it is true
(Canon 6) that a judge may have an overload of cases,
this is no excuse for his failure to file an already
signed decision with the Clerk of Court for over
Competence and diligence are prerequisites to
the due performance of judicial office. Thus, 170 days. It must be reiterated to the members
of the Judiciary that it is their sworn duty to
Canon 6 provides:
administer justice without undue delay under
a) That the judicial duties of a judge take
the time-honored precept that justice delayed
precedence over all other activities [Sec. 1];
is justice denied. [Castro v. Malazo, A.M. No.
b) That judges must devote their professional
1237-CAR (1980)]
activity to judicial duties which include their
judicial functions but also other tasks
relevant to the court’s operations [Sec. 2]; C. ADMINISTRATIVE
c) That judges will take the necessary steps to JURISDICTION OVER JUDGES
maintain their knowledge, skills, and AND JUSTICES
personal qualities necessary for the proper
performance of their judicial duties [Sec. 3];
1. Supreme Court
d) That judges shall keep themselves informed
about the relevant developments of
Under Sec. 2, Art. XI, 1987 Constitution,
international law, and international
Justices of the Supreme Court may be
conventions regarding human rights norms
removed from office, through impeachment
[Sec. 4];
upon conviction of culpable violation of the
e) That judges shall perform their duties
Constitution, treason, bribery, graft and
efficiently, fairly, and with reasonable
corruption, other high crimes, or betrayal of
promptness [Sec. 5];
public trust.
f) That judges should maintain order and
decorum in proceedings before the court
All other Justices and judges from the Court of
and be patient, dignified, and courteous to
Appeals to the lowest level may be removed
litigants, witnesses, and lawyers with whom
from office as provided by law, but not by
they deal with in an official capacity. Judges
impeachment.
must also require the same kind of conduct
from legal representatives, and court staff
According to J. Carpio’s dissenting opinion in
under his influence, direction, and control
In re: Charges of Plagiarism, etc. against
[Sec. 6]; and
Associate Justice del Castillo, A.M. No. 10-7-
g) That judges shall not engage in conduct
17-SC (2011), pursuant to Sec. 3 (1) and (6),
incompatible with the diligent discharge of
Art. XI, 1987 Constitution, the sole disciplining
their judicial duties [Sec. 7].

