DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF A LAWYER
Homeowner’s Association and Ely Mabanag.
Atty. Jimenez was the counsel of record and
handling lawyer for the association. The RTC
rendered a decision in favor of the Sps.
Santander. The CA dismissed the appeal on
the ground that the original period to file the
appellant’s brief had expired 95 days before
the first motion for extension of time to file
said brief was filed. Some members of the
association filed a Complaint for Disbarment
against Atty. Jimenez. In his defense, Atty.
Jimenez alleged that the members have no
personality to file the disbarment complaint
as they were not his clients. Is Atty. Jimenez
liable for violating Rule 18.03 and Canon 18 of
the Code of Professional Responsibility?
A: YES, Atty. Jimenez is liable. His failure to file
the appellant’s brief within the period provided
by law violates Canon 18 of the CPR. Atty. Jimenez
had filed with the CA an Urgent Motion for
Extension stating that a previous motion had
been filed but “due to the health condition of the
undersigned counsel…he was not able to finish
said Appellant’s Brief within the fifteen day
period earlier requested by him.” It is clear that
Atty. Jimenez was indeed in charge of the case. A
lawyer representing a client bears the
responsibility of protecting the client’s interest
with utmost diligence (Figueras v. Jimenez, A.C.
No. 9116, March 12, 2014).
Q: The Warriner Spouses secured the services
of Atty. Dublin to file a complaint for damages
against E.B. Villarosa& Partner Co. Ltd. before
the RTC. However, Atty. Dublin allowed the
time to lapse for the filing of the Formal Offer
of Documentary Evidence. An administrative
case was filed against Atty. Dublin, with him
reasoning out that the claims of his clients
were fabricated. Is he guilty of mishandling
the case of the spouses?
A: YES. Atty. Dublinis liable for mishandling the
case. He failed to serve his clients with
competence and diligence when he failed to
submit the necessary documents on time and
even failed to oppose the motion to dismiss of
E.B. Villarosa& Partner Co. Ltd. The issue on
whether or not his client’s claims are fabricated
are of no matter to his case, because he is allowed
to withdraw as counsel when the client insists
that a lawyer pursue immoral or illegal conduct.
Finally, as an officer of the court, he is proscribed
from disobeying and disrespecting court orders
89
and processes (Spouses Warriner v. Atty. Dublin,
A.C. No. 5239, Nov. 18, 2013).
DUTY TO APPRISE CLIENT
RULE 18.04, CANON 18
A lawyer shall keep the client informed of
the status of his case and shall respond
within a reasonable time to the client’s
request for information.
A lawyer should notify his client of the adverse
decision while within the period to appeal to
enable the client to decide whether to seek an
appellate review. He should communicate with
him concerning the withdrawal of appeal with all
its adverse consequences. The client is entitled to
the fullest disclosure of the mode or manner by
which his interest is defended or why certain
steps are taken or omitted.
Q: Spouses Garcia engaged the services of
Atty. Rolando Bala to appeal to the CA the
adverse decision of the Department of
Agrarian Relations Adjudication Board
(DARAB). Instead, he erroneously filed a
Notice of Appeal. During one instance when
the spouses had called on him to ask for a
copy of the supposed appeal, Atty. Bala
uttered unsavory words against them.
Because of his error, the prescribed period for
filing the petition lapsed, to the prejudice of
his clients. Did Atty. Bala violate any ethical
rules?
A: YES. Rule 18.04 states that a "lawyer shall
keep the client informed of the status of his case
and shall respond within a reasonable time to the
client's request for information." Accordingly, the
spouses had the right to be updated on the
developments and status of the case for which
they had engaged the services of Atty. Bala. But
he apparently denied them that right. Having
become aware of the wrong remedy he had
erroneously taken, he purposely evaded his
clients, refused to update them on the appeal, and
misled them as to his whereabouts. Moreover, he
uttered invectives at them when they visited him
for an update on the case. (Spouses Garcia v. Bala,
A.C. No. 5039, November 25, 2005)
Q: Sps. Ramiscals engaged the legal services of
Atty. Edgar S. Orro to handle a case in which
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW
 Legal Ethics
they were the defendants seeking the
declaration of the nullity of title to a parcel of
land. Upon receiving the P10,000.00
acceptance fee from them, Orro handled the
trial of the case until RTC decided it in their
favor. When the case reached CA, Orro
requested from the spouses an additional
amount of P30,000.00 for the preparation and
submission of their appellees’ brief. Later on,
the CA reversed the decision of the RTC. Orro
did not inform the Ramiscals of the adverse
decision of the CA which they only learned
about from their neighbors. They endeavored
to communicate with Orro but their efforts
were initially in vain. When they finally
reached him, he asked an additional
P7,000.00 from them as his fee in filing a
motion for reconsideration in their behalf,
albeit telling them that such motion would
already be belated. They later discovered that
he did not file the motion for reconsideration;
hence, the decision attained finality,
eventually resulting in the loss of their
property. Did Atty. Orro competently and
diligently discharge his duties as a lawyer?
A: NO.Every lawyer, upon becoming a member of
the Philippine Bar, solemnly takes the Lawyer’s
Oath, by which he vows, among others, that: "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 to the courts as to my clients." If he
should violate the vow, he contravenes the Code
of Professional Responsibility, particularly its
Canon 17, and Rules 18.03 and 18.04 of Canon 18.
As an essential part of their highly fiduciary
relationship, the client is entitled to the periodic
and full updates from the lawyer on the
developments of the case. Updating the clients
could have prevented their substantial prejudice
by enabling them to engage another competent
lawyer to handle their case. As it happened, his
neglect in that respect lost for them whatever
legal remedies were then available. His various
omissions manifested his utter lack of
professionalism towards them. (Ramiscal v. Orro,
A.C. No. 10945, February 23, 2016)
NOTE: The lawyer is obliged to respond within a
reasonable time to a client's request for
information. A client is entitled to the fullest
disclosure of the mode or manner by which that
client's interest is defended or why certain steps
are taken or omitted. A lawyer who repeatedly
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
2018 GOLDEN NOTES
90
fails to answer the inquiries or communications
of a client violates the rules of professional
courtesy and neglects the client's interests
(Villariasa-Reisenbeck v. Abarrientos, A.C. No.
6238, November 4, 2004).
Doctrine of imputed knowledge
The knowledge acquired by an attorney during
the time that he is acting within the scope of his
authority is imputed to the client. It is based on
the assumption that an attorney, who has notice
of matter affecting his client, has communicated
the same to his principal in the course of
professional dealings.
NOTE: The doctrine applies regardless of
whether or not the lawyer actually communicated
to the client what he learned in his professional
capacity, the attorney and his client being one
judicial person.
Notice to counsel is notice to client, but not
vice versa if the latter appeared by attorney
GR: The law requires that service of any notice
upon a party who has appeared by attorney shall
be made upon his attorney. Notice sent to a party
who has appeared by counsel is not notice in law,
it being immaterial that the client actually
received the notice or volunteered to get a copy
thereof.
XPNs:
1. Strict application might foster dangerous
collusion to the detriment of justice;
2. Service of notice upon party instead of upon
his attorney is ordered by the court;
3. Notice of pre-trial is required to be served
upon parties and their respective lawyers;
and
4. In appeal from the lower court to the RTC,
upon docketing of appeal.
REPRESENTATION WITH ZEAL
WITHIN LEGAL BOUNDS
CANON 19
A lawyer shall represent his client with zeal
within the bounds of the law
When a lawyer accepts a case, whether for a fee or
not, his acceptance is an implied representation
that he: [CASE]
 DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF A LAWYER
1. will exercise reasonable and ordinary Care
and diligence in the pursuit or defense of the
case;
2. will possess the requisite degree of Academic
learning, skill and ability in the practice of his
profession;
3. will take steps as will adequately Safeguard
his client’s interests; and
4. will Exert his best judgment in the
prosecution or defense of the litigation
entrusted to him (Islas v. Platon, G.R. No. L-
23183, December 29, 1924).
Authority to appear in court is presumed
GR: A lawyer is presumed to be properly
authorized to represent any cause in which he
appears.
XPN: On motion of either party and on reasonable
grounds, the presiding judge may require an
attorney to prove the authority under which he
appears (Sec. 21, Rule 138, RRC).
Voluntary appearance of lawyer without
authority
An attorney may not appear for a person until he
is in fact employed by, or retained for such
person. An attorney willfully appearing in court
for a person without being employed, unless by
leave of court, may be punished for contempt as
an officer of the court, who has misbehaved in his
official transactions (Sec. 26, Rule 138).
Effects of unauthorized appearance
1. The party represented is not bound by
attorney’s appearance in the case neither by
the judgment rendered therein;
2. Court does not acquire jurisdiction over the
person of the party represented;
3. The adverse party who has been forced to
litigate as a defendant by the unauthorized
action on the part of the attorney for the
plaintiff may, on that ground, move for the
dismissal of the complaint; and
4. If unauthorized appearance is willful,
attorney may be cited for contempt as an
officer of the court who has misbehaved in
his official transactions, and he may be
disciplined for professional misconduct.
Ratification of unauthorized appearance
1. Express– Categorized assertion by client that
91
he has authorized a lawyer or that he
confirms his authorization to represent him
in the case.
2. Implied– Where party with knowledge of
fact that a lawyer has been representing him
in a case, accepts benefits of representation
or fails to promptly repudiate the assumed
authority.
Requisites of implied ratification by silence
1. The party represented by the attorney is of
age or competent or if he suffers from any
disability, he has a duly appointed guardian
or legal representative;
2. The party or his guardian, as the case may be,
is aware of the attorney’s representation; and
3. He fails to promptly repudiate assumed
authority.
Extent of lawyer’s authority in litigation
A lawyer has authority to bind the client in all
matters of ordinary judicial procedure. The cause
of action, the claim or demand sued upon and the
subject matter of the litigation are within the
exclusive control of the client. A client may waive,
surrender, dismiss, or compromise any of his
rights involved in litigation in favor of the other
party even without or against the consent of his
attorney.
Q: May a lawyer be held liable for damages by
his clients for the lawyer’s failure to file the
necessary pleadings to prosecute the client’s
case and as a result of which the client
suffered damages? (2014 Bar)
A: YES, a lawyer may be held liable for damages
by his client for failure to represent his client
with zeal (Canon 19, CPR) and for not serving his
client with competence and diligence (Canon 18,
CPR).
USE OF FAIR AND HONEST MEANS
RULE 19.01, CANON 9
A lawyer shall employ only fair and honest
means to attain the lawful objectives of his
client and shall not present, participate in
presenting or threaten to present,
participate in presenting or threaten to
present unfounded criminal charges to
obtain an improper advantage in any case
or proceeding(1997 Bar)
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW
 Legal Ethics
Rule 19.01 of the CPR obligates a lawyer, in
defending his client, to employ only such means
as are consistent with truth and honor. He should
not prosecute patently frivolous and meritless
appeals or institute clearly groundless actions.
The act of a lawyer in preventing the execution of
the judgment against his clients shows that he
actually committed what the above rule expressly
prohibits (Que v. Revilla, A.C. No. 7054, December
4, 2009).
Under this rule, a lawyer should not file or
threaten to file any unfounded or baseless
criminal case or cases against the adversaries of
his client designed to secure a leverage to compel
the adversaries to yield or withdraw their own
cases against the lawyer’s client.
CLIENT’S FRAUD
RULE 19.02, CANON 19
A lawyer who has received information that
his client has, in the course of the
representation, perpetrated a fraud upon a
person or tribunal, shall promptly call upon
the client to rectify the same, and failing
which he shall terminate the relationship
with such client in accordance with the
Rules of Court (2001 Bar)
The lawyer’s duty to his client does not mean
freedom to set up false or fraudulent claims
especially with respect to provisions of law or
administrative rules and that while lawyers are
bound to exert utmost legal skill in prosecuting
their client’s cause or defending it, their duty, first
and foremost, is to the administration of justice
(CPR Annotated, PhilJA).
NOTE: It is an unethical tactic for a lawyer to
offer monetary rewards to anyone who could give
him information against a party so that he could
have leverage against all actions involving such
party (CPR Annotated, PhilJA).
Q: Atty. Bravo represents Carlos Negar (an
insurance agent for Dormir Insurance Co.) in a
suit filed by insurance claimant Andy Limot
who also sued Dormir Insurance. Limot
testified during the trial that he had mailed
the notice of the loss to the insurance agent,
but admitted that he lost the registry receipt
so that he did not have any documentary
evidence of the fact of mailing and of its
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
2018 GOLDEN NOTES
92
timeliness. Dormir Insurance denied liability
contending that the timely notice had not
been given either to the company or its agent.
A few days after Negar testified, he admitted
to Atty. Bravo that he had lied when he denied
receipt of Limot's notice; he did receive the
notice by mail but immediately shredded it to
defeat Limot's claim.
If your were Atty. Bravo, what would you do in
light of your client's disclosure that he
perjured himself when he testified? (2013
Bar)
A: I shall promptly call upon Carlos Negar, my
client, to rectify his perjured testimony by
recanting the same before the court. Should he
refuse or fail to do so I shall then terminate my
relationship with him (Canon, 19, Rule 19.02)
stating that with his having committed perjury he
persuaded an illegal conduct in connection with
the case (Ibid., Canon 22, Rule 22.01).
Q: In a prosecution for a murder against a
ranking army officer, the latter engaged the
services of RS, a well-known trial lawyer, to
whom the officer in one of their conferences
disclosed a plan to eliminate or salvage—i.e.,
kill or otherwise cause to disappear—the only
witness, a fellow military officer, through a
contrived traffic or highway vehicular
accident.
a. What are the legal and moral obligations
of Atty. RS to his client and to the
authorities, under the given
circumstances?
b. Should the planned accident take place,
and the witness to the prosecution be
killed, as a result, is Atty. RS under any
obligation to disclose to the authorities
the plan that his client had mentioned to
him, as above mentioned?
A:
a. Atty. RS has the obligation to disclose such
facts to authorities. The announced intention
of a client to commit a crime is not included
within the confidences which his attorney is
bound to respect. The attorney cannot reveal
to anybody the facts stated by the client as
regards the case proceedings. However this is
not an absolute rule. The privilege is limited
or has reference only to communications
 DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF A LAWYER
which are within the ambit of lawful
employment and does not extend to those
transmitted in contemplation of future
crimes or fraud.
b. YES, Atty. RS has the obligation to disclose
such information to the authorities. As
provided for by Rule 19.02 of Canon 19, a
lawyer shall not allow his client to perpetrate
fraud. He shall promptly advise the client to
rectify the same, and if the client refuses to
heed the lawyer's advice for rectification, the
lawyer must withdraw from the case (People
v. Sandiganbayan, 275 SCRA 505).
Q: If the lawyer is counsel de parte for the
accused and he learns later after accepting the
case and while trial is ongoing that his client
was indeed the perpetrator of the crime, may
the lawyer withdraw his appearance from the
case? Why or Why not? (2014 Bar)
A: He may withdraw his appearance but in
accordance with procedure in Section 26, Rule
138 of the Rules of Court. Moreover, Rule 19.02 of
the CPR provides that “a lawyer who has received
information that his client has, in the course of
the representation, perpetuated a fraud upon a
person or tribunal, shall promptly call upon the
client to rectify the same, and failing which, he
shall terminate the relationship with such client
in accordance with the Rules of Court.”
PROCEDURE IN HANDLING THE CASE
RULE 19.03, CANON 19
A lawyer shall not allow his client to dictate
the procedure in handling the case.
Who has control over the case
1. As to matters of procedure - it is the client
who yields to the lawyer and not the lawyer
yielding to the client. (Lapena 2009)
NOTE: The basis of this rule is that the
lawyer is better trained and skilled in law.
2. As to subject matter - the client is in control.
NOTE: Cause of action, claim or demand, and
subject of litigation are within client’s
control. Proceedings to enforce the remedy
are within the exclusive control of the
attorney.
93
Authority of counsel to compromise
GR: The attorney has no authority to
compromise his client’s case. This is so because
the client, even if represented by counsel, retains
exclusive control over the subject matter of the
litigation. The client can, of course, authorize his
lawyer to compromise his case, and the
settlement made by the lawyer will bind his
client.
XPNs:
1. When the lawyer is confronted with an
emergency where prompt and urgent action
is necessary to protect the interest of his
client and there is no opportunity for
consultation with the latter.
2. Settlement of monetary obligation to client is
full payment in cash.
Duty of the lawyer in gathering information
regarding the case
The lawyer cannot entirely depend on the
information his client gave or the time his client
wished to give. The lawyer should take more
control over handling the case. Where the client is
based overseas, the lawyer should with more
reason, have moved to secure all the legal means
available to him either to continue representing
his client effectively or to make the necessary
manifestation in court, with the client’s
conformity, that he was withdrawing as counsel
of record (CPR Annotated, PhilJA).
Appearance
It is the coming into court as a party either as a
plaintiff or as a defendant and asking relief
therefrom.
Kinds of appearance
1. General appearance – When a party comes
to court either as plaintiff or defendant and
seeks general reliefs from the court for
satisfaction of his claims or counterclaims
respectively.
2. Special appearance– When a defendant
appears in court solely for the purpose of
objecting to the jurisdiction of the court over
his person.
NOTE: By virtue of Sec. 20, Rule 14 of the 1997
Rules of Civil Procedure, there is no more
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW
 Legal Ethics
distinction between general appearance and
special appearance, in the sense that a defendant
may file a motion to dismiss not only on the
ground of lack of jurisdiction over his person but
also on some other grounds without waiving the
jurisdiction of the court over his person.
Entry of appearance v. Appearance of counsel
Entry of appearance is the written manifestation
submitted by the counsel of record to inform the
court that he will act as the counsel of a party
made before the date of the hearing while
appearance of counsel is the verbal manifestation
of the counsel in order for the court to recognize
his presence during the hearing of the case (Sec.
21, Rule 138, Rules of Court).
ATTORNEY’S FEES
(1990, 1991, 1992, 1994, 1995, 1997, 1998,
2005, 2006, 2007 Bar)
CANON 20
A lawyer shall charge only fair and
reasonable fees
GR: Only lawyers are entitled to attorney’s fees.
The same cannot be shared with a non-lawyer. It
is unethical.
XPNs: A lawyer may divide a fee for legal
services with another under the following
instances: [CPR]
1. A lawyer undertakes to Complete the
unfinished legal business of a deceased
lawyer;
2. 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;
3. A lawyer or law firm includes non-lawyer
employees in Retirement plan, even if the
plan is based, in whole or in part, on a profit-
sharing agreement. (Rule 9.02, CPR)
NOTE: Entitlement to lawyer’s fees is presumed
(Funa, 2009).
Unless otherwise expressly stipulated, rendition
of professional services by a lawyer is for a fee or
compensation and is not gratuitous (Research and
Services Realty, Inc. v. CA, G.R. No. 124074, January
27, 1997).
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
2018 GOLDEN NOTES
94
RULE 20.01, CANON 20
A lawyer shall be guided by the following
factors in determining his fees:
a. The time spent and the extent of the
service rendered or required;
b. The novelty and difficulty of the
questions involved;
c. The importance of the subject matter;
d. The skill demanded;
e. The probability of losing other
employment as 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.
NOTE: Generally, the amount of attorney’s
fees due is that stipulated in the retainer
agreement which is conclusive as to the amount
of lawyer’s compensation (Funa, 2009) unless the
stipulated amount in the written contract is found
by the court to be unconscionable or
unreasonable. (Sec. 24, Rule 138, RRC)
In the absence thereof, the amount of attorney’s
fees is fixed on the basis of quantum meruit.
(Sesbreno v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 117438, June
8, 1995; Funa, 2009)
Kinds of payment
1. Fixed or absolute feethat which is payable
regardless of the result of the case.
a. A fixed fee payable per appearance
b. A fixed fee computed upon the number of
hours spent
c. A fixed fee based on piece work
d. Combination of any of the above
2. Contingent fee–a fee that is conditioned on
the securing of a favorable judgment and
recovery of money or property and the
amount of which may be on a percentage
basis.
 DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF A LAWYER
Requisites for the accrual of attorney’s fees
1. Existence of attorney-client relationship; and
2. Rendition by the lawyer of services to the
client.
NOTE: A pauper, while exempted from payment
of legal fees is not exempted from payment of
attorney’s fees. (Cristobal v. Employees’
Compensation Commission, G.R. No. L-49280,
February 26, 1981)
Factors in determining the attorney’s fees
(1994 Bar)
In determining what is fair and reasonable, a
lawyer shall be guided by the following factors:
[STIP-SNACCC]
1. Skill demanded;
2. Time spent and the extent of the services
rendered or required;
3. Importance of the subject matter;
4. Probability of losing other employment as a
result of acceptance of the proffered case;
5. Professional Standing of the lawyer;
6. Novelty and difficulty of the questions
involved;
7. Amount involved in the controversy and the
benefits resulting to the client from the
services;
8. Customary Charges for similar services and
the schedule of fees of the IBP chapter to
which he belongs;
9. Contingency or certainty of compensation;
and
10. Character of the employment, whether
occasional or established. (Rule 20.01)
NOTE: Imposition of interest in the payment of
attorney’s fees is not justified. (Funa, 2009)
Contracts for attorney’s services in this
jurisdiction stands upon an entirely different
footing from other contract for the payment of
compensation for any other services. (Mambulao
Lumber Co. v. Philippine National Bank, G.R. No. L-
22973, January 30, 1968)
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 professional
knowledge. A written contract for services shall
control the amount to be paid therefor, unless
found by the court to be unconscionable or
95
unreasonable. (Sec. 24, Rule 138, RRC)
Factors to consider in determining the
amount of attorney’s fees in the absence of
any fee arrangement [TINS]
1. Time spent and the services rendered or
required – A lawyer is justified in fixing
higher fees when the case is so complicated
and requires more time and effort in fixing it.
2. Importance of subject matter – The more
important the subject matter or the bigger
the value of the interest of the property in
litigation, the higher is the attorney’s fees.
3. Novelty and difficulty of questions involved –
When the questions in a case are novel and
difficult, greater effort, 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 a lawyer – The totality of
the lawyer’s experience provides him skill
and competence admired in lawyers.
Different types of fee arrangements
1. Retainer’s fee where the lawyer is paid for
services for an agreed amount for the case.
2. The lawyer agrees to be paid per court
appearance.
3. Contingent fee where the lawyer is paid for
his services depending on the success of the
case. This applies usually in civil suits for
money or property where the lawyer’s fee is
taken from the award granted by the court.
4. Attorney de officio. The attorney is appointed
by the court to defend the indigent litigant in
a criminal case. The client is not bound to pay
the attorney for his services although he may
be paid a nominal fee taken from a public
fund appropriated for the purpose.
5. Legal aid. The attorney renders legal services
for those who could not afford to engage the
services of paid counsel.
6. Quantum meruit basis. If there is no specific
contract between the lawyer and the client,
the lawyer is paid on quantum meruit basis,
that is, what the lawyer deserves for his
services.
NOTE: When the claim for entitlement to
attorney's fees is contingent, but no written
agreement has been executed bearing the
supposed contingent fees, the only way to
determine the same is to apply the principle of
quantum meruit. The recovery of attorney's fees
on the basis of quantum meruit is a device that
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW
 Legal Ethics
prevents an unscrupulous client from running
away with the fruits of the legal services of
counsel without paying for it and it also avoids
unjust enrichment on the part of the attorney
himself. (National Power Corporation v. Heirs of
Sangkay, G.R. No. 165828, August 24, 2011)
Q: Spouses de Guzman engaged the legal
services of Atty. Rosario, Jr. as defense counsel
in a complaint filed against them. As
represented by Atty. Rosario, Spouses de
Guzman won their case at all levels, from RTC
to the Supreme Court. Atty. Rosario filed a
Motion to Determine Attorney's Fees. He
alleged that he had a verbal agreement with
the Spouses and that he would get 25% of the
market value of the subject land if the
complaint filed against them would be
dismissed. Despite the fact that he had
