Admission to The Law

By: Jose Sunder Phil C. Tabadero

Qualification for admission to the practice of law

There are two basic requirements that should be complied with before a person
can engage in the practice of law.

First Requirements

He should first be admitted to the bar. This requirements is accomplished by

complying with the following requirements(Sec. 2 in relation to Secs. 5, 6, and 14,
Rule 138, ROC):

A. Citizenship - He must be a citizen of the Philippines;

B. Age - He must at least be twenty-one years of age;

C. Residence - He must be resident of the Philippines;

D. Educational Qualification
D.1 He must have completed a four-year high school course
which is a prerequisite to a bachelor’s degree in arts or science;
D.2 He must have completed any bachelor’s degree and also
requires that the bar applicants complete specific coursework during college.
Applicants must have accumulated at least 18 units of English, 6 units of
mathematics, and 18 units of social science during college.
D.3 Those seeking admission to any law school must first take
and pass a uniform nationwide Philippine Law School Admission Test.
D.4 He must required to complete mandatory Law internship to
allows the future Bar Exam taker to apply his/her theoretical learnings into
practice.
D.5 He must have completed a Bachelors of Laws degree in a
law school or university approved and recognized by the Secretary of
Education.

E. Moral and other qualifications - He must be 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.

F. Bar Examinations - He must pass the Bar Examinations

F.1 In order that a candidate may be deemed to have passed his
examinations successfully, he must have obtained a general average of 75% in
any subjects. In determining the average, the subjects in the examinations shall
be given the following relative weights: Civil Law,15%; Labor and Social
Legislation, 10%; Political and International Law, 15%; Taxation, 10%;
Remedial Law, 20%; Legal ethics and Practices Exercise, 5%.
G. Oath - He must take the lawyer’s oath before the Supreme Court itself. (Sec. 17,
Rule 138, ROC)
H. Attorney’s Roll - He must sign the roll of attorneys and receive from the Clerk of
Court of the Supreme Court a certificate of the license to practice. (Secs. 18 and 19,
Rule 138, ROC)

Second Requirement (After Admission to the BAR)

The lawyer must remain in good and regular standing. This requires the
following:

A. He must be member of the IBP (Integrated Bar of the Philippines);

B. He must regularly pay all IBP membership dues and other lawful assessment;

C. He must observe faithfully the rules and ethics of the profession; and

D. He should be subject to Judicial disciplinary control.

E. He should be updated on current laws and practice by MCLE (Mandatory

Continuing Legal Education)

Purpose of imposing said requirements

The said requirements are imposed to see to it that those who are admitted to
the practice of law are mentally and morally fit to discharge their duties to their
clients, to courts, and to the public in general.

Repeaters

Applicants who do not pass the Bar Exam are allowed to retake it as many
times as necessary. Nevertheless, candidates who fails three bar examinations must
prove that they have enrolled in and passed regular fourth year bar review classes and
attended a pre-bar review course before they can take the Bar Exam again.

Practice of Law is more of a privilege than a right

The practice of law is not a matter of right. It is privilege accorded only to

those who measures up to certain rigid standards of mental and moral fitness. Anyone
who is granted the said privilege is expected to maintain the said rigid standards.

Practice of law is a profession and not a business

Law advocacy is not a capitals that yields profits. The returns it gives birth to
are simple rewards for job done or service rendered. It a calling that, unlike mercantile
pursuits which enjoy greater deal of freedom from government interference, is
impressed with public interest, for which it is subject to State regulation.
(Metropolitan Bank and trust company vs Court of Appeals, G.R.Nos. 86100-03, Jan.
23, 1990)

Duties of attorneys. — It is the duty of an attorney:

(a) To maintain allegiance to the Republic of the Philippines and to support the
Constitution and obey the laws of the Philippines.

(b) To observe and maintain the respect due to the courts of justice and judicial officers;

(c) 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.

(d) 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;

(e) 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;

(f) To abstain from all offensive personality and to advance no fact prejudicial to the
honor or reputation of a party or witness, unless required by the justice of the cause
with which he is charged;

(g) 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;
(h) Never to reject, for any consideration personal to himself, the cause of the
defenseless or oppressed;

(i) 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.