Page 83 of 129
 U.P. LAW BOC JUDICIAL ETHICS
authority (i.e. exclusive authority to discipline)
of all impeachable officers, including Justices
of the Supreme Court, is Congress. While
impeachment is often described as a political
process, it also functions as the equivalent of
administrative disciplinary proceedings against
impeachable officers since impeachable
officers are not subject to administrative
disciplinary proceedings either by the
Executive or Judicial branch.
2. All Other Courts
Pursuant to Sec. 6, Art. VIII, 1987 Constitution,
only the Supreme Court can oversee
compliance with the law and the Rules of Court
on the part of the Presiding Justice of the CA
down to the lowest municipal trial court judge
and take the proper administrative action
against them if they commit any violation
thereof, requiring supervisory or administrative
sanction [Agpalo, (2004)].
Pursuant to Sec. 11, Art. VIII, 1987
Constitution, the Supreme Court en banc shall
have the power to discipline judges of lower
courts or order their dismissal by a vote of
majority of the Members who actually took part
in the deliberations on the issues in the case
and voted thereon.
Thus, the Ombudsman has no power to
entertain and investigate administrative
complaints against judges and court personnel.
Complaints against judges and court personnel
should accordingly be filed with the Supreme
Court [Maceda v. Vasquez, supra.; Dolalas v.
Office of the Ombudsman, G.R. No. 118808
(1996)].
Administrative jurisdiction over a court
employee belongs to the Supreme Court,
regardless of whether the offense was
committed before or after employment in the
judiciary. Indeed, the standard procedure is for
the CSC to bring its complaint against a judicial
employee before the Office of the Court
Administrator [Ampong v. CSC, G.R. No.
167916 (2008)].
Page 84 of 129
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
In order for the Court to acquire jurisdiction
over an administrative case, the complaint
must be filed during the incumbency of the
respondent. Once jurisdiction is acquired, it is
not lost by reason of respondent’s cessation
from office [Re: Missing Exhibits and Court
Properties in Regional Trial Court, Branch 4,
Panabo City, Davao Del Norte, AM. 10-2-41-
RTC (2013)].
3. Initiation of Complaint against
Judges and Justices
Proceedings for the discipline of judges of
regular and special courts and justices of the
Court of Appeals and the Sandiganbayan may
be instituted:
1. Motu proprio by the Supreme Court;
2. Upon the verified complaint, supported by
affidavits of persons who have personal
knowledge of the facts alleged therein or by
documents which may substantiate said
allegations; or
3. Upon an anonymous complaint, supported
by public records of indubitable integrity.
The complaint shall be in writing and shall state
clearly and concisely the acts and omissions
constituting violations of standards of conduct
prescribed for judges, the RoC, or the Code of
Judicial Conduct [Sec. 1].
The right to institute disbarment proceedings is
not confined to clients nor is it necessary that
the person complaining suffered injury from the
alleged wrongdoing. The procedural
requirement observed in ordinary civil
proceedings that only the real party-in-interest
must initiate the suit does not apply in
disbarment cases. Disbarment proceedings
are matters of public interest and the only basis
for the judgment is the proof or failure of proof
of the charges [Figueros v. Jimenez, A.C. No.
9116 (2014)].
 U.P. LAW BOC
D. DISQUALIFICATION OF
JUDICIAL OFFICERS
1. Compulsory
No judge or judicial officer shall sit in any case,
without the written consent of all parties in
interest and entered upon the record, in which:
a. He, or his wife or child, is pecuniarily
interested as heir, legatee, creditor or
otherwise; or
b. He is related to either party within the 6th
degree of consanguinity or affinity, or to
counsel within the 4th degree, computed
according to the rules of civil law;
c. He has been executor, administrator,
guardian, trustee or counsel; or
d. He has presided in any inferior court when
his ruling or decision is the subject of
review [par. 1, Sec. 1].
Sec. 5, Canon 3 makes an enumeration when
judges should disqualify themselves. It notes of
the following instances where they are unable
to decide the matter impartially or which may
appear to a reasonable observer that they are
unable to act with impartiality. The cases
include:
a. Actual bias or prejudice concerning a party
or personal knowledge of the disputed
evidentiary facts;
b. Judge previously served as a lawyer or is a
material witness on the matter;
c. The judge or a member of his family has a
material interest in the outcome of the
controversy;
d. Judge previously served as an executor,
administrator, guardian, trustee, or lawyer,
in the controversy;
e. That the judge’s ruling in a lower court is the
subject of review;
f. Relation of the judge by consanguinity or
affinity to a party litigant within the sixth civil
degree or to counsel within the fourth civil
degree;
g. The judge knows that his or her spouse or
child has a financial interest as an heir,
legatee, creditor, fiduciary or otherwise in
the controversy, or has any other interest
JUDICIAL ETHICS LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
that could substantially be affected by the
outcome of the proceedings.
Note: The enumeration in Sec. 5, Canon 3 is
not exclusive. The proviso states that such
instances may include but are not limited to
the enumeration in Section 5.
The law conclusively presumes that a judge
cannot objectively or impartially sit in such a
case and, for that reason, prohibits him and
strikes at his authority to hear and decide it, in
the absence of written consent of all parties
concerned. The purpose is to preserve the
people's faith and confidence in the courts'
justice [Garcia v. De La Peña, A.M. No. MTJ-
92-687 (1994)].
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.
COMELEC, G.R. No. L-68379-81 (1996)].
GROUNDS FOR COMPULSORY INHIBITION
OF A JUDGE
a. Actual Bias or Prejudice
In Umale v. Villaluz (1973), a judge inhibited
himself from trying a robbery case due to his
personal knowledge of the case. The Supreme
Court stated that it is possible that the
respondent Judge might be influenced by his
personal knowledge of the case when he tries
and decides the same on the merits, which
would certainly constitute a denial of due
process to the party adversely affected by his
judgment or decision. Thus, it is best that after
some reflection, the judge, on his own initiative,
disqualifies himself from hearing the robbery
case and thereby rendering himself available
as witness to any of the parties subject to
cross-examination.
In People v. Gomez (1967), the judge
dismissed criminal informations on the
suspicion, arising from a dinner invitation from
a stranger and a subsequent personal
investigation, that the court was being used as
Page 85 of 129
 U.P. LAW BOC
a forum for extortion and exploitation of the
persons charged. The Supreme Court found
that this unstated extraneous matter makes the
dismissal as one affected with partiality and
bias. The prayer of the judge to be disqualified
in hearing the case because he has lost all
respect in the manner in which the prosecutor
has been prosecuting the case was granted.
b. Economic Interest of Judge or his
Family
In Oktubre v. Velasco (2004), a municipal
judge, as private complainant, caused three
criminal complaints to be filed before his own
court. He also issued a warrant of arrest and
subpoenas before finally inhibiting himself from
hearing the cases. The Supreme Court found
him guilty of grave misconduct, gross
ignorance of the law and grave abuse of
authority and dismissed him from service. It
stated that the idea that a judge can preside
over his own case is anathema to the notion of
impartiality and that his subsequent inhibition
from the three cases does not detract from his
culpability for he should not have taken
cognizance of the cases in the first place.
c. Reviewing Own Cases
In Sandoval v. CA (1996), the Supreme Court
found that an Associate Justice who only partly
presided over a case in the trial court and who
did not render the final decision cannot be said
to have been placed in a position where he had
to review his own decision and, as such, was
not legally bound, on this ground, to inhibit
himself as ponente of the case. Nevertheless,
it was held that he should have voluntarily
inhibited himself for his earlier involvement in
the case constitutes just or valid reason under
Sec. 1, Rule 137. A judge should not handle a
case in which he might be perceived, rightly or
wrongly, to be susceptible to bias and partiality.
d. Previously Served as Counsel
A judge may validly disqualify himself due to his
bias and prejudice. [However,] bias and
prejudice cannot be presumed [Soriano v.
Angeles (2000)]. The mere imputation of bias
or partiality is not sufficient for a judge to inhibit,
especially when the charge is without basis. It
must be proven with clear and convincing
JUDICIAL ETHICS LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
evidence. [Gochan v. Gochan (2003)]
Moreover, it has been held that bias and
prejudice must be shown to have stemmed
from an extrajudicial source and result in an
opinion on the merits on some basis other than
the evidence presented [Aleria v. Velez
(1998)].
Disqualification was also allowed when the
judge had been previously associated with a
party as counsel [Austria v. Masaquel (1978)],
had notarized the affidavit of a person to be
presented as witness [Mateo v. Villaluz (1973)],
or if he was a material witness to a case
[AmJur; Lewis v. State (2002)]
2. Voluntary
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 [par. 2, Sec. 1].
A judge must maintain and preserve the trust
and faith of the parties-litigants. He must hold
himself above reproach and suspicion. At the
very first sign of lack of faith and trust in his
actions, whether well-grounded or not, the
judge has no other alternative but to inhibit
himself from the case.
A judge may not be legally prohibited from
sitting in a litigation, but when circumstances
appear that will induce doubt to his honest
actuations and probity in favor of either party,
or incite such 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. The better
course for the judge under such circumstances
is to disqualify himself. That way, he avoids
being misunderstood, his reputation for probity
and objectivity is preserved [Bautista v.
Rebueno, G.R. No. L-46117 (1978)].
A judge should not be disqualified because he
was a classmate (or a co-member in a
fraternity) of one of the counsels if there is no
proof that such a relationship results in actual
bias or prejudice. To allow disqualification
would unnecessarily burden other trial judges
Page 86 of 129
 U.P. LAW BOC JUDICIAL ETHICS
to whom the case will be assigned. Confusion
would result, because a judge would then be
barred from sitting in a case whenever one of
his former classmates (and he could have
many) appeared [Masadao and Elizaga, cited
in Lex Pareto (2014)].
The mere fact that a counsel who is appearing
before a judge was one of those who
recommended him to the Bench is not a valid
ground from voluntary inhibition. “Utang na
loob” per se should not be a hindrance to the
administration of justice. Nor should
recognition of such value prevent the
performance of judicial duties. However, where
the judge admits that he may be suspected of
surrendering to the persuasions of utang na
loob, and he may succumb to it considering
that he and members of the family no less shall
ever remain obliged in eternal gratitude to the
recommending counsel, the judge should
inhibit himself [Query of Executive Judge
Estrella Estrada, etc, A.M. No. 87-9-3918-RTC
(1987) cited in Lex Pareto (2014)].
The mere imputation of bias or partiality is not
enough ground for inhibition, especially when
the charge is without basis. Extrinsic evidence
must further be presented to establish bias,
bad faith, malice, or corrupt purpose, in
addition to palpable error which may be
inferred from the decision or order itself
[Philippine Commercial International Bank v.
Dy Hong Pi, G.R. No. 171137 (2009)].
The objecting party to his competency may, in
writing, file with the subject official his objection
and its grounds. The said official may, in
accordance with his determination of the
question of his disqualification, either: 1)
proceed with the trial or 2) withdraw therefrom.
The decision of the said official shall be in
writing and filed with the other papers in the
case, but no appeal or stay shall be allowed
from, or by reason of, his decision in favor of
his own competency, until final judgment in the
case [Sec. 2].
Page 87 of 129
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
E. DISCIPLINE OF
MEMBERS OF THE
JUDICIARY
The members of the Supreme Court and
judges of lower courts shall hold office during a
good behavior until they reach the age of
seventy years or become incapacitated to
discharge the duties of their office [Sec. 11, Art.
VIII, 1987 Constitution].
1. Members of the Supreme Court
Members of the Supreme Court may be
removed from office on impeachment for,
and conviction of, culpable violation of the
Constitution, treason, bribery, graft and
corruption, other high crimes, or betrayal of
public trust [Sec. 2, Article XI, 1987
Constitution].
The impeachment of public officials has been
established for removing otherwise
constitutionally tenured and independent public
officials.
The power to initiate impeachment cases rests
with the House of the Representatives while
the power to try the same rests with the Senate.
Based on Sec. 3, Article VI, 1987 Constitution,
the steps leading to impeachment are as
follows:
a. A verified complaint for impeachment is
filed by a member of the House or
endorsed by him;
b. The complaint is included in the order of
business of the House;
c. The House refers the complaint to the
proper committee;
d. The committee holds a hearing, approves
the resolution calling for impeachment, and
submits the same to the House;
e. The House considers the resolution and
votes to approve it by at least one third of
all its members, which resolution becomes
the article of impeachment to be filed with
the Senate when approved; and
 U.P. LAW BOC JUDICIAL ETHICS
f. The Senate tries the public official under
the article [J. Abad, Separate Concurring
Opinion, Gutierrez v. HOR Committee on
Justice, G.R. No. 193459 (2011)].
2. Lower Courts and Justices of
Court of Appeals, and
Sandiganbayan, and Court of Tax
Appeals (Rule 140)
Initiation of Proceedings
See Initiation of Complaint against Judges
and Justices above.
Investigation
Upon the filing of the comment of the
respondent or upon the expiration of the period
for such filing, which is ten days from the date
of service to him of the copy of the complaint
[Sec. 2], the Supreme Court shall:
1. Refer the matter to the Office of the
Court Administrator for evaluation,
report, and recommendation; or
2. Assign the case for investigation,
report, and recommendation to:
i. A retired member of the Supreme
Court, if the respondent is a
justice of the Court of Appeals
and the Sandiganbayan;
ii. A justice of the Court of Appeals,
if the respondent is a judge of a
Regional Trial Court or of a
special court of equivalent rank;
or
iii. A judge of the Regional Trial
Court, if the respondent is a
judge of an inferior court [Sec. 3,
Rule 140].
Hearing and Termination
The investigating justice or judge shall set a
day for the hearing and send notice to the
parties. If the respondent fails to appear, the
investigation shall proceed ex parte.
The investigating justice or judge shall
terminate the proceedings:
a) Within 90 days from the date of its
commencement; or
Page 88 of 129
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
b) Within such extension as the Supreme
Court may grant [Sec. 4].
Report and Action
Within 30 days from termination, the
investigating justice or judge shall submit to the
Supreme Court a report containing his findings
of fact and recommendation, accompanied by
the evidence and pleadings filed by the parties.
Such report shall be confidential and shall be
for the exclusive use of the Supreme Court.
A copy of the decision or resolution of the court
shall be attached to the record of the
respondent in the OCA [Secs. 5 and 12].
The Supreme Court shall take action on the
report as the facts and the law may warrant
[Sec. 6].
Proceedings shall be private and confidential
but a copy of the decision shall be attached to
the record of the judge in the OCA [Sec. 12]
Automatic Conversion of
Administrative Cases to Disciplinary
Proceedings
Pursuant to A.M. No. 02-9-02-SC,
administrative cases against justices of the
Court of Appeals and the Sandiganbayan,
judges of regular and special courts, and court
officials who are lawyers, shall also be
considered a disciplinary action against them,
if they are based on grounds which are likewise
grounds for the disciplinary action of members
of the bar for:
a. Violation of the Lawyer's Oath;
b. Violation of the Code of Professional
Responsibility;
c. Violation of the Canons of Professional
Ethics; or
d. Such other forms of breaches of conduct
that have been traditionally recognized as
grounds for the discipline of lawyers.
The respondent is required to comment on the
complaint and show cause why he should not
also be suspended, disbarred or otherwise
disciplinarily sanctioned as a member of the
 U.P. LAW BOC JUDICIAL ETHICS
bar. Judgment in both respects may be
incorporated in one decision or resolution.
Members of the judiciary are not a class of their
own. In recent rulings, the Court has also
applied substantial evidence as the quantum of
proof necessary in resolving administrative
complaints against judges [Macias v. Macias,
A.M. No. RTJ-01-1650 (2009)].
Effect of Withdrawal or Desistance
The actuations of a judge seriously affect the
public interest inasmuch as they involve the
administration of justice. It is for this reason that
a motion to withdraw a complaint will not justify
the dismissal of the administrative case.
To condition administrative actions upon the
will of every complainant, who may, for one
reason or another, condone a detestable act, is
to strip the Supreme Court of its supervisory
power to discipline erring members of the
judiciary [Anguluan v. Taguba (1979)].
Thus, a complainant’s desistance is not an
obstacle to the taking of disciplinary action
against a judge if the record reveals that he had
not performed his duties properly [Espayos v.
Lee (1979)].
1. Grounds
Administrative charges are classified as
serious, less serious, or light [Sec. 7].
Misconduct
“Misconduct” implies a wrongful intention and
not a mere error or judgment. For serious [or
gross] 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 [In re:
Impeachment of Horrilleno (1922)].
The commission of two or more administrative
offenses alleged in the same administrative
complaint may aggravate the offense and
render the same serious, which will warrant
dismissal of the judge from the service [Agpalo
(2004)].
Page 89 of 129
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
The judge was found guilty of gross
misconduct, abandonment of office, and was
dismissed due to his frequent absence totaling
3 years which were not approved for his
explanations were inexcusable. He has caused
great disservice to many litigants and has
denied them speedy justice [In Re: Leaves of
Absence without Approval of Judge Eric
Calderon, A.M. No. 98-8-105 MTC (1999)].
When Judge Samson accepted the application
for a judicial post of a probationer before his
discharge from probation and even
recommending him for such post, she
committed impropriety and gross misconduct
[The Anonymous Letter Complaint vs. Judge
Samson, et al. A.M. No. MTJ 16-1870 (2017)].
Judge Barcillano committed conduct
unbecoming a judge when he embarrassed a
lady police officer and repeatedly asked her to
stand and sit beside him, insulted the lady
police when he repeatedly asked her name and
said “PO1 ka lang”; and held her gun and
cocked it in public. [PO1 Myra Marcelo vs.
Judge Ignacio Barcillano, A.M. No. RTJ 16-
2450 (2017)]
By having an affair with a married woman,
Judge Laron's immorality and serious
misconduct have repercussions not only on the
judiciary but also on the millions OFWs. While
Wilfredo was working hard abroad to earn for
his family, Judge Laron was sleeping with his
wife in his bed in his house and spending his
hard-earned dollars. What was even worse
was the flaunting of the illicit relationship before
his young boys who related it to him upon his
return from abroad. A judge is the visible
representation of the law and of justice. He
must comport himself in a manner that is free
of aby whiff of impropriety, not only with respect
to the performance of his official duties but also
as to his behavior outside his sala and as a
private individual. His character must be able
to withstand the most searching public scrutiny
because the ethical principles and sense of
propriety of a judge are essential to the
preservation of the people's faith in the judicial
system. [Wilfredo F. Tuvillo v. Judge Henry
Laron, A.M. No. MTJ-10-1755; Melissa J.
 U.P. LAW BOC JUDICIAL ETHICS
Tuvillo v. Judge Henry Laron, A.M. No. MTJ-
10-1756 (2016)].
Respondent's act of not wearing the judicial
robe during court sessions violates
Administrative Circular 25 of 9 June 1989,
which is mandatory. Violation of Supreme
Court rules, directives, and circulars is
considered a less serious charge [Jocelyn
Mclaren, et al. v. Hon. Jacinto C. Gonzales,
A.M. No. MTJ-16-1876 (2017)].
Gross Ignorance of the Law
Judge Mislang manifested a serious lack of
knowledge and understanding of basic legal
principles on prejudicial questions and on
jurisdiction in petitions for the suspension of a
criminal action based on prejudicial questions.
Where the law is straightforward and the facts
so evident, failure to know it or to act as if one
does not know it constitutes gross ignorance of
the law. A blatant disregard of the clear and
unmistakable provisions of a statute, as well as
Supreme Court circulars enjoining their strict
compliance, upends this presumption and
subjects the magistrate to corresponding
administrative sanctions. Judges are expected
to exhibit more than just cursory acquaintance
with statutes and procedural laws, they must
know the laws and apply them properly in all
good faith. Judicial competence requires no
less. Thus, unfamiliarity with the rules is a sign
of incompetence. [Department of Justice v.
Hon. Rolando Mislang, A.M. No. RTJ-14-2369
(2016)]
Gross Inefficiency
Like misconduct, inefficiency as a ground for
disciplinary action must be serious or one
which is weighty or momentous and not trifling.
Negligence in the performance of duty, if
reckless in character, could amount to serious
or inexcusable inefficiency [Agpalo (2004)].
Examples:
● Failure to deposit funds with the municipal
treasurer or produce them despite promise
to do so [Montemayor v. Collado (1981)];
● Misappropriation of fiduciary funds (i.e.,
proceeds of cash bail bond) by depositing
the check in a personal account, thus
Page 90 of 129
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
converting the trust fund to personal use
[Barja v. Beracio (1976)];
● Extorting money from a party-litigant who
has a pending case [Haw Tay v. Singayao
(1988)]:
● Solicitation of donation for office equipment
[Lecaroz v. Garcia (1981)];
● Frequent unauthorized absences in office
[Municipal Council of Casiguruhan,
Quezon v. Morales (1974)];
● Delay in the disposition of cases in violation
of the canon that a judge must promptly
dispose of all matters submitted to him
[Balagot v. Opinion (1991)];
● Unduly granting repeated motions for
postponement [Araza v. Reyes (1975)];
● Unawareness of or unfamiliarity with the
application of the Indeterminate Sentence
Law and duration and graduation of
penalties [In re: Paulin (1980)];
● Reducing to a ridiculous amount
(P6,000.00) the bail bond of the accused
murderer, enabling him to escape the toils
of the law [Soriano v. Mabbayad (1975)];
● Imposing the penalty of subsidiary
imprisonment on a party for failure to pay
civil indemnity in violation of R.A. No. 5465
[Monsanto v. Palarca (1983)];
● Directing a subordinate to alter the TSN by
incorporating statements pertaining to
substantial matters not actually made
during the hearing [Balanay v. White, A.M.
No. RTJ-16-2443, (2016)].
Judge Perez’s being inexperienced as a newly
appointed judge and his explanation that the
delay was not intended to prejudice the
plaintiffs are not persuasive, because it is his
duty to resolve the cases within the
reglementary period as mandated by law and
the rules. A judge is expected to keep his own
listing of cases and to note therein the status of
each case so that they may be acted upon
accordingly and without delay. He must adopt
a system of record management and organize
his docket in order to monitor the flow of cases
for a prompt and effective dispatch of business.
He is guilty of undue delay in rendering a
decision which is a less serious charge.
[Gamboa-Roces v. Perez, A.M. No. MTJ-16-
1887, (2017)].
 U.P. LAW BOC JUDICIAL ETHICS LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS

