4663888 UP B2005 Legal Profession Reviewer

8/8/2019 4663888 UP B2005 Legal Profession Reviewer

1/42

LEGAL

PROFESSIONREVIEWER

Handog nina Tina, Dorothy, Salve, Ian, Dodie, Ari, Joel, Alain,Naj, at ni Chek para sa mga magagandang babae at sa mgamatipunong lalaki ng B2005. Naway maka-uno tayo lahat sadarating na eksamen J

LAWYERS IN SOCIETY

WADE, "NATURE AND MEANING OF THE LEGAL PROFESSION"This article basically states the attributes of the Learned Profession. First, thattraining is necessary for admission to a learned profession. Second, that thelearned profession is characterized by an organization that sets standards for

licenses and admissions into it. Third, and most importantly, the members of thelearned profession are dedicated to a spirit of public service.

With respect to the responsibilities of a member of a learned profession to hisclients there is a relationship of trust and confidence. Also the professionalshould not have interests of his own.

A professional seeks to improve his profession. He has the duty to engage inresearch, to write articles and treatises. He must continue through self-educationand has the duty to comply with the code of ethics.

To the society, a professional has the duty to influence the opinions and actionsof others. He must supply intelligent and unselfish leadership to the forming of

public opinions and determination of important issues.

LUNDBERG, "THE LEGAL PROFESSION - A SOCIAL PHENOMENON"The small body of law practitioners probably plays a much more weighty socialrole than do editors, physicians and publishers. This is because the socialphilosophy that is actually expressed in public policy is that of the man of law.The fact that lawyers make public policy is not a consequence of their being ourweightiest intellects, but because of the nature of the state, which wasestablished by lawyers along legalistic lines.

The very existence of a legal profession presupposes a society torn by conflicts.Social conflicts are heightened by the chicaneries lawyers describe as part oftheir duties. If there were any real desire for reform in the profession, it wouldprobably be accomplished in short order.

A large part of social injustice exists because the legal profession has notshouldered the responsibilities that go with the privileges it enjoys. The taskfacing society is to make it possible for the constructive work that is done bylawyers on behalf of the middle class to be extended for the benefit of the lowerclass.

PEREZ/SAN JUAN, THE REVOLUTIONARY IMPERATIVE OF LAWYERS INTHE PHILIPPINESHistorically, lawyers have been known as mere mercenaries of the monied class.Their main concern is to enrich the landholdings and further the interest of thesepeople. This has been the public perception for quite some time.

Theres a need for a legal service program for social and economic

1


2/42

transformation. Many forms of this type of legal service are being used today (AlternativeLaw, Developmental Legal Aid Human Rights Lawyering, etc.) The goal of the lawyer inthese legal programs is to work for his own obsolescence, that is, to empower and trainthe layman such that time will come when his services will no longer be needed. Thisempowerment of the lower class of society is the revolutionary imperative of lawyers in thePhilippines.

Agabin: its difficult to go to far-flung and depressed areas and serve the underprivilegedwhen your own family is in dire need of financial help. Of course, your first impulse is todo what you can to help them first, and then you focus on other social concerns

STATE REGULATIONCONST, ART VIII, SEC 5(5)The Supreme Court has the following powers:(5) Promulgate rules concerning the protection and enforcement of constitutional rights,pleading, practice, and procedure in all courts, the admission to the practice of law, theIntegrated Bar of the Philippines, and legal assistance to the underprivileged. Such rulesshall provide a simplified and inexpensive procedure for the speedy disposition of cases,shall be uniform for all courts of the same grade, and shall not diminish, increase or

modify, substantive rights. Rules of procedure of special courts and quasi-judicial bodiesshall remain effective unless disapproved by the Supreme Court.

CONST, ART XII SEC 14 (2)The practice of all professions in the Philippines shall be limited to Filipino citizens, saveincases prescribed by law.

CONST XVIII SEC 10All courts existing at the time of the ratification of this Constitution shall continue toexercise their jurisdiction until otherwise provided by law. The provisions of the existingRules of Court, judiciary acts, and procedural laws no inconsistent with this Constitutionshall remain operative unless amended or repealed by the Supreme Court or theCongress.

In re Cunanan

The Supreme Court is the only constitutional body that can prescribe the admissionrequirements to the Philippines Bar.

In the matter if the Integration of the Integrated Bar of the Philippines

The Supreme Court, due to the powers given to it by the Constitution, has the over-alladministrative power over the members of the Philippine Bar. The integration of the bar can

serve the interests of justice better as it organizes the attorneys all around the Philippines.

LEGAL EDUCATIONPRE-LAW: RULES OF COURT, RULE 138, SEC 6:No applicant for the admission to the bar examination shall be admitted unless he

presents a certificate that he has satisfied the Secretary of Education that, before he

began the study of law, he had pursued and satisfactorily completed in anauthorized and recognized university or college, requiring for admission theretothe completion of a four-year high school course, the course of studyprescribed therein for a bachelors degree in arts or sciences with any of thefollowing subjects as major or field of concentration: political science, logic,English, Spanish, history and economics.

LAW PROPER: RULES OF COURT, RULE 138, SEC 5. No applicant shall be admitted to the bar examinations unless he hassatisfactorily completed the following course in a law school or university dulyrecognized by the government: civil law, commercial law, remedial law,criminal law, public and private international law, political law, labor andsocial legislation, medical jurisprudence, taxation and legal ethics.

REYES, "OBJECTIVES OF LEGAL EDUCATION IN PRESENT-DAYPHILIPPINE SOCIETYThe problems concerning the legal profession, being the same, then the basicobjectives of legal training do not appear to need drastic revision. Its end is still toprovide those in need of legal service with skilled and moral practitioners. If

change is required, it is one of emphasis. Lawyers must revise their attitudestowards social problems:

Concern should not be with remedial or curative practice. The bar,

therefore, has to familiarize itself with negotiation, compromise, andarbitration techniques.

Favor "preventive" practice- the drafting of plain and unambiguous

documents that will avoid doubts and controversies.

Extend services to neglected areas.

Ultimately, education should not be mere spoon-feeding of pre-digestedinformation. Studies must be organized and integrated so that student may seehow each legal rule and principle connect with each other.

AGABIN, "TEACHING LAW AS A SOCIAL SCIENCE"Why approach law as a social science? Reason, according to the realists, wasnot a reliable guide to law or moral understanding. And the case method isolatescases from their historical and social context and failed to take into account thefactors that caused the evolution of legal principle. If the laws of any country aremerely imported wholesale, it will not be an effective instrument for social control.By using the tools of social science in law, this will broaden the study of law into amultidisciplinary phenomenon. Law will cease to exist in a vacuum; it will bestudied with insights from the social science.Legal education must train students also as responsible citizens cognizant of thesocial, economic, and political malaise gripping society. Viewing law as part ofthe larger social firmament enables the young lawyer to meet the pressing needsof his society.

2


3/42

BERNAS, PREPARATORY BACHELOR OF ARTS AND PROFESSIONAL TRAININGFirst Class Lawyers should possess:

analytic skills (how to examine problems from all angles)

substantive legal knowledge (be able to zoom in on a law pertinent to clients

problem)

basic working skills (write, research, draft, express)

familiarity with institutional environment (maabilidad)

awareness of total non-legal environment (kelangan marunong makipag link-up

sa ibang tao from other fields)

good judgment

in the end, its not really the actual preparatory curriculum that matters, but how it wasused by the student .

Agabin: it doesnt really matter what your prep. Course is, basta may basic understandingng social sciences, ok na. During deans time, 2 yr. lng undergrad nila

THE BAR EXAMINATIONSRULES OF COURT, RULE 138SEC 7: applicant must file with the clerk of the Supreme Court 15 days before theexamination all the requirements in sections 2 and 3.

SEC 8: the notice for applications will be published at least 10 days before theexamination

SEC 9: applicants shall be subjected to the following examinations: Civil Law, Labor andSocial Legislation, Mercantile Law, Criminal Law, Political Law (Constitutional Law, PublicCorporations, and Public Officers), International Law (private and public), Taxation,Remedial Law (Civil Procedure, Criminal Procedure, Evidence), Legal Ethics and PracticalExercises (Pleading and Conveyancing)

SEC 10: Nothing can be brought in side the room. The same questions in English andSpanish shall be given to everyone. And theoretically, one can petition the Supreme Courtthe chance to use a noiseless typewriter. Nothing that could identify the examinee shall beplaced on the examination papers.

SEC 11: the bar examinations shall take place in Manila in the span of four days thatwould be designated by the chairman of the committee of bar examiners. The distributionof the exams shall be as follows: 1st day: political law and International law (Am) and laborand social legislation in the afternoon (pm). 2nd day: civil law (am) and taxation (pm). 3rd

day: mercantile law (am) and Criminal law (pm). 4th day: remedial law (am) and legalethics and practical exercises (pm)

SEC 12: bar committee shall be composed of one member of the Supreme Court

(chairman) and 8 members of the Philippines Bar. They shall hold office for the period of

one year.