successfully represented them, the spouses
refused his written demand for payment of
the contracted attorney’s fees. Is Atty. Rosario
entitled to recover his attorney’s fees?
A:YES. In the case at bench, the attorney’s fees
being claimed by the petitioner refers to the
compensation for professional services rendered,
and not as indemnity for damages. The award of
P10,000, made in its extraordinary concept as
indemnity for damages, forms part of the
judgment recoverable against the losing party
and is to be paid directly to Spouses de Guzman
and not to Atty. Rosario. Thus, to grant
petitioner’s motion to determine attorney’s fees
would not result in a double award of attorney’s
fees. The amount of attorney’s fees must be based
in quantum meruit. Atty. Rosario served as
defense counsel for Spouses de Guzman for
almost seventeen (17) years. Given the
considerable amount of the time spent, the
diligent effort exerted by Rosario, and the quality
of work shown by him in ensuring the successful
defense of his clients, he clearly deserves to be
awarded reasonable attorney’s fees for services
rendered. Justice and equity dictate that
petitioner be paid his professional fee based on
quantum meruit. (Rosario v. de Guzman, G.R. No.
191247, July 10, 2013)
Q: Concept Placement retained the services of
Atty. Funk. Under their retainer contract, Atty.
Funk is to render various legal services except
litigation, quasi-judicial and administrative
proceedings and similar actions for which
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
2018 GOLDEN NOTES
96
there will be separate billings. Thereafter,
Atty. Funk represented Concept Placement in
the case filed against it for illegal dismissal.
While the labor case was still pending,
Concept Placement terminated the services of
Atty. Funk. Nevertheless, Atty. Funk continued
handling the case. Atty. Funk then advised
Concept Placement of the POEA’s favorable
decision and requested the payment of his
attorney’s fees. Concept Placement refused. Is
Atty. Funk entitled to attorney’s fees for
assisting Concept Placement as counsel in the
labor case even if the services of Atty. Funk
were already terminated?
A: YES. The expiration of the retainer contract
between the parties during the pendency of the
labor case does not extinguish the respondent’s
right for attorney’s fees. The Court found that
while the petitioner and the respondent did not
execute a written agreement on the fees in the
labor case aside from the Retainer Agreement,
the petitioner did categorically and unequivocally
admit in its Compulsory Counterclaim that it has
engaged the services of the respondent as its
counsel for a fee of P60, 000, etc. (Concept
Placement Resources Inc. v. Atty. Funk, G.R. No.
137680, February 6, 2004)
Retainer
1. This is the act of the client by which he
employs a lawyer to manage for him a cause
to which he is a party, or otherwise to advise
him as counsel;
2. It also refers to a fee which the client pays his
attorney whom he retains. (Pineda, 2009)
Retaining fee
A retaining fee is a preliminary fee given to an
attorney or counsel to insure and secure his
future services, and induce him to act for the
client. (Pineda, 2009)
Kinds of Retainer Agreements on Attorney’s
Fees
1. General retainer or retaining fee– It is the
fee paid to a lawyer to secure his future
services as general counsel for any ordinary
legal problem that may arise in the ordinary
business of the client and referred to him for
legal action. The client pays fixed retainer
fees, which could be monthly or otherwise.
The fees are paid whether or not there are
 DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF A LAWYER
cases referred to the lawyer;
2. Special retainer – It is a fee for a specific or
particular case or service rendered by the
lawyer for a client. (Pineda, 2009)
Q: Atty. M is a partner in the law firm OMP &
Associates. C, a former classmate of Atty. M
engaged the legal services of Atty. M to handle
his appeal to the Court of Appeals (CA) from
an adverse decision of the Regional Trial
Court (RTC) in his annulment case. After the
notice to file brief was issued by the CA, Atty.
M met an accident which incapacitated him
from further engaging law practice. May Atty.
P, his partner in the law firm, file the required
appeal brief for C? Explain your answer. (2014
Bar)
A: It depends on whether or not C knew Atty. M
to be a partner of the OMP & Associates law firm
when he hired him. Generally, the retainer of a
member of a law firm is equivalent to the retainer
of the firm itself. Thus, if the said member dealt
with dies or is incapacitated to render service, the
law firm is bound to provide a substitute. Hence,
Atty. P may file the required brief for C.
On the other hand, if Atty. M was retained alone,
without the knowledge that he belonged to a law
firm, P may not file the required brief for C
without the consent of the latter. There is no
statement in the problem that C knew M to be a
member of the law firm OMP & Associates at the
time that C engaged his services.
Q: Atty. Francisco’s retainer agreement with
RXU said that his attorney's fees in its case
against CRP “shall be 15% of the amounts
collected.” Atty. Francisco asked the trial
court to issue a temporary restraining order
against CRP but this was denied, prompting
him to file a petition for certiorari with the
Court of Appeals to question the order of
denial. At this point, RXU terminated Atty.
Francisco’s services. When the parties later
settled their dispute amicably, CRP paid RXU
P100 million. Because of this, Atty. Francisco
came around and claimed a 15% share in the
amount. What should be his attorney’s fees?
(2011 Bar)
A: A reasonable amount that the court shall fix
upon proof of quantum meruit which means “as
much as he deserves”.
97
Instances when the measure of quantum
meruit may beresorted to(2007 Bar)
1. There is no express contract for payment of
attorney’s fees agreed upon between the
lawyer and the client;
2. Although there is a formal contract for
attorney’s fees, the stipulated fees are found
unconscionable or unreasonable by the court;
3. The contract for attorney’s fees is void due to
purely formal matters or defects of execution;
4. The counsel, for justifiable cause, was not able
to finish the case to its conclusion;
5. Lawyer and client disregard the contract for
attorney’s fees; and
6. The client dismissed his counsel before the
termination of the case.
Q: A client refuses to pay Atty. A his contracted
attorney's fees on the ground that counsel did
not wish to intervene in the process of
effecting a fair settlement of the case. Decide.
(2001 Bar)
A: Rule 1.04 of the Code of Professional
Responsibility provides that "a lawyer shall
encourage his clients to avoid, end or settle a
controversy if it will admit of a fair settlement". If
a lawyer should refuse to intervene in a
settlement proceeding, his entitlement to his
attorney's fees may be affected. However, if he
has already rendered some valuable services to
the client, he must be paid his attorney's fees on
the basis of quantum meruit, even if it is assumed
that he is dismissed.
Instances when counsel cannot recover the
full amount despite written contract for
attorneys’ fees (2006 Bar)
1. When the services called for were not
performed as when the lawyer withdrew
before the case was finished, he will be
allowed only reasonable fees;
2. When there is a justified dismissal of the
attorney, the contract will be nullified and
payment will be on the basis of quantum
meruit only. A contrary stipulation will be
invalid;
3. When the stipulated attorney’s fees are
unconscionable, when it is disproportionate
as compared to the value of services
rendered and is revolting to human
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW
 Legal Ethics
conscience;
4. When the stipulated attorney’s fees are in
excess of what is expressly provided by law;
5. When the lawyer is guilty of fraud or bad
faith toward his client in the matter of his
employment;
6. When the counsel’s services are worthless
because of his negligence;
7. When contract is contrary to law, morals or
public policy; and
8. Serving adverse interest unless the lawyer
proves that it was with the consent of both
parties.
Rationale behind the rule that the court may
reduce unconscionable attorney’s fees
1. A lawyer is primarily an officer of the court
hence fees should be subject to judicial
control;
2. Sound public policy demands that courts
disregard stipulations for attorney’s fees
when they appear to be a source of
speculative profit at the expense of the
debtor or mortgagor. (Borcena v. IAC, et. al.,
G.R. No. 70099, January 7, 1987)
NOTE: A trial judge may not order the reduction
of the attorney’s fees on the ground that the
attorney is “below average standard of a lawyer.”
The opinion of the judge as to the capacity of a
lawyer is not a basis of the right to a lawyer’s
fees. (Fernandez v. Hon. Bello, G.R. No. L-14277,
April 30, 1960)
ACCEPTANCE FEES
Q: B hired Atty. Z to file a replevin case against
C for an agreed acceptance fee of P30,000.00
which was evidence by a written contract.
After the complaint was filed by Atty. Z, B
terminated his services and hired a new
lawyer for the same amount of attorney’s fees.
How much attorney’s fees is Atty. Z entitled
to? (2014 Bar)
A: Atty. Z is entitled to the entire amount of the
attorney’s fees agreed upon because his services
were terminated by the client without just cause.
(Sec. 26, Rule 138, Rules of Court)
Q: Rose engaged the services of Atty. Jack as
counsel for five cases. In the Retainer
Agreement, Rose agreed to pay Atty. Jack the
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
2018 GOLDEN NOTES
98
amount of 200,000 as Acceptance Fee for the
five cases plus an additional 1,500
Appearance Fee per hearing and in the event
that damages are recovered, she would pay
Atty. Jack 10% as success fee. Rose issued two
checks amounting to 51,716.54 in favor of
Atty. Jack however despite receipt of said
amounts he failed to file a case in one of the
five cases referred to him; one case was
dismissed due to untimely appeal; and
another case was dismissed but he failed to
inform Rose about it before she left for
abroad. Dissatisfied with the outcome of her
cases she demanded from Atty. Jack the return
of all the records she had entrusted to him
however he returned only two of the five
cases. She filed a complaint charging him with
violation of Canon 16 and 16.03 of the Code of
Professional Responsibility. Was there a
violation of the said Canon by the respondent?
A: NONE. From the records of the case, it was
found that four of the cases referred by Rose
were filed but were dismissed or terminated for
causes not attributable to Atty. Jack; and that
there was no probable cause to maintain the suit.
No fault or negligence can be attributed to Atty.
Jack. Rose still owes payment of acceptance fee
because she only paid 51, 716.54.
An acceptance fee is not a contingent fee, but is an
absolute fee arrangement which entitles a lawyer
to get paid for his efforts regardless of the
outcome of the litigation. Dissatisfaction from the
outcome of the cases would not render void the
retainer agreement for Atty. Jack appears to have
represented the interest of Rose. (Yu v. Bondal,
A.C. No. 5534, January 17, 2005)
NOTE: The expiration of the retainer contract
between the parties during the pendency of the
labor case does not extinguish the respondent’s
right to attorney’s fees. (Uy v. Gonzales, A.C. No.
5280, March 30, 2004)
CONTINGENCY FEE ARRANGEMENTS
Contingency fee contract
One which stipulates that the lawyer will be paid
for his legal services only if the suit or litigation
ends favorably to the client. (Taganas v. NLRC,
G.R. No. 118746, September 7, 1995)
 DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF A LAWYER
It is like a contract subject to a suspensive
condition wherein the obligation to pay the
counsel is based upon the outcome of the case.
Contingent fees are sanctioned by the CPE and by
the CPR subject to certain limitations. (Licudan v.
CA, G.R. No. 91958, January 24, 1991)
NOTE: If a lawyer employed on contingent basis
dies or becomes disabled before the final
adjudication or settlement of the case has been
obtained, he or his estate will be allowed to
recover the reasonable value of the services
rendered. The recovery will be allowed only after
the successful termination of the litigation in
the client’s favor. (Morton v. Forsee, Ann. Cas. 1914
D. 197; Lapena, 2009, Pineda, 2009)
Rationale for contingent fee contracts
Contracts of this nature (contingent fee contract)
are permitted because they redound to the
benefit of the poor client and the lawyer
especially in cases where the client has
meritorious cause of action, but no means with
which to pay for the legal services unless he can,
with the sanction of law, make a contract for a
contingent fee to be paid out of the proceeds of
the litigation. (Francisco, 1949)
Limitation of the stipulation regarding
contingent fee contract
It must be reasonable based on the circumstance
of the case. Contingent fee contracts are under
the supervision and close scrutiny of the court in
order that clients may be protected from just
charges. Its validity depends on the measure of
reasonableness of the stipulated fees under the
circumstances of the case. Stipulated attorney’s
fees must not be unconscionable wherein the
amount is by far so disproportionate compared to
the value of the services rendered as to amount to
fraud perpetrated to the client. (Sesbreno v. CA,
G.R. No. 117438, June 8, 1995)
Q: The stipulation between the lawyer and
counsel is as follows, “the attorney’s fees of
the Atty. X will be ½ of whatever the client
might recover from his share in the property
subject of the litigation.” Is the stipulation
valid?
A: YES. The stipulation made is one of a
contingent fee which is allowed by the CPE and
the CPR. It does not violate the prohibition of
99
acquisition of property subject of the litigation by
the lawyer provided for in the Civil Code since the
prohibition applies only to a sale or assignment to
the lawyer by his client during the pendency of
the litigation. The transfer actually takes effect
after the finality of the judgment and not during
the pendency of the case. As such it is valid
stipulation between the lawyer and client.
Acceptance of an initial fee before or during
the progress of the litigation detract from the
contingent nature of the fees
The acceptance of an initial fee before or during
the progress of the litigation does not detract
from the contingent nature of the fees, as long as
the bulk thereof is made dependent upon the
successful outcome of the action. (Francisco v.
Matias, G.R. No. L-16349, January 31, 1964)
Q: Chester asked Laarni to handle his claim to
a sizeable parcel of land in Quezon City
against a well-known property developer on a
contingent fee basis. Laarni asked for 15% of
the land that may be recovered or 15% of
whatever monetary settlement that may be
received from the property developer as her
only fee contingent upon securing a favorable
final judgment or compromise settlement.
Chester signed the contingent fee agreement.
Assuming that the property developer settled
the case after the case was decided by the
Regional Trial Court in favor of Chester for P1
Billion. Chester refused to pay Laarni P150
Million on the ground that it is excessive. Is
the refusal justified? Explain. (2008 Bar)
A: The refusal of Chester to pay is unjustified. A
contingent fee is impliedly sanctioned by Rule
20.01(f) of the CPR. A much higher compensation
is allowed as contingent fees in consideration of
the risk that the lawyer will get nothing if the suit
fails. In several cases, the Court has indicated that
a contingent fee of 30% of the money or property
that may be recovered is reasonable. Moreover,
although the developer settled the case, it was
after the case was decided by the RTC in favor of
Chester, which shows that Atty. Laarni has
already rendered service to the client.
Q: Assuming that there was no settlement and
the case eventually reached the Supreme
Court which promulgated a decision in favor
of Chester. (This time) Chester refused to
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW
 Legal Ethics
convey to Laarni 15% of the litigated land as
stipulated on the ground that the agreement
violates Article 1491 of the Civil Code, which
prohibits lawyers from acquiring by purchase
properties and rights, which are the object of
litigation in which they take part by reason of
their profession. Is the refusal justified?
Explain. (2008 Bar)
A: Chester’s refusal is not justified. A contingent
fee arrangement is not covered by Art.1491 of the
Civil Code, because the transfer or assignment of
the property in litigation takes effect only upon
finality of a favorable judgment. (Director of
Lands v. Ababa, G.R. No. L-26096, February 27,
1979); (Macariola v. Asuncion, A.C. No. 133-J, May
31, 1982)
Q: Evangelina Masmud’s husband, the late
Alexander, filed a complaint against his
employer for non-payment of permanent
disability benefits, medical expenses, sickness
allowance, moral and exemplary damages,
and attorney’s fees. He engaged the services
of Atty. Go, as his counsel and agreed to pay
attorney’s fees on a contingent basis, as
follows: 20% of total monetary claims as
settled or paid and an additional 10% in case
of appeal. The Labor Arbiter granted the
monetary claims of Alexander. Eventually,
after several appeals, the decision being
favorable to Evangelina (substituted her
deceased husband), the decision became final
and executory. Upon motion of Atty. Go, the
surety company delivered to the NLRC
Cashier, the check amounting to
P3,454,079.20. Thereafter, Atty. Go moved for
the release of the said amount to Evangelina.
Out of the said amount, Evangelina paid Atty.
Go the sum of P680,000.00. Dissatisfied, Atty.
Go filed a motion to record and enforce the
attorney’s lien alleging that Evangelina
reneged on their contingent fee agreement.
Evangelina manifested that Atty. Go’s claim
for attorney’s fees of 40% of the total
monetary award was null and void based on
Article 111 of the Labor Code. Is her
contention correct?
A: NO. Art. 111. Attorney's fees. (a) In cases of
unlawful withholding of wages, the culpable party
may be assessed attorney's fees equivalent to ten
percent of the amount of the wages recovered.
Contrary to Evangelina’s proposition, Article 111
of the Labor Code deals with the extraordinary
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
2018 GOLDEN NOTES
100
concept of attorney’s fees. It regulates the amount
recoverable as attorney's fees in the nature of
damages sustained by and awarded to the
prevailing party. It may not be used as the
standard in fixing the amount payable to the
lawyer by his client for the legal services he
rendered.
In this regard, Section 24, Rule 138 of the Rules of
Court should be observed in determining Atty.
Go’s compensation. The said Rule provides:
Sec. 24. Compensation of attorneys; agreement as
to fees. An attorney shall be entitled to have and
recover from his client no more than a reasonable
compensation for his services, with a view to the
importance of the subject matter of the
controversy, the extent of the services rendered,
and the professional standing of the attorney. No
court shall be bound by the opinion of attorneys as
expert witnesses as to the proper compensation,
but 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 therefor unless found by the
court to be unconscionable or unreasonable.
The retainer contract between Atty. Go and
Evangelina provides for a contingent fee. The
contract shall control in the determination of the
amount to be paid, unless found by the court to
be unconscionable or unreasonable. The criteria
found in the Code of Professional Responsibility
are also to be considered in assessing the proper
amount of compensation that a lawyer should
receive. (Canon 20, Rule 20.01, CPR; Evangelina
Masmud v. NLRC, et. al., G.R. No. 183385, February
13, 2009)
Champertous contract
Is one where the lawyer stipulates with his client
in the prosecution of the case that he will bear all
the expenses for the recovery of things or
property being claimed by the client, and the
latter agrees to pay the former a portion of the
thing or property recovered as compensation.
A champertous contract is considered VOID
It is void due to public policy, because it would
make him acquire a stake in the outcome of the
litigation which might lead him to place his own
interest above that of the client (Bautista v.
Gonzales, A.M. No. 1625, February 12, 1990).
 DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF A LAWYER
Contingent vs. Champertous contract
CONTINGENT CHAMPERTOUS
CONTRACT CONTRACT
Payable in cash – Payable in kind - a
dependent on the portion of the thing or
success of the property recovered as
litigation compensation
Lawyers do not Lawyers undertake to
undertake to pay all pay all expenses of
expenses of litigation litigation
Valid Void
Q: Complainants engaged the legal services of
Atty. Bañez, Jr. in connection with the
recovery of their properties from Fevidal.
Complainants signed a contract of legal
services, where it was agreed that they would
not pay acceptance and appearance fees to
Atty. Bañez, Jr., but that the docket fees would
instead be shared by the parties. Under the
contract, complainants would pay respondent
50% of whatever would be recovered of the
properties. Did Atty. Bañez, Jr violate any
canon of the Code of Professional
Responsibility?
A: YES. He violated Canon 16.04 of the Code of
Professional Responsibility, which states that
lawyers shall not lend money to a client, except
when in the interest of justice, they have to
advance necessary expenses in a legal matter
they are handling for the client. He violated such
canon because the contract for legal services he
has executed with complainants is in the nature
of a champertous contract – an agreement
whereby an attorney undertakes to pay the
expenses of the proceedings to enforce the
client’s rights in exchange for some bargain to
have a part of the thing in dispute. (Conchita
Baltazar et. al. v. Atty. Bañez, Jr., A.C. No. 9091,
December 11, 2013)
Q: The contract of attorney's fees entered into
by Atty. Quintos and his client, Susan,
stipulates that if a judgment is rendered in
favor of the latter, Atty. Quintos gets 60% of
the property recovered as contingent fee. In
turn, he will assume payment of all expenses
of the litigation. May Atty. Quintos and Susan
increase the amount of the contingent fee to
80%? (2006 Bar)
101
A: NO. Atty. Quintos and Susan cannot agree to
increase the amount of the contingent fee to 80%
because the agreement is champertous. Even if
there is no champertous provision present, the
contingent fee of 80% of the PROPERTY
recovered could still be considered as
unconscionable, because it is so disproportionate
as to indicate that an unjust advantage had been
taken of the client, and is revolting to human
conscience. Contracts for attorney's fees are
always subject to control by the courts.
Q: A inherited parcel of land situated in
Batasan Hills which is occupied by informal
settlers. He wanted to eject the occupants, but
he has no financial means to pursue the
ejectment case. He contracted the services of
Atty. B, who agreed to defray all the expenses
of the suit on the condition that he will be paid
one-half of the property to be recovered as his
compensation. What is this kind of attorney’s
fees? Can Atty. B enforce this contract against
A?
What are the respective remedies relative to
the collection of attorney’s fees, if any, of A
and Atty. B against each other? (2014 Bar)
A: This is a champertous contract and not a
contingent contract. In the problem, Atty. B
defrays all the expenses for litigation and gets
50% of the property to be recovered as his
compensation. This has the characteristics of a
champertous contract. Hence, void for being
contrary to public policy. The legal profession
exists to serve the ends of justice and is not to be
conducted as a business enterprise. Since the
contract is void, Atty. B cannot enforce it against
A but A has a cause of action against Atty. B for
unethical conduct.
ATTORNEY’S LIENS
Attorney’s retaining lien
A retaining lien is the right of an attorney to
retain the funds, documents and papers of his
client who 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.
NOTE: A lawyer is not entitled to unilaterally
appropriate his client’s money for himself by the
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW
 Legal Ethics
mere fact alone that the client owes him his client which have lawfully come into his
attorney’s fees. (Rayos v. Hernandez, G.R. No. possession until his lawful fees and
169079, February 12, 2007) disbursements have been paid and to apply
such funds to the satisfaction thereof.
Requisites in order for an attorney to be able 2. Charging Lien - right which the attorney has
to exercise his retaining lien [ALU] upon all judgments for the payment of
money, and executions issued in pursuance of
1. Attorney-client relationship; said judgments, which he has secured in
2. Lawful possession by the lawyer of the litigation of his client.
client’s funds, documents and papers in his
professional capacity; and Under this rule, this lien, whether retaining
3. Unsatisfied claim for attorney’s fees or or charging, takes legal effect only from and
disbursements. after, but not before, notice of said lien has
been entered in the record and served on the
Attorney’s charging lien adverse party (Elena De Caiña, et al. v. Hon.
Victoriano, et al., G.R. No. L-12905, February
A charging lien is the right of a lawyer to the same 26, 1959).
extent upon all judgments for the payment of
money, and executions issued in pursuance of RETAINING CHARGING
such judgments which he has secured in a LIEN LIEN
litigation of his client, from and after the time As to Nature Passive lien. It Active lien. It
when he shall have caused a statement of his cannot be can be
claim of such lien to be entered upon the records actively enforced by
of the court rendering such judgment, or issuing enforced. It is a execution. It is
such execution, and shall have caused written general lien. a special lien.
notice thereof to be delivered to his client and to As to Basis Lawful Securing of a
the adverse party; and he shall have the same possession of favorable
right and power over such judgments and papers, money
executions as his client would have to enforce his documents, judgment for
lien and secure the payment of his fees and property client.
disbursements. (Sec. 37, Rule 138, RRC) belonging to
the client.
Requisites in order for an attorney to be able
to exercise his charging lien As to Coverage Covers papers, Covers all
documents, judgments for
1. Existence of attorney-client relationship; and properties the payment of
2. The attorney has rendered services; in the lawful money and
3. Favorable money judgment secured by the possession of execution
counsel for his client; the attorney by issued in
4. The attorney has a claim for attorney’s fees reason of his pursuance of
or advances; and professional such judgment.
5. A statement of the claim has been duly employment.
recorded in the case with notice thereof
served upon the client and the adverse party. As to Effect As soon as the As soon as the
attorney gets claim for
NOTE: A charging lien, to be enforceable as a possession of attorney’s fees
security for the payment of attorney’s fees, papers, had been
requires as a condition sine qua non a judgment documents, or entered into
for money and execution in pursuance of such property. the records of
judgment secured in the main action by the the case.
attorney in favor of his client.
As to May be Generally,
Retaining Lien vs.Charging Lien Applicability exercised exercised only
before when the
1. Retaining Lien - right of the attorney to judgment or attorney had
retain the funds, documents, and papers of execution or already

UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS

2018 GOLDEN NOTES
102
 DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF A LAWYER
regardless secured a failed to pay in full the stipulated attorney’s
thereof. favorable fees of Atty. D. How can Atty. D collect his fees
judgment for from M? Discuss fully. (2014 Bar)
his client.
A: D can exercise the remedy of retaining lien
As to When When client over the documents and other pieces of evidence
Extinguishme possession loses action as which have lawfully come to his possession,
nt lawfully ends lien may only under Sec. 37, Rule 138 of the Revised Rules of
as when be enforced Court. The payment of attorney's fee is based on
lawyer against the services rendered and not dependent on the
voluntarily judgment success or failure of the case.
parts with awarded in
funds, favor of client,
documents, proceeds FEES AND CONTROVERSIES WITH CLIENTS
and papers of thereof/execut
client or offers ed thereon. RULE 20.02, CANON 20
them as A lawyer shall, in cases of referral, with the
evidence. consent of the client, be entitled to a division
of fees in proportion to the work performed
and responsibility assumed.
Q: Upon being replaced by Justice C, Atty. B,
the former counsel of the parents of the NOTE: This is not in the nature of a broker’s
victims of the OZONE Disco tragedy, was commission.
directed to forward all the documents in his
possession to Justice C. Atty. B refused, Lawyer-referral system
demanding full compensation pursuant to
their written contract. Sensing that a Under this system, if another counsel is referred
favorable judgment was forthcoming, Atty. B to the client, and the latter agrees to take him as
filed a motion in court relative to his collaborating counsel, and there is no express
attorney’s fees, furnishing his former clients agreement on the payment of attorney’s fees, the
with copies thereof. Is Atty. B legally and said counsel will receive attorney’s fees in
ethically correct in refusing to turn over the proportion to the work performed and
documents and in filing the motion? Explain. responsibility assumed. The lawyers and the
(1996 Bar) client may agree upon the proportion but in case
of disagreement, the court may fix the
A: YES. He is entitled to a retaining lien which proportional division of fees. (Lapena, 2009)
gives him the right to retain the funds, documents
and papers of his client which have lawfully come
to his possession until his lawful fees and RULE 20.03, CANON 20
disbursement have been paid (Sec. 37, Rule 138, A lawyer shall not, without the full
RRC; Rule 16.03, CPR). He is also legally and knowledge and consent of the client, accept
ethically correct in filing a motion in court any fee, reward, costs, commission, interest,
relative to his fees. He is entitled to a charging rebate or forwarding allowance or other
lien upon all judgments for the paying of money, compensation whatsoever related to his
and executions issued in pursuance of such professional employment from anyone
judgments, which he has secured in a litigation of other than the client. (1997, 2003 Bar)
his client, from and after the time when the
records of the court rendering such judgment or It is intended to secure the fidelity of the lawyer
issuing such execution. to his client’s cause and to prevent a situation in
which the receipt by him of a rebate or
commission from another with the client’s
Q: M engaged the services of Atty. D to business may interfere with the full discharge of
prosecute his annulment of marriage case in his duty to his client (Report of the IBP
the Regional Trial Court. After a long-drawn Committee).
trial, Atty. D was able to secure a favorable
judgment from the court. Unfortunately, M has GR: Fees shall be received from the client only.

103 UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS

FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW
 Legal Ethics
XPN: A lawyer may receive compensation from a
person other than his client when the latter has
full knowledge and approval thereof [Sec. 20 (e),
Rule 138].
Q: Atty. X, lawyer of a labor union of rank and
file employees succeeded in the negotiation of
a collective bargaining agreement for the rank
and file employees by virtue of which salary
increase was received by the rank and file
employees. At the same time the employer
granted salary increase to supervisory
employees who were not members of the
union. Atty. X now seeks to collect from the
non-supervisory employees’ attorney’s fees
for this increase in salaries. Is he entitled to
such fees?
A: NO. Atty. X is not entitled to collect attorney’s
fees from the non-union supervisory employees.
A lawyer who rendered services to a party, who
did not employ him nor authorize his
employment, cannot recover compensation even
if his services have redounded to the benefit of
such party. Otherwise, anyone might impose
obligations upon another without the latter’s
knowledge or consent, and even against his
protest as what happened in the present case. In
labor cases such as this one, where the company
grants the same salary increase to non-union
supervisory employees similar to the rank and
file employees who were the clients of the lawyer,
it is not because of the special efforts of the
latter’s lawyer that the non-union supervisory
employees benefited but because of the
company’s policy of non-discrimination. The
lawyer is not entitled to claim attorney’s fees
from the supervisors for the benefits they
received (Orosco v. Hernaez, G.R. No. L-541&9,
December 2, 1901).
RULE 20.04, CANON 20
A lawyer shall avoid controversies with
clients concerning his compensation and
shall resort to judicial action only to prevent
imposition, injustice or fraud. (1998 Bar)
GR: A lawyer should avoid the filing of any case
against a client for the enforcement of attorney’s
fees.
NOTE: The legal profession is not a money-
making trade but a form of public service.
Lawyers should avoid giving the impression that
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
2018 GOLDEN NOTES
104
they are mercenary (Perez v. Scottish Union and
National Insurance Co., C.A. No. 8977, March 22,
1946). It might even turn out to be unproductive
for him for potential clients are likely to avoid a
lawyer with a reputation of suing his clients.
XPNs:
1. To prevent imposition
2. To prevent injustice
3. To prevent fraud (Rule 20.04, CPR)
NOTE: A client may enter into a compromise
agreement without the intervention of the
lawyer, but the terms of the agreement should
not deprive the counsel of his compensation for
the professional services he had rendered. If so,
the compromise shall be subjected to said fees. If
the client and the adverse party who assented to
the compromise are found to have intentionally
deprived the lawyer of his fees, the terms of the
compromise, insofar as they prejudice the lawyer,
will be set aside, making both parties accountable
to pay the lawyer’s fees. But in all cases, it is the
client who is bound to pay his lawyer for his legal
representation (Atty. Gubat v. NPC, G.R. No.
167415, February 26, 2010).
Ways on how lawyers claim attorney's fees
1. Same action in which the services of a lawyer
had been rendered; or
2. In a separate action.
With respect to the first situation, the remedy for
recovering attorney’s fees as an incident of the
main action may be availed of only when
something is due to the client. Attorney’s fees
cannot be determined until after the main
litigation has been decided and the subject of the
recovery is at the disposition of the court. The
issue over attorney’s fees only arises when
something has been recovered from which the fee
is to be paid.
While a claim for attorney’s fees may be filed
before the judgment is rendered, the
determination as to the propriety of the fees or as
to the amount thereof will have to be held in
abeyance until the main case from which the
lawyer’s claim for attorney’s fees may arise has
become final. Otherwise, the determination to be
made by the courts will be premature. Of course,
a petition for attorney’s fees may be filed before
the judgment in favor of the client is satisfied or
the proceeds thereof delivered to the client
(Rosario, Jr. vs. De Guzman et. al., G.R. No. 191247,
 DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF A LAWYER
July 10, 2013).
Instances when an independent civil action to
recover attorney’s fees is necessary
1. Main action is dismissed or nothing is
awarded;
2. Court has decided that it has no jurisdiction
over the action or has already lost it;
3. Person liable for attorney’s fees is not a party
to the main action;
4. Court reserved to the lawyer the right to file a
separate civil suit for recovery of attorney’s
fees;
5. Services for which the lawyer seeks payment
are not connected with the subject litigation;
6. Judgment debtor has fully paid all of the
judgment proceeds to the judgment creditor
and the lawyer has not taken any legal step to
have his fees paid directly to him from the
judgment proceeds; and
7. Failure to exercise charging Lien.
Effects of the nullity of contract on the right to
attorney’s fees
If the nullification is due to:
1. Illegality of its object - the lawyer is
precluded from recovering; or
2. Formal defect (or because the court has
found the amount to be unconscionable) -
the lawyer may recover for any services
rendered based on quantum meruit.
Kinds of lawyer according to services
rendered and the compensation they are
entitled to
1. Counsel de parte– He is entitled to the
reasonable attorney’s fees agreed upon, or in
the absence thereof, on quantum meruit
basis.
2. Counsel de officio– The counsel may not
demand from the accused attorney’s fees
even if he wins the case. He may, however,
collect from the government funds, if
available based on the amount fixed by the
court.
3. Amicus Curiae– not entitled to attorney’s
fees.
CONCEPTS OF ATTORNEY’S FEES
Two concepts of attorney’s fees
1. Ordinary attorney's fee– The reasonable
105
compensation paid to a lawyer by his client
for the legal services he has rendered to the
latter (Pineda, 2009).
NOTE: The basis for this compensation is the
fact of his employment by and his agreement
with the client.
2. Extraordinary attorney's fee– An
indemnity for damages ordered by the court
to be paid by the losing party in litigation.
NOTE: The basis for this is any of the cases
provided for by law where such award can be
made, such as those authorized in Article
2208 of the Civil Code, and is payable to the
client, NOT to the lawyer unless they have
agreed that the award shall pertain to the
lawyer as additional compensation or as part
thereof.
ORDINARY CONCEPT OF ATTORNEY’S FEES
Q: Aurora Pineda filed an action for
declaration of nullity of marriage against
Vinson Pineda, who was represented by Attys.
Clodualdo de Jesus, Carlos Ambrosio and
Emmanuel Mariano. The marriage was
subsequently declared null and void.
Throughout the proceedings counsels and
their relatives and friends availed of free
products and treatments from Vinson’s
dermatology clinic. This notwithstanding,
they billed him additional legal fees
amounting to P16.5 million which he,
however, refused to pay. Instead, he issued
them several checks totaling P1.12 million as
full payments as settlement. Still not satisfied,
the three lawyers filed in the same court a
motion for payment of lawyers' fees for P50
million, which is equivalent to 10% of the
value of the properties awarded to Pineda in
the case. Is their claim justified?
A: NO. Clearly, what they were demanding was
additional payment for legal services rendered in
the same case. Demanding P50 million on top of
the generous sums and perks already given to
them was an act of unconscionable greed. They
could not charge Pineda a fee based on
percentage, absent an express agreement to that
effect. The payments to them in cash, checks, free
products and services from Pineda’s business
more than sufficed for the work they did. The full
payment for settlement should have discharged
Vinson's obligation to them.
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW
 Legal Ethics
As lawyers, they should be reminded that they
are members of an honorable profession, the
primary vision of which is justice. It is the
lawyer’s despicable behavior in the case at bar
which gives lawyering a bad name in the minds of
some people. The vernacular has a word for it:
nagsasamantala. The practice of law is a decent
profession and not a money-making trade.
Compensation should be but a mere incident
(Pineda v. de Jesus, G.R. No. 155224, Aug. 23, 2006).
EXTRAORDINARY CONCEPT OF ATTORNEY’S
FEES
Rules on extraordinary concept of attorney’s
fees
GR: Attorney’s fees as damages are not
recoverable. An adverse decision does not ipso
facto justify their award in favor of the winning
party.
XPNs: Attorney’s fees in the concept of
damagesmay be awarded in any of the following
circumstances:
1. When there is an agreement;
2. When exemplary damages are awarded;
3. When defendant’s action or omission
compelled plaintiff to litigate;
4. In criminal cases of malicious prosecution
a. Plaintiff was acquitted; and
b. The person who charged him knowingly
made the false statement of facts or that
the filing was prompted by sinister
design to vex him;
5. When the action is clearly unfounded;
6. When defendant acted in gross and evident
bad faith;
7. In actions for support;
8. In cases of recovery of wages;
9. In actions for indemnity under workmen’s
compensation and employee’s liability laws;
10. In a separate civil action arising from a crime;
11. When at least double costs are awarded
(costs of suit does not include attorney’s
fees);
12. When the court deems it just and equitable;
and
13. When a special law so authorizes. (Art. 2208,
NCC)
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
2018 GOLDEN NOTES
106
Rationale why that the Court shall state the
reason for the award of attorney’s fees in in its
decision
The award of attorney’s fees being an exception
rather than the general rule, it is necessary for the
court to make findings of facts and law that would
bring the case within the exception and justify the
grant of such award. (Agustin v. CA, G.R. No.
84751, June 6, 1990.
NOTE: Attorney’s fees must be specifically prayed
for and proven and justified in the decision itself
(Trans-Asia Shipping Lines, Inc. v. CA, G.R. No.
118126, March 4, 1996).
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.
The protection given to the client is perpetual and
does not cease with the termination of the
litigation nor is affected by the party ceasing to
employ the attorney and employ another or any
other change of relation between them. It even
survives the death of the client.
PROHIBITED DISCLOSURES AND USE
RULE 21.01, CANON 21
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.
GR: A lawyer shall not reveal the confidences and
secrets of his client.
NOTE: 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, or with a view to,
professional employment, nor can an attorney’s
secretary, stenographer, or clerk be examined,
without the consent of the client and his
 DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF A LAWYER
employer, concerning any fact the knowledge of
which has been acquired in such capacity [Sec.
24(b), Rule 130, RRC].
XPNs:
1. When authorized by his client after
acquainting him of the consequences of the
disclosure;
NOTE: The only instance where the waiver of
the client alone is insufficient is when the
person to be examined with reference to any
privileged communication is the attorney’s
secretary, stenographer or clerk, in respect to
which, the consent of the attorney is likewise
necessary.
2. When required by law; or
3. When necessary to collect his fees or to
defend himself, his employees or associates
by judicial action.
NOTE: Payment of retainer fee is not essential
before an attorney can be required to safeguard a
prospective client’s secret acquired by the
attorney during the course of the consultation
with the prospective client, even if the attorney
did not accept the employment.
Instances when a lawyer may testify as a
witness in a case which he is handling for a
client
1. On formal matters, such as the mailing,
authentication or custody of an instrument
and the like;
2. Acting as an expert on his fee;
3. Acting as an arbitrator;
4. Depositions; and
5. 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.
RULE 21.02, CANON 21
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 21.05, CANON 21
A lawyer shall adopt such measures as may
be required to prevent those whose services
107
are utilized by him, from disclosing or using
confidences or secrets of the client.
RULE 21.06, CANON 21
A lawyer shall avoid indiscreet conversation
about a client’s affairs even with members of
his family.
RULE 21.07, CANON 21
A lawyer shall not reveal that he has been
consulted about a particular case except to
avoid possible conflict of interest.
Q: Bun Siong Yao is a majority stockholder of
Solar Farms & Livelihood Corporation and
Solar Textile Finishing Corporation. Atty.
Leonardo Aurelio is also a stockholder and
the retained counsel of both the corporation
and Bun Siong Yao. The latter purchased
several parcels of land using his personal
funds but were registered in the name of the
corporations upon the advice of Atty. Aurelio.
After a disagreement between Atty. Aurelio
and Bun Siong Yao’s wife, the former
demanded the return of his investment in the
corporations but when Yao refused to pay, he
filed 8 charges for estafa and falsification of
commercial documents against Yao, his wife
and the other officers of the corporation. Yao
alleged that the series of suits is a form of
harassment and constitutes an abuse of the
confidential information which Atty. Aurelio
obtained by virtue of his employment as
counsel. Atty.. Did Atty. Aurelio abuse the
confidential information he obtained by
virtue of his employment as counsel?
A: YES. The long-established rule is that an
attorney is not permitted to disclose
communications made to him in his professional
character by a client, unless the latter consents.
Atty. Aurelio took advantage of his being a lawyer
in order to get back at Yao. In doing so, he has
inevitably utilized information he has obtained
from his dealings with Yao and Yao's companies
for his own end.
Lawyers cannot be allowed to exploit their
profession for the purpose of exacting vengeance
or as a tool for instigating hostility against any
person most especially against a client or former
client (Bun Siong Yao v. Aurelio, A.C. No. 7023,
March 30, 2006).
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW
 Legal Ethics

