Legal Ethics Bar Exams 2015 Pointers (1)

8/18/2019 Legal Ethics Bar Exams 2015 Pointers (1)

1/46

Pointers in Legal and Judicial Ethics 2015 Bar Examinations

Prof. Victoria V. Loanzon

Final Advice1. Legal and Judicial Ethics is the last subject of the bar examinations. Save the BEST for last.

2. Think before ou !rite our final ans!ers. "ind time to make an outline using onl ke !ords inour #uestionnaire. $anage our time %ro%erl . &f there are '( #uestions) make a mathematical

com%utation to divide the * hours allotted for ou to finish the exams.'. +emember #uestions in Legal and Judicial Ethics deal) more or less) !ith a%%ro%riate standardsof behavior. ,ou can surmise from the narration of facts if one-s act is ina%%ro%riate. +emember toa%%l our inherent sense of !hat is right and !hat is !rong in a given situation.*. &n case of doubt) think !hether the action involved serves the ends of justice) im%roves theadministration of justice and %rotects the rights of the individuals. &f it does not fall !ithin thesegeneral guide%osts) then it must be unethical and violates of the canons for the bench and the bar.

. "ollo! the basic guidelines that all la! ers) !hether in %rivate %ractice or in governmentservice) must serve the ends of justice) %reserve the justice s stem) %rotect the rights of individuals/ and both members of bar and the bench are the vanguards of justice.0. +elax) have fun. &t is just a matter of time for ou to rea% the re!ards of hard !ork and reali e alifetime dream.

Like most of ou) & !ill take a much needed rest after ovember 23. & sta ed u% man nightsreading cases and related la!s. & have made ever effort %ossible to %re%are the !eekl %ointersin all the eight bar subjects !ith the ho%e that in m small and humble !a ) & !ill able to hel% oubuild our career in the legal %rofession in the same !a m %rofessors at the 4.5. 6ollege of La!

%re%ared me to become a la! er.

7ll the best8 Sta !ell. 9ee% faith.

PA ! "#E $ LE%AL E!&'() ' $!he Attorne*+s "ath

Q. Write the Attorney’s Oath 7. :&) ;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;; do solemnl s!ear that & !ill maintain allegiance to the +e%ublic of the5hili%%ines/& !ill su%%ort its 6onstitution and obe the la!s as !ell as the legal orders of the dul constitutedauthorities therein/& !ill do no falsehood) nor consent to the doing of an in court/ & !ill not !ittingl or !illingl %romote or sue an groundless) false or unla!ful suit) neither giveaid nor consent to the same/& !ill dela no man for mone or malice) and !ill conduct m self as a la! er according to the bestof m kno!ledge and discretion) !ith all good fidelit as !ell to the courts as to m clients/ and& im%ose u%on m self this voluntar obligation !ithout an mental reservation or %ur%ose of evasion. So hel% me +ules of 6ourt) "orm 2?@

Q. What are the sources of ethical standards for the members of the bench and bar? A. >1@ 6onstitution7rticle A&&& The Judicial Ce%artment) Sec. > @) 7rticle A& The Legislative Ce%artment) Sec.1*) 7rticle A&& The Executive Ce%artment) Sec. 1')

1


2/46

7rticle &D 6onstitutional 6ommissions) &D 7) Sec. 2/>2@ The 7ttorne -s Fath/>'@ The 6ode of 5rofessional +es%onsibilit />*@ The 6ode of Judicial Ethics/> @ The +ules of 6ourt/ >0@ 2((* +ules on otarial 5ractice/>G@ $6LE +ules/>?@ JB6 +ules/>3@ &ssuances of the Su%reme 6ourt/>1(@ Legislations from 6ongress >creation and jurisdiction of a%%ellate and other lo!er courts) alsothe La%id La! on legal aid service of la! ers@/>11@ Juris%rudence/ and>12@ Scholarl Hritings on Legal and Judicial Ethics.

Q. What is the four-fold duty of a lawyer? 7. The "our fold dut of a la! er to Societ ) the Legal 5rofession) the 6ourts and 6lients.

Q. What is the practice of law? 7 . The %ractice of la! is %erforming :an activit ) in or out of court) !hich re#uires the a%%lication

of la!) legal %rocedure) kno!ledge) training and ex%erience.= Paguia v. Office of the President,621 SCRA 600

Q. What is the privilege of the practice of law? 7. The %ractice of la! is a mere %rivilege and not a right. The admission of la! ers and the rulesgoverning the %ractice of la! is a constitutional mandate given to the Su%reme 6ourt.Elements of the legal %rofession areI organi ation) learning) and the s%irit of %ublic service .(Section 5 (5), Artic e !""", Constitution)Ca#etano v. $onsod >021 S6+7 0((@I 7 la! er sus%ended from the %ractice of la! is%recluded from a%%l ing his kno!ledge of la! in and out of court !hile undergoing his sus%ension. 7 sus%ended la! er cannot even a%%ear on behalf of a relative as a :friend= because he !ouldinevitabl a%%l his kno!ledge of the la!.

Q. What is included in the practice of law? 7. The %ractice of la! includesI the %re%aration of %leadings) and other %a%ers incident to actionsand s%ecial %roceedings/ conve ancing) the %re%aration of legal instruments of all kinds/ and thegiving of all legal advice to clients.