SEC 13: no candidate should influence any member of the committee and thatthey should not communicate with each other during the examinations. Thecandidate that violates this provision shall be barred form the exam and it shallcount as a failure for him. Permanent disqualification may also be given as a

sanction by the court.

SEC 14: in order to pass, the candidate must have a general average of 75%with no grade lower than 50% in any of the subjects. The weights shall bedistributed as follows: Civil Law: 15%, Labor and Social Legislation: 10%,Mercantile Law: 15%, Criminal Law: 10%, Political Law and International Law:15%, Taxation: 10%, Remedial Law: 20%, Legal Ethics and Practical Exercises:5%

SEC 15: Feb. 15 or as close to it as possible will be the deadline of thecommittee to report on the examinations. The exam paraphernalia shall bedeposited with the clerk of court.

LABRADOR, THE BAR EXAMS AS NAN INTRUMENT OF LEGALEDUCATIONThe bar exam has considerable influence on legal education. In that professorscompile past bar questions and have used these as a GUIDE their studentspreparation. While the bar exams is not a positive and exact test of futurecompetence and capacity, it is the best the court has devised to test prospectivelawyers on both knowledge of the law as well as its application to sets of facts.

Agabin: some schools focus too much and have become bar-oriented. We donot need legal encyclopedias but lawyers who are responsive to clients needsin particular and society in general.

LEGAL ETHICS

Legal Ethics is the embodiment of all principles of morality and refinements thatshould govern the conduct of every member of the Bar. It has been broadlydefined as living spirit of the profession, which limits yet uplifts it as a livelihood.It specifically refers to the branch of modern science, which treats of the dutieswhich an attorney owes to the court, to his client, to his colleagues in theprofession and the public.

In June 21, 1988, the Supreme Court promulgated the Code of ProfessionalResponsibility. The Code establishes the norms of conduct and the ethicalstandards for all lawyers, including those in government service.

The code consists of 22 Canons and 77 Rules, which is divided into fourchapters, namely: the Lawyer and the Society, the Lawyer and the Legal

Profession, the Lawyer and the Courts, and the Lawyer and the Client.3


4/42

CODE OF PROFESSIONAL ETHICS

CANON 1: A lawyer shall uphold the Constitution, obey thelaws of the land and promote respect for law and legalprocess.

The trust society has put in the legal profession requires lawyers to be in the forefront inobserving and maintaining the rule of law and the preservation of its democraticinstitutions and liberties.

The first and foremost duty of a lawyer is to maintain allegiance to the Republic of thePhilippines, uphold the Constitution, and obey the laws of the land. The CPR underscores

the primacy of this duty by making it the first canon.

Bautista v. GonzalesThe very first Canon of the new Code states, "a lawyer shall uphold the Constitution, obey thelaws of the land and promote respect for law and legal process.Moreover, Rule 138, Sec. 3 of the Revised Rules of Court requires every lawyer to take an oathto 44 obey the laws of the Republic of the Philippines as well as the legal orders of the dulyconstituted authorities therein." And for any violation of this oath, a lawyer may be suspendedor disbarred by the Supreme Court.All of these underscore the role of the lawyer as the vanguard of our legal system. Thetransgression of any provision of law by a lawyer is a repulsive and reprehensible act, which theCourt will not countenance. In the instant case, respondent, having violated Art. 1491 of theCivil Code must be held accountable both to his client and to society.

Zaldivar v. GonzalesApart from the constitutional mandate to regulate admission to the practice of law, whichincludes as well authority to regulate the practice itself of law, the disciplinary authority of theSupreme Court over members of the Bar is an inherent power incidental to the properadministration of justice and essential to an orderly discharge of judicial functions.The Supreme Court has inherent power to punish for contempt. The power is necessary for itsown protection against an improper interference with the due administration of justice, it is notdependent upon the complaint of any of the parties litigant.Contempt of court may be committed both by lawyers and non-lawyers, both in and out of court.The disciplinary authority of the Court over members of the Bar is but corollary to the Court'sexclusive power of admission to the Bar. A lawyer is not merely a professional but also anofficer of the court and as such, he is called upon to share in the task and responsibility of

dispensing justice and resolving disputes in society. Any act on his part which visiblytends to obstruct, pervert, or impede and degrade the administration of justiceconstitutes both professional misconduct calling for the exercise of disciplinary actionagainst him, and contumacious conduct warranting application of the contempt power.It is sometimes asserted that in the exercise of the power to punish for contempt orof the disciplinary authority of the Court over members of the Bar, the Court isacting as offended party, prosecutor and arbiter at one and the same time. Thus, inthe present case, respondent Gonzalez first sought to get some members of the Courtto inhibit themselves in the resolution of this case for alleged bias and prejudiceagainst him. A little later, he in effect asked the whole Court to inhibit itself frompassing upon the issues involved in this proceeding and to pass on responsibility forthis matter to the Integrated Bar of the Philippines, upon the ground that the Courthas become incapable of judging him impartially and fairly. Respondent Gonzalezmisconceives the nature of the proceeding at bar as well as the function of themembers of the Court. Undeniably, the members of the Court are, to a certaindegree, aggrieved parties. But in the exercise of its disciplinary powers, the Courtacts as an entity separate and distinct from the individual personalities of itsmembers.

The power to exclude persons from the practice of law is but a necessary incident ofthe power to admit persons to said practice. By constitutional precept, this power isvested exclusively in this Court.

RULE 1.01: A lawyer shall not engage in unlawful, dishonest,

immoral, or deceitful conduct.

The lawyer assumes responsibilities well beyond the basic requirements of goodcitizenship. He should be the exemplar for others to emulate.

Unlawful conduct: act or omission against the law. Dishonest act: lying/cheating.Immoral/deceitful conduct: involves moral turpitude. Anything done contrary tojustice, modesty, or good morals, or to any vileness, baseness, or depravity in

the private and social duties that one owes to his fellows and society, contrary toaccepted rule f right and duty between man and man.

A lawyer who engages in any of these acts may be held administratively liable.Duh.

Figueroa v. BarrancoBarranco was prevented from taking the lawyer's oath in 1971 because of the chargeof gross immorality made by complainant. He bore an illegitimate child with hissweetheart, Patricia Figueroa, who also claims that he did not fulfill his promise tomarry her after he passes the bar examinations.These facts do not constitute gross immorality warranting the permanent exclusion ofrespondent from the legal profession. His engaging in premarital sexual relations with

4


5/42

complainant and promises to marry suggests a doubtful moral character on his part but thesame does not constitute grossly immoral conduct. The Court has held that to justify suspensionor disbarment the act complained of must not only be immoral, but grossly immoral.A grossly immoral act is one that is so corrupt and false as to constitute a criminal act or sounprincipled or disgraceful as to be reprehensible to a high degree. It is a willful, flagrant, orshameless act which shows a moral indifference to the opinion of respectable members of thecommunity.

Ui v. BonifacioIn the case at bar, it is the claim of respondent Atty. Bonifacio that when she met Carlos Ui,she knew and believed him to be single. Respondent fell in love with him and they got marriedand as a result of such marriage, she gave birth to two children. Upon her knowledge of the truecivil status of Carlos Ui, she left him.A lawyer may be disbarred for "grossly immoral conduct, or by reason of his conviction of acrime involving moral turpitude". A member of the bar should have moral integrity in addition toprofessional probity.It is difficult to state with precision and to fix an inflexible standard as to what is "grosslyimmoral conduct" or to specify the moral delinquency and obliquity which render a lawyer

unworthy of continuing as a member of the bar. The rule implies that what appears to beunconventional behavior to the straight-laced may not be the immoral conduct that warrantsdisbarment. Immoral conduct has been defined as "that conduct which is willful, flagrant, orshameless, and which shows a moral indifference to the opinion of the good and respectablemembers of the community."For such conduct to warrant disciplinary action, the same must be "grossly immoral," that is, itmust be so corrupt and false as to constitute a criminal act or so unprincipled as to bereprehensible to a high degree.We have held that "a member of the Bar and officer of the court is not only required to refrainfrom adulterous relationships but must also so behave himself as to avoid scandalizing thepublic by creating the belief that he is flouting those moral standards. Respondents act ofimmediately distancing herself from Carlos Ui upon discovering his true civil status belies justthat alleged moral indifference and proves that she had no intention of flaunting the law andthe high moral standard of the legal profession.

