Chan v Carrera

A.C. No. 10439

Sept. 3, 2019

Facts: Complainant Analiza Chan and Respondent, Rebene Carrera, member of the IBP, met at
Max's Fried Chicken restaurant. Chan claimed that respondent expressed his wish to pursue her but she
was adamant because she was married at that time. Carrera would eat several times a week at said
restaurant and eventually, they became close. They traveled together to Hongkong and upon return,
decided to live together. It was later found out that Carrera was still married to his wife who was in an
institution for schizophrenia. Chan wanted to leave him but she was pregnant with respondent's child.
Chan later discovered that respondent also had relations other women and their relationship turned sour.
Regardless, she stayed with him for her concern with the welfare of her child. Respondent denied all
allegations. Being an officer of the IBP and a member of good standing since taking the oath, he asked
for compassion as his infraction did not amount to what constitutes grossly immoral conduct.

Issue: WON respondent's acts constituted gross immoral conduct. (YES).

Ruling: The IBP recommended admonishing and warning of Carrera and the Board of Governors
recommended suspension of 3 years. The Court, however, finds the actuation of Carrera warrant the
penalty of disbarment. Chan manifested disinterest in pursuing her complaint against Carrera but this do
not bar action taken by the IBP-- investigation of the administrative case. Sec. 5, Rule 139-B of the Rules
of Court “No investigation shall be interrupted or terminated by reason of the desistance, settlement,
compromise, restitution, withdrawal of the charges or failure of the complainant to prosecute the same”.
Disbarment case is sui generis—it is neither civil or criminal but it is rather an investigation by the Court
into the conduct of its' officers. Hence, it continues despite the desistance of a complaint or failure of the
complainant to prosecute the same.
The Court finds Carrera in clear violation of Rules 1.01 and 7.03 of the Code of Professional
Responsibility - “A lawyer shall not engage in unlawful, dishonest, immoral or deceitful conduct”; “A
lawyer shall not engage in conduct that adversely affects on his fitness to practice law, nor should he,
whether in public or private life, behave in a scandalous manner to his discredit of the legal profession”.
Immoral conduct or immorality, is that which is so willful, flagrant, or shameless as to show indifference
to the opinion of good and respectable members of the community. The act of respondent of abandonment
of his or her spouse in order to live and cohabit with another constitutes immorality. The act of Carrera
of hiding the fact that he was married when he pursued Chan and freely lived with her and had a child
with her when his marriage was still subsisting constitutes immorality. The Court order his disbarment.
A person who cannot abide by the laws in his private life cannot be expected to do so with his professional
dealings.