Judicial Immunity Civil Liability

General rule: A judge cannot be subjected to Refusal or neglect without just cause by a
liability – civil, criminal, or administrative – public servant to perform his official duty [Art.
when he acts within his legal powers and 27, Civil Code].
jurisdiction, even though such acts are
erroneous. [Agpalo (2004)]. Directly or indirectly obstructing, defeating,
violating or in any manner impeding or
Purpose: A judicial officer, in exercising the impairing civil liberties guaranteed by the
authority vested in him, shall be free to act Constitution [Art. 32, Civil Code].
upon his own convictions, without
apprehension of personal consequences to Criminal Liability
himself. a. Under the RPC:
1. Knowingly rendering an unjust
This concept of judicial immunity rests upon judgment [Art. 204]
consideration of public policy, its purpose being 2. Judgment rendered through
to preserve the integrity and independence of negligence [Art. 205]
the judiciary [Equatorial Realty Development v. 3. Knowingly rendering an unjust
Anunciacion Jr. A.M. No. MTJ-91-562 (1997)]. interlocutory order [Art. 206]
4. Malicious delay in the administration of
In the absence of fraud, dishonesty or justice [Art. 207]
corruption, the acts of judge in his judicial 5. Direct bribery [Art. 210]
capacity are not subject to disciplinary actions, 6. Indirect bribery [Art. 211]
even though these may be erroneous, provided 7. Infidelity in the custody of documents
he acted in good faith and without malice. In [Art. 226]
such case, the proper remedy is not an 8. Open disobedience [Art. 231]
administrative charge against the judge, but an 9. Prolonging performance of duties [Art.
appeal or a petition for review of his decision 237]
[Equatorial Realty Development v. Anunciacion 10. Abandonment of office [Art. 238]
Jr. supra]. 11. Disobeying requisites for
disqualification [Art. 242]
Exceptions: A judge may be held criminally, 12. Abuses against chastity [Art. 245]
civilly or administratively liable 13. Falsification by a public officer [Art.
1. For malfeasance or misfeasance in office 171]
[Valdez v. Valera, A.M. No. 1628-CAR b. Under Special Laws
(1978)]. 1. Plunder [R.A. No. 7080]
2. Where an error is so gross or patent or 2. Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act
when acts were committed with fraud, [R.A. No. 3019]
dishonesty, corruption, malice, ill-will, bad 3. Violation of the Code of Conduct of
faith or deliberate intent to do injustice Public Officials [R.A. No. 6713]
[Lorenzana v. Austria, A.M. No. RTJ-09- 4. Violation of Omnibus Election Code
2200 (2014)]. 5. Violation of the right to counsel [E.O.
3. When the law or procedure is so 155]
elementary, such as the provisions of the 6. Transfer of unlawfully acquired
ROC, not to know or to act as if one does property [R.A. No. 1379]
not know constitutes gross ignorance of the
law, even without proving malice or bad 4. Impeachment
faith [Pancho v. Aguirre, A.M. No. RTJ-09-
2196 (2010)]. Art. IX, Sec. 2 of the 1987 Constitution states
that Justices of the Supreme Court may be
removed from office, through impeachment
upon conviction of culpable violation of the

Page 91 of 129
 U.P. LAW BOC JUDICIAL ETHICS
Constitution, treason, bribery, graft and
corruption, other high crimes, or betrayal of
public trust. Justices and judges of lower courts
may be removed from office as provided by
law, but not impeachment.
In In re: Charges of Plagiarism, etc. against
Associate Justice del Castillo, A.M. No. 10-7-
17-SC (2011), the sole disciplining authority of
all impeachable officers, including Justices of
the Supreme Court, is Congress.
Impeachment, though a political process, also
serves as an administrative disciplinary
proceeding against an impeachable officer as
they are not subject to the ordinary disciplinary
proceeding initiated by the Judiciary or the
Executive.
Note: In Republic vs. Sereno the Supreme
Court granted the quo warranto petition of the
government thereby removing Chief Justice
Sereno from office. The court reasoned that
Page 92 of 129
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
impeachment refers to an offense done by the
public official during his term of office and there
is a presumption that said official legally holds
that office. In a quo warranto proceeding, the
question goes to the legality of the
appointment. There is no question on the
validity of the officer’s title to the office in an
impeachment hearing. [Republic v. Sereno,
G.R. No. 237428, May 11, 2018]
5. Sanctions imposed by the
Supreme Court on erring members
of the judiciary
On September 11, 2001, the Court approved
A.M. No. 01-8-10-SC which amended Rule 140
of the Rules of Court which governed the
discipline of justices and judges. See the table
below for the grounds, offenses, and
corresponding sanctions imposed:
U.P. Law BOC Judicial Ethics Legal and Judicial Ethics

Administrative Liability [A.M. No. 01-8-10-SC (2001)]

Serious Charges Less Serious Charges Light Charges

Grounds 1. Bribery, direct or indirect; 1. Undue delay in

2. Dishonesty and violations of the rendering a decision or
Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices order, or in
Law (R.A. No. 3019); transmitting the 1. Vulgar and
3. Gross misconduct constituting records of a case; unbecoming
violations of the Code of Judicial 2. Frequently and conduct;
Conduct; unjustified absences 2. Gambling in
4. Knowingly rendering an unjust without leave or public;
judgment or order as determined by habitual tardiness; 3. Fraternizing
a competent court in an appropriate 3. Unauthorized practice with lawyers
proceeding; of law; and litigants
5. Conviction of a crime involving 4. Violation of Supreme with pending
moral turpitude; Court rules, directives, case/cases
6. Willful failure to pay a just debt; and circulars; in his court;
7. Borrowing money or property from 5. Receiving additional or and
lawyers and litigants in a case double compensation 4. Undue delay
pending before the court; unless specifically in the
8. Immorality; authorized by law; submission
9. Gross ignorance of the law or 6. Untruthful statements of monthly
procedure; in the certificate of reports.
10. Partisan political activities; and service; and
11. Alcoholism and/or vicious habits 7. Simple misconduct
[Sec. 8]. [Sec. 9]

Sanctions 1. Dismissal from the service, forfeiture

[Sec. 11] of all or part of the benefits as the
1. A fine of not
Court may determine, and
less than
disqualification from reinstatement 1. Suspension from office
P1,000.00
or appointment to any public office, without salary and
but not
including government-owned or other benefits for not
exceeding
controlled corporations. Forfeiture of less than one nor
P10,000.00;
benefits does not include accrued more than three
and/or
leave credits; months; or
2. Censure;
2. Suspension from office without 2. A fine of more than
3. Reprimand;
salary and other benefits for more P10,000.00 but not
4. Admonition
than three but not exceeding six exceeding P20,000.00
with
months; or
warning.
3. A fine of more than P20,000.00 but
not exceeding P40,000.00

Page 93 of 129
U.P. Law BOC Forms Practical Exercises

FORMS
PRACTICAL EXERCISES

Page 94 of 129
 A. DEMAND AND AUTHORIZATION LETTERS
Demand Letter
[DATE]

[NAME OF ADDRESSEE]
[ADDRESS]
RE: [SUBJECT]

Dear [NAME],

We are writing in behalf our client [NAME], in the matter of [SUBJECT].