Vda. De Mijares v. VillaluzIn this only Christian country of the Far East, society cherishes and protects the sanctity ofmarriage and the family as a social institution. Consequently, no one can make a mockery thereofand perform a sham marriage with impunity. The defense of respondent that what was enteredinto by him and complainant on January 7, 1994 was nothing but a "sham" marriage is unavailingto shield or absolve him from liability for his gross misconduct, nay sacrilege.The nature of the office of an attorney at law requires that he shall be a person of good moralcharacter. This qualification is not only a condition precedent for admission to the practice oflaw; its continued possession is also essential for remaining in the practice of law. Under Rule1.01 of the Code of Professional Responsibility, a lawyer shall not engage in unlawful, dishonest,

immoral or deceitful conduct. The commission of grossly immoral conduct and deceit are

grounds for suspension or disbarment of lawyers.

Melendrez v. DecenaGenerally, a lawyer should not be suspended or disbarred for misconduct committed inhis personal or non-professional capacity. Where however, misconduct outside hisprofessional dealings becomes so patent and so gross as to demonstrate moralunfitness to remain in the legal profession, the Court must suspend or strike out thelawyer's name from the Roll of Attorneys.The nature of the office of an attorney at law requires that he shall be a person ofgood moral character. This qualification is not only a condition precedent to admissionto the practice of law; its continued possession is also essential for remaining in thepractice of law, in the exercise of privileges of members of the Bar. Gross misconducton the part of a lawyer, although not related to the discharge of professional dutiesas a member of the Bar, which puts his moral character in serious doubt, renders himunfit to continue in the practice of law.In the instant case, the exploitative deception exercised by respondent attorney uponthe complainants in his private transactions with them, and the exacting ofunconscionable rates of interest, considered together with the acts of professional

misconduct, led the Court to the conviction that he has lost that good moral characterwhich is indispensable for continued membership in the Bar.

Delos Reyes v. AznarComplainant submitted to respondent's solicitation for sexual intercourse because ofrespondent's moral ascendancy over her and if she would not accede, she would flunkin her subjects. The fact that he is a rich man and does not practice his profession asa lawyer, does not render respondent a person of good moral character. Evidence ofgood moral character precedes admission to bar and such requirement is notdispensed with upon admission thereto. Good moral character is a continuingqualification necessary to entitle one to continue in the practice of law.Immoral conduct has been defined as that which is willful, flagrant, or shameless, andwhich shows a moral indifference to the opinion of the good and respectable membersof the community. In the present case, it was highly immoral of respondent, amarried man with children, to have taken advantage of his position as chairman of thecollege of medicine in asking complainant, a student in said college, to go with him toManila where he had carnal knowledge of her under the threat that she would flunk inall her subjects in case she refused.

Cordova v. CordovaThe most recent reconciliation between complainant and respondent (the Cordovaspouses), assuming the same to be real, does not excuse and wipe away the misconductand immoral behavior of the respondent carried out in public, and necessarilyadversely reflecting upon him as a member of the Bar and upon the Philippine Baritself. An applicant for admission to membership in the bar is required to show that he

is possessed of good moral character. That requirement is not exhausted and5


6/42

dispensed with upon admission to membership of the bar. It persists as a continuing conditionfor membership in good standing.It is important to note that the lack of moral character referred to as essential is not limitedto good moral character relating to the discharge of the duties and responsibilities of anattorney at law. The moral delinquency that affects the fitness of a member of the bar tocontinue as such includes conduct that outrages the generally accepted moral standards of thecommunity; conduct for instance, which makes "a mockery of the inviolable social institution ormarriage."

People v. TuandaThe crimes of which respondent was convicted import deceit and violation of her attorney'soath and the Code of Professional Responsibility under both of which she was bound to obey thelaws of the land. Conviction of a crime involving moral turpitude might not (as in the instantcase, violation of BP 22 does not) relate to the exercise of the profession of a lawyer; however,it certainly relates to and affects the good moral character of a person convicted of suchoffense.

RULE 1.02: A lawyer shall not counsel or abet activities aimed at defiance

of the law or at lessening confidence in the legal profession.

He should not subvert the law by counseling or assisting activities in defiance of the law;he should not promote an organization known to be violating the law nor assist it in adishonest scheme; he should not allow his services to be engaged by an organizationwhose members are violating the law and defend them when they get caught.

In re TerrellThe promoting of organizations, with knowledge of their objects, for the purpose of violating orevading the laws against crime constitutes such misconduct on the part of an attorney, anofficer of the court, as amounts to malpractice or gross misconduct in his office, and for whichhe may be removed or suspended. The assisting of a client in a scheme, which the attorneyknows to be dishonest, or the conniving at a violation of law, are acts which justify disbarment.

(Though Terrell wasnt disbarred here because he was acquitted of estafa, still his acts wereunprofessional. He got suspended.)

RULE 1.03: A lawyer shall not, for any corrupt motive or interest, encourageany suit or delay any mans cause.

A lawyer owes to society and to the court the duty not to stir up litigation this is knownat common law as the crime of maintenance.

Unprofessional acts within the prohibition:

Volunteering advice to bring lawsuit except where ties of blood, relationship, and

trust make it a duty to do so

Hunting up defects in titles or other causes of action and informing thereof to be

employed to bring suit or collect judgment, or to breed litigation byseeking out claims for personal injuries or any other grounds to securethem as clients

Employing agents or runners for like purposes

Paying direct or indirect reward to those who bring or influence the

bringing of such cases to his office

Remunerating policemen, court or prison officials, physicians etc. who

may succeed, under the guise of disinterested friendly advice, ininfluencing criminals, the sick, the ignorant, etc. to seek professionalservices

Searching for unknown heirs and soliciting their employment

Initiating a meeting of a club and inducing them to organize and contest

legislation under his guidance

Purchasing notes to collect them by litigation at a profit

Furnishing credit reports in expectation of possible employment

Agreeing with a purchaser of future interests to invest therein in

consideration of his services

Purpose of prohibition: to prevent ambulance chasing (i.e. the solicitation ofalmost ay kind of legal business by laymen employed by an attorney for his ownpurposes).

The evils of ambulance chasing:

Fomenting litigation thus burdening the courts and the public

Subornation of perjury

Mulcting innocent persons by judgments upon manufactured causes of

action

Defrauding injured persons having proper causes of action but are

ignorant of their legal rights.

RULE 1.04: A lawyer shall encourage his client to avoid, end, or

settle a controversy if it will admit of a fair settlement.

He should be a mediator rather than instigator

Parties to an amicable settlement enjoy benefits better than those, which can belegally secured a litigation involves time, expense, and ill feelings which maywell be avoided by he settlement of the action!

Compromise can save clients expenses and avoid clogging of the docket

Castaeda v. AgoThe Court condemns the attitude of the respondents and their counsel who, far fromviewing courts as sanctuaries for those who seek justice, have tried to use them to

subvert the very ends of justice.6


7/42

It is the duty of a counsel to advise his client, ordinarily a layman to the intricacies and vagariesof the law, on the merit or lack of merit of his case. If he finds that his client's cause isdefenseless, then it is his bounden duty to advise the latter to acquiesce and submit, ratherthan traverse the incontrovertible. A lawyer must resist the whims and caprices of his client,and temper his clients propensity to litigate. A lawyer's oath to uphold the cause of justice issuperior to his duty to his client; its primacy is indisputable.

CANON 2: A lawyer shall make his legal services available inan efficient and convenient manner compatible withindependence, integrity, and effectiveness of the profession.

This arose because of the necessity of representation and the right to counsel in judicial oradministrative proceedings.

It is the responsibility of the bar to provide legal services. A wide gap exists between theneed and its satisfaction because of:

Poverty and inability to pay

Ignorance of legal services or where to find a competent, dependable lawyer, and

fear of delays and technicalities

RULE 2.01: A lawyer shall not reject, except for valid reasons, the cause of

the defenseless/oppressed.

This stems from the lawyers obligation to represent the poor and oppressed in theprosecution of their claims and defense of their rights.

The court is empowered to require a lawyer to render professional services de oficio toany party in a case, if the party is without means to employ a counselde parte.

Ledesma v. Climaco:

A lawyer reluctant to fulfill his obligation would prejudice the welfare of the accused and hisright to counsel. In criminal cases there can be no fair hearing without the accused being giventhe opportunity to be heard by counsel. It is essential for the court not only to apprise theright to attorney but to assign one de oficio for him if defendant is poor or give him reasonabletime to find one. The present Constitution provides for the right of the accused to be heard byhimself and counsel, and to be informed of such right.

RULE 2.02: Even if the lawyer does not accept a case, he shall not refuse torender legal advice to the person concerned if only to the extent necessary

to safeguard the latters rights.

A lawyer may refuse to accept a case for valid reasons (e.g. not in a position toeffectively/competently carry out the case), but he shall not refuse to advise the person

concerned if only to the extent necessary to protect that persons interests.