Reference:
Book of Rolando Suarez - Introduction to Law
Law in Rule 138
LEB Memorandum Order No. 7-2016, 29 December 2016
Bar Matter No. 1161, Re: Proposed Reforms in the Bar Examinations, 3 September 2013

Case digest in Basis to become a lawyer provided by the Law

By Jose Sunder Phil C. Tabadero

Mercuria D. So vs Ma. Lucille P. Lee

Facts: On may 19, 2017, the Office of the Bar Confidant (OBC) received a letter
from mercuria D. So alleging that Lee is a defendant in Civil Case No. 740 and is not
fit for admission to the bar considering her irresponsible attitude towards her
monetary obligations. Attached in the said letter was a copy of the Complaint for
collection of Sum of Money So had filed against Lee

Issue: Whether Lee should be allowed to retake the Lawyer’s oath and sign the roll of
attorneys.

Held: The Practice of law is not a right but a privilege bestowed by the state upon
those who show that they possess, and continue to possess, the qualifications required
by law for the conferement of such privilege. It is extended only to the few who
possess the high standards of intellectual and moral qualifications and the Court is
duty-bound to prevent the entry of undeserving aspirants, as well as to exclude those
who have been admitted but have become a disgrace to the profession. Section 2,
Rules 138 of the Rules of Court provides for the minimum requirements applicants
for the admission to the Bar must possess, to wit:
“ Sec. 2. Requirements for all applicants for admission to the Bar. - Evary 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. ”

In sum, the pendency of civil cases alone should not prevent successful Bar examines
to take their Lawyer’s Oath and sign the Roll of Attorneys, unless the same involve
acts or omissions which had been previously determined by the Court to be tainted
with moral turpitude. This is of course without prejudice to the filing of any
administrative action against would - be lawyers who fail to continue to possess the
required moral fitness of members of legal profession.

RE: Petition of AL Argosino to take the Lawyers Oath

B.M. No. 712 March 19, 1997

Facts: Petitioner Caparros Argosino passed the bar examinations held in 1993. The
Court however deferred his oath-taking due to his previous conviction for Reckless
Imprudence Resulting In Homicide. The Criminal case which resulted in Caparros
Argosino conviction, arose fro the death of a neophyte during fraternity initiation rites
sometime in September 1991. Petitioner and seven other accused initially entered
pleas of not guilty to homicide charges. The eight accused later withdrew their initial
pleas and upon re-arraignment all pleaded guilty to reckless imprudence resulting in
homicide.

On 14 April 1995, the Court through then Senior Associate Justice Florentino P.
Feliciano issued a resolution requiring petitioner to submit to the Court evidence that
he may now be regarded as complying with the requirement of good moral character
imposed upon those seeking admission to the bar.
In compliance with the above resolution, petitioner submitted no less than (15)
certificates/letters executed by among others two senators, five trial court Judges, and
six members of religious orders. Petitioner likewise submitted evidence that a
scholarship foundation had been established in honor of raul camaligan. The hazing
victim, through joint efforts of the latter’s family and eight accused in the criminal
case.

Issue: Whether or not Petitioner is allowed to take lawyer’s oath , sign the roll of
attorneys, and thereafter, practice the legal profession.

Held: After a very careful evaluation of this case, we resolve to allow petitioner to
take the lawyer’s oath, sign the Roll of Attorneys and practice the legal profession
with the following admonition:

In allowing Petitioner to take lawyer’s oath, the Court recognizes that Petitioner is not
inherently of bad moral fiber. On the contrary, the various certifications show that he
is a devout Catholic with genuine concern for civic duties and public service.

The Court is persuaded that Petitioner has exerted all efforts to atone for the death of
raul camaligan. We are prepared to give him the benefit of the doubt, taking judicial
notice of the general tendency of youth to be rash, temerarious and uncalculating.

We stress to Petitioner that the lawyer’s oath is NOT a mere ceremony or formality of
practicing law.Every lawyer should at ALL TIMES weigh his actions according to the
sworn promises he makes when taking the lawyer’s oath. If all lawyers conducted
themselves strictly according to the lawyer’s oath and the code of Professional
Responsibility, the administration of Justice will undoubtedly be faster, farier and
eseier for everyone concerned.