Q. A group of businessmen decided to incorporate a stoc corporation with the primary ob!ective of giving legal guidance to their clients who regularly invest in publicly listed companies. "hey intend to hire at least #$ lawyers who will perform the wor . %f you werethe &hairman of the 'ecurities and ()change &ommission* will you approve theregistration of the sub!ect company?

7. o. The %ractice of la! is not a business and la! ers cannot form stock cor%orations to%ractice the %rofession. &t is also %rohibited for la! ers to allo! non la! ers to %ractice la! nor arela! ers allo!ed to share their legal fees !ith non la! ers . % e& v. 'he ega C inic, "nc., ( ar $atter *o. 550, +une 1 , 1-- )

Q. +ow may one pursue the practice of law? 7. The %ractice of la! as a %rofession ma onl be exercised b natural %ersons) !ho are la! ers)either as solo %ractitioners or in %artnershi% !ith other la! ers.

2


3/46

Q. What are the primary characteristics which distinguish the legal profession frombusiness?

7. 1. The %ractice of la! involves a dut of %ublic service of !hich the emolument is a b %roductand one ma obtain eminence !ithout making much mone .2. The %ractice of la! creates a relation as an officer of the court !hose %rimar role is to assist inthe administration of justice involving thorough sincerit ) integrit and reliabilit .'. The %ractice of la! creates a relation !ith clients !ith the highest fiduciar degree.*. The %ractice of la! creates a relation !hich other la! ers !hich re#uires candor) fairness anddecenc avoiding an kind of encroachment u%on other-s %ractice.

Q. What is the nature of a law partnership? 7. 7 %artnershi% in the %ractice of la! is a mere relationshi% or association of la! ers !ith the sole%ur%ose of rendering legal services. &t is not a legal entit and is not even a tax%a er and anla! er in the %artnershi% is considered a solo %ractitioner !ho is the tax %a er. > "an v. ,el

osario* r.* #/0 '& A/#12

Q. What is the rule of use of Firm 3ame? A. 4etition For Authority "o &ontinue 5se Of "he Firm 3ame 6'ycip* 'ala7ar* Feliciano*

+( 3A3,(8 9 &A'"%::O6 A3, %3 "+( ;A""( OF "+( 4("%"%O3 FO A5"+O %"< "O &O3"%35( 5'( OF "+( F% ; 3A;( 6O8A("A* O;5:O* ,( :(O3* ;A=A3"A 9 (


4/46

the dismissal of the case arguing that the matter does involve any lawyer-client relationship. %s his legal argument tenable?

7.7 la! er cannot have a dichotom bet!een his %rivate life and his %rofessional res%onsibilit asa la! er. e can be disbarred even if there is no la! er client relationshi% bet!een him and acom%lainant in a disbarment case and if the transaction involves his sale of a %ortion of his real%ro%ert . acias v. =alauitan (50 SCRA ?, 2006 ,

Q. &an an individual practicing before the 'hai’ra court affi) the prefi) HA""


5/46

application for admission to the practice of law. 'antiago o successfully passed the bar e)aminations and landed $ th in said e)aminations. =efore ta ing his oath* :eticia 'ia as ed the 'upreme &ourt not to allow o to ta e his oath because she actually filed a rape caseagainst him which case remains pending but which information o withheld in hisapplication. Will her reJuest be given due course?

7. ,es. &f it can be established that the bar %asser does not %ossess good moral character) he !illnot be allo!ed to take his oath.8aguirre v. &astillo ) >7.6. o. *321) $arch 0) 2(('@I 7.6. o ?'32 June 23)2(1(@I The Su%reme 6ourt disbarred a la! er !hofounded a religious cult and made his secretar a sex slave.&ordon v. =alicanta >7dm. 6ase o. 2G3G) Fctober *) 2((2) '3( S6+7 233 >2((2@I The S.6.disbarred a la! er !ho used his kno!ledge of the la! to commit fraud against his client b

forming a cor%oration out of the estate of the deceased husband of the com%lainant. The la! er made himself the sole signator of said com%an !hich allo!ed him to mortgage several%ro%erties of the cor%oration !hich !ere eventuall foreclosed b the creditor bank.

Arellano 5niversity* %nc. v. ;i!ares %%% 0( S6+7 3') 2((3I The S.6. disbarred a la! er !hoadmitted in his 7ffidavit in the disbarment case against him that he asked for :facilitation fee= tobribe the Aice $a or of $anila in the course of his engagement as counsel. The S.6. referred thecase to the Fmbudsman against the Aice $a or and the la! er for the crime of briber . The 6ourtheld that a la! er-s %rofessional fee does not include :facilitation fee.=

Q. What is the coverage of the annual bar e)aminations? 7. Bar Subjects under Sec. 3) +ule 1'?) +ules of 6ourtincludeI 5olitical La!) Labor and Social

Legislation) 6ivil La!) Taxation) $ercantile La!) 6riminal La!) +emedial La! and Legal andJudicial Ethics and 5ractical Exercises.

Q. What is the essence of bar e)aminations? 7. 5ublic %olic demands that an %erson seeking admission to the bar in the 5hili%%ines bere#uired to furnish satisfactor %roof of his kno!ledge of the la! and ethical standards and of his%ossession of such degree of learning and %roficienc in la! as ma be deemed necessar for thedue %erformance of the duties of la! er.

Q. &andido completed his law degree in October #CB$. +e wanted to become a lawyer but he reali7ed that it was too late for him to ta e the 3ovember #CB$ bar e)aminations. &an hefile a petition to the 'upreme &ourt to be allowed to ta e his special bar e)aminations?