Acts punished under Art. 209 of the Revised Professional employment of a law firm is
Penal Code (betrayal of trust by attorney) equivalent to retainer of members thereof. In a
law firm, partners or associates usually consult
1. By causing damage to his client, either: a) by one another involving their cases and some work
any malicious breach of professional duty, or as a team. Consequently, it cannot be avoided that
b) by inexcusable negligence or ignorance; some information about the case received from
the client may be disclosed to the partners or
2. By revealing any of the secrets of his clients
associates.
learned by him in his professional capacity;
or
3. By having undertaken the defense of a client Q: In need of legal services, Niko secured an
or having received confidential information appointment to meet with Atty. Henry of
from said client in a case, shall undertake the HENRY & MEYER LAW OFFICES. During the
defense of the opposing party in the same meeting, Niko divulged highly private
information to Atty. Henry, believing that the
case, without the consent of his first client.
lawyer would keep the confidentiality of the
information. Subsequently, Niko was shocked
when he learned that Atty. Henry had shared
RULE 21.03, CANON 21
the confidential information with his law
A lawyer shall not, without the written
partner, Atty. Meyer, and their common
consent of his client, give information from
friend, private practitioner Atty. Canonigo.
his files to an outside agency seeking such
When confronted, Atty. Henry replied that
information for auditing, statistical,
Niko never signed any confidentiality
bookkeeping, accounting, data processing,
agreement, and that he shared the
or any other similar purposes.
information with the two lawyers to secure
affirmance of his legal opinion on
Niko’s problem. Did Atty. Henry violate any
Q: Certain government officers, armed with a
rule of ethics? Explain fully. (2008 Bar)
search warrant duly issued, seized among
other things, a filing cabinet belonging to Atty.
A: Atty. Henry violated Canon 21 of the CPR by
X. In seeking the return of the cabinet, Atty. X
sharing information obtained from his client Niko
claimed that the cabinet contained documents
with Atty. Canonigo. Canon 20 provides that “a
and articles belonging to his clients but the
lawyer shall preserve the confidences or secrets
government refused to return the cabinet.
of his client even after the attorney-client
Atty. X petitioned the court which issued the
relationship is terminated.” The fact that Atty.
warrant, praying that the agents be prohibited
Canonigo is a friend from whom he intended to
from opening the cabinet. Should Atty. X’s
secure legal opinion on Niko’s problem, does not
petition be given due course?
justify such disclosure. He cannot obtain a
collaborating counsel without the consent of the
A: YES. The lower court cannot order the opening
client (Rule 18.01, CPR).
of said cabinet. To do so is in violation of his
rights as an attorney. It would be tantamount to
On the other hand, Atty. Henry did not violate
compelling him to disclose his client’s secrets
Canon 21 in sharing information with his partner
(Lapena, 2009).
Atty. Meyer. Rule 21.04 of the CPR specifically
provides that “a lawyer may disclose the affairs of
a client of the firm to partners or associates
NOTE: Confidential information obtains even
thereof unless prohibited by the client.” Atty.
against government agencies and
Henry was not prohibited from disclosing the
instrumentalities (Funa, 2009).
affairs of Niko with the members of his law firm.
The employment of a member of a firm is
DISCLOSURE, WHEN ALLOWED
generally considered as employment of the firm
itself (Hilado v. David, G.R. No. L-961, September
RULE 21.04, CANON 21
21, 1949).
A lawyer may disclose the affairs of a client of
the firm to partners or associates thereof
unless prohibited by the client.

UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS

2018 GOLDEN NOTES
108
 DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF A LAWYER
Privileged communication rule with regard to
the identity of his client
GR: A lawyer may not invoke privileged
communication to refuse revealing a client’s
identity.
XPNs:
1. When there is a strong possibility that
revealing the client’s name would implicate
the client in the very activity for which he
sought the lawyer’s advice;
2. When disclosure would open the client to
civil liability; or
3. When the government’s lawyers have no case
against an attorney’s client and revealing the
client’s name would furnish the only link that
would come from the chain of testimony
necessary to convict him.
Reasons why a lawyer may not invoke
privileged communication to refuse
revealing a client’s identity
1. Due process considerations require that the
opposing party should know their adversary;
2. The privilege pertains to the subject matter
of the relationship;
3. The privilege begins to exist only after
attorney-client relationship has been
established hence, it does not attach until
there is a client; and
4. The court has a right to know that the client
whose privileged information is sought to be
protected is flesh and blood.
Q: Atty. X was hired by Mr. D to draft the
demand letters and complaint-affidavit
charging Mr. A of estafa. However, Atty. X later
on represented Mr. A in the similar case.
Consequently, Atty. X was charged with
violating the Code of Professional
Responsibility for representing conflicting
interests. Atty. Y Contends that his lawyer-
client relationship with Mr. D ended when he
and his group entered into the compromise
settlement. Is his contention correct?
A: NO. Atty. X’s contention is not correct. The
lawyer-client relationship did not terminate as of
the date of the compromise agreement, for the
fact remained that he still needed to oversee the
implementation of the settlement as well as to
proceed with the criminal cases until they were
dismissed or otherwise concluded by the trial
court. It is also relevant to indicate that the
109
execution of a compromise settlement in the
criminal cases did not ipso facto cause the
termination of the cases not only because the
approval of the compromise by the trial court was
still required, but also because the
compromise would have applied only to the civil
aspect, and excluded the criminal aspect pursuant
to Article 2034 of the Civil Code (Samson v. Era,
A.C. No. 6664, July 16, 2013).
WITHDRAWAL OF SERVICES
CANON 22
A lawyer shall withdraw his services only for
good cause and upon notice appropriate in
the circumstances.
Right to withdraw
GR: A lawyer lacks the unqualified right to
withdraw once he has taken a case. By his
acceptance, he has impliedly stipulated that he
will prosecute the case to its conclusion. This is
especially true when such withdrawal will work
injustice to a client or frustrate the ends of justice.
XPNs: The right of a lawyer to retire from the
case before its final adjudication, which arises
only from:
1. The client’s written consent; or
2. By permission of the court after due notice
and hearing.
Instances when a lawyer may withdraw his
services without the consent of his client (Rule
22.01, Canon 22)
a. When the client pursue 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 in Violation 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;
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW
 Legal Ethics
f. When the lawyer is Elected or appointed to a
public office; and
g. Other similar cases. (Rule 22.01, CPR)
i. When there is conflict of interest.
Hot Potato Rule
GR: A lawyer may not unreasonably withdraw
from representing a client.
XPN: Withdrawal may be allowed if there is a
conflict of interests arising from circumstances
beyond the control of the lawyer or the law firm.
(Black’s Law Dictionary, 9th edition)
NOTE: In cases a-e (above), the lawyer must file a
written motion with an express consent of his
client and the court shall determine whether he
ought to be allowed to retire.
He may also retire 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, RRC)
Procedure to follow when withdrawal is
without client’s consent
1. File a petition for withdrawal in court.
2. Serve a copy of this petition upon his client
and the adverse party at least 3 days before
the date set for hearing.
NOTE: He should present his petition well in
advance of the trial of the action to enable the
client to secure the services of another lawyer.
If the application is filed under circumstances
that do not afford a substitute counsel sufficient
time to prepare for trial or that it will
work prejudice to the client’s cause, the court
may deny his application and require him to
conduct the trial.
A lawyer should not presume that the court will
grant his petition for withdrawal. Until his
withdrawal shall have been proved, the lawyer
remains counsel of record who is expected by his
client as well as by the court to do what the
interests of his client require.
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
2018 GOLDEN NOTES
110
Q: Can a client discharge the services of his
lawyer without a cause? (1994, 1997, 1998
Bar)
A: YES. A client has the right to discharge his
attorney at any time with or without a cause or
even against his consent.
1. With just cause – lawyer is not necessarily
deprived of his right to be paid for his
services. He may only be deprived of such
right if the cause for his dismissal constitutes
in itself a sufficient legal obstacle for
recovery.
2. Without just cause
a. No express written agreement as to fees
- reasonable value of his services up to
the date of his dismissal (quantum
meruit).
b. There is written agreement and the fee
stipulated is absolute and reasonable –
full payment of compensation.
c. The fee stipulated is contingent.
d. If dismissed before the conclusion of the
action - reasonable value of his
services (quantum meruit)
e. If contingency occurs or client prevents
its occurrence – full amount.
NOTE: A lawyer should question his discharge
otherwise he will only be allowed to recover on
quantum meruit basis.
Limitations on client’s right to discharge the
services of his lawyer
1. When made with justifiable cause, it shall
negate the attorney’s right to full payment of
compensation.
2. The attorney may, in the discretion of the
court, intervene in the case to protect his
right to fees.
3. A client may not be permitted to abuse his
right to discharge his counsel as an excuse to
secure repeated extensions of time to file a
pleading or to indefinitely avoid a trial.
Conditions for substitution of counsel
1. Written application
2. Written consent of the client
3. Written consent of the attorney to be
substituted, or in the absence thereof, proof
of service of notice of said motion to the
attorney to be substituted in the manner
prescribed by the rules.
 DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF A LAWYER
Heavy workload as excuse for withdrawal as
counsel
Standing alone, heavy workload is not sufficient
reason for the withdrawal of a counsel. When a
lawyer accepts to handle a case, whether for a fee
or gratis et amore, he undertakes to give his
utmost attention, skill and competence to it
regardless of its significance. Failure to fulfill his
duties will subject him to grave administrative
liability as a member of the Bar (Ceniza v. Atty.
Rubia, A.C. No. 6166, October 2, 2009).
Q: On the eve of the initial hearing for the
reception of evidence for the defense, the
defendant and his counsel had a conference
where the client directed the lawyer to
present as principal defense witnesses 2
persons whose testimonies were personally
known to the lawyer to have been perjured.
The lawyer informed his client that he refused
to go along with the unwarranted course of
action proposed by the defendant. But the
client insisted on the directive, or else he
would not pay the agreed attorney’s fees.
When the case was called for hearing the next
morning the lawyer forthwith moved in open
court that he be relieved as counsel for the
defendant. Both the defendant and the
plaintiff’s counsel objected to the motion.
Under the given facts, is the defense lawyer
legally justified in seeking withdrawal from
the case? Why or why not? Reason briefly.
(2004 Bar)
A: YES, he is justified. Under Rule 22.01 of the
CPR, a lawyer may withdraw his services “if the
client insists that the lawyer pursue conduct
violative of these canons and rules”. The
insistence of the client that the lawyer present
witnesses whom he personally knows to have
been perjured, will expose him to criminal and
civil liability and violate his duty of candor,
fairness and good faith to the court.
Q: Was the motion for relief as counsel made
by the defense lawyer in full accord with the
procedural requirements for a lawyer’s
withdrawal from a court case? Explain briefly.
(2004 Bar)
A: NO, his actuation is not in accord with the
procedural requirements for the lawyer’s
withdrawal from a court case. Whether or not a
111
lawyer has a valid cause to withdraw from a case,
he cannot just do so and leave the client in the
cold unprotected. He must serve a copy of his
petition upon the client and the adverse party. He
should, moreover, present his petition well in
advance of the trial of the action to enable the
client to secure the services of another lawyer.
NOTE: In one case, respondent lawyer admitted
that he deliberately failed to timely file a formal
offer of exhibits because he believes that the
exhibits were fabricated and was hoping that the
same would be refused admission by the RTC. If
respondent truly believes that the exhibits to be
presented in evidence by his clients were
fabricated, then he has the option to withdraw
from the case. Canon 22 allows a lawyer to
withdraw his services for good cause such as
when the client pursues an illegal or immoral
course of conduct with the matter he is handling
or when the client insists that the lawyer pursue
conduct violative of these canons and rules. (Sps.
Warriner v. Atty. Dublin, A.C. No. 5239, November
18, 2013)
Q: Atty. X filed a notice of withdrawal of
appearance as counsel for the accused Y after
the prosecution rested its case. The reason for
the withdrawal of Atty. X was the failure of
accused Y to affix his conformity to the
demand of Atty. X for increase in attorney's
fees. Is the ground for withdrawal justified?
Explain. (2000 Bar)
A: The ground for the withdrawal is not justified.
Rule 22.01 (e) of the Code of Professional
Responsibility provides that a lawyer may
withdraw his services when the client
deliberately fails to pay the fees for his services or
fails to comply with the retainer agreement. In
this case, the client has not failed to pay the
lawyer's fees or to comply with the retainer
agreement. He has only refused to agree with the
lawyer's demand for an increase in his fees. It is
his right to refuse as that is part of his freedom of
contract.
RULE 22.02, CANON 22
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
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW
 Legal Ethics
information necessary for the proper
handling of the matter.

Duties of a discharged lawyer or one who

withdraws

1. Immediately turn-over all papers and

property to which the client is entitled; and
2. To cooperate with his successor in the orderly
transfer of the case.

UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS

2018 GOLDEN NOTES
112
 SUSPENSION, DISBARMENT AND DISCIPLINE OF LAWYERS
SUSPENSION, DISBARMENT AND DISCIPLINE
OF LAWYERS (RULE 139-B, RULES OF COURT)
NATURE AND CHARACTERISTICS OF
DISCIPLINARY ACTION AGAINST LAWYERS
Rationale of disciplining errant lawyers
The practice of law is considered a privilege
bestowed by the State on those who show that
they possess and continue to possess the legal
qualifications for the profession. Lawyers may,
this, be disciplined for any conduct that is
wanting of the above standards whether in their
professional or in their private capacity. (Engr.
Tombokon v. Atty. Pefianco, Adm. Case No. 6116,
August 1, 2012)
Nature of the power to discipline
The power to discipline a lawyer is JUDICIAL in
nature and can be exercised only by the courts. It
cannot be defeated by the legislative or executive
departments.
The power to disbar and to reinstate is an
inherently judicial function (Andres v. Cabrera,
SBC- 585, February 29, 1984).
NOTE: The power to disbar must be exercised
with great caution, and only in a clear case of
misconduct that seriously affects the standing
and character of the lawyer as an officer of the
Court and as a member of the bar. Thus, where a
lesser penalty, such as temporary suspension,
could accomplish the end desired, disbarment
should never be decreed (Ventura v. Samson, A.C.
No. 9608, November 27, 2012).
Forms of disciplinary measures by the
Supreme Court (WARCS-DIP)
1. Warning- an act of putting one on his guard
against an impending danger, evil, consequence
or penalty.
2. Admonition- a gentle or friendly reproof mild
rebuke, warning, reminder or counselling 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 at fault
by his superior officer or the body to which he
belongs;
113
4. Censure- official reprimand;
5. Suspension- temporary withholding of a
lawyer’s right to practice his profession as a
lawyer for a certain period or for an indefinite
period of time.
a. Definite
b. Indefinite – qualified disbarment;
lawyer determines for himself how long
or how short his suspension shall last by
proving to court that he is once again fit
to resume practice of law.
NOTE: Indefinite suspension is not cruel.
Indefinite suspension puts in his hands the key
for the restoratiton of his rights and privileges as
a lawyer. (Dumagdag v. Lumaya, A.C. No. 2614,
June 29, 2000)
6. Disbarment – It is the act of the Supreme Court
of withdrawing from an attorney the right to
practice law. The name of the lawyer is stricken
out from the Roll of Attorneys;
7. Interim Suspension- It is the temporary
suspension of a lawyer from the practice of law
pending imposition of clinical discipline;
Includes:
a. Suspension upon conviction of a
“serious crime”
b. Suspension when the lawyer’s
continuing conduct is or is likely
to watch cause of immediate and
serious injury to a client or
public
8. Probation it is a sanction that allows a lawyer
to practice law under specified conditions.
Powers of the Court of Appeals and the
Regional Trial Courts in Relation to the
Discipline of Lawyers [SWARP]
They are also empowered to:
1. Suspend an attorney from practice for any of
the causes named in Sec 27, Rule 138 until
further action of the Supreme Court in the
case (Sec. 16, Rule 139-B);
2. Warn;
3. Admonish;
4. Reprimand; and
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW
 Legal Ethics
5. Probation (IBP Guidelines)
NOTE: The CA and RTC cannot disbar a lawyer.
Q: Atty. D was required by Judge H of the
Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Manila to show
cause why he should not be punished for
contempt of court for shouting invectives at
the opposing counsel and harassing his
witness.
Assuming that there was sufficient cause or
ground, may Judge H suspend Atty. D from the
practice of law? If Judge H finds that the
actuations of Atty. D are grossly unethical and
unbecoming of a member of the bar, may
Judge H disbar Atty. D instead? (2014 Bar)
A: Under Section 28, Rule 138 of the Rules of
Court, a Regional Trial Court may suspend a
lawyer from the practice of law for any of the
causes provided in Section 27, until further action
from the Supreme Court. But it may not disbar
him, for only the Supreme Court can disbar a
lawyer pursuant to its constitutional power to
admit persons to the practice of law.
Other sanctions and remedies
1. Restitution;
2. Assessment of costs;
3. Limitation upon practice;
4. Appointment of a receiver;
5. Requirement that a lawyer take the bar
examination or professional responsibility
examination;
6. Requirement that a lawyer attend continuing
education courses; and
7. Other requirements that the highest court or
disciplinary board deems consistent with the
purposes of the sanctions.
Factors to be considered in imposing Lawyer’s
sanctions
1. The duty violated;
2. The lawyer’s mental state;
3. The actual and potential injury caused by the
lawyer’s misconduct; and
4. The existence of aggravating and mitigating
factors. (Guidelines for imposing Lawyer’s
sanctions, Sec. 3.0)
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
2018 GOLDEN NOTES
114
NOTE: After misconduct has been established,
aggravating and mitigating circumstances may be
considered in deciding what sanction to impose.
Aggravating factors which may be considered
in increasing the degree of discipline to be
imposed:
1. Prior disciplinary offenses;
2. Dishonest or selfish motives;
3. A pattern of misconduct;
4. Multiple offenses;
5. Bad faith obstruction of the disciplinary
proceeding by intentionally failing to comply
with rules or orders of the disciplinary
agency;
6. Submission of false evidence, false
statements, or other deceptive practices
during the disciplinary process;
7. Refusal to acknowledge wrongful nature of
conduct;
8. Vulnerability of victim;
9. Substantial experience in the practice of law;
and
10. Indifference to making restitution (IBP
Guidelines 9.22).
Mitigating which may be considered in
decreasing the degree of discipline to be
imposed:
1. Good faith in the acquisition of a property of
the client subject of litigation (In Re: Ruste,
A.M. No. 632, June 27, 1940);
2. Inexperience of the lawyer (Munoz v. People,
G.R. No. L-33672, September 28, 1973);
3. Age (Santos v. Tan, A.C. No. 2697, April 19,
1991);
4. Apology (Munoz v. People, G.R. No. L- 33672,
September 28, 1973);
5. Lack of Intention to slight or offend the Court
(Rheem of the Philippines, Inc. v. Ferrer, G.R.
No. L-22979, January 27, 1967);
6. Absence of prior disciplinary record;
7. Absence of dishonest or selfish motive;
8. Personal or emotional problems;
9. Timely good faith effort to make restitution
or to rectify consequences of misconduct;
10. Full and free disclosure to disciplinary board
or cooperative attitude toward the
proceedings;
11. Character or reputation;
12. Physical or mental disability or impairment;
13. Delay in disciplinary proceedings;
 SUSPENSION, DISBARMENT AND DISCIPLINE OF LAWYERS
14. Interim rehabilitation;
15. Imposition of other penalties or sanctions;
16. Remorse;
17. Remoteness of prior offenses (IBP Guidelines
9.32).
Factors which should not be considered as
aggravating or mitigating:
1. Forced or compelled restitution
2. Agreeing to the client’s demand for certain
improper behavior or result
3. Withdrawal of complaint against the lawyer
4. Resignation prior to completion of disciplinary
proceedings
5. Complainant’s recommendation as to sanction;
6. Failure of injured client to complain
SUI GENERIS
Sui generis in nature (2002 Bar)
Administrative cases against lawyers belong to a
class of their own (sui generis). They are distinct
from and may proceed independently of civil and
criminal cases (In re Almacen, G.R. No. L-27654,
February 18, 1970; Funa, 2009). It is:
a. Neither purely civil nor purely criminal, they
are investigations by the Court into the
conduct of one of its officers.
b. Not a civil action because there is neither
plaintiff nor respondent, and involves no
private interest. The complainant is not a
party and has no interest in the outcome
except as all citizens have in the proper
administration of justice. There is no redress
for private grievance.
c. Not a criminal prosecution because it is not
meant as a punishment depriving him of
source of livelihood but rather to ensure that
those who exercise the function should be
competent, honorable and reliable so that the
public may repose confidence in them.
Main objectives of disbarment and suspension
1. Compel the attorney to deal fairly and
honestly with his clients;
2. Remove from the profession a person whose
misconduct has proved him unfit to be
entrusted with the duties and responsibilities
belonging to the office of an attorney;
3. Punish the lawyer;
4. Set an example or a warning for the other
members of the bar;
115
5. Safeguard the administration of justice from
incompetent and dishonest lawyers;
6. Protect the public.
NOTE: The purpose and the nature of disbarment
proceedings make the number of defenses
available in civil and criminal actions inapplicable
in disciplinary proceedings.
Q: Is the defense of Atty. R in a disbarment
complaint for immorality filed by his
paramour P that P is in pari delicto material or
a ground for exoneration? Explain. (2010 Bar)
A: The defense of in pari delicto is immaterial in
an administrative case which is sui generis. The
administrative case is about the lawyer's conduct,
not the woman's. (Mortel v. Aspiras, 100 Phil. 586,
1956)
Q: Arabella filed a complaint for disbarment
against her estranged husband, Atty. P, on the
ground of immorality and use of illegal drugs.
After Arabella presented evidence and rested
her case before the Investigating
Commissioner of the IBP Committee on Bar
Discipline, she filed an Affidavit of Desistance
and motion to dismiss the complaint, she and
her husband having reconciled for the sake of
their children. You are the Investigating
Commissioner of the IBP. Bearing in mind that
the family is a social institution which the
State is duty-bound to preserve, what will be
your action on Arabella's motion to dismiss
the complaint? (2010 Bar)
A: I would still deny the motion to dismiss. The
general rule is that “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 unless the
Supreme Court motu proprio or upon
recommendation of the IBP Board of Governors
determines that there is no compelling reason to
continue with the proceedings. An administrative
investigation of a lawyer is sui generis, neither a
civil nor criminal proceeding. An affidavit of
desistance has no place in it.
Q: Atty. Hyde, a bachelor, practices law in the
Philippines. On long weekends, he dates
beautiful actresses in Hong Kong. Kristine, a
neighbor in the Philippines, filed with the
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW
 Legal Ethics
Supreme Court an administrative complaint
against the lawyer because of sex videos
uploaded through the internet showing Atty.
Hyde's sordid dalliance with the actresses in
Hong Kong. In his answer, Atty. Hyde (a.)
questions the legal personality and interest of
Kristine to institute the complaint and (b.)
insists that he is a bachelor and the sex videos
relate to his private life which is outside
public scrutiny and have nothing to do with
the law practice. Rule on the validity of Atty.
Hyde's defenses. (2009 Bar)
A:
a. The legal personality and interest of Kristine
to initiate the complaint for disbarment is
immaterial. A disbarment proceeding is sui
generis, neither civil nor a criminal
proceeding. Its sole purpose is to determine
whether or not a lawyer is still deserving to
be a member of the bar. In a real sense,
Kristine is not a plaintiff; hence, interest on
her part is not required.
b. Atty. Hyde's second defense is untenable. His
duty not to engage in unlawful, dishonest,
immoral and deceitful conduct under Rule
1.01 of the CPR, as well as his duty not to
engage in scandalous conduct to the discredit
of the legal profession under Rule 7.03, is
applicable to his private as well as to his
professional life.
Q: Atty. Cortes executed a Special Power of
Attorney (SPA) authorizing a certain Inis to
sell two parcels of land registered in the
names of Loyola, Lacdan, Veloso, and Inis. The
SPA was alleged to be forged because Loyola
and Lacdan were already dead at the time of
its execution. Moreover, Atty. Cortes notarized
in Quezon City 12 falsified Deeds of Donation
which was executed in Carmona, Cavite.
Consequently, an administrative case as well
as a criminal case of Estafa was instituted
against Atty. Cortes. As a defense, Atty. Cortes
asserted that all the criminal complaints
against him had been dismissed; hence, he
should be exonerated of all the charges
against him. Will the administrative case
prosper?
A: YES, it will prosper. Administrative cases
against lawyers are sui generis, or a class of their
own. Disbarment cases are aimed at purging the
legal profession of individuals who obdurately
scorn and despise the exalted standards of the
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
2018 GOLDEN NOTES
116
noble profession of law. In this case, the Court
found that Atty. Cortes acted with deceit when he
used the falsified documents to effect the transfer
of properties. Also, his act of bringing the Deeds
of Donation that were executed in Carmona,
Cavite, to his law office in Quezon City, and
notarizing them there, not only violated Section
240 of the Revised Administrative Code but "also
partook of malpractice of law and falsification
(Sta. Ana etc. v. Atty. Cortes, A.C. 6980, August 30,
2017).
QUANTUM OF EVIDENCE REQUIRED
The Supreme Court has consistently held that a
clear preponderant evidence is necessary to justify
the imposition of administrative penalty
considering the serious consequence of
disbarment or suspension of a member of the Bar
(Rose Bunagan-Bansig v. Atty. Rogelio Celera, A.C.
No. 5581, January 14, 2014; Atty. Clodualdo De
Jesus v. Atty. Risos-Vidal, A.C. No. 7961, March 19,
2014).
PRESCRIPTION
NO prescriptive period for the filing of a
administrative complaint against an erring
lawyer
Rule VII, Section 1 of the Rules of Procedure of
the CBD-IBP, which provides for a prescriptive
period for the filing of administrative complaints
against lawyers, should be struck down as void
and of no legal effect for being ultra vires (Heirs of
Falame v. Atty. Baguio, A.C. No. 6876, March 7,
2008).
Q: Atty. Gutierrez phoned Yuhico and asked
for a cash loan claiming that he needed money
to pay for the medical expenses of his mother
who was seriously ill, and promised to pay the
loan very soon. Consequently, he again asked
for a loan to pay for his wife’s
hospitalization and again promised to pay
“within a short time” but failed to do so.
Later, he again attempted to borrow money
for his daughter’s licensure examination
in the US Medical Board and assured Yuhico
that he will pay his debts on or before a
certain date but Yuhico refused to lend him
the money, instead, he demanded payment of
his debts. Atty. Gutierrez failed to pay which
led to the filing of a complaint before the IBP-
 SUSPENSION, DISBARMENT AND DISCIPLINE OF LAWYERS
CBD for non-payment of just debts. It turned
out that Atty. Gutierrez was previously
disbarred in the case of Huyssen v. Atty.
Gutierrez for gross misconduct in view of his
failure to pay his debts and his issuance of
worthless checks. May Atty. Gutierrez be
disbarred for the second time?
A: NO. The SC held that while the IBP
recommended to disbar Atty. Gutierrez for the
second time, we do not have double or multiple
disbarment in our laws or jurisprudence and
neither do we have a law mandating a minimum
5-year requirement for readmission, as cited by
the IBP. Thus, while Gutierrez’s infraction calls
for the penalty of disbarment, they cannot disbar
him anew (Yuhico v. Atty. Gutierrez, A.C. No. 8391,
November 23, 2010).
GROUNDS
Specific grounds for suspension or
disbarment of a lawyer
1. Deceit;
2. Malpractice;
3. Grossly immoral conduct;
4. Conviction of a crime involving moral
turpitude;
5. Violation of oath of office;
6. Willful disobedience of any lawful order of a
superior court;
7. Corrupt or willful appearance as an attorney
for a party to a case without authority to do
so (Sec. 27, Rule 138, RRC);
8. Non-payment of IBP membership dues
(Santos, Jr. v. Atty. Llamas, Adm. Case No.
4749, January 20, 2000).
The statutory enumeration is not to be takenas a
limitation on the general power of SC to suspend
or disbar a lawyer (In Re: Puno, A.C. No. 389,
February 28, 1967). HENCE, the grounds
enumerated are NOT exclusive.
NOTE: Lending money by a justice of Supreme
Court is not a ground for disbarment and helping
a person apply for sale application on a lot is not
an offense and not also a ground for disbarment
(Olazo v. Justice Tinga (Ret.), A.M. No. 10-5-7-SC,
December 7, 2010).
Lawyer’s misconduct committed prior and
after admission to the bar and its effects
1. PRIOR to admission to the bar- acts of
117
misconduct prior to admission include those
that indicate that at the time the lawyer took
his oath, he did not possess the required
qualifications for membership in the bar.
Consequently, the cancellation of his license
is justified.
2. AFTER admission to the bar - those which
cause loss of moral character on his part or
involve violation of his duties to the court, his
client, to the legal profession and to the
public.
NOTE: Disbarment is merited when the action is
not the lawyer’s first ethical infraction of the
same nature (Que v. Revilla, A.C. No. 7054,
December 4, 2009).
Malpractice
It refers to any malfeasance or dereliction of duty
committed by a lawyer (Tan Tek Beng v. David,
Adm. Case No. 1261, December 29 1983; Lapena,Jr.,
2009).
Legal Malpractice
It consists of failure of an attorney to use such
skill, prudence and diligence as a lawyer 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, December 29, 1983).
Gross Misconduct
It is any inexcusable, shameful or flagrant
unlawful conduct on the part of the person
concerned in the administration of justice which
is prejudicial to the rights of the parties or to the
right determination of a cause, a conduct that is
generally motivated by a premeditated, obstinate
or intentional purpose (Yumol Jr. v. Ferrer, Sr., A.C.
No. 6585, April 21, 2005).
NOTE: The issuance of worthless checks
constitutes gross misconduct as its effect
transcends the private interests of the parties
directly involved in the transaction and touches
the interests of the community at large. As a
lawyer, respondent is deemed to know the law,
especially B. P. Blg. 22. By issuing checks in
violation of the provisions of this law, respondent
is guilty of serious misconduct(PACG v. Atty.
Carandang, A.C. No. 5700, January 30, 2006).
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW
 Legal Ethics
Grossly immoral conduct
Immoral conduct has been defined as that
conduct which is wilful, flagrant, or shameless,
and wwhich shows a moral indifference to the
opinion of the good and respectable members of
the community. (Arciga v. Maniwang, A.M. No.
1608, August 14, 1981)
An act of personal immorality on the part of a
lawyer in his private relation with opposite sex
may puthis character in doubt. But to justify
suspension or disbarment, the act must not only
be immoral, it must be grossly immoral. (Abaigar
v. Paz, A.M. No. 997, September 10, 1979)
Immoral conduct is gross when it is so corrupt as
to constitute a criminal act, or so unprinciples as
to be reprehensible to a high degree, or when
committed under such scandalous or revolting
circumstances as to shock the community’s sense
of decency. (Dr. Perez v. Atty. Catindig and Atty.
Baydo, A.C. No. 5816, March 10, 2015)
NOTE: Mere intimacy between a lawyer and a
woman with no impediment to marry each other,
and who voluntarily cohabited and had two
children, is neither so corrupt to constitute a
criminal act nor so unprincipled as to warrant
disbarment or disciplinary action against the man
as a member of the bar (Arciga v. Maniwang, A.C.
No. 1608, August 14, 1981).
Moral turpitude
It is defined as “everything that is done contrary
to justice, honesty, modesty, or good morals; an
act of baseness, vileness, or depravity in the
private and social duties which a man owes his
fellowmen, or to society in general, contrary to
the accepted and customary rule of right and duty
between man and woman, or conduct contrary to
justice, honesty modesty, or good morals (Soriano
v. Dizon, A. C. No. 6792, January 25, 2006).
All crimes of which fraud or deceit is an element
or those inherently contrary to rules of right
conduct, honesty, or morality in civilized
community.
Other statutory grounds for suspension and
disbarment of members of the bar
1. Acquisition of interest in the subject matter
of the litigation, either through purchase or
assignment (Art. 1491, NCC);
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
2018 GOLDEN NOTES
118
2. Breach of professional duty, inexcusable
negligence, or ignorance, or for the revelation
of the client’s secrets (Art. 208, RPC);
3. Representing conflicting interests (Art. 209,
RPC).
Any errant behavior on the part of a lawyer, be it
in his public or private activities, which tends to
show him deficient in moral character, honesty,
probity or good demeanor, is sufficient to
warrant his suspension or disbarment (Tiong vs.
Atty. Florendo, A.C. No. 4428, December 12, 2011).
Other grounds for discipline
1. Non-professional misconduct
GR: A lawyer may not be suspended or
disbarred for misconduct in his non-
professional or private capacity.
XPN: Where such is so gross as to show him
to be morally unfit for office or unworthy of
privilege, the court may be justified in
suspending or removing him from the Roll of
Attorneys. (2005 Bar Question)
2. Promoting to violate or violating penal laws
3. Misconduct in discharge of official duties – 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
government official.
However, if the misconduct is in violation of
the CPR or of his oath as a lawyer or is of
such a character as to affect his qualifications
as a lawyer, he may be subject to disciplinary
action such as disbarment (Collantes v.
Renomeron, A.C. No. 3056, August 16, 1991).
NOTE: This rule does not apply to
impeachable officials like SC justices,
members of constitutional commissions and
Ombudsman because they can only be
removed by impeachment.
4. Commission of fraud or falsehood; and
5. Misconduct as notary public
NOTE: By applying for having himself
commissioned as notary public, a lawyer
assumes duties in a dual capacity, the non-
performance of which may be a ground for
discipline as a member of the bar.
 SUSPENSION, DISBARMENT AND DISCIPLINE OF LAWYERS
Q: Jose secured the services of Atty. Lada to
pursue a case for partition of property. After
accepting the engagement, Atty. Lada filed the
corresponding complaint eventually
dismissed by the RTC for lack of cause of
action and insufficiency of evidence. Atty.
Lada allegedly asked for the amount of
P10,000.00 for the payment of appeal fees and
other costs. Upon payment, notice of appeal
was filed but was also dismissed for being
filed out of time. Atty. Lada however, did not
disclose such fact and, instead, showed to Jose
an Order purportedly issued by the RTC
directing the submission of the results of a
DNA testing to prove his filiation. When Jose
found out that the Order was spurious, he
filed a disbarment case against Atty. Lada.
Will the case prosper?
A: YES. Atty. Lada already knew of the dismissal
of complainant’s partition case before the RTC.
Moreover, Atty. Lada was inexcusably negligent
in filing complainant’s appeal only on September
12, 2007, or way beyond the reglementary period
therefor, thus resulting in its outright dismissal.
Clearly, Atty. Lada failed to exercise such skill,
care, and diligence as men of the legal profession
commonly possess and exercise in such matters
of professional employment. Worse, Atty. Lada
attempted to conceal the dismissal of
complainant’s appeal by fabricating the Order
which purportedly required a DNA testing to
make it appear that complainant’s appeal had
been given due course, when in truth, the same
had long been denied. In so doing, he engaged in
an unlawful, dishonest, and deceitful conduct that
caused undue prejudice and unnecessary
expenses on the part of complainant. For gross
misconduct, Atty. Lada should be disbarred (Tan
v. Diamante, A.C. No. 7766, August 5, 2014).
PROCEEDINGS
Initiation of disbarment
Any interested person or the court motu proprio
may initiate disciplinary proceedings. There can
be no doubt as to the right of a citizen to bring to
the attention of the proper authority acts and
doings of public officers which citizens feel are
incompatible with the duties of the office and
from which conduct the citizen or the public
might or does suffer undesirable consequences.
(2000 Bar Question)
119
NOTE: A disbarment proceeding may proceed
regardless of interest or lack of interest of the
complainant (Rayos-Ombac v. Rayos, A.C. No. 2884,
January 28, 1998). However, if the complainant
refuses to testify and the charges cannot then be
substantiated, the court will have no alternative
but to dismiss the case.
Characteristics of disbarment proceedings
1. Sui Generis
2. The defense of “double jeopardy” cannot be
availed of in a disbarment proceeding;
3. It can be initiated motu proprio by the SC or
IBP. It can be initiated without a complaint;
4. It is imprescriptible;
5. Conducted confidentially;
6. It can proceed regardless of the interest or
the lack thereof on the part of the
complainant; and
7. It in itself constitutes due process of law.
8. Whatever has been decided in a disbarment
case cannot be a source of right that may be
enforced in another action;
9. In pari delicto rule not applicable;
10. No prejudicial question in disbarment
proceedings;
11. Penalty in a disbarment case cannot be in the
alternative; and
12. 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.
NOTE: The confidentiality of the proceedings is a
privilege which may be waived by the lawyer in
whom and for the protection of whose personal
and professional reputation it is vested, as by
presenting the testimony in a disbarment case or
using it as impeaching evidence in a civil suit
(Villalon v. IAC, G.R. No. L-73751, September 24,
1986).
Offices authorized to investigate disbarment
proceedings
1. Supreme Court (Sec. 13, Rule 139-B, RRC)
2. IBP through its Commission on Bar Discipline
or authorized investigator (Sec. 2, Rule 139-B,
RRC)
3. Office of the Bar Confidant (Sec. 13, Rule 139-
B, RRC as amended by B.M. No. 1645)
Purposes of disbarment
Disbarment is not meant as a punishment to
deprive an attorney of a means of livelihood but
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW
 Legal Ethics
rather intended to:
1. To protect the public
2. To protect and preserve the legal profession
3. To compel the lawyer to comply with his
duties and obligations under the CPR.
Quantum of proof
The burden of proof is upon the complainant and
the SC will exercise its disciplinary power only if
the complainant establishes his case by the
required quantum of proof which is clear,
convincing and satisfactory evidence or
clearly preponderant evidence(Aquino v.
Mangaoang, A.C. No. 4934, March 17, 2004).
Q: Atty. Sesbreño was found guilty of murder
and was sentenced to suffer the penalty of
reclusion perpetua by the Cebu City RTC. On
appeal, however, the Supreme Court
downgraded the crime to homicide. On July
27, 2001, Sesbreño was released from
confinement following his acceptance of the
conditions of his parole. The order of
commutation provides that his original
sentence is commuted to an indeterminate
prison term of from 7 years and 6 months to
10 years imprisonment and to pay an
indemnity of P50,000.00. Dr. Garcia filed a
disbarment case against Sesbreño alleging
that he is practicing law despite his previous
conviction for homicide and continuing to
engage in the practice of law despite his
conviction of a crime involving moral
turpitude. Sesbreño argued that the executive
clemency granted to him restored his full civil
and political rights. Decide.
A: There was no mention that the executive
clemency was absolute and unconditional and
restored Sesbreño to his full civil and political
rights. The executive clemency merely
“commuted to an indeterminate prison term of 7
years and 6 months to 10 years imprisonment”,
the penalty imposed on Sesbreño. Commutation
is a mere reduction of penalty and it only partially
extinguished criminal liability. The penalty for
Sesbreño’s crime was never wiped out. For
unauthorized practice of law, Sesbreño is
disbarred (Garcia v. Atty. Sesbreño, A.C. No. 7973
and A.C. No. 10457, February 3, 2015).
Q: After passing the Philippine Bar in 1986,
Richards practiced law until 1996 when he
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
2018 GOLDEN NOTES
120
migrated to Australia where he subsequently
became an Australian citizen in 2000. As he
kept himself abreast of the legal
developments, petitioner learned about the
citizenship retention and re-acquisition act of
2003 (RA 9225), pursuant to which he
reacquired his Philippine citizenship in 2006.
He took his oath of allegiance as a Filipino
citizen at the Philippine embassy in Canberra,
Australia. Jaded by the laid back life in the
outback, he returned to the Philippines in
December of 2008. After the holidays, he
established his own law office and resumed
his practice of law. Months later a concerned
woman who had secured copies of Atty.
Richard's naturalization papers with the
consular authentication, filed with the SC an
anonymous complaint against him for illegal
practice of law. May the Supreme Court Act
upon the complaint filed by an anonymous
person?
A: YES. The Supreme Court may act upon the
complaint filed by an anonymous complainant,
because the basis of the complaint consists of
documents with consular authentications which
can be verified being public records. There is no
need to identify the complainant when the
evidence is documented and verifiable (In re:
Echiverri 67 SCRA 467, 1975). Besides, the
Supreme Court or the IBP may initiate
disbarment proceedings motu proprio.
PROCEDURE FOR DISBARMENT
BAR MATTER NO. 1645 (OCTOBER 13, 2015)
AMENDMENT OF SEC. 1, RULE 139-B OF THE
ROC (AMENDMENT OF B.M 1960)
Proceedings for disbarment, suspension or
discipline of attorneys may be taken by the:
1. Supreme Court motu proprio; or
2. Upon the feeling of a verified complaint of
any person before the Supreme Court or the
Integrated Bar of the Philippines.
NOTE: The complaint shall state clearly and
concisely the facts complained of and shall be
supported by affidavits of persons having
personal knowledge of the facts therein
alleged and/or by such documents as may
substantiate said facts.
By virtue of B.M. No. 1645, the IBP has no
power to dismiss complaint against lawyers.
 SUSPENSION, DISBARMENT AND DISCIPLINE OF LAWYERS
It may only recommend the dismissal of such
complaints as the power to dismiss
complaints against lawyers is solely reserved
to the Supreme Court.
DISBARMENT PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE IBP
The IBP shall forward to the Supreme Court for
appropriate disposition all complaints for
disbarment, suspension and discipline filed
against incumbent Justices of the Court of
Appeals, Sandiganbayan, Court of Tax Appeals
and judges of lower courts, or against lawyers in
the government service whether or not they are
charged singly or jointly with other respondents,
and whether or not such complaint deals with
acts unrelated to the discharge of their official
functions.
If the complaint is filed before the IBP, six (6)
copies of the verified complaint shall be filed with
the Secretary of the IBP or the Secretary of any of
its chapter who shall forthwith transmit the same
to the IBP Board of Governors for assignment to
an investigator.
PROCEDURAL STEPS FOR
DISBARMENT IN THE IBP
1. The Board of Governors shall appoint from
among the IBP members an investigator or
when special circumstances so warrant, a
panel of 3 investigators to investigate the
complaint;
2. If the complaint is meritorious, the
respondent shall be served with a copy
requiring him to answer within 15 days from
service.
3. The respondent shall file a verified answer
containing the original and five (5) legible
copies; after receipt of the answer or lapse of
the period to do so, the Supreme Court, may,
motu proprio or upon recommendation, the
IBP Board of Governors suspend an attorney
from practice, for any of the causes under
Rule 138, Sec. 27, during the pendency of the
investigation
4. After joinder of the issues or failure to
answer, the respondent shall be given full
opportunity to defend himself. But if the
respondent fails to appear to defend himself
in spite of notice, the investigator may
proceed ex parte. The investigation shall be
terminated within 3 months from
commencement unless extended for good
cause by the Board of Governors upon prior
121
application.
5. The investigator shall make a report to the
Board of Governors within 30 days from
termination of the investigation which report
shall contain his findings and
recommendations together with the
evidence.
6. The Board of Governors shall have the power
to review the decision of the investigator. Its
decision shall be promulgated within a
period not exceeding 30 days from the next
meeting of the Board following the
submission of the report of the investigator.
7. If the decision is a finding of guilt of the
charges, the IBP Board of Governors shall
issue a resolution setting forth its findings
and recommendations which shall be
transmitted to the Supreme Court for final
action together with the record.
RESOLUTION OF THE COURT EN BANC
DATED JUNE 17, 2008 B.M. NO. 1755
(RE: RULES OF PROCEDURE OF THE
COMMISSION
ON BAR DISCIPLINE)
Propriety of a motion for reconsideration
1. A party can no longer file a motion for
reconsideration of any order or resolution of
the Investigating Commissioner, such motion
being a prohibited pleading.
2. Regarding the issue of whether a motion for
reconsideration of a decision or resolution of
the Board of Governors (BOG) can be
entertained, an aggrieved party can file said
motion with the BOG within fifteen (15) days
from notice of receipt thereof by said party.
3. In case a decision is rendered by the BOG that
exonerates the respondent or imposes a
sanction less than suspension or disbarment,
the aggrieved party can file a motion for
reconsideration within the 15-day period
from notice. If the motion is denied, said
party can file a petition for a review under
Rule 45 of the Rules of Court with the
Supreme Court within fifteen (15) days from
notice of the resolution resolving the motion.
If no motion for reconsideration is filed, the
decision shall become final and executory
and a copy of said decision shall be furnished
to the Supreme Court.
4. If the imposable penalty is suspension from
the practice of law or disbarment, the BOG
shall issue a resolution setting forth its
findings and recommendations. The
aggrieved party can file a motion for
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW
 Legal Ethics
reconsideration of said resolution with the
BOG within fifteen (15) days from notice. The
BOG shall first resolve the incident and shall
thereafter elevate the assailed resolution
with the entire case records to the Supreme
Court for final action. If the 15-day period
lapses without any motion for
reconsideration having been filed, then the
BOG shall likewise transmit to this Court the
resolution with the entire case records for
appropriate action.
NOTE: Lawyers must update their records with
the IBP by informing the IBP National Office or
their respective chapters of any change in office
or residential address and other contact details.
In case such change is not duly updated, service
of notice on the office or residential address
appearing in the records of the IBP National
Office shall constitute sufficient notice to a lawyer
for purposes of administrative proceedings
against him (Keld Stemmerik v. Atty. Leonuel Mas,
A.C. No. 8010, June 16, 2009).
DISBARMENT PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE
SUPREME COURT
1. In proceedings initiated by the Supreme
Court or in other proceeding when the
interest of justice so requires, the Supreme
Court may refer the case for investigation to
the Office of the Bar Confidant, or to any
officer of the Supreme Court or judge of a
lower court, in which case the investigation
shall proceed in the same manner provided
in sections 6-11 hereof, save that the review
off the report of investigation shall be
conducted directly by the Supreme Court.
The complaint may also be referred to the
IBP for investigation, report, and
recommendation. (Sec. 13, Rule 139-b, RRC, as
amended by B.M. No. 1685)
Q: Atty. Narag’s wife filed a petition for
disbarment because he courted one of his
students, maintained the said student as a
mistress and had children with her. On the
other hand, Atty. Narag claimed that his wife
was a possessive, jealous woman who abused
him and filed the complaint against him out of
spite. Atty. Narag, however, failed to refute the
testimony given against him as his actions
were of public knowledge. Is Atty. Narag’s
disbarment appropriate?
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
2018 GOLDEN NOTES
122
A: YES, Atty. Narag failed to prove his innocence
because he failed to refute the testimony given
against him and it was proved that his actions
were of public knowledge and brought disrepute
and suffering to his wife and children. Good moral
character is a continuing qualification required of
every member of the bar. Thus, when a lawyer
fails to meet the exacting standard of moral
integrity, the Supreme Court may withdraw his or
her privilege to practice law. When a lawyer is
found guilty of gross immoral conduct, he may be
suspended or disbarred. As a lawyer, one must
not only refrain from adulterous relationships but
must not behave in a way that scandalizes the
public by creating a belief that he is flouting those
moral standards (Narag v. Atty. Narag, A.C. No.
3405, June 29, 1998).
Effect of lawyer’s death in an administrative
proceeding against him
1. Renders the action moot and academic, but
2. The Court may still resolve the case on its
merit in order to clear publicly the name of
the lawyer
CONFIDENTIALITY OF DISBARMENT
PROCEEDINGS
Three-fold purpose of confidentiality of
disbarment proceedings
1. To enable the court to make its investigation
free from extraneous influence or
interference;
2. To protect the personal and professional
reputation of attorneys from baseless
charges of disgruntled, vindictive and
irresponsible persons or clients by
prohibiting publication of such charges
pending their final resolution (Albano v.
Coloma, A.C. No. 528, October 11, 1967);
3. To deter the press from publishing charges or
proceedings based thereon for even a
verbatim reproduction of the complaint
against an attorney in the newspaper may be
actionable.
NOTE: The confidentiality of the proceedings is a
privilege which may be waived by the lawyer in
whom and for the protection of whose personal
and professional reputation it is vested, as by
presenting the testimony in a disbarment case or
using it as impeaching evidence in a civil suit.
 SUSPENSION, DISBARMENT AND DISCIPLINE OF LAWYERS
(Villalon v. IAC, G.R. No. L-73751, September 24,
1986)
Q: Atty. Fortun is the counsel for Ampatuan,
Jr., the principal accused in the murder cases
in the Maguindanao Massacare. Atty.
Quinsayas, et al. filed a disbarment complaint
against Atty. Fortun on the ground that he
used and abused the different legal remedies
available and allowed under the rules; and
muddled the issues and diverted the attention
away from the main subject matter of the
cases. Atty. Fortun alleged that Atty.
Quinsayas, et al. actively disseminated the
details to the media of the disbarment
complaint against him in violation of Rule
139-B of the Rules of Court on the confidential
nature of disbarment proceedings Is Atty.
Fortun correct?
A: NO. As a general rule, disbarment proceedings
are confidential in nature until their final
resolution and the final decision of this Court. In
this case, however, the filing of a disbarment
complaint against Atty. Fortun is a matter of
public concern considering that it arose from the
Maguindanao Massacre case. The interest of the
public is not on Atty. Fortun but primarily on his
involvement and participation as defense counsel
in the Maguindanao Massacre case.
The Maguindanao Massacre is a very high-profile
case. It is understandable that any matter related
to the Maguindanao Massacre is considered a
matter of public interest and that the
personalities involved, including Atty. Fortun, are
considered as public figure. Thus, media has the
right to report the filing of the disbarment case as
legitimate news. It would have been different if
the disbarment case against petitioner was about
a private matter as the media would then be
bound to respect the confidentiality provision of
disbarment proceedings under Section 18, Rule
139-B of the Rules of Court (Fortun v. Quinsayas,
G.R. No. 194578, February 13, 2013).
DISCIPLINE OF FILIPINO LAWYERS
PRACTICING ABROAD
Judgment of suspension of a Filipino lawyer in
a foreign court
The judgment of suspension against a Filipino
lawyer in a foreign jurisdiction does not
automatically result in his suspension or
123
disbarment in the Philippines as the acts giving
rise to his suspension are not grounds for
disbarment and suspension in this jurisdiction.
Judgment of suspension against a Filipino lawyer
may transmute into a similar judgment of
suspension in the Philippines only if the basis of
the foreign court's action includes any of the
grounds for disbarment or suspension in this
jurisdiction. (Velez v. De Vera, A.C. No. 6697, July
25, 2006).
NOTE: The judgment, resolution or order of the
foreign court or disciplinary agency shall be
prima facie evidence of the ground for
disbarment or suspension (SC Resolution date 21
February 1992 amending Sec. 27, Rule 138, RRC).
Q: Atty. Forma is a member of the Philippine
Bar. He went to New York City, took the New
York State Bar, and passed the same. He then
practiced in New York City. One of his
American clients filed a case for disbarment
against him for pocketing the money which
was entrusted to him as payment for the filing
fee and other incidental expenses of his
damage suit. Atty Forma came back to the
Philippines and practiced as a lawyer.
Will his disbarment in New York be used
against him for purposes of disbarment
proceedings here in the Philippines? (2014
Bar Question)
A: Atty. Forma may be disbarred in the
Philippines if the ground for his disbarment in
New York is also a ground for disbarment in this
country. But he is still entitled to due process of
law, and the foreign court’s judgment against him
only constitutes prima facie evidence of unethical
conduct as a lawyer. He is entitled to be given an
opportunity to defend himself in an investigation
to be conducted in accordance with Rule 139 of
the Revised Rules of Court (In Re: Suspension from
the Practice of Law in the Territory of Guam of
Atty. Leon Maquera, B.M. 793, July 30, 2004; Velez
v. De Vera, A.C. No. 6697, July 25, 2006).
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW
 Legal Ethics
PROCEDURE FOR DISBARMENT OR DISCIPLINE OF ATTONEYS BY THE
SUPREME COURT MOTU PROPRIO (Rule 139-B, RRC, as amended by B.M. no. 1645)