He should refrain from even giving advice however if he labors under a conflict ofinterests between him and a prospective client or a prospective client and apresent client.

RULE 2.03: A lawyer shall not do or permit to be done any act

designed to primarily solicit legal business.

A lawyer should not recommend employment of himself, his partner, associate,or staff member to a non-lawyer who has not sought his advice; or give anythingof value to secure his employment or to serve as a reward for having made arecommendation resulting to his employment

A lawyer who agrees with a non-lawyer to divide attorney's fees paid by clientssupplied by the non-lawyer is guilty of malpractice

RULE 2.04: A lawyer shall not charge lower rates to attractbusiness.

The rule prohibits competition in charging professional fees for the purpose ofattracting clients to lower rates. This does not prohibit reducing fees or notcharging any at all to an indigent or someone who would have difficulty payingthe usual fee.

CANON 3: A lawyer in making known his legal servicesshall use only true, honest, fair, dignified and objectiveinformation or statement of facts.

"Tradtional dignity": Restriction originated from practices in the Inns of the Courtof England way, way back they young men studying as barristers well are fromwell-to-do families who did not have to worry about earning a living and

traditionally looked down upon all forms of trade and competition. This became arecognized custom and tradition carried over to the US and here.

The profession is primarily for public service. To allow a lawyer to advertise hisskill is to commercialize the practice of law and lower the public confidence.

Not all types of advertising are prohibited only those methods which areincompatible with the traditional dignity of a lawyer and maintenance of correctprofessional standards.

Allowable advertising:

Publication in reputable law list with brief biographical and informative

data

Ordinary simple professional card with name, firm, address, number and

7


8/42

branch of law practiced

Announcement or representation in a local legal journal, but with no reference to

special qualificzations and must not be given to non-lawyers

Seeking of appointment to public office that may be filled up only by a lawyer

Proffer of free legal services to the indigent

Writing of legal articles write and sell articles of general nature on legal

subjects for publication; no improper advertising, giving of legal advice to onewith whom no attorney-client relationship exists, or aiding of kaymen inunauthorized law practice

Giving of advice on legal matters over the radio or through newspapers is

improper because it is indirect advertising and a violation of the confidentiality ofthe attorney-client relationship

Engaging in business OK as long as it is entirely apart from his functions in

the practice of law, and not inconsistent with the lawyer's duties as a member ofthe Bar

In re TagordaThe most worthy and effective advertisement possible, even for a young lawyer, and especially

with his brother lawyers, is the establishment of a well-merited reputation for professionalcapacity and fidelity to trust. This cannot be forced, but must be the outcome of character andconduct.The publication or circulation of ordinary simple business cards, being a matter of personaltaste or local custom, and sometimes of convenience, is not per se improper. But solicitation ofbusiness by circulars or advertisements, or by personal communications or interview notwarranted by personal relations, is unprofessionalIt becomes the Court's duty to condemn solicitation of cases by lawyers. It lowers thestandards of that profession. It works against the confidence of the community in the integrityof the members of the bar. It results in needless litigation and in incensing to strife otherwisepeacefully inclined citizens. The solicitation of employment by an attorney is a ground fordisbarment or suspension.

Director of Religious Affairs v. BayotThe advertisement posted by Bayot in the newspaper was a flagrant violation by the respondentof the ethics of his profession, it being a brazen solicitation of business from the public.Section 25 of Rule 127 expressly provides among other things that "the practice of solicitingcases at law for the purpose of gain, either personally or thru paid agents or brokers,constitutes malpractice." It is highly unethical for an attorney to advertise his talents or skillas a merchant advertises his wares. Law is a profession and not a trade.

RULE 3.01: A lawyer shall not use or permit the use if any false, fraudulent,misleading, self-laudatory, or unfair statement or claim regarding hisqualifications or legal services.

Commonsense and a spirit of fairness, if legal guidelines are absent, must be relied upon

for guidance as to what is or is not proper in advertising and solicitation.

RULE 3.02: In the choice of a firm name, no false, misleading, orassumed name of a deceased partner is permissible provided thatthe firm indicates in all its communications that said partner isdeceased.

The reason for allowing the use of a deceased partner's name is that all of thepartners by their joint efforts contributed to the goodwill attached to the firmname. The name of a law firm may not necessarily identify the individualmembers, so the continued use of the name after some members have passedaway is not a deception.

Filipino lawyers cannot practice under a foreign law firm as the foreign firmcannot practice in the Philippines.

In re Firm Name Sycip, Salazar (before the new rule)

Petitioners cited Canon 33 of the Canons of Professional Ethics of the American BarAssociation" in support of their petitions. It is true that Canon 33 does not consider

as unethical the continued use of the name of a deceased or former partner in thefirm name of a law partnership when such a practice is permissible by local custom butthe Canon warns that care should be taken that no imposition or deception is practicedthrough this use.The possibility of deception upon the public, real or consequential, where the name ofa deceased partner continues to be used cannot be ruled out. The familiar ring of adistinguished name appearing in a firm title might guide a person in search of legalcounsel.Petitioners argue that U.S. Courts have consistently allowed the continued use of adeceased partner's name in the firm name of law partnerships. But that is so becauseit is sanctioned by custom. Not so in this jurisdiction where there is no local customthat sanctions the practice. Custom has been defined as a rule of conduct formed by

repetition of acts, uniformly observed (practiced) as a social rule, legally binding andobligatory. Courts take no judicial notice of custom. A custom must be proved as afact, according to the rules of evidence. Juridical custom must be differentiatedfrom social custom. The former can supplement statutory law or be applied in theabsence of such statute. Not so with the latter.Moreover, judicial decisions applying or interpreting the laws form part of the legalsystem. When the Supreme Court issued Resolutions directing lawyers to desist fromincluding the names of deceased partners in their firm designation, it laid down a legalrule against which no custom or practice to the contrary, even if proven, can prevail.Our civil law clearly ordains that a partnership is dissolved by the death of anypartner. Customs which are contrary to law, public order or public policy shall not becountenanced.

8


9/42

Dacanay v. Baker and McKenzieBaker & McKenzie, being an alien law firm, cannot practice law in the Philippines (Sec. 1, Rule138, Rules of Court). As admitted by the respondents in their memorandum, Baker & McKenzieis a professional partnership organized in 1949 in Chicago, Illinois with members and associatesin 30 cities around the world. Respondents, aside from being members of the Philippine bar,practising under the firm name of Guerrero & Torres, are members or associates of Baker &Mckenzie.As pointed out by the Solicitor General, respondents' use of the firm name Baker & McKenzieconstitutes a representation that being associated with the firm they could "render legalservices of the highest quality to multinational business enterprises and others engaged inforeign trade and investment". This is unethical because Baker & McKenzie is not authorized topractise law here.

RULE 3.03: Where a partner accepts public office, he shall withdraw fromthe firm and his name shall be dropped from the firm name unless the lawallows him to practice law concurrently.

Reason for disqualification: a public office is a public trust. Conflicts of interest must be

avoided to preserve the public trust in the public office.

Absolutely prohibited from engaging in private practice or giving professional advice toclients as members of the bar: judges; other officers and employees of the courts, SolicitorGeneral, and other government prosecution offices; the President; the Vice-President;members of the Cabinet, their deputies and assistants; constitutional commissionmembers; civil service officers/employees required to devote their entire time to thegovernment; governors, city and municipal mayors

Prohibited only from appearing (arguing a case, filing of motions, please and answers) ascounsel before any court and other bodies: members of the Legislature, members ofsanggunian

Civil officers/employees who are not required to have their time completely at the disposal

of the government may be allowed to practice law with written permit from theirdepartment head

But government officials who are prohibited by express mandate of law may not practicelaw even with the department head's consent, but may be allowed in isolated cases wherehe is to act as counsel for a relative or close family friend

A person who haws been duly admitted to the bar and is in good and regular standing isentitled to practice law. Disbarred or suspended attorneys are prohibited from practiceuntil readmission

Legal rememdies to suppress unauthorized law practice: Petitions for injunction,declaratory relief, contempt of court, disqualification, complaints for disbarment

Criminal complaints for estafa against those who assume to be attorneys. Agovernment employee forbidden to practice law may be held criminally liable. Acivil service officer/employee who did not have permission from the departmenthead may be held administratively liable

CANON 4: A lawyer shall participate in development ofthe legal system by initiating or supporting efforts in lawreform and in the improvement of the administration ofjustice.

Not a strict duty, but a duty nevertheless. A lawyer must not be confined bytechnical legal questions but instead grow in knowledge and competence tomake the law socially responsive.

CANON 5: A lawyer shall keep abreast of legaldevelopments, participate in continuing legal educationprograms, support efforts to achieve highest standards

in law schools as well as in the practical training of lawstudents and assist in disseminating informationregarding law and jurisprudence.