7. o. The Su%reme 6ourt administers the bar examinations onl once a ear. Sec. 11 +ule 1'?)rules of 6ourt

Q. Fernando* a Filipino citi7en* completed his study of law in 'pain and was allowed to practice law in 'pain. +e sought permission from the 'upreme &ourt that he be allowed tobe admitted to 4hilippine bar. %n his petition he invo ed the provisions of the "reaty on

Academic ,egrees and 4rofessions between the 4hilippines and 'pain. +ow will you ruleon the petition of Fernando?

7. & !ill den "ernando-s %etition. "ernando has remained a "ili%ino citi en and he cannot invokethe %rovisions of the treat !hich is founded on reci%rocit of the nationals of each countr and thegrant of the %rivilege is al!a s subject to the domestic la!s of both countries. %n eG arcia* # '& A $

5


6/46

Q. ,efine the followingG1. Attorneys-at :aw I the class of %ersons !ho are b license) officers of the court) em%o!ered toa%%ear) %rosecute and defend) and u%on !hom %eculiar duties) res%onsibilities and liabilities aredevelo%ed b la! as a conse#uence. &ul v. &ul* B#C 4hil. 0#2. Attorney-in-Fact an agent !hose authorit is strictl limited b the instrument a%%ointing him.

is authorit is %rovided in a s%ecial %o!er of attorne or a general %o!er of attorne or letter of authorit . 7n attorne in fact is not necessaril a la! er.3 . &ounsel de oficio a counsel) a%%ointed or assigned b the court) from among such membersof the bar in good standing !ho) b reason of their ex%erience and abilit ma ade#uatel defendthe accused. The %erson need not be a member of the bar if no la! er is available in a givenlocalit . >Sec. G) +ule 110) +ules of 6ourt@

7 counse de oficio is a%%ointed to defend an indigent in a criminal action >Sections ') *) and )+ule 110/ Sec. '2) +ule 1'?@/ or to re%resent a destitute %art in a case >Sec.'1) +ule 1'[email protected]. Attorney Ad +ocG a %erson named and a%%ointed b the court to defend an absenteedefendant in a suit in !hich the a%%ointment is made.5. Attorney of ecord a member of the bar a%%ointed b a client to re%resent in cause of a courtand u%on !hom service of %a%ers ma be made.M. Of &ounselGa member of the bar !ho is associated !ith a la! office but does not normall

a%%ear as counsel of record of cases handled b the la! office.0. :ead &ounselG a member of the bar !ho charged !ith the %rinci%al management and directionof a %art litigant.

. +ouse &ounselG a member of the bar !ho acts as attorne for a business com%an as anem%lo ee of such com%an and renders legal advice on matters necessar in the ordinar courseof its business.

. Amicus &uriaeGa friend of the court. 7 %erson !ith strong interest in or vie!s on the subjectmatter of the action. Fne !ho is considered as an ex%erience and im%artial attorne to hel% in thedis%osition of issues submitted to the 6ourt. >Sec. '0) +ule 1'?@BC. Amicus &uriae par ()cellenceG bar associations !ho a%%ear in court as amici curiae or friends of the court. Like an individual a3icus curiae, a3icus curiae &ar e ce ence do not

re%resent an %art to the case but act as consultant in a doubtful issue for resolution of the court.The do not receive an com%ensation for their legal services to the court.BB. &ounsel de parteG a la! er retained b a %art litigant) usuall ) for a fee) to %rosecute or defend his cause in court. The term im%lies freedom of choice either on the %art of the la! er toacce%t the em%lo ment or on the %art of the litigant to continue or terminate the retainer at antime.B#. 4ro bono &ounselG a la! er !ho renders legal services !ithout charging an %rofessionalfees but does not shoulder the costs of litigation on behalf of his client.B/. AdvocateG a la! er !ho %leads on behalf of a third %art .B1. =arristerG &n England) a %erson entitled to %ractice la! as an advocate or counsel in su%erior courts.

B$. 'olicitorG &n England) a %erson %rosecuting or defending suits in a 6ourt of 6hancer . 7 6ourtof 6hancer is a court !hich administers e#uit and %roceeding according to the forms and%rinci%les of e#uit .BM. 4roctorG&n England ) an attorne in in the admiralt and ecclesiastical courts !hose dutiesand business corres%ond exactl to those of an attorne at la! or solicitor in a 6hancer .

Q. What is barratry? 7. &t is the offense of fre#uentl exciting and stirring u% #uarrels in suits. &t is fro!ned u%on as it isagainst %ublic %olic as it !ill clog the dockets of the courts and frustrate the orderl administrationof justice.

Q. What is ambulance chasing? 7. This %ractice originated in e! ,ork) !here through a la! er or his agent) cases are literallsolicited in hos%itals or in %olice %recincts. The evils sought to be %revented b this %ractice areI

6


7/46

fomenting litigation/ subornation of %erjur / mulcting of innocent %ersons u%on manufacturedcauses of action/ defrauding injured %arties.

