Do you agree or believe that lawyers, who have no legal impediments to marry, should

be prohibited to have dating relationship with their clients who also do not have legal
impediments to marry? Why or why not?

Is there a need to come up with express rules on the matters mentioned in the article?

“[W]hen we chose to become lawyers, we did not just choose a profession or a career.
We chose a way of life: Ethics. Ethics is the heartbeat of why we serve the way we do
as lawyers,” Lazaro-Javier said in her opening remarks.

“The character of an ethical lawyer speaks of integrity, professionalism, respect, and

accountability. These are the values which we as members of the legal profession ought
to embody as lifetime trustees of truth, fairness, and justice,” she added.

ON DATING

One of the essential requisites of marriage is the legal capacity of the contracting
parties. Legal capacity means that the parties are at least 18 years of age (Article 5,
Family Code of the Philippines) and are not barred by any impediment to marry each
other.1 A legal impediment has two kinds. The first are diriment impediments, which are
those that make the marriage void, e.g., a prior existing marriage, lack of legal capacity,
and close blood relationship. The second are prohibitive impediments, which are those
that do not affect the validity of the marriage but criminal sanction may be imposed, e.g.,
marriage without waiting for three months when there is unfavorable parental advice. 2
Although the subject at hand is merely dating, it is important to consider the following in
order to allow a relationship which will not be looked down on by the law. On the other
hand, membership in the bar is an exacting responsibility. It is a privilege that is
burdened with conditions and it imposes the bare minimum of the obligation of attending
to a client’s cause with zeal and due diligence. 3 Furthermore, the attorney-client
relationship is a fiduciary one. Keeping the assigned article in mind on the changes to
be made to the Code of Professional Responsibility that has been in place for about 35
years now, it begs to ask the question – is dating a client such a detriment to practicing
the legal profession, so much so as to provide a proscription on it? Does dating the
client violate that zeal? If it is done between two consenting adults, is it that bad so as to
warrant intervention from the Bar?

Reflection (which, if the group will agree with, I will reword later. If not, it’s
completely fine. 😄):
- No, lawyers, who have no legal impediments to marry, should not be prohibited
to have a dating relationship with their clients who also do not have legal
impediments to marry. However, there must be certain limitations that must
imposed in order to preserve the fervor of the attorney-client relationship.

1
Pineda, E. The Civil Code of the Philippines Annotated. (2011 ed.). (2011). Central Book Supply, Inc.
2
Ibid.
3
Canon 19, Code of Professional Responsibility, promulgated on June 21, 1988
 - My submission: The word “dating” should be defined so as not to include purely
sexual relationships. The relationship should start AFTER litigation or after
services have been rendered OR it may be that the relationship has started
BEFORE legal services were contracted (just like in the rules set forth by the
American Bar Association [ABA. It is a justifiable limitation given that although
dating is a personal matter, the Bar can impose limitations and regulations on
personal aspects to preserve the law profession.

Reason: In a speech made by Justice Vicente Mendoza, he cited “The Legal

Profession” by Paul A. Freund, where it was stated that law is a service
profession and that it must be measured by the standards of those professions,
one of which is independence. Independents notes how lawyers are
professionals who must conduct themselves in a professional way, while he
owes entire devotion and loyalty within the bounds of honor. 4

Thus, while the lawyer is engaged in the services of the client, there must be a
delineation between that of the personal relationship and the professional
relationship between the lawyer and client in order that personal matters or
issues do not get in the way of the case being handled. Furthermore, this is to
ensure that what is shared during the attorney-client relationship remains
guarded by attorney-client privilege.

In the USA, the ABA is strict on sexual relationships between the lawyer and the
client, except when the sexual relationship between the parties predated their
attorney-client relationship (as lawyers should be free to represent their
spouses). Their rationale is mainly to avoid the quid pro quo “services-for-sexual
services” fee arrangements. Moreover, that since clients come to their lawyers to
resolve their legal problems, for the relationship to work, clients must be free to
share with their lawyers sensitive and intimate matters that must be guarded for
his or her best interest. “There should be nothing, or no one, during the course of
the relationship, that interferes with or limits the lawyer’s professional judgment
and the lawyer must be able to render candid advice to their client.” 5

ON RESPONSIBLE USE OF SOCIAL MEDIA

The prohibitions include posts about fake news and using fake identities on social
media: 

 A lawyer shall not post, share, upload or otherwise disseminate false or

unverified statements, claims, or commit any other act of disinformation.
 A lawyer shall not create, maintain or operate accounts in social media for the
purpose of hiding his or her identity to circumvent the law or the provisions of this
Code. 

4
Villareal II, E. Legal profession. (1st ed.). (2002). Rex Book Store.
5
McCabe, Jr. M. (2019). Attorney-client sex: A bad idea that’s also unethical. Retrieved from
https://ipethicslaw.com/attorney-client-sex-a-bad-idea-thats-also-unethical/
 - There should be a definition on what fake news is. The article even says that the
determination of what constitutes false information or who will determine such is
still a gray area:

“It is not yet clear who will determine what constitutes false information or if lawyers can
no longer use different names online. Although, it is the Supreme Court that will ultimately
determine a lawyer’s liability.”

- Won’t this be an impediment to the freedom of expression?

A need to come up with express rules on the matters mentioned in the article

It is 2023 and the Code of Professional Responsibility was promulgated on June 21,
1988. A new century has entered and many modern advancements have been
introduced, especially the evolution of technology, the internet, and of course, the
flourishing of social media. To adapt to these developments, there should be express
and more recent rules on the matters mentioned in the article. Thus, in light of the
advances of the modern times of today, there should be updates on the Code of
Professional Responsibility to be more responsive to the issues that involve lawyers, the
practice of law, and with regard to the issues that the country faces as a whole. (Will
add more.)