Counsel and judges must keep abreast of the latest decisions and precedents, toeffectively discharge their duties and avoid mistakes.

The three-fold obligation of lawyers entering practice:

Continue improving legal knowledge

Maintain high standards of legal obligation

Make law part of the social consciousness of the lay public

In re IBPThe purposes of an integrated Bar, in general, are:(5)Provide a forum for the discussion of law, jurisprudence, law reform, pleading,practice and procedure, and the relations of the Bar to the Bench and to the public,and publish information relating thereto;(6)Encourage and foster legal education;(7)Promote a continuing program of legal research in substantive and adjective law,and make reports and recommendations thereon; and(8)Enable the Bar to discharge its public responsibility effectively.Bar integration is not unfair to lawyers already practicing because although therequirement to pay annual dues is a new regulation, it will give the members of the Bara new system which they hitherto have not had and through which, by proper work,they will receive benefits they have not heretofore enjoyed, and discharge their

9


10/42

public responsibilities in a more effective manner than they have been able to do in the past.In many other jurisdictions, notably in England, Canada and the United States, Bar integrationhas yielded the following benefits: (1) improved discipline among the members of the Bar; (2)greater influence and ascendancy of the Bar; (3) better and more meaningful participation ofthe individual lawyer in the activities of the Integrated Bar; (4) greater Bar facilities andservices; (5) elimination of unauthorized practice; (6) avoidance of costly membershipcampaigns; (7) establishment of an official status for the Bar; (8) more cohesive profession; and(9) better and more effective discharge by the Bar of its obligations and responsibilities to itsmembers, to the courts, and to the public.Evils prophesied by opponents of Bar integration have failed to materialize in over fifty yearsof Bar integration experience in all the jurisdictions where the Integrated Bar has been tried;on the other hand, it has restored public confidence in the Bar, enlarged professionalconsciousness, energized the Bar's responsibilities to the public, and vastly improved theadministration of justice.

CANON 6: These canons shall apply to lawyers in governmentservice in the discharge of their official duties.

Reason for the rule: a lawyer does not shed his professional obligations upon assumingpublic office, because his conduct will be magnified in the public eye

Macoco v. DiazWhatever might have been the agreement and with whomsoever respondent might have enteredit into, the undeniable fact remains that he misappropriated the money in breach of trust. Thismakes him unfit for the office of an attorney-at-law. And his being a deputy fiscal and not lawpractitioner at the time of the misappropriation, far from mitigating his guilt, aggravates it.Want of moral integrity is to be more severely condemned in a lawyer who holds a responsiblepublic office.

Cayetano v. MonsodPractice of law means any activity, in or out of court, which requires the application of law, legalprocedure, knowledge, training and experience. "To engage in the practice of law is to performthose acts which are characteristics of the profession. Generally, to practice law is to givenotice or render any kind of service, which device or service requires the use in any degree oflegal knowledge or skill."To avoid any misunderstanding which would result in excluding members of the Bar who are nowemployed in the COA or Commission on Audit, the provision on qualifications regarding membersof the Bar does not necessarily refer or involve actual practice of law outside the COA. Thismeans that as long as the lawyers who are employed in the COA are using their legal knowledgeor talent in their respective work within COA, then they are qualified to be considered forappointment as members or commissioners, even chairman, of the Commission on Audit.

Collantes v. RenomeronThe issue in this disbarment proceeding is whether the respondent register of deeds,as a lawyer, may also be disciplined by this Court for his malfeasances as a publicofficial. The answer is yes, for his misconduct as a public official also constituted aviolation of his oath as a lawyer. The lawyer's oath imposes upon every lawyer theduty to delay no man for money or malice. The lawyer's oath is a source of hisobligations and its violation is a ground for his suspension, disbarment or otherdisciplinary actionThe Code of Professional Responsibility applies to lawyers in government service in thedischarge of their official tasks (Canon 6). The acts of dishonesty and oppressionwhich Attorney Renomeron committed as a public official have demonstrated hisunfitness to practice the high and noble calling of the law.

RULE6.01: The primary duty of a lawyer in public prosecution isnot to convict but to see that justice is done. The suppression offacts and concealment of witnesses capable of establishing theinnocence of the accused is highly reprehensible and cause for

disciplinary action.

A public prosecutor is a quasi-judicial office. He is a representative of not anordinary party but sovereignty whose obligation to govern impartially is ascompelling as its obligation to govern at all, and whose interest in a criminalprosecution is that justice shall be done.

Prosecutors should not give the impression that their office is being used forpolitical ends.

While he may strike hard blows, he cannot strike foul ones. It is his duty to refrainfrom improper methods calculated to make a wrong conviction, as it is to useevery legitimate means to produce a just one. He should not hesitate torecommend the acquittal of the accused if he finds no legal basis for conviction.

Like defense counsel he is presumed to be a man learned in the law, of highmoral character, with the view that justice be meted out.

Private prosecutors role: he is allowed to intervene in the prosecution of acriminal action when from the nature of the offense the offended party is entitledto indemnity and has not waived, expressly reserved or instituted the civil actionfor damages arising therefrom.

A public prosecutor should not allow the trial in a private prosecutors hands todegenerate into a private prosecution. The administration of criminal law mustnot become a vehicle of oppression for any gratification of malice or privateadvantage.

10


11/42

People v. PinedaThe Supreme Court believes in this case that the Fiscal has not abused his discretion. Aprosecuting attorney, by the nature of his office, is under no compulsion to file a criminalinformation where he is not convinced that he has evidence to prop up the averments thereof,or that the evidence at hand points to a different conclusion. This is not to discount the

possibility of the commission of abuses on the part of the prosecutor. A prosecuting attorneyshould not be unduly compelled to work against his conviction. In case of doubt, he should havethe benefit of the doubt.

Suarez v. PlatonWe cannot overemphasize the necessity of close scrutiny and investigation of prosecutingofficers of all cases handled by them, but whilst this Court is averse to any form of vacillationby such officers in the prosecution of public offenses, it is unquestionable that they may, inappropriate cases, in order to do justice and avoid injustice, reinvestigate cases in which theyhave already filed the corresponding in formations.

RULE 6.02: A lawyer in government service shall not use his public position

to promote or advance his private interests, nor allow the latter to interferewith his public duties.

Restriction applies particularly to lawyers in government service who are allowed by law toengage in private law practice and to those who are prohibited from practice but knowpeople in the active practice of law.

A public official should see to it that his private activity does not interfere with thedischarge of his official functions.

The foregoing principles complement the code of conduct for public officers andemployees that they are not allowed to be employed in any private enterprise regulated bytheir office unless otherwise provided by law, to engage in private practice unless allowedby the Constitution and law provided that there will be no conflict of duties, to recommendany person to a position in a private enterprise which has a transaction with their office,and to use/divulge information known by them by reason of their office to further theirprivate interests and to prejudice the public interest.

Penticostes v. IbaezIn his defense, respondent claimed that his act of accommodating Encarnacion Pascual'srequest to make payments to the SSS did not amount to professional misconduct but wasrather an act of Christian charity. Furthermore, he claimed that the action was moot andacademic, the amount of P1,804.00 having already been paid by him to the SSS. Lastly, hedisclaimed liability on the ground that the acts complained of were not done by him in hiscapacity as a practicing lawyer but on account of his office as a prosecutor.The Court finds respondent guilty of professional misconduct. While there is no doubt that

payment of the contested amount had been effected to the SSS, it is clear that the same was

made only after a complaint had been filed against respondent. Furthermore, theduties of a provincial prosecutor do not include receiving money from persons withofficial transactions with his office.The failure of respondent to immediately remit the amount to the SSS gives rise tothe presumption that he has misappropriated it for his own use. This is a grossviolation of general morality as well as professional ethics; it impairs public confidencein the legal profession and deserves punishment.

Misamin v. San JuanWhile the charges against respondent have to be dismissed, still it would beappropriate for him as member of the bar to avoid all appearances of impropriety. Thefact that suspicion could be entertained that far from living true to the concept of apublic office being a public trust, he did make use, not so much of whatever legalknowledge he possessed, but the influence that laymen could assume was inherent inthe office, to frustrate the statutory scheme that labor be justly compensated butalso to be at the beck and call of alien interest, is a matter that should not passunnoticed. Respondent, in his future actuations as a member of the bar. should refrainfrom laying himself open to such doubts and misgivings as to his fitness not only for

the position occupied by him but also for membership in the bar.

RULE 6.03: A lawyer shall not, after leaving government service,accept engagement or employment in connection with any matter inwhich he had interned.

The restriction on the public official not to use his profession to advance privateinterests extends beyond his tenure on certain matters in which he intervened asa public official.

He cannot accept work from anyone that will involve or relate to the matter inwhich he intervened as a public official, except on behalf of the public authority,which he served during his term.