Q. What is assumpsit? 7. 7 %romise or engagement b !hich one %erson assumes or undertakes to do some act or %asomething to another. Assumpsit on Juantum meruit is !hen a %erson em%lo s another to do!ork for him) !ithout an agreement as to his com%ensation) the la! im%lies a %romise from theem%lo er to the !orkman that he !ill %a him for his services as much as the deserve on merit>Black-s La! Cictionar @

'''. A//earance of #on La *ersQ. What is the 'tudent 4ractice ule? A. La )tudent Practice ule +ule 1'? 7 of the +ules of court allo!s a la! student to re%resentindigent clients %rovided one has successfull com%leted the 'rd ear of a %rescribed four ear curriculum and enrolled in a recogni ed la! school-s clinical legal education %rogram

&n Bar $atter o.G'( dated June 1() 133?) the Su%reme 6ourt re#uired that la! student %racticebefore the +egional Trial 6ourt must be under the direct su%ervision and control of a member of the &ntegrated Bar of the 5hili%%ines.

4nder Section '* of the +ules of 6ourt) a la! student ma a%%ear before the first le6el courtas an agent or friend of a %art !ithout the su%ervision of a member of the bar.

Q. 5nder what circumstances can non-lawyers represent parties? 7. on la! ers ma a%%ear in the follo!ingI1. on la! ers in first level courtsI small claims cases2. on la! ers in administrative tribunalsI L4+B) CE +) C7+) L+6) etc.'. 5roceedings !here la! ers are %rohibited from a%%earingI %roceedings before the Lu%ongTaga%ama a%a)*. on la! ers in court ordered mediation

Q. What are the sanctions for practice or appearance without authority? 1. La *ers ithout authorit* (ontem/t of (ourt 7)ec. 1 ule 81,

Acts constituting contemptG ;isbehavior as an officer of the court* disobedience or resistance to a lawful order of the court* abuse or unlawful interference with !udicial

proceedings* obstruction in the administration of !ustice* misleading the court or ma ing false allegations* criticisms* insults or veiled threats against the court* aiding in theunauthori7ed practice of law* unlawful retention of clients* advising a client to commit acontemptuous act* publications which tend to impede* obstruct* embarrass or influencecourts may degrade the courtN disrespectful pleadings.2. Persons ho are not la *ers 'ndirect (ontem/t 7)ec. 3 7e, ule 81,

&iocon- eer v. :ubao M01 '& A B/ )/ >araan ou d a a#s a&&ear in court and he even fi es & eadings ithout indicating an# Ro of Attorne# *o., P'R, $C and " P O.R.*o. After investigation, OCA found out that the 1 #ear o d >araan as not in fact a a #er. 8e as found gui t# of indirect conte3&t of court and fined P10,000.00 ithout i3&rison3ent .

'V. Pu9lic "fficials and Practice of La

Q. Are government lawyers covered by the &ode of 4rofessional esponsibility H&4 I2? 7. ,es. 67 F 0 of the 65+ %rovidesI:These 6anons shall a%%l to la! ers in governmentservice in the discharge of their tasks.=>+ules 0.(1 0.(') 6ode of 5rofessional +es%onsibilit @.

Q. &an a government lawyer who retired pending the processing of a license application*represent the applicant after he is separated from service?

7


8/46

7. o. +ule 0.(' of the 6ode of 5rofessional +es%onsibilit . +ule 0.(' %rohibits former government la! ers from acce%ting Mengagement or em%lo ment in connection !ith an matter in!hich he had intervened !hile in said service.M

Q. Who are the public officials not allowed to practice law? 7. 4nder the 6onstitutionI The 5resident) Aice 5resident) members of the 6onstitutional6ommissions) members of the judiciar ) members of the cabinet) their de%uties and assistants4nder 6ivil Service +ulesI government la! ers in government de%artmentsNofficesNbureaus) ingovernment o!ned and controlled cor%orations) government financial institutions and those !ithlocal government units4nder S%ecial La!sI Local 2@ 7%%ear as counsel in an criminal case !herein an officer or em%lo ee of the national or local government is accused of an offensecommitted in relation to his office/

>'@ 6ollect an fee for their a%%earance in administrative %roceedingsinvolving the local government unit of !hich he is an official/ and

>*@ 4se %ro%ert and %ersonnel of the *02 S6+7 1 >2(( @@I 7 la! er is guilt of violating the 6ivil Service rule ondouble com%ensation !hen he acce%ted an a%%ointment as a la! er of the 4rban 7ffairs Fffice of the 6it of $anila and a member of the 5LEB of Oue on 6it .

Q. Who are the lawyers who represent the government :8


9/46

7. The la! ers tasked to re%resent governmentI FS2(12@I 7 la! er cannot esca%e :the disci%lining arm of the

6ourt= des%ite an dela in the filing of an administrative case against a la! er.

ules on ,isbarment ule B/ -=2"nitiation of a Co3& aint

9

http://www.scribd.com/doc/201374347/208290http://www.scribd.com/doc/201374347/208290http://www.scribd.com/doc/201374347/208290http://www.scribd.com/doc/201374347/208290


10/46

B the Su%reme 6ourt motu %ro%rioB the &B5 Board of


11/46


12/46

Q. &an a lawyer move for dismissal of a disciplinary case against him on the ground that the complainants are not the in!ured party to the case?

7. o because the %ractice of la! is imbued !ith %ublic interest and institution of com%laintsagainst la! ers is not %redicated on a la! er client relationshi%.