Records disclose that [SUMMARY OF BASIC FACTS SUPPORTING YOUR CLIENT’S

DEMAND/CAUSE OF ACTION].

We wish to inform you that your acts constitute violation of [APPLICABLE LAW OR
CONTRACTUAL STIPULATION].

Accordingly, a demand is hereby made upon you to settle the amount of [AMOUNT] within ____
days from the receipt of this letter. Otherwise, we will be constrained to find recourse in the courts of
law and file the necessary legal action against you to protect the interest of our client.

We trust that you will give this matter your urgent attention.

Yours,
[COUNSEL]

Authorization Letter
[DATE]

[BRANCH CLERK OF COURT]

Regional Trial Court
Branch [NUMBER], [VENUE]
RE: [SUBJECT]

To the Branch Clerk of Court:

I am [NAME OF CLIENT], [Plaintiff/Defendant] in [Civil/Criminal] Case No. [NUMBER]

pending before this Honorable Court.

I am writing this letter to introduce my counsel, [FIRM] and to authorize its lawyers and
apprentices, including, but not limited to, [NAMES OF LAWYERS] to obtain copies of records
pertaining to the aforementioned case on my behalf.

For any clarifications or concerns, you may reach me through [NUMBER/E-MAIL ADDRESS]

Page 95 of 129
 Thank you for your kind consideration.

Yours,
[NAME OF CLIENT]

Page 96 of 129
 B. CONTRACT OF SALE

Deed of Sale of Motor Vehicle

DEED OF SALE OF MOTOR VEHICLE

KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS:

That I, [NAME OF SELLER], Filipino, of legal age, single/married to [SPOUSE, IF

APPLICABLE], a resident of [ADDRESS OF SELLER], is the lawful owner of a certain motor vehicle
which is more particularly described as follows:

MAKE : MOTOR NO. :

SERIES : SERIAL/CHASSIS NO.:
TYPE OF BODY: PLATE NO. :
YEAR MODEL : FILE NO. :
C.R. NO. :

That for and in consideration of the sum of [AMOUNT IN WORDS PESOS] (PhP xxx,
xxx.xx), Philippine Currency, receipt whereof is hereby acknowledged to my entire satisfaction, I
hereby sell, transfer and convey by way of Absolute Sale unto [NAME OF BUYER], Filipino, of legal
age, and resident of [ADDRESS OF BUYER], the above described motor vehicle, free from all liens
and encumbrances.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have signed this agreement this __th day of [MONTH,
YEAR] at [PLACE OF SIGNING].

(sgd.) (sgd.)
[NAME OF BUYER] [NAME OF SELLER]
VENDEE VENDOR

[If Seller is married, include spousal consent as follows:]

With my consent:

(sgd.)
[NAME OF SPOUSE OF SELLER]

SIGNED IN THE PRESENCE OF:

_________________ _________________

[PLUS ACKNOWLEDGMENT FOR TWO-PARTY INSTRUMENT]

Bill of Sale (Personal Property)

REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES )
City/Municipality of ____________ ) S.S.

Page 97 of 129
 BILL OF SALE

KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS:

I, [NAME OF SELLER], Filipino, single, and resident of [ADDRESS OF SELLER] for and in
consideration of the amount of [AMOUNT IN WORDS PESOS] (PhP xxx,xxx.xx), paid to me today
by [NAME OF BUYER], Filipino, single and resident of [ADDRESS OF BUYER] do hereby SELL,
TRANSFER and CONVEY absolutely and unconditionally unto said [NAME OF BUYER] the following
property:

(Description of property)

I own and have the right to sell and transfer the title and ownership of the above–described
property; I will defend the same against the claims of any and all persons whatsoever.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have signed this instrument this __th day of [MONTH, YEAR]
at [PLACE OF SIGNING].

(sgd).
[NAME OF SELLER]

SIGNED IN THE PRESENCE OF:

_________________ _________________

[PLUS ACKNOWLEDGMENT]

Unilateral Deed of Sale of Registered Land

REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES )
City/Municipality of ____________ ) S.S.

DEED OF ABSOLUTE SALE

KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS:

I, [NAME OF SELLER], Filipino, single/married to [SPOUSE, IF APPLICABLE], and resident
of [ADDRESS OF SELLER] for and in consideration of the amount of [AMOUNT IN WORDS PESOS]
(PhP xxx,xxx.xx), paid to me today by [NAME OF BUYER], Filipino, single and resident of
[ADDRESS OF BUYER] do hereby SELL, TRANSFER and CONVEY absolutely and unconditionally
unto said [NAME OF BUYER] that certain parcel(s) of land, together with the buildings and
improvements thereon situated in the [CITY/MUNICIPALITY OF ____], free from all liens and
encumbrances whatsoever and more particularly described as follows:
(Technical Description of property as indicated in the title)
of which I am the registered owner in fee simple, my title thereto being evidenced by
[TRANSFER/ORIGINAL CERTIFICATE TITLE NO.__________], issued by the Register of Deeds of
[CITY/MUNICIPALITY].

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have signed this instrument this __th day of [MONTH, YEAR]
at [PLACE OF SIGNING]

Page 98 of 129
 (sgd).
[NAME OF SELLER]

[If Seller is married, include spousal consent as follows:]

With my consent:
(sgd.)
[NAME OF SPOUSE OF SELLER]

SIGNED IN THE PRESENCE OF:

_________________ _________________

[PLUS ACKNOWLEDGMENT]

Unilateral Deed of Sale of Unregistered Land

REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES )
City/Municipality of ____________ ) S.S.

DEED OF ABSOLUTE SALE

KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS:

I, [NAME OF SELLER], Filipino, single/married to [SPOUSE, IF APPLICABLE], and resident

of [ADDRESS OF SELLER] for and in consideration of the amount of [AMOUNT IN WORDS PESOS]
(PhP xxx,xxx.xx), paid to me today by [NAME OF BUYER], Filipino, single and resident of
[ADDRESS OF BUYER] do hereby SELL, TRANSFER and CONVEY absolutely and unconditionally
unto said [NAME OF BUYER] that certain parcel(s) of land, together with the buildings and
improvements thereon situated in the [CITY/MUNICIPALITY OF ____], free from all liens and
encumbrances whatsoever and more particularly described as follows:
(Description: state the nature of each piece of land and its improvements, situations and boundaries,
area in square meters, e.g. “Bounded on the N. by ____________; on the E. by ___________; on the
S. by ____________; and on the W. by ____________; with an area of ________ square meters,
more or less.”)

THAT the SELLER does hereby declare that the boundaries of the foregoing land are visible
by means of [MONUMENTS, CREEKS, TREES ETC.] that the permanent improvements existing
thereon consist of [LIST VARIOUS IMPROVEMENTS, IF NONE, STATE SO.]; that the land is
assessed for the current year at (PhP xxx.xx) as per Tax Declaration No. _________, and that the
property is in present possession of the SELLER.

The above described real estate, not having been registered under Act No. 496 nor under the
Spanish Mortgage Law, I have agreed to register this instrument under the provisions of Sec. 194 of
the Revised Administrative Code, as amended by Sec. 113 of P.D 1159.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have signed this instrument this __th day of [MONTH, YEAR]
at [PLACE OF SIGNING].

(sgd).
[NAME OF SELLER]

[If Vendor is married, include spousal consent as follows:]

Page 99 of 129
With my consent:

(sgd.)
[NAME OF SPOUSE OF SELLER]

SIGNED IN THE PRESENCE OF:

_________________ _________________

[PLUS ACKNOWLEDGMENT]

Bilateral Deed of Sale of Registered Land

REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES )
City/Municipality of ____________ ) S.S.

DEED OF ABSOLUTE SALE

KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS:

This DEED OF ABSOLUTE SALE is made, executed and entered into by:

[NAME OF SELLER], Filipino, single/married to [SPOUSE, IF APPLICABLE], and resident

of [ADDRESS OF SELLER] (SELLER)

-and-

[NAME OF BUYER], Filipino, single/married to [SPOUSE, IF APPLICABLE] and resident of

[ADDRESS OF BUYER] (BUYER)

WITNESSETH

That the SELLER is the registered owner in fee simple of a parcel of land with improvements
situated in the [CITY/MUNICIPALITY OF ____] with [TRANSFER/ORIGINAL CERTIFICATE TITLE
NO.__________], issued by the Register of Deeds of [CITY/MUNICIPALITY] and more particularly
described as follows:

(Technical Description of property as indicated in the title)

That the SELLER for and in consideration of the amount of [AMOUNT IN WORDS PESOS]
(PhP xxx,xxx.xx), does hereby SELL, TRANSFER and CONVEY absolutely and unconditionally unto
the BUYER that certain parcel(s) of land, together with the buildings and improvements thereon free
from all liens and encumbrances whatsoever.

That it is hereby mutually agreed that the BUYER shall bear all expenses for the execution
and registration of this deed of sale.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have signed this contract on this __th day of [MONTH,
YEAR] at [PLACE OF SIGNING].