Supreme Court shall refer the case to an investigator, who may

either be:
1. Office of the Bar Confidant
2. Any officer of the SC, or
3. Any judge of a lower court

Notify Respondent

RESPONDENT’S VERIFIED ANSWER (Must be filed within

15 days from service)

INVESTIGATION
(TERMINATE WITHIN 3 MONTHS)

REPORT TO SUPREME COURT (to be submitted not later than

30 days from investigation’s termination)

REPORT MUST CONTAIN THE INVESTIGATOR’S:

1. Findings of fact
2. Recommendations

UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS

2018 GOLDEN NOTES
124
 SUSPENSION, DISBARMENT AND DISCIPLINE OF LAWYERS
PROCEDURE FOR DISBARMENT OR DISCIPLINE OF ATTORNEYS BY THE IBP (Rule 139-B, RRC)

IBP Motu Proprio (Committee on Bar VERIFIED COMPLAINT TO THE IBP BY ANY
Discipline through National Grievance PERSON
Investigator) Complaint must be:
1. In writing;
2. State facts complained of; and
3. Supported by affidavits / documents

Shall appoint an investigator / panel of 3

investigators and notify respondent

IF NOT MERITORIOUS: IF MERITORIOUS, RESPONDENT TO

Recommend the dismissal of the FILE VERIFIED ANSWER
complaint to the Board of (Must be filed within 15 days from
Governors service)

DISMISSAL BY BOARD OF GOVERNORS – INVESTIGATION (terminate within 3 months)

(should be promulgated within a period
not exceeding 30 days from the next
meeting of the board following the
submittal of the investigator’s report)
1. Investigator may issue subpoenas and
administer oaths,
2. Provide respondent with opportunity to be
heard,
3. May proceed with investigation ex parte should
respondent fail to appear.