Q. What is the effect of conviction upon the practice of law of a lawyer? 7. &atalan* r. v. 'ilvosa , 6 SCRA 52 (2012)/A a #er convicted of direct ri er# can e asu :ect of dis ar3ent &roceedings. Direct ri er# is a cri3e invo ving 3ora tur&itude. 'hedefense that his conviction as not in his ca&acit# as a a #er ut as a &u ic officer etra#s theun3ista7a e ac7 of integrit# in his character.%n eG Atty. odolfo ,.4actolin , 6 0 SCRA 66(2112)/ 'he conviction of Att#. Pacto in eforethe Sandigan a#an for the cri3e of Ja sification of Pu ic Docu3ent is contrar# to :ustice, honest# and good 3ora s. 'his is a cri3e invo ving 3ora tur&itude. ven if the " P reco33ended dis3issa of the case, S.C. dis arred hi3 ecause Bdis ar3ent is the a&&ro&riate &ena t# for conviction # fina :udg3ent for a cri3e invo ving 3ora tur&itude.<

Q. &an a !udge who has been dismissed from the !udiciary still be a sub!ect of a

disbarment proceeding? 7. ,es. O&A v. :iangco , 662 SCRA 10 (2011)/ 'he dis3issa of a :udge fro3 service i not &rec ude the fi ing of a dis ar3ent case against hi3 efore the " P. 'he dis ar3ent as ased onthe sa3e grounds for his dis3issa / gross 3isconduct and ine cusa e ignorance. 8e fai ed to3a7e a distinction et een a Reso ution and an Ordinance and that as :udge, he cannot render an O&inion ut rather he 3ust receive evidence and 3a7e a decision after ter3ination of tria . "t

i e the " P ho i investigate a :udge ho has retired fro3 the :udiciar# and not the Su&re3eCourt.

Q. What is the proof reJuired to establish the culpability of a lawyer in a disbarment proceeding?

7 4OB O'( =. &A'4( v. A""


13/46

Atty. Alan F. 4aguia v. Atty. ;anuel ". ;olina , A.C. *o. -??1, +une K, 201K .'he S.C. said inhen it co3es to ad3inistrative cases against a #ers, t o things are to e considered/ 9uantu3

of &roof, hich re9uires c ear # &re&onderant evidence4 and urden of &roof, hich is on theco3& ainant. 8ere, the co3& aint as ithout factua asis. ven if Att#. $o ina did &rovide hisc ients ega advice, he sti cannot e he d ad3inistrative # ia e ithout an# sho ing that his act

as attended ith ad faith or 3a ice. 'he defau t ru e is &resu3&tion of good faith.

Q. What is the effect of the withdrawal of a disbarment case? 7. Adelia L. Quiachon v. Atty. oseph Ador A. amos , A.C. *o. - 1 , +une K, 201K . 'heS.C.he d that the ithdra a of a dis ar3ent case against a a #er does not terminate or abatethe !urisdiction of the %=4 and of the &ourt to continue an administrative proceeding against a a #erHres&ondent as a 3e3 er of the Phi i&&ine ar. 'he co3& ainant in a dis ar3ent case isnot a direct &art# to the case, ut a itness ho rought the 3atter to the attention of the Court. "nthis case, Att#. Ra3os vio ated Canon Ru es 1?.0 and 1?.0K of the Code of Professiona Res&onsi i it#. 'hus, the a&&ro&riate &ena t# shou d e i3&osed des&ite the desistance of co3& ainant or the ithdra a of the charges

Q. What are the grounds for suspension ,isbarment2? 7. Section 2G) +ule 1'?) +ules of 6ourt %rovides the follo!ing groundsI deceit or an grossmisconduct) grossl immoral conduct) conviction of crime involving moral tur%itude) violation of la! er-s Fath) !illful disobedience of an la!ful order) or corru%tl or !illfull a%%earing as anattorne for a %art in a case !ithout authorit ) mal%ractice !hich includes %ractice of solicitingcases for the %ur%ose of gain) either %ersonall or through %aid agents or brokers..R ose =unagan-=ansig v. Atty. ogelio uan A. &elera* A.C. *o. 55?1, +anuar# 1K, 201K . 'heCourt ordered Ce era dis arred for contracting a second 3arriage hen his first 3arriage ithCo3& ainant as sti su sisting. 'he Su&re3e Court he d that for &ur&oses of the dis ar3ent

&roceeding, the $arriage Certificates earing the na3e of Att#. Ce era are co3&etent and convincing evidence to &rove that he co33itted iga3#, hich renders hi3 unfit to continue as a3e3 er of the ar. Att#. Ce era e hi ited a de& ora e ac7 of that degree of 3ora it# re9uired of

hi3 as a 3e3 er of the ar. 8e 3ade a 3oc7er# of 3arriage, a sacred institution de3anding res&ect and dignit#. 8is act of contracting a second 3arriage hi e his first 3arriage is su sisting constituted gross # i33ora conduct and are grounds for dis ar3ent under Section 2 , Ru e 1 ? of the Revised Ru es of Court.

(dgardo Areola v. Atty. ;aria Lilma ;endo7a , A.C. *o. 101 5, +anuar# 15, 201K .'his caseinvo ves a PAO a #er ho advised her c ients LB"#a7Hi#a7an ang nin#o si +udge $artin at

&a a a#ain na 7a#o. $a a3 ot ang &uso noon.