Page 100 of 129

 (sgd.) (sgd.)
[NAME OF BUYER] [NAME OF SELLER]
BUYER SELLER

[If Buyer and/or Seller are married, include spousal consent as follows:]

With my consent:

(sgd.) (sgd.)
[NAME OF SPOUSE OF BUYER] [NAME OF SPOUSE OF SELLER]

SIGNED IN THE PRESENCE OF:

_________________ _________________

[PLUS ACKNOWLEDGMENT FOR TWO-PARTY INSTRUMENT]

Page 101 of 129

 C. CONTRACT OF LEASE

CONTRACT OF LEASE

KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS:

This Agreement made and entered into at [PLACE] this ____ day of [MONTH, YEAR] by and
between [NAME OF LESSOR], of legal age, single/married to [SPOUSE, IF APPLICABLE],
(LESSOR) and resident of [ADDRESS], and [NAME OF LESSEE], of legal age, single and resident
of [ADDRESS] (LESSEE), WITNESSETH that:

1. In consideration of a monthly rental of [AMOUNT IN WORDS PESOS] (PhP xxx,xxx.xx)

and the covenants made below, the LESSOR hereby LEASES to the LESSEE a(n) [PROPERTY]
located at [ADDRESS OF PROPERTY TO BE LEASED] covered by [TCT/TAX DEC. NO.] for a
period of TWELVE (12) MONTHS from signing of this contract.

2. The LESSEE covenants, as follows:

2.1. To pay the rentals on or before the fifth day of each month, without need of demand at the
residence of LESSOR;

2.2. To keep the premises in good and habitable condition, making the necessary repairs
inside and outside the house;

2.3. Not to make major alterations and improvements without the written consent of the
LESSOR and in the event of such unauthorized major alterations and improvements,
surrendering ownership over such improvements and alterations to the LESSOR upon
expiration of this lease;

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have signed this contract on the date and the place first
mentioned.

(sgd.) (sgd.)
[NAME OF LESSOR] [NAME OF LESSEE]
LESSOR LESSEE

[If Lessor is married, include spousal consent as follows:]

With my consent:

(sgd.)
[NAME OF SPOUSE OF LESSOR]

SIGNED IN THE PRESENCE OF:

_________________ _________________

[PLUS ACKNOWLEDGMENT FOR TWO-PARTY INSTRUMENT

Page 102 of 129

 D. SPECIAL POWER OF ATTORNEY
Special Power of Attorney for Sale of Real Property
REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES )
City/Municipality of ____________ ) S.S.

SPECIAL POWER OF ATTORNEY

KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS:

I, [NAME], of legal age, Filipino citizen, with residence and postal address at [ADDRESS], do
hereby NAME, CONSTITUTE, AND APPOINT [NAME OF AGENT/ATTORNEY IN FACT], of legal
age, Filipino citizen, with postal address at [ADDRESS], as my true and lawful attorney-in-fact to act
for and in my name, place and stead and to perform the following acts:

(A) To sell, offer for sale, and come to an agreement as to the purchase price;
(B) To sign for me and in my name; and
(C) To receive payment from the sale of my property more particularly described as follows:

[DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY]

HEREBY GRANTING unto said attorney-in-fact full power and authority to execute and
perform every act necessary to render effective the power to sell the foregoing properties, as though
I myself have performed it, and HEREBY APPROVING ALL that he/she may do by virtue hereof with
full right of substitution of his/her person and revocation of this instrument.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto affixed my signature on this __th day of [MONTH,
YEAR], in [PLACE OF EXECUTION OF INSTRUMENT].

__________________ __________________
[NAME OF PRINCIPAL] [NAME OF AGENT]

Signed in the presence of:

__________________ __________________

[PLUS ACKNOWLEDGEMENT]

Special Power of Attorney for Purchase of Real Property

REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES )
City/Municipality of ____________ ) S.S.

SPECIAL POWER OF ATTORNEY

KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS:

I, [NAME], of legal age, Filipino citizen, with residence and postal address at [ADDRESS], do
hereby NAME, CONSTITUTE, AND APPOINT [NAME OF AGENT/ATTORNEY IN FACT], of legal

Page 103 of 129

age, Filipino citizen, with postal address at [ADDRESS], as my true and lawful attorney-in-fact to act
for and in my name, place and stead and to perform the following acts:

(A) To purchase real property or properties situated anywhere in the Philippines, in an amount
acceptable to him/her;
(B) To sign and/or execute any deed conveyance to effect the sale of the property in my name;
and
(C) To receive all documents pertinent to the purchase of any property:

HEREBY GRANTING unto said attorney-in-fact full power and authority to execute and
perform every act necessary to render effective the power to purchase properties, as though I myself
have performed it, and HEREBY APPROVING ALL that he/she may do by virtue hereof with full right
of substitution of his/her person and revocation of this instrument.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto affixed my signature on this __th day of [MONTH,
YEAR], in [PLACE OF EXECUTION OF INSTRUMENT].

__________________ __________________
[NAME OF PRINCIPAL] [NAME OF AGENT]

Signed in the presence of:

__________________ __________________

[PLUS ACKNOWLEDGEMENT]

Special Power of Attorney for Representation in Actions

REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES )
City/Municipality of ____________ ) S.S.

SPECIAL POWER OF ATTORNEY

KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS:

I, [NAME], of legal age, Filipino citizen, Corporate Secretary of [CORPORATION] (“ABC”),

a corporation duly organized and existing under Philippine laws, by virtue of this authority given to
me pursuant to Board Resolution duly issued by the Board of Directors of [“ABC”] in its meeting on
[DAY MONTH YEAR], as evidenced by the secretary’s certificate attached hereto, do hereby NAME,
CONSTITUTE, AND APPOINT [NAME OF AGENT/ATTORNEY IN FACT], of legal age, Filipino
citizen, with postal address at [ADDRESS], to be [“ABC”]’s true and lawful attorney-in-fact in Civil
Case No. 21324 entitled [TITLE] (“Case”), to act for on its behalf to:

(A) Appear for and represent [ABC] whether at the original or appellate stage, and whether as
appellant of appellee, petitioner or respondent;
(B) Sign, under oath or otherwise, all necessary and appropriate pleadings, motions,
verifications, certifications, papers and documents;
(C) Act as agent and appear on behalf of [ABC] in the mandatory conciliation, mediation
conference, judicial dispute resolution, and pre-trial proceedings and all other hearings in the
Case, with full power and authority to consider:
(i) The possibility of an amicable settlement or of submission to alternative modes of
dispute resolution;

Page 104 of 129

 (ii) The simplification of issues;
(iii) The necessity or desirability of amending the pleadings;
(iv) The possibility of obtaining stipulations or admissions of fact and of documents to
avoid unnecessary proof;
(v) The limitation of the number of witnesses;
(vi) The advisability of a preliminary reference of issues to a commissioner;
(vii) The propriety of rendering judgment on the pleadings, or summary judgment, or of
dismissing the Case should a valid ground therefor be found to exist;
(viii) The advisability or necessity of suspending proceedings; and
(ix) Such other matters as may aid in the prompt disposition of this Case.
(D) Negotiate, conclude, enter into, and execute a compromise or amicable settlement of the
Case, if appropriate.

HEREBY GRANTING unto said attorney-in-fact full power and authority to execute and
perform every act necessary, as though ABC itself has performed it, and HEREBY APPROVING
ALL that he/she may do by virtue hereof with full right of substitution of his/her person and
revocation of this instrument.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto affixed my signature on this__th day of [MONTH,

YEAR], in [PLACE OF EXECUTION OF INSTRUMENT].

__________________ __________________
[NAME OF PRINCIPAL] [NAME OF AGENT]

Signed in the presence of:

__________________ __________________

[PLUS ACKNOWLEDGEMENT]

Page 105 of 129

 E. VERIFICATION AND CERTIFICATE OF NON-FORUM
SHOPPING

I, [NAME], Filipino, of legal age, with residence at [ADDRESS] do hereby state that:

1. I am the [PARTY e.g. COMPLAINANT/PETITIONER etc.] in the above-entitled case;

2. I caused the preparation of the foregoing [DESIGNATION OF THE PLEADING e.g.

PETITION, COMPLAINT etc.];

3. I have read its contents and affirm that they are true and correct to the best of my own
personal knowledge and authentic documents in our possession;

4. I have not commenced any other action or proceeding involving the same issues in the
Supreme Court, the Court of Appeals, or any other tribunal or agency;

5. To the best of my knowledge no other such action or proceeding is pending in the

Supreme Court, the Court of Appeals, or any other tribunal or agency and if I should
thereafter learn that a similar action or proceeding has been filed or is pending before the
Supreme Court, the Court of Appeals, or any other tribunal or agency, I undertake to
report that fact within five (5) days therefrom to this Honorable Court.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto signed this instrument this __th day of [MONTH,
YEAR] at [PLACE OF SIGNING].

(sgd.)
[NAME OF
AFFIANT]
Affiant

[PLUS JURAT]

Notes:
As per In Re: Letter Complaint of Fabiana [A.M. No. CA-13-51-J (2013)], if there are pending actions
involving the same parties and/or related question of law and/or fact, the affiant must render complete
statements of the present status thereof.

In Jacinto v. Gumaru, Jr. [G.R. No. 191906 (2014)], the Court reiterated the difference between non-
compliance and defective form:
1. Distinguish between non-compliance with the requirement on or submission of defective: (1)
verification, and (2) certification against forum shopping.
2. As to verification, non-compliance/defect does not necessarily render the pleading fatally
defective. The Court may order its submission or correction or act on the pleading if the attending
circumstances are such that strict compliance with the Rule may be dispensed with to serve the
ends of justice.

Page 106 of 129

3. Substantial compliance in verification: when one who has ample knowledge to swear to the truth
of the allegations in the complaint or petition signs the verification, and when matters alleged in
the petition have been made in good faith or are true and correct.
4. As to certification against forum shopping, non-compliance/defect is generally not curable by its
subsequent submission or correction thereof, unless there is a need to relax the Rule on the
ground of substantial compliance or presence of special circumstances or compelling reasons.
5. The certification against forum shopping must be signed by all the plaintiffs or petitioners in a case;
otherwise, those who did not sign will be dropped as parties to the case. Under reasonable or
justifiable circumstances, however, as when all the plaintiffs or petitioners share a common interest
and invoke a common cause of action or defense, the signature of only one of them in the
certification against forum shopping substantially complies with the Rule.
6. Finally, the certification against forum shopping must be executed by the party-pleader, not by his
counsel. If, however, for reasonable or justifiable reasons, the party-pleader is unable to sign, he
must execute a Special Power of Attorney designating his counsel of record to sign on his behalf.