Sec. 7(b) RA 6713: no former public official/employee may practice hisprofession in connection with any matter before his former office within one yearafter retirement or separation from office.

Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act: public officials cannot accept or have anyfamily member accept employment in a private enterprise which has pendingbusiness with him during the said pendency or within a year after its termination.

CANON 7. A lawyer shall at all times uphold the integrityand dignity of the legal profession and support theactivities of the integrated bar.

11


12/42

To enable the bar to be an effective instrument in the proper administration of justice,every lawyer should strive at all times to uphold the honor and maintain the dignity of thelegal profession and to improve not only the law but the administration of justice as well.

A lawyer can do honor to the legal profession by faithfully performing his duties to thecourt, to the public to his brethren in the profession, and to his client. He advances the

honor of the profession and the best interests of his client when he renders services orgives legal advice tending to impress upon his client and his undertaking exactcompliance with the strictest principles of moral law.

A lawyer should also involve in, and actively support the activities of, the IBP. He shouldnot limit himself to merely paying his dues and other assessments of the IBP, but shouldalso help realize its objectives and purposes:

To assist in the administration of justice

To safeguard the professional interests of its members

To cultivate among its members a spirit of cordiality and brotherhood

To provide a forum for the discussion of law, jurisprudence, law reform, pleading,

practice and procedure and the relations of the bar thereto

To encourage and foster legal education

To promote a continuing program of legal research in substantive and adjective law,and make reports and recommendations thereon.

In re: 1989 Elections of the Integrated Bar of the Philippines, 178 SCRA 398 (1989):

A basic postulate of the IBP, heavily stressed at the time of its organization andcommencement of existence, is that the IBP shall be non-political in character and that thereshall be no lobbying nor campaigning in the choice of members of the Board of Governors and ofthe House of Delegates, and of the IBP officers, national, or regional, or chapterIt is evident that the manner in which the principal candidates for the national positions in theIBP conducted their campaign preparatory to the elections on 9 June 1989, violated Section 14of the IBP By-Laws and made a travesty of the idea of a strictly non-political Integrated Barenshrined in Section 4 of the By-Laws

The candidates and many of the participants in that election not only violated the By-Laws ofthe IBP but also the ethics of the legal profession which imposes on all lawyers, as a corollaryof their obligation to obey and uphold the constitution and the laws, the duty to promoterespect for law and legal processes and to abstain from activities aimed at defiance of the lawor at lessening confidence in the legal system (Rule 1.02, Canon 1, CPR). Respect for law isgravely eroded when lawyers themselves, who are supposed to be minions of the law, engage inunlawful practices and cavalierly brush aside the very rules that the IBP formulated for theirobservance. The unseemingly ardor with which the candidates pursued the presidency of theassociation detracted from the dignity of the legal profession. The spectacle of lawyersbribing or being bribed to vote in one way or another certainly did not uphold the honor of theprofession nor elevate it in the public esteem.

Rule 7.01 A lawyer shall be answerable for knowingly making a false

statement or suppressing a material fact in connection with hisapplication for admission to the bar.

A student aspiring to be a lawyer must, at that early period, study and observethe duties and responsibilities of a lawyer. He cannot claim that not being amember of the bar, the CPR does not apply to him. One who aspires to profess

the law must show his fitness for admission by adherence to, or observance of,the standards of conduct required of all members of the bar. For failure to live upto them may prevent him from being admitted to practice and, if admitted withoutthe SC acquiring knowledge of his transgressions thereof, he may be disbarredfor such misconduct.

Every applicant for admission to the practice of law must :

Be an RP citizen and resident (because an alien cannot maintain allegiance

to RP, which the lawyers oath requires)

Be at least 21 years old

Be a person of good moral character

Show that no charges against him involving moral turpitude are filed or

pending in court

SC decides WON an offense involves moral turpitude. Applicant must discloseunder oath in application form any crime of which he is charged. Concealment orwithholding from court of fact that crime charged is ground for disqualification ofapplicant to take the bar exam, or for revocation of license to practice. If whatthe applicant concealed is a crime that doesnt involve moral turpitude, it is thefact of concealment and not the commission of the crime itself that makes himmorally unfit to become a lawyer.

Possess the required educational qualifications

(four-year high school course + bachelors degree in arts or sciences withPolSci/ Logic/ English/ Spanish/ History/ Economics as a major field of

concentration + 4 year bachelors degree in law with completed courses in civillaw, commercial law, remedial law, criminal law, public and private internationallaw, political law, labor and social legislation, medical jurisprudence, taxation,legal ethics). Courses of study must be completed in an authorized andrecognized university, college, or school, and must be taken progressively in theusual manner (e.g. applicant who only completed pre-law after he beganstudying law not qualified to take the bar)

Pass the bar exams.

The SC may likewise prescribe such other qualifications or requirements as itmay deed necessary to elevate the standards of the legal profession. The

additional qualifications may be apart from whatever qualifications the legislature12


13/42

may provide.

By seeking admission to practice of law, applicant assumes the burden of proof toestablish all those qualifications to the court. He must, accordingly, produce sufficientevidence to clear any doubt as to any of his qualifications. But after having presentedprima facie evidence of his qualifications, it is incumbent upon anyone objecting to his

admission to offer contrary evidence to overcome the applicantsprima facie showing.

The fact that the bar exam committee has passed upon, and is satisfied with, theapplicants qualifications will not preclude a subsequent judicial inquiry on the samequestion in a disbarment proceeding where that question is raised as an issue. Thelawyers name may not, however, be stricken from the roll of attorneys by reason ofalienage, non-completion of prescribed course, or bad moral character in the presence ofclearly preponderant evidence that he did not, in fact possess the necessary qualificationsat the time of his admission. The burden of proof, in such a case, shifts to thecomplainant.

Santos v. Llamas, 322 SCRA 529

By indicating IBP-Rizal 259060 in his pleadings and thereby misrepresenting to the public and

the courts that he had paid his IBP dues to the Rizal Chapter, respondent is guilty of violatingthe CPR

Rule 7.02 A lawyer shall not support the application for admission to thebar of any person known by him to be unqualified in respect to character,education, or other relevant attribute.

He should not execute affidavit of good moral character in favor of applicant whom heknows has not lived up to such standard. He should help in guarding the bar againstadmission of candidates who are unfit or unqualified. He should volunteer information orcooperate in any investigation concerning alleged anomaly in the bar exam, so thosecandidates who failed therein can be ferreted out and those lawyers responsible thereforecan be disbarred. He should expose before the SC corrupt or dishonest conduct in the

profession and should accept without hesitation professional employment against a lawyerwho has wronged his client.

Rule 7.03 A lawyer shall not engage in conduct that adversely reflects onhis fitness to practice law, nor shall he, whether in public or private life,behave in a scandalous manner to the discredit of the legal profession.

Among the acts which adversely reflect on the lawyers fitness to practice law which justifysuspension from practice or disbarment include gross immorality, conviction of a crimeinvolving moral turpitude, and fraudulent transactions.

Canon 8. A lawyer shall conduct himself with courtesy,fairness, and candor toward his professional colleagues, and

shall avoid harassing tactics against opposing counsel.

Camacho v. Pangulayan, 328 SCRA 631

Although aware that the students were represented by counsel, respondent attorneyproceeded, nonetheless, to negotiate with them and their parents with out at the veryleast communicating the matter to their lawyer, herein complainant, who was counselof record in Civil Case No. Q-97-30549. The failure of respondent whether by designor because of oversight is an inexcusable violation of the canons of professional ethicsand in utter disregard of a duty owing to a colleague. Respondent fell short of thedemands required of him as a lawyer and a member of the Bar.

Javier v. Cornejo, 63 Phil 293 (1936)

Mutual bickering and unjustifiable recriminations between brother attorneys detractfrom the dignity of the legal profession and will not receive any sympathy from thiscourt.

Macias v. Malig, 157 SCRA 762 (1988)

The Court is not prepared to condone by passing over sub silentiothe misconduct of

which complainant and respondent are guilty one vis--vis the other. Each party herehas shown himself to be too ready to believe the other guilty of serious misconduct inthe practice of the profession to which they both belong while vehemently assertinghis own good faith. Each party here was too anxious and willing to make seriousaccusations against the other which the exertion of reasonable diligence along withsimple courtesy would have shown to be unwarranted by the facts and the records.Each attorney here was too prone to use intemperate and offensive language indescribing the behavior of the otherWHEREFORE, it is respectfully recommended that the charges and counterchargesbetween Atty. Macias and Atty. Malig be dismissed for insufficiency of evidence andlack of merit, both parties should be severely disciplined by the imposition of heavyfine in addition to being subjected to stern censure by the SC. We hold thatcomplainant Macias and respondent Malig are both guilty of conduct unbecoming alawyer and an officer of the court. Lawyers must at all times treat each other, and aswell as their clients, former clients, and the rest of the community, with that personaldignity, courtesy and civility rightly demanded of members of the ancient and learnedprofession of the law.