14/46

therefor eing sho n, re9uire an# attorne# ho assu3es the right to a&&ear in a case to &roduceor &rove the authorit# under hich he a&&ears, and to disc ose, henever &ertinent to an# issue,the na3e of the &erson ho e3& o#ed hi3, and 3a# thereu&on 3a7e such order as :usticere9uires. An attorne# i fu # a&&earing in court for a &erson ithout eing e3& o#ed, un ess #

eave of the court, 3a# e &unished for conte3&t as an officer of the court ho has 3is ehaved inhis officia transactions.<

An attorne#Hc ient re ationshi& ter3inates u&on death of either c ient or the a #er.'hus, a a #er 3ust e 3ore circu3s&ect in his de3eanor and attitude to ards the &u ic in genera as agents of the :udicia s#ste3."( ('%"A =. (3 %Q5(8* v. A""


15/46

7. ,es. A:L%3 '. F(:%&%A3O v. A""


16/46

Ad3ission to the Phi i&&ine ar, one 3ust e a Ji i&ino citi;en. 'hus, hen he assu3ed another citi;enshi&, he ipso facto ost his Ji i&ino citi;enshi&. 'he returning Ji i&ino a #er must repatriate himself under the provisions of .A. ##$. Said a sa#s that Ba Phi i&&ine citi;ens

ho eco3e citi;ens of another countr# shall be deemed not to have lost their 4hilippineciti7enship under the conditions of .A. ##$2.IR.A. -225 &rovides that if a &erson intends to &ractice the ega &rofession in the Phi i&&ines and he reac9uires his Ji i&ino citi;enshi& &ursuant to its &rovisions h eshall apply with the proper authority for a license or permit to engage in such practice.I 4etition for :eave to esume 4ractice of :aw of =en!amin ;. ,acanay* $1C '& A 1#1 / 'oreac9uire, the authorit# to resu3e his &ractice of a , the re&atriated Ji i&ino 3ust/1. %&date and &a# in fu his annua 3e3 ershi& dues in the " P42. Pa# his &rofessiona ta 4

. Co3& ete his 6 credit hours of $C to refresh hi3 of his 7no edge of Phi i&&ine a s, ru esof &ractice, recent :uris&rudence and u&date hi3 of recent ega deve o&3ents ($C i e fro3the ti3e he as a sent in the Phi i&&ines u& to the ti3e he resu3es his &ractice)4and K. Reta7e his oath hich i not on # re3ind hi3 of his duties and res&onsi i ities as a a #er and as an officer of the Court, ut a so to rene his & edge to 3aintain a egiance to the Re&u ic of the Phi i&&ines.

V''. =uties and es/onsi9ilities of a La *er A. =ut* to )ociet*1. es/ect for la and legal /rocesses67 F 1 7 la! er shall u%hold the 6onstitution) obe the la!s of the land and %romote res%ectfor la! and legal %rocesses. >+ules 1.(1 1.(*@

Q. What does respect for rule of law include? 7. The la! er must at all times in the %rotection of the rights of client ensure com%liance !ith thela! governing the issues of the %ending case. F( 3A3,O W. &+5v.A""


17/46

3arita vo of fide it#.< 8is i icit re ationshi& ith the ife of his c ient sho ed that he vio ated Canon 1 of the CPR for a use of the trust and confidence re&osed in hi3. An Affidavit of Desistance or an# other s orn state3ent ith the sa3e effect i not e cuse the a #er ecausean# disci& inar# &roceeding is c othed ith &u ic interest.

arrido v. arrido , 611 SCRA 50? (2010)/ A charge of i33ora it# as rought efore the a #er for having contracted three 3arriages. 8e eft his first ife to &ursue his stud# of a . 8econtracted his second 3arriage u&on 3isre&resentation that he is sing e. 8e engaged in an e tra3arita affair ith a a #er ho3 he eventua # 3arried in 8ong7ong hi e his second 3arriage

as su sisting. Such conduct etra#ed his 3ora de&ravit# for hich he as dis arred. 'he ad# a #er as eventua # dis arred for 7no ing that @arrido had other t o su sisting 3arriageshen she had her ro3antic re ationshi& ith hi3 even efore she eca3e a a #er.

Q. What constitutes deceitful conduct on the part of the lawyer? A. =rennisen v. &ontawi , 6 0 SCRA 5?(2012)/ 'he S.C. dis arred a a #er ho acted B ithdeceit hen, through the use of a fa sified docu3ent, he effected the unauthori;ed 3ortgage and sa e of his c ient s &ro&ert# for his &ersona enefit.=ueno v. aneses , 6? SCRA 11(2012)/ 'he S.C. dis arred a a #er ho &ractica # as7ed the

c ient to se ever#thing for the sa7e of inning the case, on # to end u& not rea # doing an#thing.# as7ing 3one# fro3 his c ient for a &ur&orted # ri er# to the :udge to in a case, the a #er tarnished the i3age of the :udiciar# and &ut a ac7 3ar7 in the ega &rofession as e .3atividad 4. 3avarro and +ilda '. 4resbitero v. Atty. %van ;. 'olidum* r ., A.C. *o. -? 2,+anuar# 2?, 201K .'he Court he d that Att#. So idu3, +r. vio ated Ru e 1.01 of the Code of Professiona Res&onsi i it#. Conduct, as used in the Ru e, is not confined to the &erfor3ance of a

a #er s &rofessiona duties. 'he test is hether his conduct sho s hi3 to e anting in 3ora character, honest#, &ro it#, and good de3eanor, or hether it renders hi3 un orth# to continue asan officer of the court. Att#. So idu3, +r. as he d gui t# of engaging in dishonest and deceitfu conduct, oth in his &rofessiona ca&acit# ith res&ect to his c ient, Pres itero, and in his &rivateca&acit# ith res&ect to co3& ainant *avarro. oth Pres itero and *avarro a o ed Att#. So idu3,

+r. to draft the ter3s of the oan agree3ents. Att#. So idu3, +r. drafted the su :ect docu3ents ithfu 7no edge that the interest rates ere e or itant. 'a7ing advantage of the &rovisions in theinstru3ents, he ater assai ed the va idit# of the sa3e agree3ents hich he &ersona # &re&ared.8e issued chec7s that ere dra n fro3 his son s account hose na3e as si3i ar to his ithout infor3ing co3& ainants. Jurther, the records do not indicate an# underta7ing on his &art to &a# the oans he o tained fro3 co3& ainants. 'he fiduciar# nature of the re ationshi& et een thecounse and his c ient i3&oses on the a #er the dut# to account for the 3one# or &ro&ert# co ected or received for or fro3 his c ient. Att#. So idu3, +r. fai ed to fu fi this dut#.