Page 107 of 129

 F. NOTICE OF HEARING AND EXPLANATION IN MOTIONS
Request for and Notice of Hearing
THE BRANCH CLERK OF COURT
[COURT e.g. METROPOLITAN TRIAL COURT, REGIONAL TRIAL COURT etc.]
[CITY/MUNICIPALITY], [BRANCH NO.]

Please submit the foregoing Motion to the Court for its consideration and approval immediately upon
receipt hereof and kindly include the same in the court’s calendar for hearing on [DATE] at [TIME
e.g. 8:30 in the morning.]

[NAME AND DETAILS OF COUNSEL OF OTHER PARTY]

Please take notice that counsel has requested to be heard on [DATE] at [TIME e.g. 8:30 in the
morning.]

(sgd.)
[NAME AND DETAILS OF COUNSEL]

Note: Rule 15 (Motions), RoC state the requirements of a notice of hearing:

Every written motion required to be heard and the notice of the hearing thereof shall be served in such
a manner as to ensure its receipt by the other party at least three (3) days before the date of hearing,
unless the court for good cause sets the hearing on shorter notice. (Sec. 4)

The notice of hearing shall be addressed to all parties concerned, and shall specify the time and date
of the hearing which must not be later than ten (10) days after the filing of the motion. (Sec. 5)

Page 108 of 129

Proof of Service by Registered Mail with Explanation
Copy Furnished:

[NAME AND DETAILS OF COUNSEL OF OTHER PARTY]

EXPLANATION

The foregoing [DESIGNATION OF PLEADING, MOTION, ETC.] and its attachment(s) were served
on [NAME OF OPPOSING COUNSEL] [IF APPLICABLE: “AND FILED WITH THIS HONORABLE
COURT”] by registered mail due to the lack of time and available personnel to effect personal
service. This explanation is given pursuant to Section 11, Rule 13 of the Rules of Court.

(sgd.)
[NAME AND DETAILS OF COUNSEL]

REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES )

City/Municipality of ____________ ) S.S.

AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE

I, [NAME], a messenger of [NAME OF COUNSEL], with office address at [ADDRESS] after

being duly sworn, hereby depose and state:

That on [DATE OF MAILING], I served a copy of the following pleadings/papers by

registered mail in accordance with Section 10, Rule 13 of the Rules of Court:

Nature of Pleading/Paper
________________________
________________________

in Case No. _________________ entitled ____________________ by depositing a copy in the post

office in a sealed envelope, plainly addressed to [NAME OF PARTY OR HIS/HER COUNSEL] at
[ADDRESS] with postage fully paid, as evidenced by Registry Receipt No.
_____________________ attached and with instructions to the post master to return the mail to
sender after ten (10) days if undelivered.

TO THE TRUTH OF THE FOREGOING, I have signed this Affidavit on ___day of [MONTH,
YEAR] at [PLACE OF SIGNING].

(sgd.)
[NAME OF AFFIANT]
Affiant

[PLUS JURAT]

Page 109 of 129

G. JUDICIAL AFFIDAVIT

JUDICIAL AFFIDAVIT

I, [NAME], of legal age, [SINGLE/MARRIED], [CITIZENSHIP], residing at [ADDRESS],

employed as [OCCUPATION/PROFESSION] at [OFFICE ADDRESS], after having been duly sworn
to in accordance with law and fully conscious that I do so under oath and that I may face criminal
liability for false testimony or perjury in way of answers to the questions propounded to me during
the examination conducted on [DATE] by [NAME OF LAWYER], with office address [OFFICE
ADDRESS OF LAWYER], do hereby depose and state:

Q1: [QUESTION]

A: [ANSWER]

Q2: [QUESTION]

A: [ANSWER]

Q3: [QUESTION]

A: [ANSWER]

Q4: [QUESTION]

A: [ANSWER]

Q5: [QUESTION]

A: [ANSWER]

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto signed this instrument this __th day of [MONTH,
YEAR] at [PLACE OF SIGNING].

(sgd.)
[NAME OF AFFIANT]
Affiant

ATTESTATION AND OFFER

I, [NAME OF LAWYER], of legal age, with office address [OFFICE ADDRESS OF

LAWYER], do hereby certify that:

I propounded questions to [NAME] and faithfully recorded or caused to be recorded the

questions I asked and the corresponding answers that [NAME] gave, as above stated.

Page 110 of 129

 Neither I nor any other person then present or assisting [HIM/HER] coached [HIM/HER]
regarding [HIS/HER] answers and which testimony is being offered to prove: [ENUMERATE THE
PURPOSE OF THE OFFER].

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto signed this instrument this __th day of [MONTH,
YEAR] at [PLACE OF SIGNING].

(sgd.)
[NAME OF LAWYER]

[PLUS JURAT WHICH INCLUDES THE DETAILS OF THE WITNESS AND LAWYER]

Note: Judicial Affidavit Rule shall apply to ALL actions, proceedings, and incidents requiring the
presentation of evidence; ALL courts, quasi-judicial and investigative bodies authorized by SC to
receive evidence, including IBP; and NOT to small claims cases.

A false attestation shall subject the lawyer to disciplinary action against disbarment.

Page 111 of 129

 H. NOTARIAL CERTIFICATES: JURAT AND
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
Jurat

SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO BEFORE ME in the [CITY/MUNICIPALITY of

_______________] on this ___ day of [MONTH, YEAR], affiant exhibiting before me his Government
Issued ID no. _______________ issued on [DATE OF ISSUANCE] at [PLACE OF ISSUANCE] and
valid until [DATE OF EXPIRY].

(Sgd.)
NOTARY PUBLIC

Doc. No.
Page No.
Book No.
Series of [YEAR]

Acknowledgment (Two-Party Instrument)

Republic of the Philippines )
City of ____________ ) S.S.

BEFORE ME, this ___ day of [MONTH, YEAR] in the [CITY/ MUNICIPALITY OF
__________], personally appeared:
NAME TYPE OF I.D AND I.D NO. DATE/PLACE ISSUED
__________________________________ _____________________________
__________________________________ _____________________________
__________________________________ _____________________________

Known to me and to me known to be the same persons who executed the foregoing instrument, and
who acknowledged to me that the same is their free act and deed.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have set my hand and affixed my Notarial seal on the day, year
and place written.

(Sgd.)
NOTARY PUBLIC

Doc. No.
Page No.
Book No.
Series of [YEAR]

Note: If the instrument consists of 2 or more pages, include the following after the 1st paragraph:

This instrument, consisting of ___ pages, including the page on which this acknowledgment is written,
has been signed on the left margin of each and every page thereof by ___________ and his witnesses
(if any), and sealed with my Notarial seal.

Page 112 of 129

Acknowledgment (Affiant Representing a Corporation)
Republic of the Philippines )
City of ____________ ) S.S.

BEFORE ME, this ___ day of [MONTH, YEAR] in the [CITY/ MUNICIPALITY OF
__________], personally appeared [NAME OF AFFIANT], representing to be [POSITION IN THE
CORPORATION] of [NAME OF CORPORATION] with [VALID IDENTIFICATION DOCUMENT]
(No.________________) issued by the [OFFICIAL AGENCY] on [DATE OF ISSUANCE], known to
me to be the same person who executed the foregoing instrument, and who acknowledged to me that
the same is his free act and deed.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have set my hand and affixed my Notarial seal on the day, year
and place written.

(Sgd.)
NOTARY PUBLIC

Doc. No.
Page No.
Book No.
Series of [YEAR]

Note: Acknowledgment vs. Jurat

A jurat is that part of an affidavit in which the officer certifies that the instrument was sworn to before
him. It is not a part of a pleading but merely evidences the fact that the affidavit was properly made.

The jurat in the petition in the case also begins with the words "subscribed and sworn to me."

To subscribe literally means to write underneath, as one's name; to sign at the end of a document.
To swear means to put on oath; to declare on oath the truth of a pleading, etc. Accordingly, in a jurat,
the affiant must sign the document in the presence of and take his oath before a notary public or any
other person authorized to administer oaths. [Gamido v. New Bilibid Prison Officials, G.R. No. 114829,
March 1, 1995].

An acknowledgment is the act of one who has executed a deed in going before some competent officer
or court and declaring it to be his act or deed. [Tigno v. Spouses Aquino, G.R. No. 129416, November
25, 2004]

Note that if the document is subscribed before a public officer duly authorized to take oaths under the
Revised Administrative Code, then there is no need for the affiant to produce a Community Tax
Certificate (CTC), any competent evidence of identity by at least one current identification document
issued by an official agency bearing the photograph and signature of an individual, nor for the entry
into a Notarial Register; the italicized portion of the jurat is dispensed with, but not the oath itself.

Notes:
1. Rule 7, Sec. 3 of the Rules of Court reiterates the importance of the signature of counsel, and an
unsigned pleading produces no legal effect.
2. The En Banc Resolution on Bar Matter No. 1132 (2003) requires counsels to indicate the ff. in all
papers and pleadings submitted to the various judicial or quasi-judicial bodies:

Page 113 of 129

 a. Roll of Attorneys No.
b. IBP Official Receipt No. OR Lifetime Membership No.
c. Current Professional Tax Receipt (PTR) No.
3. A.M. NO. 07-6-5-SC (2007) requires counsels to indicate in their pleadings or other legal
documents their contact details aside from addresses such as telephone number, fax number,
cellular phone number, or email address.
4. Bar Matter No. 1922 (2008) requires practicing members of the bar to indicate in all pleadings filed
before the courts or quasi-judicial bodies, the number and date of issue of their MCLE Certificate
of Compliance or Certificate of Exemption, as may be applicable, for the immediately preceding
compliance period.

Page 114 of 129

I. MOTIONS FOR EXTENSION OF TIME, TO DISMISS, AND
TO DECLARE IN DEFAULT
Motion for Extension of Time

REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES

REGIONAL TRIAL COURT
NATIONAL CAPITAL REGION
BRANCH [#], [VENUE]

[PLAINTIFF] Civil Case No.: 123984

Plaintiff,
-versus- For: [NATURE OF ACTION]

[DEFENDANT],
Defendant.
x-------------------------------------------------------------------x.

MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME

COMES NOW the Defendant by his undersigned counsel, and to this Honorable Court
respectfully states that:
1. Defendant engaged the services of undersigned counsel only on [DATE];
2. Defendant was served with Summons and copy of the Complaint on [DATE] and
thus has until [DATE] within which to submit an [ANSWER OR OTHER
RESPONSIVE PLEADING];
3. However, due to the pressured of equally urgent professional work and prior
commitments, the undersigned counsel will not be able to meet the said deadline;
4. As such, the undersigned counsel is constrained to request for an additional period
of [NUMBER OF DAYS] from [DATE TODAY] or until [DATE OF END OF
EXTENSION] within which to submit Defendant’s [ANSWER OR OTHER
RESPONSIVE PLEADING]. Moreover, this additional time will also allow the
undersigned to interview the available witness and study this case further;
5. This motion is not intended for delay but solely due to the foregoing reasons.

PRAYER

WHEREFORE, Defendant most respectfully prays of this Honorable Court that he be given
an additional period of [NUMBER OF DAYS] from [DATE TODAY] or until [DATE OF END OF
EXTENSION] within which to submit an [ANSWER OR OTHER RESPONSIVE PLEADING].
Other just and equitable reliefs prayed for.
[VENUE], [DATE].

[NAME OF COUNSEL]
Attorney for Defendant
[ADDRESS]
Roll No. [1234]
PTR No. [1234] / [Place] / [Date]

Page 115 of 129

 IBP No. [[1234] / [Place] / [Date]
MCLE Compliance No. [1234]

NOTICE OF HEARING
The undersigned will submit the foregoing Motion for Extension of Time for the consideration
and approval of the Honorable Court on [DATE] at [TIME].

COPIES FURNISHED
[NAME OF COUNSEL]
Attorney for Plaintiff
[ADDRESS]

[BRANCH CLERK OF COURT]

Regional Trial Court of [VENUE]
Branch [NUMBER]
EXPLANATION
This motion will be served on Plaintiff’s counsel by registered mail due to lack of time and
distance between his office and the office of the undersigned.

Motion to Dismiss
REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES
REGIONAL TRIAL COURT
NATIONAL CAPITAL REGION
BRANCH [#], [VENUE]

[PLAINTIFF] Civil Case No.: 123984

Plaintiff,
-versus- For: [NATURE OF ACTION]

[DEFENDANT],
Defendant.
x-------------------------------------------------------------------x.

MOTION TO DISMISS

COMES NOW the defendant by his undersigned counsel, and to this Honorable Court
respectfully moves that the complaint be dismissed on the following grounds:

[GROUNDS]

Discussion

[ARGUMENTS]

PRAYER

WHEREFORE, it is respectfully prayed that the complaint be dismissed.

Page 116 of 129

 [VENUE], [DATE].

[NAME OF COUNSEL]
Attorney for Defendant
[ADDRESS]
Roll No. [1234]
PTR No. [1234] / [Place] / [Date]
IBP No. [[1234] / [Place] / [Date]
MCLE Compliance No. [1234]

NOTICE OF HEARING
The undersigned will submit the foregoing Motion to Dismiss for the consideration and
approval of the Honorable Court on [DATE] at [TIME].

COPIES FURNISHED
[NAME OF COUNSEL]
Attorney for Plaintiff
[ADDRESS]

[BRANCH CLERK OF COURT]

Regional Trial Court of [VENUE]
Branch [NUMBER]

EXPLANATION
This motion will be served on Plaintiff’s counsel by registered mail due to lack of time and
distance between his office and the office of the undersigned.

Page 117 of 129

Motion to Declare in Default
REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES
REGIONAL TRIAL COURT
NATIONAL CAPITAL REGION
BRANCH [#], [VENUE]

[PLAINTIFF] Civil Case No.: 123984

Plaintiff,
-versus- For: [NATURE OF ACTION]

[DEFENDANT],
Defendant.
x-------------------------------------------------------------------x.

MOTION TO DECLARE DEFENDANT IN DEFAULT

COMES NOW the Plaintiff by his undersigned counsel and to this Honorable Court
respectfully moves that the Defendant be declared in default. Plaintiff respectfully states that:
1. The records of the Honorable Court show that the Defendant was served with copy
of the summons and of the complaint, together with annexes thereto on [DATE];
2. Upon verification however, the records show that Defendant [NAME] has failed to
file his Answer within the reglementary period specified by the Rules of Court
despite the service of the summons and the complaint;

PRAYER

WHEREFORE, it is respectfully prayed that the Defendant [NAME] be declared in default

pursuant to the Rules of Court and that the Honorable Court proceed to render judgment as the
complaint may warrant.
Other just and equitable reliefs prayed for.

[VENUE], [DATE].

[DETAILS OF COUNSEL]
Attorney for Plaintiff
[ADDRESS]
Roll No. [1234]
PTR No. [1234] / [Place] / [Date]
IBP No. [[1234] / [Place] / [Date]
MCLE Compliance No. [1234]

NOTICE OF HEARING
The undersigned will submit the foregoing Motion to Declare in Default for the consideration
and approval of the Honorable Court on [DATE] at [TIME].

COPIES FURNISHED
[DETAILS OF COUNSEL]
Attorney for Defendant

Page 118 of 129

[ADDRESS]

[BRANCH CLERK OF COURT]

Regional Trial Court of [VENUE]
Branch [NUMBER]

EXPLANATION
This motion will be served on Defendant’s counsel by registered mail due to lack of time
and distance between his office and the office of the undersigned.

Page 119 of 129

 J. QUITCLAIMS IN LABOR CASES
Republic of the Philippines )
City/Municipality of ____________ ) S.S.

WAIVER, RELEASE AND QUITCLAIM

I, [NAME], of legal age, [SINGLE/MARRIED], [CITIZENSHIP], residing at [ADDRESS], after being

sworn to in accordance with law, depose and state:

1. That by these presents, I hereby state that I have voluntarily resigned as [POSITION HELD] of
[EMPLOYER];

2. That I hereby acknowledge to have received from my employer the sum of [AMOUNT IN
WORDS] ([P###.##]) which is in full and final satisfaction of my salary and other benefits that may
be due me for the service which I have rendered for the latter employer;

3. That I hereby declare that I have no further claims whatsoever against my employer, its President,
members of the Board, officers or any of its staff and that I hereby release and forever discharge all
of them from any and all claims, demands, cause of action of whatever nature arising out of my
employment with the latter;

4. I further agree that this WAIVER, RELEASE AND QUITCLAIM may be pleaded in bar to any suit
or proceeding (Civil, SSS, PhilHealth, Medicare, Labor, etc.) to which either I, or my heirs and
assigns, may have against my employer in connection with my employment with the latter and that
the payment which I have received as provided herein should not in any way be construed as an
admission of liability on the part of my employer and is voluntarily accepted by me and will, if need
be, serve as full and final settlement of any amount(s) due me or any claims or cause of action,
either past, present, future, which I may have in connection with my employment with my employer;

5.As such, I finally make manifest that I have no further claim(s) or cause of action against my
employer nor against any person(s) connected with the administration and operation of the latter and
forever release the latter from any and all liability.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto signed this instrument this ___day of [MONTH, YEAR]
at [PLACE OF SIGNING].

(Sgd.)
[NAME OF AFFIANT]
Affiant

(JURAT)

Page 120 of 129

 K. PROMISSORY NOTE
Promissory Note

P___.__
[DATE]

FOR VALUE RECEIVED, I promise to pay to the order of [PAYEE], the sum of [AMOUNT]
(P___.__) Philippine Currency, in [NO. OF INSTALLMENTS] (P___.__) equal monthly installments
of [AMOUNT] (P___.__) starting [DATE] and every __th [DAY OF THE MONTH] thereafter until fully
paid. Should I fail to pay on the due date, a late penalty fee of [AMOUNT] (__%) per month shall be
added on each unpaid installment from due date thereof until fully paid. In addition to the foregoing, I
promise to pay monthly interest at the rate of [INTEREST RATE] (___%) percent, without need of
demand, starting from the month of [MONTH, YEAR] until this note is fully paid.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto signed this instrument this ___day of [MONTH, YEAR]
at [PLACE OF SIGNING].

(Sgd.)
[NAME OF MAKER]
Maker

Page 121 of 129

 L. INFORMATION IN CRIMINAL CASES
Bigamy
REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES
REGIONAL TRIAL COURT
NATIONAL CAPITAL REGION
BRANCH [#], [VENUE]

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Criminal Case No.: 123984

Plaintiff,

- versus - For: Bigamy

[ACCUSED]
Accused.
x-------------------------------------------------------------------x.

INFORMATION

The Undersigned accuses _____________________ of the crime of Bigamy, committed as

follows:

That on or about ________ 200_, in the City of ________ and within the jurisdiction of this
Honorable Court, the said accused, being then legally married to _____________________, and
without such marriage having been legally dissolved and thus valid and existing, did wilfully, unlawfully
and feloniously contract a second marriage with _____________________ in the City of ________.

CONTRARY TO LAW.
_____________________
Assistant City Prosecutor

CERTIFICATE OF PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATION

I hereby certify that a preliminary investigation in this case was conducted by me in accordance
with law; that I examined the Complainant and her witnesses; that there is reasonable ground to
believe that the offense charged had been committed and that the accused is probably guilty thereof;
that the accused was informed of the Complaint and of the evidence submitted against him and was
given the opportunity to submit controverting evidence; and that the filing of this Information is with the
prior authority and approval of the City Prosecutor.
_____________________
Assistant City Prosecutor

SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO BEFORE ME this __th day of _________ 200_ in ________ City.

_____________________
City Prosecutor
Bail Recommended: P10,000.00

Notes: Refer to Rule 110, section 6-13, RoC

Page 122 of 129

Theft
REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES
REGIONAL TRIAL COURT
NATIONAL CAPITAL REGION
BRANCH [#], [VENUE]

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Criminal Case No.: 123984

Plaintiff,

- versus - For: Theft

[ACCUSED]
Accused.
x-------------------------------------------------------------------x.

INFORMATION

The Undersigned accuses _____________________ of the crime of Theft, committed as

follows:

That on or about ________ 200_, in the City of ________ and within the jurisdiction of this
Honorable Court, the said accused, then ___ years old and without any known address, willfully,
unlawfully and feloniously, with intent to gain, without force upon things or violence upon persons and
without the knowledge and consent of _____________________, the owner, took a _____________
valued at __________________ Pesos (P________.00) to the prejudice of said owner.