Rule 8.01 A lawyer shall not, in professional dealings, use languagewhich is abusive, offensive or otherwise improper.

Rule 8.02 A lawyer shall not, directly or indirectly, encroach uponthe professional employment of another lawyer; however, it is theright of any lawyer, without fear or favor, to give proper advice andassistance to those seeking relief against unfaithful or neglectful

13


14/42

counsel.

Improper conduct: competing with other lawyers over clients, stealing another lawyersclient or inducing the latter to retain him by promise of better service/result/reduced fees,disparage another lawyer, make comparisons, publicize his talent as a means to lawpractice

Lawyer may accept employment to handle a matter, which another lawyer previouslyhandled, provided the other lawyer has been given notice by client that his service hasbeen terminated. Without such notice of termination by client, a lawyer retained to takeover a case from a peer should do so only after he shall have obtained the conformity ofthe counsel whom he substituted. If such conformity cant be obtained,he should at leastgive sufficient notice to such lawyer of the contemplated substitution.

The substituting lawyer may have the duty to contest the first lawyers claim to a right tocompensation. But it is equally the substituting lawyers duty to give the first lawyer everyopportunity to have his claim protected.

A lawyer should not communicate upon the subject of controversy with a party

represented by counsel. Much less should he undertake to negotiate or compromise thematter with him, but should only deal with his counsel. Neither should he, in the absenceof the adverse partys counsel, interview the adverse party even if adverse party consents.Neither should he sanction his clients attempt to settle a litigated matter with the adverseparty without the knowledge of the latters counsel.

The client should be left to determine WON to employ additional counsel. The lawyersubsequently retained as additional counsel, however, should communicate first with theoriginal counsel before he enters his appearance in the case. He should declineassociation, as a colleague if the original counsel objects, but if the lawyer first retained isrelieved, he may come into the case.

When lawyers jointly associated in a case disagree on any matter vital to the clientsinterest, the conflict of opinion should be frankly stated to the client for the clients final

determination.

Laput v. Remotique, 6 SCRA 45 (1962)

A lawyer was dismissed by his client because the latter no longer trusted him. In his stead theclient contracted the services of another lawyer, who, to safeguard the interest of his client,prepared the papers for the revocation of the power of attorney previously executed in favorof the first lawyer. After the second lawyer had filed his appearance in court, the first lawyervoluntarily withdrew as counsel and, simultaneously, filed a motion for the payment of hisattorneys fees. Held:The appearance of the second lawyer is not unprofessional or improper;the first lawyers voluntary withdrawal as counsel and his filing of a motion for the payment ofhis fees amounted to an acquiescence to the appearance of the second lawyer.

In re Soriano, 33 SCRA 801 (1970)

Relying on the assurance of the party respondent in said cases and of a mutualacquaintance on the status of each of the two cases, respondent Atty. ClementeSoriano agreed to render professional services in consideration of a contingent feeand entered his appearance in cases L-24114 entitled PHHC and UP v. Mencias,Tiburcio , et.al. and L-30546, entitled Varsity Hills vs. Hon. Herminio C. Mariano, etc.et.al., both terminated before this Court. His entry of appearance in the said cases aschief counsel of record for the respondents in effect sought to pre-empt theformer counsel, Atty. Memesio Diaz, of the premier control of over the case. Yet, hehad not bothered at all to communicate with the latter. Held: Atty. Clemente M.Soriano is guilty of gross negligence in the performance of his duties as a lawyer andas an officer of this court. This inexcusable negligence would merit no less than hissuspension from the practice of the law profession, were it not for his candor, at thehearing of this incident, in owning his mistake and the apology he made to the Court.It is in this sense that he is severely censured.

Term practice of law: do any of those acts which are characteristic of the legalprofession; embraces any activity, in or out of court, which requires theapplication of law, legal principle, practice or procedure and calls for legal

knowledge, training and experience; presupposes attorney-client relationship,implies customarily or habitually holding oneself out to the public, as a lawyer forcompensation as a source of livelihood or in consideration of his service.

However, an isolated appearance may amount to practice in relation to ruleprohibiting some persons from engaging in the exercise of the legal profession.

Practice of law is a privilege. But a lawyer cannot be prevented from practicinglaw except for valid reasons, the practice of law not being a matter of statesgrace or favor.

Allowed limited representation on behalf of others by laymen:

Municipal trial court/metropolitan trail court a party may conduct litigation

with aid of agent or friend appointed by him for that purpose

Criminal proceeding before municipal trial court in a locality where duly

licensed lawyer not available the MTC may, in its discretion, admit orassign a person, resident in the province and of good repute for probity andability, to aid the defendant in his defense although the person so assignedmay not be a lawyer

Laymen is permitted by the SC to appear for another only in the Municipal

or Metropolitan Trial Court; he cannot represent another in any other courtnor be appointed by any court other than the MunTC or MetTC to aid adefendant in his defense, in absence of an authority from the high tribunal.

Some laws: authorize union representative to appear for his organization or

its members before the NLRC, labor arbiter or arbitrator (Labor Code &Rules of the NLRC) , and an individual to act on behalf of a claimant beforea cadastral court. (Act No. 2259, Sec. 9)

14


15/42

Limitations that should be observed in cases where layman may represent another:

He should confine his work to non-adversary contentions (e.g. no examination or

cross-examination of witnesses or presentation of evidence)

Services should not be habitually rendered.

Layman should not charge or collect attorneys fees.

Individual litigant in civil case has the right to conduct his litigation personally. But he willbe bound by the same rules of procedure and evidence as those applicable to partiesappearing through counsel. Moreover, he may not be heard to complain later that he hasbeen deprived of the right to the assistance of counsel.

An attorney otherwise disqualified to practice law or who has been suspended ordisbarred from practice can validly prosecute or defend his own litigation.

In criminal cases involving grave and less grave offenses, an accused who is a laymanmust always appear by counsel.

A juridical person must always appear in court by a duly licensed member of the bar,

except in the MunTC where it may be represented by its agent or officer who need not bea lawyer.

Corporations cannot engage in the practice of law. They may hire attorneys to attend toand conduct its own legal businesses or affairs. But it cannot practice law directly orindirectly by employing a lawyer to practice for it or to appear for others for its benefit.Reason: nature of the privilege and on the confidential and trust relation between attorneyand client.

A lawyer should not allow an intermediary to intervene in the performance of hisprofessional obligations. He may accept employment from any organization to renderlegal services in any matter in which the organization is interested, that employmentshould not include rendering legal services to members of that organization for theirindividual affairs. Exception: charitable society rendering aid to the indigent is not anintermediary within the meaning of the rule.

Canon 9. A lawyer shall not, directly or indirectly, assist in theunauthorized practice of law.

PAFLU v. Binalbagan-Isabela Sugar Co., 42 SCRA 802 (1971)

Applicable to the issue at hand is the principlethat an agreement provided for the division ofattorneys fees, whereby a non-lawyer union president is allowed to share in said fees withlawyers, is condemned by Canon 34 of Legal Ethics and is immoral and cannot be justified. Anaward by a court of attorneys fees is no less immoral in the absence of a contract, as in thepresent caseThe provision in Section 5(b) of Republic Act 875 that In the proceeding before the Court or

Hearing Examiner thereof, the parties shall not be required to be represented bylegal counsel is no justification for a ruling that the person representing the party-litigant in the Court of Industrial Relations, even if he is not a lawyer, is entitled toattorneys fees: for the same section adds that it shall be the duty and obligationof the Court or Hearing Officer to examine and cross examine witnesses on behalf ofthe parties and to assist in the orderly presentation of evidence, thus making it clear

that the representation should be exclusively entrusted to duly qualified members ofthe BarThe permission for a non-member of the bar to represent or appear or defend in thesaid court on behalf of the party-litigant does not by itself entitle the representativeto compensation for such representation. For Sec. 24, Rule 138 of the Rules of Court,providing Sec. 24. Compensation of attorneys; agreement as to fees An attorneyshall be entitled to have and recover from his client no more than a reasonablecompensation for his services imports the existence of an attorney-clientrelationship as a condition to the recovery of attorneys fees. Such relationshipcannot exist unless the clients representative in court be a lawyerThe reasons are that the ethics of the legal profession should not be violated; thatacting as an attorney without authority constitutes contempt of court, which is

punishable by fine or imprisonment or both, and the law will not assist a person reapthe fruits or benefit of an unlawful act or an act done in violation of the law; and thatif fees were to be allowed to non-lawyers, it would leave the public in hopelessconfusion as to whom to consult in cases of necessity and also leave the bar in achaotic condition, aside from the fact that non-lawyers are not amenable todisciplinary measures. And the general rule above stated (referring to non-recoveryof attorneys fees by non-lawyers) cannot be circumvented when the services werepurely legal, by seeking to recover as an agent and not as an attorney.