2. Efficient and con6enient legal ser6ices67 F 2 7 la! er shall make his legal services available in an efficient and convenient manner com%atible !ith the inde%endence) integrit and effectiveness of the %rofession.>+ules 2.(12.(*

Q. When is a lawyer guilty of encroaching on another lawyer’s practice? A. :isangan v. "olentino , A.C. *o. 66 2, Se&te3 er K, 200-/ A a #er ho a o ed his &ara ega Isecretar# to so icit the c ients of a fe o a #er ith a &ro3ise of financia assistance

as sus&ended # the S.C. and re3inded a #ers that their ca ing cards 3ust on # contain their na3e, fie ds of &ractice, contact detai s and nothing 3ore. 'he &rohi ition a&& ies to the nonH ega staff in order to cur an# a use of the &rivi ege of the a .

3. !rue honest fair dignified and o9Cecti6e information on legal ser6ices67 F ' 7 la! er in making kno!n his legal services shall use onl the true) honest) fair)dignified and objective information or statement of facts. >+ules '.(1 '.(*@

17

http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/pdf/web/viewer.html?file=/jurisprudence/2014/january2014/9872.pdfhttp://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/pdf/web/viewer.html?file=/jurisprudence/2014/january2014/9872.pdfhttp://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/pdf/web/viewer.html?file=/jurisprudence/2014/january2014/9872.pdfhttp://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/pdf/web/viewer.html?file=/jurisprudence/2014/january2014/9872.pdf


18/46

Q. &an a lawyer be held liable for the allegations set forth in a pleading which has beenverified by his client?

7. o. ,e :eon v. &astelo , 6 - SCRA 2 (2011)/ 'he S.C. he d that B ith the c oa7 of &rivi ege,a #ers can free # and courageous # s&ea7 for their c ients, ver a # or in riting, in the course of

:udicia and 9uasiH:udicia &roceedings, ithout running the ris7 of incurring cri3ina &rosecution or actions for da3ages.<

4. Partici/ation in the im/ro6ement and reforms in the legal s*stem67 F * 7 la! er shall %artici%ate in the develo%ment of the legal s stem b initiating or su%%orting efforts in la! reforms and in the im%rovement of the administration of justice.

A a #er is encouraged to &artici&ate in the for3u ation of a3end3ents in the Ru es of Court toi3&rove the ad3inistration of :ustice.

A a #er 3a# attend congressiona hearings invo ving changes in su stantive a s4 creation of ne courts4 and redefining :urisdiction of tria and a&&e ate courts.

5. Partici/ation in legal education /rogram and other related acti6ities67 F 7 la! er shall kee% abreast of legal develo%ments) %artici%ate in continuing legaleducation %rograms) su%%ort efforts to achieve high standards in la! schools as !ell as in the

%ractical training of la! students and assist in disseminating the la! and juris%rudence. A a #er is e &ected to co3& # ith the re9uire3ents of the $andator# Continuing ega ducation and to &artici&ate in the activities of the " P and other ega &rofessiona organi;ations.

4urposeG (LE hat it isD ho enforces the (LE

Q. What is the composition of constitution of the (LE Board: 7. The $6LE Board is com%osed of a retired justice of the Su%reme 6ourt is the 6hairman) !iththe follo!ing as membersI an incumbent dean of a recogni ed la! school) a re%resentative from adesignated la! center) the 6hancellor of the 5hili%%ine Judicial 7cadem and the 5resident of the&ntegrated Bar of the 5hili%%ines.

Q. What are the reJuirements to complete the ;&:(? 7. 6overage of the $6LE '0 unit re#uirement > corres%onding unitsI 0 for Legal Ethics/ 0 for %rescribed courses as a%%roved b the $6LE Board) * for trail and %re trial techni#ues) * for legal!riting and oral advocac ) for alternative dis%ute resolution) 2 for international la! andconventions and 3 for u%dates on substantive and %rocedural la!s@

Q. What is the period of compliance for one’s;&:(? 7. 7 la! er has ' ear com%letion %eriod.

Q. Who are e)empted from the ;&:( reJuirement? 7. 5resident) Aice 5resident) $embers of the Senate and ouse of +e%resentatives) $embers of the 6onstitutional 6ommissions)


19/46

A. %n reG 4etition of Atty. ;edado to sign oll of Attorneys* .$. *o. 25K0, Se&te3 er 2K,201 / 5etitioner $edado %assed the bar examinations in 13G3. e took the 7ttorne -s Faththereafter) and !as scheduled to sign the +oll of 7ttorne s) but failed to do so. &t !as onl in 2((that he reali ed that he did not sign the +oll after being asked his +oll number !hen he attendedhis $6LE. Thirt >'(@ ears after %assing the bar) $edado filed a 5etition to allo! him to sign inthe +oll of 7ttorne s. The Su%reme 6ourt held that !hile an honest mistake of fact could be usedto excuse a %erson from the legal conse#uences of his acts as it negates malice or evil motive) amistake of la! cannot be utili ed as a la!ful justification) because ever one is %resumed to kno!the la! and its conse#uences. 9no!ingl engaging in unauthori ed %ractice of la! transgresses6anon 3 of the 6ode of 5rofessional +es%onsibilit . Such 6anon also a%%lies to la! students andbar candidates. $edado !as im%osed a /enalt* a in to sus/ension 9* allo ing him to signone 71, *ear after recei/t of the (ourt+s esolution.