CONTRARY TO LAW.
_____________________
Assistant City Prosecutor

CERTIFICATION AS TO CONDUCT OF INQUEST

I hereby certify that the accused was lawfully arrested without a warrant and that, upon being
informed of his rights, refused to waive the provisions of Article 125 of the Revised Penal Code and,
for this reason, an Inquest was conducted; that based on the complaint and the evidence presented
before me without any countervailing evidence submitted by the accused, despite opportunity to do
so, there is reasonable ground to believe that the accused has committed the crime of theft and should,
thus, be held for said crime; that this Information was with the prior authority of the City Prosecutor.
_____________________
Assistant City Prosecutor

SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO BEFORE ME this __th day of _________ 200_ in ________ City.

_____________________
City Prosecutor

Note: if Information is filed after inquest (and not preliminary investigation), add:
1. Place where accused is actually detained
2. Full name and address of evidence custodian
3. Detailed description of recovered items, if any

Page 123 of 129

Attempted Rape
REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES
REGIONAL TRIAL COURT
NATIONAL CAPITAL REGION
BRANCH [#], [VENUE]

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Criminal Case No.: 123984

Plaintiff,

- versus - For: Attempted Rape

[ACCUSED]
Accused.
x-------------------------------------------------------------------x.

INFORMATION

The undersigned accuses _____________________ of attempted rape committed as follows:

That on or about ________ 200_, in ________ City, the accused did then and there wilfully,
unlawfully and feloniously enter the house of _____________________, a married woman, and finding
that her husband was away, with lewd designs and by means of force and intimidation, commenced
directly by overt acts to commit the crime of attempted rape upon her person, to wit: while
_____________________ was cooking lunch, the accused seized her from behind, threw her to the
floor, raised her skirt, pulled down her underwear and attempted to penetrate her with his sexual organ
and would have succeeded in doing so had not her loud protests and vigorous resistance brought her
neighbors to her assistance, causing the accused to flee from the premises without completing all the
acts of execution.

CONTRARY TO LAW with the aggravating circumstance of dwelling.

_____________________
Assistant City Prosecutor

CERTIFICATE OF PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATION

I hereby certify that a preliminary investigation in this case was conducted by me in accordance
with law; that I examined the Complainant and her witnesses; that there is reasonable ground to
believe that the offense charged had been committed and that the accused is probably guilty thereof;
that the accused was informed of the Complaint and of the evidence submitted against him and was
given the opportunity to submit controverting evidence; and that the filing of this Information is with the
prior authority and approval of the City Prosecutor.
_____________________
Assistant City Prosecutor

SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO BEFORE ME this __th day of _________ 200_ in ________ City.

_____________________
City Prosecutor

Can also be Certification as to Conduct of Inquest

Note: if Information is filed after inquest (and not preliminary investigation), add:

Page 124 of 129

 1. Place where accused is actually detained
2. Full name and address of evidence custodian
3. Detailed description of recovered items, if any

Frustrated Murder
REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES
REGIONAL TRIAL COURT
NATIONAL CAPITAL REGION
BRANCH [#], [VENUE]

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Criminal Case No.: 123984

Plaintiff,

- versus - For: Frustrated Murder

[ACCUSED]
Accused.
x-------------------------------------------------------------------x.

INFORMATION

The undersigned accuses _____________________ of frustrated murder committed as

follows:

That on or about ________ 200_, in ________ City, the accused did then and there take a
loaded ________ pistol, directly aim the same firearm at the person of _____________________, an
invalid septuagenarian, and, at point-blank range, with intent to kill, discharge the firearm twice against
the person of said _____________________, inflicting on said _____________________ two (2)
wounds on his chest and stomach, which wounds would have been fatal had not timely medical
assistance been rendered to the said _____________________.

CONTRARY TO LAW with the aggravating circumstances of evident premeditation, use of firearm and
disregard of age.
_____________________
Assistant City Prosecutor

CERTIFICATE OF PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATION

I hereby certify that a preliminary investigation in this case was conducted by me in accordance
with law; that I examined the Complainant and her witnesses; that there is reasonable ground to
believe that the offense charged had been committed and that the accused is probably guilty thereof;
that the accused was informed of the Complaint and of the evidence submitted against him and was
given the opportunity to submit controverting evidence; and that the filing of this Information is with the
prior authority and approval of the City Prosecutor.
_____________________
Assistant City Prosecutor

SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO BEFORE ME this __th day of _________ 200_ in ________ City.

Page 125 of 129

 _____________________
City Prosecutor

Can also be Certification as to Conduct of Inquest

Note: If Information is filed after inquest (and not preliminary investigation), add:
1. Place where accused is actually detained
2. Full name and address of evidence custodian
3. Detailed description of recovered items, if any

Page 126 of 129

 M.RETAINER AGREEMENT
Can also be Certification as to Conduct of Inquest

REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES )

City/Municipality of ____________ ) S.S.

RETAINER CONTRACT

KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS:

This CONTRACT made and executed by and between:

[CLIENT] a domestic corporation duly organized and existing under and by virtue of the
laws of the Republic of the Philippines, with principal office at [ADDRESS] and represented in this act
by its [POSITION], [NAME OF OFFICER], (hereinafter referred to as the "CLIENT");

- and –

[LAW FIRM], a law firm organized under and by virtue of the laws of the Republic of the Philippines
as a general professional partnership, with principal office at [ADDRESS], and represented in this act
by its Managing Partner, [MANAGING PARTNER], (hereinafter referred to as the "LAW FIRM")

WITNESSETH: That —

WHEREAS, the LAW FIRM has offered its professional legal services to the CLIENT and CLIENT
agrees to retain the professional legal services of the LAW FIRM under a retainership basis, subject
to the terms and conditions hereinafter stipulated:

NOW THEREFORE, for and in consideration of the mutual covenants and agreements herein agreed
upon, the CLIENT and the LAW FIRM, by these presents, have entered, as they hereby enter, into a
contract of services whereby the LAW FIRM shall render legal services to the CLIENT, under the
following terms and conditions:

1. The term or duration of this contract shall be for one (1) year effective upon signing of this
agreement and shall automatically renewed on a year to year basis unless either party pre-terminates
the same upon serving a thirty (30) day-prior written notice to the other party, without need of cause;

2. The LAW FIRM, while in the performance of its duties, shall be entitled to a fixed monthly retainer
fee of PESOS: [AMOUNT] (P___.__);

3. The LAW FIRM shall make itself available for ready consultation by the CLIENT or its duly
authorized officers in all matters or business requiring legal advice and opinion affecting the said
corporation in general. Written opinions rendered by the LAW FIRM on matters affecting the
business and operations of the corporation shall be subject to confirmations;

4. The LAW FIRM shall render documentation and notarial services to the CLIENT as part of this
retainership. Client documents shall be notarized free of charge while documents requiring the
participation and signature of a party other than the Client shall be subject to fees or charge at the
following rates:

Notarial Rates

Page 127 of 129

5. In case of extra-judicial foreclosure of mortgage endorsed to the LAW FIRM by the CLIENT, the
attorney's fees shall be at the rates provided as follows:

Rates of Legal Fees on Foreclosure

6. In collection cases other than extra-judicial foreclosure of mortgage, the attorney's fees shall be at
the rates provided as follows:

Rates of Legal Fees for Collection Cases

7. The LAW FIRM shall handle other cases as referred to it by the CLIENT for a fee that shall be
determined by mutual agreement of the law firm and the CLIENT, on a case to case basis, such as,
but not limited to, all suits or cases for or against the CLIENT, including officers and employees of the
CLIENT sued in their official capacity;

8. The LAW FIRM shall not compromise or settle judicially or extra-judicially any account, foreclosure
proceeding or suit wherein the CLIENT is a party, without the written consent and conformity of the
CLIENT or his duly authorized officer;

9. Routinary expenses for mailing of demand letters, pleadings to court and copies thereof to adverse
parties, costs of photocopy of evidentiary documents, payment of stenographic notes,
costs of publications of notices, as well as filing fees and other legal expenses in court and other
appropriate government offices shall be for the account of the CLIENT;

10. The LAW FIRM shall, whenever requested by the CLIENT take immediate measures to investigate
the facts and ascertain the legal position of the CLIENT concerning any accidents, claim or
liability, and shall on such cases do what may be required for the protection of the CLIENT. The LAW
FIRM may represent the CLIENT in all suits and proceedings pending or which may be pending in
[CITY] or its environs wherein the CLIENT is a party, or its rights or interest are involve, at the
direction of the CLIENT;

11. The LAW FIRM shall keep in its office a docket of record in which it shall cause to be recorded all
proceedings connected with any action which the CLIENT is interested and shall keep such other
records necessary to preserve a complete history of the business of the CLIENT entrusted to its
charge. Said docket and records shall be subject to the inspection and control of the CLIENT or his
representative;

12. The LAW FIRM shall submit to the CLIENT at least once every quarter or as often as required,
written reports on all pending matters handled by the LAW FIRM for the CLIENT;

13. The LAW FIRM, in addition to the herein enumerated services, shall well and faithfully serve the
CLIENT and shall at all times devote its whole time and attention to the assignments and tasks
given and/or entrusted to it by the CLIENT and shall do and perform all such services, acts and things
connected therewith as the CLIENT shall from time to time direct; nor shall the LAW FIRM at any time
get itself in a situation where a conflict of interest may arise between those of the CLIENT and the
LAW FIRM and/or its CLIENTS;

14. The LAW FIRM shall not, either during the term of this contract or any time thereafter, use or
disclose to any person, office, corporation or entity any confidential information concerning the
affairs of the CLIENT which he nay have acquired in the course of or as incident to this contract for its
own benefit, or to the detriment or probable detriment of the CLIENT;

Page 128 of 129

15. It is understood and agreed that nothing in this contract shall be construed as establishing the
relationship of employer-employee between the CLIENT and the LAW FIRM, including its personnel;

16. Any violation of the terms and conditions of this contract by the LAW FIRM shall give the CLIENT
the option to rescind or cancel immediately the contract without necessity of judicial proceedings;

17. The CLIENT reserves the right to terminate this Agreement without need of cause or reason upon
thirty-day written notice to the LAW FIRM.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have signed this on this___ day of [MONTH, YEAR], in [PLACE
OF EXECUTION OF INSTRUMENT].

__________________________________ __________________
[NAME OF MANAGING PARTNER] [NAME OF CLIENT]

Signed in the presence of:

__________________ __________________

[PLUS ACKNOWLEDGEMENT]

Page 129 of 129