U.S. v. Ney, 8 Phil. 146 (1907)

Under section 102 of the Code of Civil Procedure, pleadings must be subscribed bythe party or his attorney. The subscription of the names of other persons is impliedlyprohibited and is illegal; nor can a subscription by an agent, other than an admitted

attorney, be recognized.A person not admitted to the bar may not hold himself out to the public as engaged inthe practice of law, either alone or as associated with a practicing attorney under afirm nameAn attempt to practice law by a person who has by order of this court been refusedadmission to the bar is a disobedience of such order and is contempt of court, notqualified by the fact that an appeal has been taken from that orderThe repeated irregular signature of pleadings by an attorney in the name of a firmimproperly constituted, with one partner who, by an order of this court, had beendenied the right to practice, and the participation by him in an act of contemptcommitted by such partner, is misbehavior which renders him guilty of contempt undersection 232 of the Code of Civil Procedure.

15


16/42

In re: del Rosario, 52 Phil. 399 (1922)

The practice of law is not an absolute right to be granted everyone who demands it, but is aprivilege to be extended or withheld in the exercise of a sound discretionAcquittal upon a criminal charge is not a bar to proceedings intended to determine if acandidate is worthy to be admitted to the barThe standards of the legal profession are not satisfied by conduct which merely enables one to

escape the penalties of criminal law.

Rule 9.01 A lawyer shall not delegate to any unqualified person theperformance of any task which by law may only be performed by a memberof the Bar in good standing.

Cannot be delegated to layman: work involving the application of law, like the computationand determination of period within which to appeal an adverse judgment, examination ofwitnesses, presentation of evidence.

Allowed: employing lay secretaries, investigators, detectives, researchers, accountants,non-lawyer draftsmen, to undertake task not involving practice of law.Also allowed: availing help of law students in many fields of the lawyers work, like

examination of a case law, finding and interviewing witnesses, examining court records,delivering papers, etc.

Rule 9.02 A lawyer shall not divide or stipulate to divide a fee for legalservices with persons not licensed to practice law, except:a. Where there is a pre-existing agreement with a partner or associate that,upon the latters death, money shall be paid over a reasonable period oftime to his estate or to persons specified in the agreement; orb. Where a lawyer undertakes to complete unfinished or legal business ofa deceased lawyer; or

These first two exceptions, strictly speaking, represent compensation for legal services the

deceased lawyer rendered during his lifetime, which is paid to his heirs or estate.Improper: when effect of this arrangement is to make estate or heir a member ofpartnership along with surviving partners, or where estate or heir is to receive apercentage of the fees that may be paid from future business of the deceased lawyersclients.

c. Where a lawyer or law firm includes non-lawyer employees in aretirement plan, even if the plan is based in whole or in part on profit-sharing arrangement.

This exception does not involve, strictly speaking, a division of legal fees with non-lawyeremployees. The retirement benefits in the form of pension represent additional deferredwages or compensation for past services of the employees.

Canon 10 A lawyer owes candor, fairness and good faithto the court.

Some requirements of candor:

Not suppress material and vital facts which bear on the merit or lack of merit

of complaint or petition Volunteer to court any development of the case which has rendered the

issue raised moot and academic

Disclose to court any decision adverse to his position of which opposing

counsel is apparently ignorant and which court should consider in decidingcase. After doing so, he may challenge the soundness of the decision orpresent reasons, which he believes, would warrant court in not following it inthe pending case.

Not represent himself as lawyer for a client, appear for client in court and

present pleadings, only to claim later that he was not authorized to do so.

However, lawyer is not an umpire but an advocate. He is not obliged to refrainfrom making every proper argument in support of any legal point because he isnt

convinced of its inherent soundness. Neither is he obliged to suggest argumentsagainst his position.

Cobb-Perez v. Lantin, 24 SCRA 291 (1968)

A counsels assertiveness in espousing with candor and honesty his clients case mustbe encouraged and is to be commended; what we do not and cannot countenance is alawyers insistence despite the patent futility of his clients position, as in the case atbar. It is the duty of a counsel to advise his client, ordinarily a layman to theintricacies and vagaries of the law, on the merit or lack of merit of his case. If hefinds that his clients cause is defenseless, then it is his bounden duty to advise thelatter to acquiesce and submit, rather than traverse the incontrovertible. A lawyermust resist the whims and caprices of his client, and temper his clients propensity tolitigate. A lawyers oath to uphold the cause of justice is superior to his duty to his

client. Its primacy is indisputable.

Rule 10.01 A lawyer shall not do any falsehood, nor consent to thedoing of any in Court, nor shall he mislead or allow the court to bemisled by an artifice.

Rule 10.02 A lawyer shall not knowingly misquote or misrepresentthe contents of a paper, the language or the argument of opposingcounsel, or the text of a decision or authority, or knowingly cite aslaw a provision already rendered inoperative by repeal oramendment, or assert as a fact that which has not been proved.

16


17/42

To knowingly misquote or misrepresent in any of these matters not only unprofessional butalso contemptuous.

Examples of violations: making it appear that quotations in motion for recon were SCfindings when theyre actually just part of the memorandum of the Court administrator,misspelling name of complainant, making the wrong citation of authority.

Reason for this rule: Only from this Tribunals [SC] decisions and rulings do all othercourts, as well as lawyers and litigants, take their bearings. This is because the decisionsreferred to in Art. 8 of the Civil Code which reads, Judicial decisions applying orinterpreting laws or the Constitution shall form part of the legal system of the Philippinesare only those enunciated by this Court of last resortThus, ever present is the dangerthat if not faithfully and exactly quoted, the decisions and rulings of this court may losetheir proper and correct meaning, to the detriment of other courts, lawyers, and the publicwho may be thereby misled. (Insular Life Assurance Co., Ltd. Employees Association v.Insular Life Assurance Co., Ltd., 37 SCRA 244, 279-280 [1971])

Lawyer shouldnt assert as meritorious his clients case when he has in his possessionadverse information or knowledge in regard thereto.

Rule 10.03 A lawyer shall observe the rules of procedure and shall notmisuse them to defeat the ends of justice.

Lawyer should not use his knowledge of law as instrument to harass a party.Misuse of judicial process: filing a petition as a scheme to frustrate and further delay theexecution of a f inal and executory judgment.A deliberate misreading or misinterpretation of the law by a lawyer also falls under theinjunction and puts him in public distrust.

Canon 11. A lawyer shall observe and maintain the respect dueto the courts and to judicial officers and should insist onsimilar conduct by others.

Lawyer owes the court the duty to observe and maintain a respectful attitude not for thesake of the temporary incumbent of the judicial office but for the maintenance of itssupreme importance. Respect of courts helps build the high esteem and regard towardthem which is essential to the proper administration of justice.

Duty to observe and maintain the respect due the courts devolves not only upon lawyersbut upon those who will choose to enter the profession. Failure to discharge such dutymay be prevented from being inducted into the office of attorney.

Lawyers must obey lawful orders of the court. Willful disregard thereof may subject thelawyer not only to punishment for contempt but to disciplinary sanction as an officer of thecourt as well. A lawyer who gives a clearly unsatisfactory explanation on why he failed to

comply with a lawful order, or who simply ignores it commits an act within the meaning of

the term willful disobedience. One such misconduct: failure to comply withcourts order to file appellants brief or comment within the required period.

Lawyer has duty to defend judge from unfounded criticism or groundlesspersonal attack. Special civil actions or proceedings: a judge whose decision ororder is under attack in a higher court is merely a nominal party. A decent regard

for the judicial hierarchy bars the judge from seeking a reversal of his action andrequires the lawyer to refrain from making the judge appear as a party suingagainst the adverse ruling, so he may not be distracted from his main function oftrying and adjudicating cases in court. The burden of defending his challengedaction falls on private respondent and the latters counsel may be subjected todisciplinary action should he fail to discharge the task.

In re Sotto, 92 Phil 595 (1949)

Mere criticism or comment on the correctness or wrongness, soundness orunsoundness of the decision of the court in a pending case made in good faith may betolerated; because if well founded it may enlighten the court and contribute to thecorrection of an error if committed; but if it is not well taken and obviouslyerroneous, it should, in no way, influence the court in reversing or modifying its

decisionTo hurl the false charge that this Court has been for the last years committingdeliberately so many blunders and injustices, that is to say, that it has been decidingin favor of one party knowing that the law and justice is on the part of the adver

Documents

4663888 UP B2005 Legal Profession Reviewer