REPORT TO BOARD OF GOVERNORS (Submitted not later than 30 days from termination
of investigation) containing: (a) Findings of facts; and (b)Recommendations

The Board of Governors shall recommend to the Supreme Court either: (a) the dismissal of the
complaint; or (b) the imposition of disciplinary action against the respondent.

NOTE: The resolution shall be issued within a period not exceeding thirty (30) days from the
next meeting of the Board following the submission of the investigator’s report.

SUPREME COURT FOR

JUDGMENT

125 UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS

FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW
 Legal Ethics
EFFECT OF DESISTANCE OR WITHDRAWAL OF
COMPLAINT OR NON-APPEARANCE IN
DISBARMENT PROCEEDINGS

The desistance or the withdrawal of the

complainant of the charges against a
judge/lawyer does not deprive the court of the
authority to proceed to determine the matter. Nor
does it necessarily result in the dismissal of the
complaint except when, as a consequence of the
withdrawal or desistance no evidence is adduced
to prove the charges.

The affidavit of withdrawal of the disbarment

case executed by a complainant does not, in any
way, exonerate the respondent-lawyer. A case of
suspension or disbarment may proceed
regardless of interest or lack of interest of the
complainant. The complainant in a disbarment
case is not a direct party to the case, but a witness
who brought the matter to the attention of the
Court (Quiachon v. Atty. Ramos, A.C. No. 9317, June
4, 2014).

DOCTRINE OF RES IPSA LOQUITUR

APPLICABLE TO JUDGES AND LAWYERS

The doctrine of res ipsa loquitur is applicable

in cases of dismissal of judges or disbarment
of lawyers (1996, 2003 Bar Questions)

This principle or doctrine applies to both judges

and lawyers. Judges had been dismissed from the
service without need of a formal investigation
because based on the records, the gross
misconduct or inefficiency of judges clearly
appears (Uy v. Mercado, A.M. No. R-368-MTJ,
September 30, 1987).

The same principle applies to lawyers. Thus,

where on the basis of the lawyer’s comment or
answer to show a show-cause order of SC, it
appears that the lawyer has so conducted himself
in a manner which exhibits his blatant disrespect
to the court, or his want of good moral character
or his violation of the attorney’s oath, the lawyer
may be suspended or disbarred without need of
trial-type proceeding. What counts is that the
lawyer has been given the opportunity to air his
side (Prudential Bank v. Castro, A.M. No. 2756,
June 5, 1986).

UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS

2018 GOLDEN NOTES
126
 READMISSION TO THE BAR
READMISSION TO THE BAR
Reinstatement and its requirements
Reinstatement is the restoration of the privilege
to practice law after a lawyer has been disbarred.
The applicant must satisfy the Court that he is a
person of good moral character – a fit and proper
person to practice law.
NOTE: The power of the Supreme Court to
reinstate is based on its constitutional
prerogative to promulgate rules on the admission
of applicants to the practice of law (Sec. 5[5], Art.
VIII, 1987 Constitution).
LAWYERS WHO HAVE BEEN SUSPENDED
Lifting of suspension is not automatic upon
the end of the period stated in the Court’s
decision
The lifting of a lawyer’s suspension is not
automatic upon the end of the period stated in
the Court’s decision, and an order from the Court
lifting the suspension at the end of the period is
necessary in order to enable [him] to resume the
practice of his profession (J.K. Mercado and Sons
Agricultural Enterprises, Inc. et al. v. Atty. de Vera,
et al. and Atty. de Vera v. Atty. Encanto, et al.).
Thus, according to the OBC, a suspended lawyer
must first present proof(s) of his compliance by
submitting certifications from the Integrated Bar
of the Philippines and from the Executive Judge
that he has indeed desisted from the practice of
law during the period of suspension. Thereafter,
the Court, after evaluation, and upon a favorable
recommendation from the OBC, will issue a
resolution lifting the order of suspension and
thus allow him to resume the practice of law
(Maniago v. Atty. De Dios, A.C. No. 7472, March 30,
2010).
Guidelines to be observed in lifting an order
of suspension of a lawyer
The following guidelines were issued by the
Supreme Court, the same to be observed in the
matter of the lifting of an order suspending a
lawyer from the practice of law:
1. After a finding that respondent lawyer must
be suspended from the practice of law, the
127
Court shall render a decision imposing the
penalty;
2. Unless the Court explicitly states that the
decision is immediately executory upon
receipt thereof, respondent has 15 days
within which to file a motion for
reconsideration thereof. The denial of said
motion shall render the decision final and
executory;
3. Upon the 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;
4. Copies of the Sworn Statement shall be
furnished to the Local Chapter of the IBP and
to the Executive Judge of the courts where
respondent has pending cases handled by
him or her, and/or where he or she has
appeared as counsel;
5. The Sworn Statement shall be considered as
proof of respondent’s compliance with the
order of suspension;
6. 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.
Q: Raul Gonzales was found guilty of both
contempt of court in facie curiae and gross
misconduct as an officer of court and member
of the bar. For this, he was suspended
indefinitely. After more than 4 years from his
suspension, Gonzales filed an ex-parte motion
to lift his suspension from the practice of law,
alleging that he gave free legal aid services by
paying lawyers to do the same as he could not
personally represent said clients; pursued
civic work for the poor; brought honor to the
country by delivering a paper in Switzerland;
that he has a long record in the service of
human rights and the rule of law; his
suspension of 51 months has been the longest
so far; states his profound regrets for the
inconvenience which he has caused to the
Court; sincerely reiterates his respect to the
institution as he reiterates his oath to conduct
himself as a lawyer. May his suspension be
lifted?
A: YES. Gonzales’ contrition, so noticeably absent
in his earlier pleadings, has washed clean the
offense of his disrespect. His remorse has soften
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW
 Legal Ethics
his arrogance and made up for his misconduct.
Gonzales’ suspension has given him ample time
and opportunity to amend his erring ways,
rehabilitate himself, and thus, prove himself
worthy once again to enjoy the privileges of
membership of the Bar. His motion was granted
(Zaldivar v. Gonzales, G.R. Nos. 79690- 707, April 7,
1993).
LAWYERS WHO HAVE BEEN DISBARRED
Effect of reinstatement: Wipes out the
restrictions and disabilities resulting from a
previous disbarment (Cui v. Cui, G.R. No. L-18727,
August 31, 1964).
Prior to actual reinstatement, the lawyer will be
required to take anew the lawyer’s oath and sign
once again the roll of attorneys after paying the
requisite fees (Funa, 2009).
Requirements for judicial clemency for
disbarred lawyers and judges (RTAPO)
1. There must be proof of remorse and
reformation.
2. Sufficient time must have elapsed from the
imposition of the penalty to ensure a period
of reform.
3. 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.
4. There must be a showing of promise (such as
intellectual aptitude, learning or legal
acumen or contribution to the legal
scholarship and the development of the legal
system), as well as potential for public
service.
5. There must be other relevant factors and
circumstances that may justify clemency.
Q: Atty. Narag was disbarred on the ground of
gross immorality for having amorous
relationship with Gina and abandoning his
wife and children to live with his paramour.
Fifteen years had passed since his disbarment
and he is now pleading to be reinstated to the
bar. He claimed that he was extremely
remorseful and that his wife and children had
already forgiven him. As a proof thereof, he
presented an affidavit of his son, Dominador,
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
2018 GOLDEN NOTES
128
Jr. attesting to the truth of his claim. Should
Atty. Dominador be reinstated?
A: No, he should not be reinstated. The Court, in
deciding whether the respondent should indeed
be readmitted to the practice of law, must be
convinced that he had indeed been reformed; that
he had already rid himself of any grossly immoral
act which would make him inept for the practice
of law. However, it appears that the respondent,
while still legally married to Julieta, is still living
with his paramour - the woman for whose sake
he abandoned his family. Moreover, it is noted
that only his son, Dominador, Jr., signed the
affidavit which was supposed to evidence the
forgiveness bestowed upon the respondent. Thus,
with regard to Julieta and the six other children of
the respondent, the claim that they had likewise
forgiven the respondent is hearsay (Narag v. Atty.
Narag, A.C. No. 3405, Mar 18, 2014).
SUPREME COURT’S GUIDELINES IN
REINSTATEMENT
1. The applicant’s character and
standing prior to the disbarment;
2. The nature and character of the charge for
which he was disbarred;
3. His conduct subsequent to the disbarment,
and the time that has elapsed between the
disbarment and the application for
reinstatement (Prudential Bank v. Benjamin
Grecia, A.C. No. 2756, December 18, 1990);
4. His efficient government service (In re:
Adriatico, G.R. No. L-2532, November 17,
1910);
5. Applicant’s appreciation of the
significance of his dereliction and his
assurance that he now possesses the
requisite probity and integrity; and
6. Favorable endorsement of the IBP and pleas
of his loved ones (Yap Tan v. Sabandal, B.M.
No. 144, February 24, 1989).
NOTE: Whether or not the applicant shall be
reinstated rests on the discretion of the court
(Prudential Bank v. Benjamin Grecia, A.C. No. 2756,
December 18, 1990).
The court may require applicant for
reinstatement to enroll in and pass the required
fourth year review classes in a recognized law
school (Cui v. Cui, In Re: Resian, A.C. No. 270,
March 20, 1974).
 READMISSION TO THE BAR
EFFECT OF EXECUTIVE PARDON GRANTED BY
THE PRESIDENT
If during the pendency of disbarment proceeding
the respondent was granted executive pardon,
the dismissal of the case on that sole basis will
depend on whether the executive pardon is
absolute or conditional.
1. Absolute or unconditional pardon - the
disbarment case will be dismissed.
2. Conditional pardon - the disbarment case will
not be dismissed on the basis thereof.
NOTE: To be reinstated, there is still a need for
the filing of an appropriate petition with the
Supreme Court (In re: Rovero, A.M. No. 126,
December 29, 1980).
Q: X filed proceedings for disbarment against
his lawyer, Atty. C, following the latter’s
conviction for estafa for misappropriating
funds belonging to his client (X). While the
proceedings for disbarment was pending, the
President granted absolute pardon in favor of
Atty. C. Atty. C, then, moved for the dismissal
of the disbarment case. Should the motion be
granted?
A: An absolute pardon by the President is one
that operates to wipe out the conviction as well as
the offense itself. The grant thereof to a lawyer is
a bar to a proceeding for disbarment against him,
if such proceeding is based solely on the fact of
such conviction (In re: Parcasio, A.C. No. 100,
February. 18, 1976).
But where the proceeding to disbar is founded on
the professional misconduct involved in the
transaction which culminated in his conviction,
the effect of the pardon is only to relieve him of
the penal consequences of his act and does not
operate as a bar to the disbarment proceeding,
inasmuch as the criminal acts may nevertheless
constitute proof that the attorney does not
possess good moral character (In re: Lontok, 43
Phil. 293, April 7, 1922).
NOTE: In the light of recent court
pronouncements that a lawyer may be disciplined
even for non-professional misconduct, one may
argue that a lawyer convicted of a crime involving
moral turpitude, and subsequently receives
absolute pardon, may still be proceeded against
under the Code of Professional Responsibility
129
even if the acts of which he was found guilty did
not involve professional misconduct (A
modification of In Re Lontok, supra). The ground
for the petition for disciplinary action under the
Code must, however, not be founded alone on the
conviction but must be based on the acts
committed by the lawyer which rendered him
morally unfit to be a member of the bar (Aguirre,
2006).
Q: X, a member of the Bar, was charged with
and found guilty of estafa, for which he was
sentenced to suffer imprisonment and to
indemnify the offended party for the amount
involved. Not having taken an appeal from the
judgment of conviction, upon finality thereof
he was taken into custody to serve sentence. A
month after he was incarcerated, he was
granted pardon by the Chief Executive on
condition that he would not commit another
offense during the unserved portion of his
prison sentence. Soon after X’s release from
custody after being pardoned, the offended
party in the criminal case filed a Complaint for
Disbarment against X in the Supreme Court. X
set up the defense that having been pardoned
thus he may not be disbarred from the
practice of law anymore. Is X’s contention
tenable? (1999 Bar)
A: X’s contention is not tenable. He was granted
only a conditional pardon. Such conditional
pardon merely relieved him of the penal
consequences of his act but did not operate as a
bar to his disbarment. Such pardon does not
reach the offense itself. Hence, it does not
constitute a bar to his disbarment (In Re
Gutierrez, A.C. No. L-363, July 31, 1962; In re
Avancena, A.C. No. 407, August 15, 1967).
Furthermore, the acts of X leading to his
conviction may be used to show that he does not
possess the necessary requirement of good moral
character for continued membership in the Bar
(In re Valloces, A.C. No. 439, September 30, 1982).
LAWYERS WHO HAVE BEEN REPATRIATED
Q: Dacanay practiced law until he migrated to
Canada to seek medical attention for his
ailments. He subsequently applied for
Canadian citizenship to avail of Canada’s free
medical aid program. His application was
approved and he became a Canadian citizen.
Dacanay later on reacquired his Philippine
citizenship by virtue of R.A. 9225. Did
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW
 Legal Ethics
Dacanay lose his membership in the
Philippine bar when he gave up his Philippine
citizenship? Can he automatically practice law
upon reacquiring Filipino citizenship?
A: The Constitution provides that the practice of
all professions in the Philippines shall be limited
to Filipino citizens save in cases prescribed by
law. Since Filipino citizenship is a requirement
for admission to the bar, loss thereof terminates
membership in the Philippine bar and,
consequently, the privilege to engage in the
practice of law. In other words, the loss of Filipino
citizenship ipso jure terminates the privilege to
practice law in the Philippines. The practice of
law is a privilege denied to foreigners.
The exception is when Filipino citizenship is lost
by reason of naturalization as a citizen of another
country but subsequently reacquired pursuant to
R.A. 9225. This is because “all Philippine citizens
who become citizens of another country shall be
deemed not to have lost their Philippine
citizenship under the conditions of R.A. 9225.”
Therefore, a Filipino lawyer who becomes a
citizen of another country is deemed never to
have lost his Philippine citizenship if he
reacquires it in accordance with R.A. 9225.
Although he is also deemed never to have
terminated his membership in the Philippine bar,
no automatic right to resume law practice
accrues.
Before a lawyer who reacquires Filipino
citizenship pursuant to R.A. 9225 can resume his
law practice, he must first secure from the SC 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 (Petition for Leave to Resume
Practice of Law of Benjamin Dacanay, B.M. No.
1678, December 17, 2007).
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
2018 GOLDEN NOTES
130
Q: Atty. Repatriar, a law school classmate,
approached you on your 25th Class Reunion,
with questions on how he can resume the
practice of law in the Philippines. He left the
country in 1977 after two (2) years of initial
law practice, and migrated to the United
States where he was admitted to the practice
of law in the State of New York. He asks that
you give him a formal legal opinion on his
query.
Outline briefly the steps and the supporting
legal reasons you would state in your legal
opinion on what Atty. Repatriar should do to
resume his Philippine practice. (2013 Bar)
A: Atty. Repatriar must prepare a sworn petition
to re-acquire the privilege to practice law in the
Philippines. He should manifest in his petition his
desire to resume his law practice in the
Philippines, and he is not disqualified to practice
law. 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. It cannot be overstressed that the
practice of law is a privilege burdened with
conditions. It is so delicately affected with public
interest that it is both the power and duty of the
state (through the Supreme Court) to control and
regulate it in order to protect and promote the
public welfare.
Adherence to rigid standards of mental fitness,
maintenance of the highest degree of morality,
faithful observance of the legal profession,
compliance with the mandatory continuing legal
education requirement, and payment of
membership fees to the Integrated Bar of the
Philippines (IBP) are the conditions required for
membership in good standing in the bar and for
enjoying the privilege to practice law. Any breach
by a lawyer of any of these conditions makes him
unworthy of the trust and confidence which the
courts and clients repose in him for the continued
exercise of his professional privilege (In re:
petition to re-acquire the privilege to practice law
in the Philippines, Epifanio B. Muneses, B.M. No.
2112, July 24, 2011).
He should file the petition with the Supreme
Court, through the Bar Confidant, accompanied
by the original or certified copies of the following
documents:
 READMISSION TO THE BAR

1. Showing that he is still a Filipino citizen. “The

Court reiterates that Filipino citizenship is a
requirement for admission to the bar and is,
in fact, a continuing requirement for the
practice of law.” (Ibid.) Having retained
Philippine citizenship could be evidenced by
the Philippine passport, the U.S. Green Card
showing Philippine citizenship and U.S.
residency, or other authentic documents
which the Supreme Court may require.

On the other hand, if Atty. Repatriar has lost

his Philippine citizenship, he must submit the
following:

(a) Petition for Re-Acquisition of Philippine

Citizenship;
(b) Order (for Re-Acquisition of Philippine
Citizenship);
(c) Oath of Allegiance to the Republic of the
Philippines;
(d) Identification Certificate (IC) issued by
the Bureau of Immigration.

The loss of Filipino citizenship means

termination of Atty. Repatriar’s membership
in the bar; ipso jure the privilege to engage in
the practice of law. “Under R.A. No. 9225,
natural-borncitizens who have lost their
Philippinecitizenship by reason of their
naturalization as citizens of a foreign country
are deemed to have re-acquired their
Philippine citizenship upon taking the oath of
allegiance to the Republic.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.” (Ibid.)

2. Certification from the IBP indicating updated

payments of annual membership dues;
3. Proof of payment of professional tax; and
4. Certificate of compliance issued by the MCLE
Office. (Ibid.)
5. A certificate of good moral character attested
to by at least three (3) members of the bar;
and
6. A certification from the State Bar of New York
that Atty. Repatriar does not have any
previous or pending disciplinary action filed
against him before that body.

131 UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS

FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW
 Legal Ethics
MANDATORY CONTINUING LEGAL EDUCATION
(MCLE)
Purpose of MCLE
MCLE ensures that members of the IBP are kept
abreast with law and jurisprudence throughout
their career, maintain the ethics of the profession
and enhance the standards of the practice of law.
Committee on Mandatory Continuing Legal
Education
1. Composition:
a. Retired Justice of the SC – to act as
Chairman, who is nominated by the SC
b. IBP National President – acts as the Vice-
Chairman
c. 3 other members – nominated by the
Philippine Judicial Academy, UP Law
Center and Association of Law
Professors, respectively
2. Members are of proven probity and integrity
3. Compensation as may be determined by the
SC
4. The initial terms of each of the 3 members
shall be 5, 4, and 3 years respectively
REQUIREMENTS
Requirements of completion of MCLE
Members of the IBP, unless exempted under Rule 7,
shall complete every 3 years at least 36 hours of
continuing legal education activities. The 36
hours shall be divided as follows:
1. 6 hours – legal ethics
2. 4 hours – trial and pretrial skills
3. 5 hours – alternative dispute resolution
4. 9 hours – updates on substantive and
procedural laws and jurisprudence
5. 4 hours – legal writing and oral advocacy
6. 2 hours – international law and international
conventions
7. Remaining 6 hours – such other subjects as
may be prescribed by the Committee on
MCLE
MCLE for a newly admitted member of the bar
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
2018 GOLDEN NOTES
132
Starts on the first day of the month of his
admission (Bar Matter No. 850, Sec. 3, Rule 3).
Classes of credits
1. Participatory credit – Attending approved
education activities like seminars,
conventions, symposia, and the like; speaking
or lecturing, or assigned as panelist, reactor,
or commentator, etc. in approved education
activities; teaching in law school or lecturing
in bar review classes.
2. Non-participatory – Preparing, as author or
co-author, written materials (article, book or
book review) which contribute to the legal
education of the author member, which were
not prepared in the ordinary course of his
practice or employment; editing a law book,
law journal or legal newsletter.
NON-COMPLIANCE OF THE MCLE
1. Failure to complete education requirement
within the compliance period;
2. Failure to provide attestation of compliance
or exemption;
3. Failure to provide satisfactory evidence of
compliance (including evidence of exempt
status) within the prescribed period;
4. Failure to satisfy the education requirement
and furnish evidence of such compliance
within 60 days from receipt of non-
compliance notice;
5. Failure to pay non-compliance fee within the
prescribed period; or
6. Any other act or omission analogous to any of
the foregoing or intended to circumvent or
evade compliance with the MCLE
requirements.
NOTE: Members failing to comply will receive a
Non-Compliance Notice stating the specific
deficiency and will be given 60 days from date of
notification to file a response.
Q: In order to comply with the MCLE
requirements, Atty. Ausente enrolled in a
seminar given by an MCLE provider.
Whenever he has court or other professional
commitments, he would send his messenger
or a member of his legal staff to register his
attendance at the MCLE sessions so he could
be credited with the required qualifying
attendance. He would also ask them to secure
the printed handouts and the lecturers’ CDs,
 MANDATORY CONTINUING LEGAL EDUCATION
all of which he studied in his free time. Was
the action of Atty. Ausente proper? (2013 Bar
Question)
A: NO. Atty. Ausente should be sanctioned
because he circumvented or evaded full
compliance with the MCLE
requirements.(Mandatory Continuing Legal
Education, Rule 12, Section I(e))
EXEMPTIONS
Persons exempted from the MCLE
1. The President, Vice-President and the
Secretaries and Undersecretaries of
Executive Departments;
2. Senators and Members of the House of
Representatives;
3. The Chief Justice and Associate Justices of the
Supreme Court, incumbent and retired
members of the judiciary, incumbent
members of Judicial and Bar Council,
incumbent members of the MCLE Committee,
incumbent court lawyers who have availed of
the Philippine Judicial Academy programs of
continuing judicial education (Amendment to
Bar Matter 850, Resolution of the Court En
Banc, July 13, 2004);
4. The Chief State Counsel, Chief State
Prosecutor and Assistant Secretaries of the
Dept. of Justice;
5. The Solicitor General and the Assistant
Solicitor General;
6. The Government Corporate Counsel, Deputy
and Assistant Government Corporate
Counsel;
7. The Chairman and Members of the
Constitutional Commissions;
8. The Ombudsman, the Overall Deputy
Ombudsman, the Deputy Ombudsmen and
the Special Prosecutor of the Office of the
Ombudsman;
9. Heads of government agencies exercising
quasi-judicial functions;
10. Incumbent deans, bar reviewers and
professors of law who have teaching
experience for at least 10 years in accredited
law schools;
11. The Chancellor, Vice-Chancellor and
members of the Corps of Professional and
Professorial Lecturers of the Philippine
Judicial Academy; and
12. Governors and Mayors because they are
prohibited from practicing their profession
Other parties exempted:
133
1. Those who are not in law practice, private or
public;
2. Those who have retired from law practice
with the approval of the IBP Board of
Governors.
Request for exemption under special
circumstance
If there is a good cause for exemption from or
modification of requirement, member may file a
verified request setting forth good cause for
exemption (such as physical disability, illness,
post-graduate study abroad, proven expertise in
law, etc.) from compliance with or modification of
any of the requirements, including an extension
of time for compliance, in accordance with
procedure to be established by the Committee on
MCLE.
NOTE: Applications for exemption from or
modification of the MCLE requirement shall be
under oath and supported by documents.
Q: Atty. Mike started teaching Agrarian
Reform and Taxation in June 2001 at the Arts
and Sciences Department of the Far Eastern
University. In 2005, he moved to San
Sebastian Institute of Law where he taught
Political Law. Is Atty. Mike exempt from
complying with the MCLE for the 4th
compliance period in April 2013? (2011 Bar)
A: NO, since he has yet to complete the required
teaching experience to be exempt.
SANCTIONS
Consequences of non-compliance
A member who fails to comply with the
requirements after the 60-day period shall be
listed as delinquent member by the IBP Board of
Governors upon recommendation of the
Committee on MCLE.
NOTE: The listing as a delinquent member is an
administrative in nature but it shall be made with
notice and hearing by the Committee on MCLE.
B.M. No. 1922, which took effect on January 1,
2009, 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
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW
 Legal Ethics
Certificate of Exemption, as may be applicable, for
the immediately preceding compliance period.
Failure to disclose the required information
would cause the dismissal of the case and the
expunction of the pleadings from the records.
Q: Can a lawyer who lacks the number of units
required by the MCLE Board continue to
practice the profession? (2014 Bar)
A: YES. A lawyer, not being exempted from MCLE,
who fails to comply with the required legal
education activities shall receive a Non-
Compliance Notice and shall be required to
explain the deficiency or otherwise show
compliance with the requirements. A member
who fails to satisfactory comply therewith shall
be listed as a delinquent member by the IBP,
wherein he shall be included in the inactive status
(Rule 12 and Rule 13, B.M. 850).
He may still practice the profession but all his
pleadings submitted to court may be expunged
from the records since it is required that
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 (Bar Matter No.
1922, June 3, 2008).
BAR MATTER NO. 2012
RULE ON MANDATORY LEGAL AID SERVICE
The mandatory Legal Aid Service mandates every
practicing lawyer to render a minimum of 60
hours of free legal aid services to indigent
litigants yearly.
Purpose
The rule seeks to enhance the duty of lawyers to
the society as agents of social change and to the
courts as officers thereof by helping improve
access to justice by the less privileged members
of society and expedite the resolution of cases
involving them. Mandatory free legal service by
members of the bar and their active support
thereof will aid the efficient and effective
administration of justice especially in cases
involving indigent and pauper litigants (Sec. 2,
B.M. No. 2012).
Scope
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
2018 GOLDEN NOTES
134
It shall govern the mandatory requirement for
practicing lawyers to render free legal aid
services in all cases (whether, civil, criminal or
administrative) involving indigent and pauper
litigants where the assistance of a lawyer is
needed. It shall also govern the duty of other
members of the legal profession to support the
legal aid program of the Integrated Bar of the
Philippines (Sec. 3,B.M. No. 2012).
Practicing lawyers are members of the Philippine
Bar who appear for and in behalf of parties in
courts of law and quasi-judicial agencies.
The term “practicing lawyers” shall EXCLUDE:
1. Government employees and incumbent
elective officials not allowed by law to
practice;
2. Lawyers who by law are not allowed to
appear in court;
3. Supervising lawyers of students enrolled in
law student practice in duly accredited legal
clinics of law schools and lawyers of non-
governmental organizations (NGOs) and
peoples’ organizations (POs) like the Free
Legal Assistance Group who by the nature of
their work already render free legal aid to
indigent and pauper litigants; and
4. Lawyers not covered under subparagraphs 1
to 3 including those who are employed in the
private sector but do not appear for and in
behalf of parties in courts of law and quasi-
judicial agencies (Sec. 4[a], B.M. 1. 2012).
Legal aid cases
It includes actions, disputes, and controversies
that are criminal, civil and administrative in
nature in whatever stage wherein indigent and
pauper litigants need legal representation (Sec.
4[c], B. M.2012).
REQUIREMENTS FOR MANDATORY
LEGAL AID SERVICE
Under the Rule, a practicing lawyer, among
others, shall coordinate with the Clerk of Court or
the Legal Aid Chairperson of one’s Integrated Bar
of the Philippines (IBP) Chapter for cases where
the lawyer may render free legal aid service:
1. Every practicing lawyer is required to render
a minimum of 60 hours of free legal aid
services to indigent litigants in a year. Said 60
hours shall be spread within the period of 12
 MANDATORY CONTINUING LEGAL EDUCATION
months, with a minimum of 5 hours of free
legal aid services each month. However,
where it is necessary for the practicing
lawyer to render legal aid service for more
than 5 hours in one month, the excess hours
may be credited to the said lawyer for the
succeeding periods (Sec. 5[a] first par., B.M.
2012).
2. The practicing lawyer shall report
compliance with the requirement within 10
days of the last month of each quarter of the
year (Sec. 5[a] third par., B.M. 2012).
3. A practicing lawyer shall be required to
secure and obtain a certificate from the Clerk
of Court attesting to the number of hours
spent rendering free legal aid services in a
case (Sec. 5[b], B.M. 2012).
4. Said compliance report shall be submitted to
the Legal Aid Chairperson of the IBP Chapter
within the Court’s jurisdiction (Sec. 5[c], B.M.
2012).
5. The IBP chapter shall, after verification, issue
a compliance certificate to the concerned
lawyer. The IBP Chapter shall also submit
compliance reports to the IBP’s National
Committee on Legal Aid (NCLA) for recording
and documentation. The submission shall be
made within forty-five (45) days after the
mandatory submission of compliance reports
by the practicing lawyers (Sec. 5[d], B.M.
2012).
6. Practicing lawyers shall indicate in all
pleadings filed before the courts or quasi-
judicial bodies the number and date of issue
of their certificate of compliance for the
immediately preceding compliance period
(Sec 5[e], B.M. 2012).
Contents of a certificate from the Clerk of
Court attesting the number of hours spent in
rendering free legal services
1. The case or cases where the legal aid service
was rendered, the party or parties in the said
case(s), the docket number of the said case(s)
and the date(s) the service was rendered
2. The number of hours actually spent
3. The number of hours actually spent attending
mediation, conciliation or any other mode of
ADR on a particular case
4. A motion (except a motion for extension of
time to file a pleading or for postponement of
hearing or conference) or pleading filed on a
particular case shall be considered as one (1)
hour of service (Sec 5[b], B.M. 2012).
NOTE: The Clerk of Court shall issue the
135
certificate in triplicate, one (1) copy to be
retained by the practicing lawyer, one (1) copy to
be retained by the Clerk of Court and one (1) copy
to be attached to the lawyer's compliance report
(Sec 5[b][iv] second par., B.M. 2012)
CREDITS TO LAWYERS WHO RENDER FREE
LEGAL AID SERVICE
A lawyer who renders mandatory legal aid
service for the required number of hours in a year
for the three year-period covered by a
compliance period under the Rules on MCLE shall
be credited the following:
1. Two (2) credit units for legal ethics
2. Two (2) credit units for trial and pretrial
skills
3. Two (2) credit units for alternative dispute
resolution
4. Four (4) credit units for legal writing and oral
advocacy
5. Four (4) credit units for substantive and
procedural laws and jurisprudence
6. Six (6) credit units for such subjects as may
be prescribed by the MCLE Committee under
Section 2(g), Rule 2 of the Rules on MCLE
A lawyer who renders mandatory legal aid
service for the required number of hours in a year
for at least two consecutive years within the three
year- period covered by a compliance period
under the Rules on MCLE shall be credited the
following:
1. One (1) credit unit for legal ethics
2. One (1) credit unit for trial and pretrial skills
3. One (1) credit unit for alternative dispute
resolution
4. Two (2) credit units for legal writing and oral
advocacy
5. Two (2) credit units for substantive and
procedural laws and jurisprudence
6. Three (3) credit units for such subjects as
may be prescribed by the MCLE Committee
under Section 2(g), Rule 2 of the Rules on
MCLE (Sec. 8, B.M. 2012).
PENALTIES FOR NON-COMPLIANCE WITH
THERULE ON MANDATORY LEGAL AID
SERVICE
1. At the end of every calendar year, any
practicing lawyer who fails to meet the
minimum prescribed 60 hours of legal aid
service each year shall be required by the
IBP, through the National Committee on
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW
 Legal Ethics
Legal Aid (NCLA), to explain why he was
unable to render the minimum prescribed
number of hours.
2. If no explanation has been given or if the
NCLA finds the explanation unsatisfactory,
the NCLA shall make a report and
recommendation to the IBP Board of
Governors that the erring lawyer be declared
a member of the IBP who is not in good
standing.
3. Upon approval of the NCLA’s
recommendation, the IBP Board of Governors
shall declare the erring lawyer as a member
not in good standing.
4. The notice to the lawyer shall include a
directive to pay P4,000.00 penalty which
shall accrue to the special fund for the legal
aid program of the IBP.
5. The “not in good standing” declaration shall
be effective for a period of 3 months from the
receipt of the erring lawyer of the notice from
the IBP Board of Governors.
6. During the said period, the lawyer cannot
appear in court or any quasi-judicial body as
counsel.
7. Provided, however, that the “not in good
standing” status shall subsist even after the
lapse of the 3-month period until and unless
the penalty shall have been paid.
8. Any lawyer who fails to comply with his
duties under this Rule for at least 3
consecutive years shall be the subject of
disciplinary proceedings to be instituted
motu proprio by the Committee on Bar
Discipline (Sec. 7, B.M. 2012).

NOTE: The falsification of a certificate or any

contents thereof by any Clerk of Court or by any
Chairperson of the Legal Aid Committee of the
IBP local chapter where the case is pending or by
the Director of a legal clinic or responsible officer
of an NGO (non-governmental organizations) or
PO (people’s organizations) shall be a ground for
an administrative case against the said Clerk of
Court or Chairperson. This is without prejudice to
the filing of the criminal and administrative
charges against the malfeasor (Sec. 7[e], B.M. NO.
2012).

UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS

2018 GOLDEN NOTES
136
 NOTARIAL PRACTICE
NOTARIAL PRACTICE
Purpose of the Notarial Law
1. To promote, serve, and protect public
interest;
2. To simplify, clarify, and modernize the rules
governing notaries public; and
3. To foster ethical conduct among notaries
public (Sec. 2, Rule I, A.M. No. 02-8-13-SC)
Effect of notarized document
A document acknowledged before a notary public
is a public document (Sec. 19, Rule 132, RRC) and
may be presented in evidence without further
proof, the certificate of acknowledgment being
prima facie evidence of the execution of the
instrument or document involved (Sec. 30, Rule
132, RRC).
QUALIFICATIONS OF NOTARY PUBLIC
Notary public
A person 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
facts stated therein and who is authorized by the
statute to administer various oaths.
NOTE: “Notary Public" and "Notary" refer to any
person commissioned to perform official acts
under the rules on Notarial Practice (Sec. 9, Rule
II, A.M. No. 02-8-13-SC).
Qualifications of a notary public [C21-RMC]
To be eligible for commissioning as notary public,
the petitioner must be:
1. A citizen of the Philippines;
2. Over 21 years of age;
3. A resident in the Philippines for at least 1 year
and maintains a regular place of work or
business in the city or province where the
commission is to be issued;
NOTE: This is to prohibit the practice of some
notaries who maintain makeshift “offices” in
sidewalks and street corners of government
offices (Tirol, 2010).
4. A member of the Philippine Bar in good
137
standing with clearances from the Office of
the Bar Confidant of the Supreme Court and
the Integrated Bar of the Philippines; and
5. Has NOT been convicted in the first instance
of any crime involving moral turpitude
(Second par., Sec. 1, Rule III, 2004 Rules on
Notarial Practice, A.M. No. 02-8-13-SC).
LAWYERS AS NOTARY PUBLIC
GR: Only those admitted to the practice of law are
qualified to be notaries public.
XPNs: When there are no persons with the
necessary qualifications or where there are
qualified persons but they refuse appointment. In
which case, the following persons may be
appointed as notaries:
1. Those who passed the studies of law in a
reputable university; or
2. A clerk or deputy clerk of court for a period
of not less than two years.
Non-Lawyers as Notaries
The Rules now requires that notaries must be
members of the Philippine Bar. The Supreme
Court no longer approves requests from non-
lawyers for appointment or reappointment as
notaries.
Government Lawyers as Notaries
Acts of notarization are within the ambit of the
term “practice of law”. Pursuant to Memorandum
Circular No. 17, “No Government officer or
employee shall engage directly in any private
business, vocation, or profession or be connected
with any commercial, credit, agricultural, or
industrial undertaking without a written
permission from the head of Department”. The
law now allows government lawyers to serve as
notaries provided there is written permission
from the head of Department.
NOTE: In a case, a lawyer was reprimanded for
engaging in notarial practice without the
authority from the Secretary of Justice. The
Registry of Deeds with whom he obtained
authority is not the head of the Department
(Abella v. Atty. Cruzabra, A.C. No. 5688, June 4,
2009).
Clerk of Court as Notary Public
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW
 Legal Ethics
Clerk of court may act as notary public, provided
he is commissioned and has been permitted by
his superior. Such consent is necessary because
the act of notarizing a document is a practice of
law.
NOTE: Clerks of Court of RTCs are authorized to
notarize not only documents relating to the
exercise of official functions but also private
documents, subject to conditions that: (a) all
notarial fees charged shall be for the account of
the Judiciary; and (b) they certify in the notarized
documents that there are no notaries public
within the territorial jurisdiction of the RTC.
Prohibition against the RTC judges to notarize
Section 35, Rule 138, of the Revised Rules of
Court as well as Canon 5, Rule 5.07 of the Code of
Judicial Conduct provides that no judge or other
official or employee of the superior courts shall
engage in private practice as a member of the bar
or give professional advice to clients.
Notarization of documents is considered a
practice of law.
The rights, duties, privileges and functions of the
office of an attorney-at-law are so inherently
incompatible with the official functions, duties,
powers, discretions and privileges of a judge of
the Regional Trial Court.
Authority of MTC judges to notarize and its
limitation
MTC and MCTC judges may act as notaries public
ex-officio in the notarization of documents
connected only with the exercise of their official
functions and duties. They may not, as notaries
public ex-officio, undertake the preparation and
acknowledgment of private documents, contracts
and other acts of conveyances which bear no
direct relation to the performance of their
functions as judges.
However, MTC and MCTC judges assigned to
municipalities or circuits with no lawyers or
notaries public may, in the capacity as notaries
public ex-officio, perform any act within the
competence of a regular notary public, provided
that:
1. All notarial fees charged be for the account of
the Government and turned over to the
municipal treasurer
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
2018 GOLDEN NOTES
138
2. Certification be made in the notarized
documents attesting to the lack of any lawyer
or notary public in such municipality or
circuit.
Their authority to notarize is limited to their sala.
Hence, they cannot notarize documents filed in
another town because it will be considered as
practice of law.
Q: Vicente Batic charged Judge Victorio
Galapon Jr. with engaging in unauthorized
notarial practice for having notarized a Deed
of Absolute Sale between Antonio Caamic and
Lualhati Ellert. Under the deed of sale, Ellert,
was described as single. At the time of
Galapon’s notarization of the Deed of Sale,
there was a notary public in Dulag, Leyte.
Judge Galapon claims that he did not prepare
the document and that his participation was
limited to its acknowledgment, for which the
corresponding fee was collected by and paid
to the clerk of court. Is Judge Galapon
authorized to notarize the Deed of Absolute
Sale?
A: NO. While Judge Galapon explains that he
sincerely believed that when no notary public is
available, the MTC may act as ex-officio notary
public, provided the fees shall be for the
government, such is not enough to exonerate him
from liability. His acts do not fall under the
exception because at the time of his notarization
of the Deed of Sale, there was a notary public in
Dulag, Leyte (Vicente Batic v. Judge Victorio
Galapon Jr., A.M. No. MTJ-99-1239, July 29, 2005).
COMMISSION
It refers to the grant of authority to perform
notarial acts and to the written evidence of the
authority (Sec. 3, Rule II, A.M. 02-8-13-SC).
Issuance of notarial commission
A notarial commission may be issued by an
Executive Judge to any qualified person who
submits a petition in accordance with the Rules
on Notarial Practice (Sec. 1, first par., Rule III, A.M.
No. 02-8-13-SC).
Form of the petition and supporting
documents for a notarial commission