Q. What is the %ntegrated =ar of the 4hilippines? A. 4urposes of the %=4G 'o e evate the standards of the ega &rofession, i3&rove thead3inistration of :ustice, and ena e the ar to discharge its &u ic res&onsi i it# 3ore effective #.(lective Officers / President, ecutive !ice President and concurrent # a @overnor of a Region(chosen # the oard of @overnors ho i succeed the nationa President), oard of @overnors

fro3/ *orthern u;on, Centra u;on, @reater $ani a, Southern u;on, ico andia, astern!isa#as, Eestern !isa#as, astern $indanao and Eestern $indanao.Other officers / 'he " P sha have a Secretar#, 'reasurer and such other officers as e ase3& o#ees the President 3a# a&&oint ith the consent of the oard of @overnors under suchter3s and conditions s&ecified in the a&&oint3ent of each officer andIor e3& o#ee.;embership and ,ues / *onH&a#3ent of dues 3a# su :ect the a #er to disci& inar# actioninc uding re3ova of the na3e of the de in9uent a #er fro3 the Ro of Attorne#s. (Sec. -, Ru e1 -HA):%F("%;( ,5(G 4B#*$CC and A335A: ,5(G 4B*CCC%n the ;atter of =rewing &ontroversies in the %=4 (lections A.$. *o. 0-H5H2HSC, A.C. *o.?2-2, A&ri 201 )/ a #ers see7ing &ositions in the "ntegrated ar of the Phi i&&ines 3ust res&ect the rotationa ru e. 'he rotationa ru e is ado&ted to a o e9ua o&&ortunit# for a a #ers in

different regions to have access to &ositions of eadershi& in the " P. 'he S.C. a so re3inded " P officers that the# shou d not use the Court as Breferee< for their intra3ura s.

2. !&E LA >E A) A #"!A > P?BL'( 7A. . #o. 02 ; 13 )( effecti6e August 1 2004 asamended,

Q. What are the purposes of the 3otarial ules? 7. 5romote) serve and %rotect %ublic interest/ to sim%lif ) clarif and moderni e the rules governingnotaries %ublic/ and to foster ethical conduct among notaries %ublic.Please ta e note the rele6ant /ro6isions of the 2004 #otarial ules 7!a e /articular attention of the date hen a document as notarized. A document notarized 9efore theeffecti6it* of the 2004 #otarial ules ill 9e go6erned 9* the rele6ant /ro6isions of the

e6ised Administrati6e (ode here the FcedulaG ill suffice as /roof of identit*.,+(% ' OF 4(, O A:%:A3O (4 ('(3"(, =< ,AL%, A:%:A3O v. A""


20/46

71,. (ommissioning of a #otar* Pu9lic

W%:=( "O &. "A:%'%& v. A""


21/46

A. #o. ;etropolitan =an 9 "rust &ompany v. Arguelles , 6 - SCRA K? (2012)/ 'he S.C. he d that it is sufficient for the *otar# Pu ic to ascertain the identities of the affiants and the itnessesat the ti3e of the e ecution of the docu3ent. 'he *otar# Pu ic 3ust re # on the &resu3&tion that the &roofs of identit# of the &arties ere issued # the &u ic agencies in the regu ar course of thedischarge of their res&onsi i ities. "t is a so not &ractica for a notar# &u ic to reca the affiants 12 #ears after the# &ersona # a&&eared efore hi3.

Q. &an a lawyer continue to notari7e documents with an e)pired commission? A. 3o. "enoso v. (chane7 , A.C. *o. ? ?K, 11 A&ri 201 / # &erfor3ing his duties ithout rene ing his notaria co33ission, the S.C. said that he co33itted acts of fa sehood and 3ust e

&unished.

Q. &an a lawyer notari7e the statement e)ecuted by his sister-in-law? 7. o. andoJuile v. evilla , A.C. *o.-51K, 10 A&ri 201 / 'he *otaria Ru es of 200K dis9ua ifies

a #ers fro3 notari;ing docu3ents of re atives u& to the fourth civi degree of consanguinit# or affinit#. 'he defense of Att#. Revi a that he notari;ed the AffidavitHCo3& aint of his re ative # hisvirtue of the fact that he as the counse in the cri3ina case is not avai ing according to the Court.'he S.C. he d that since he signed it ith the detai s of his notaria co33ission eads to no other

conc usion that he signed it as a *otar# Pu ic and not as counse . 'he S.C. reiterated the ru ethat here the affiants are &ersona # 7no n to the *otar# Pu ic, the :urat 3ust state so,other ise, &arties 3ust sho &roof of co3&etent identit#.

Q. &an one’s notarial commission included in the conduct of the disbarment of the lawyer although the same was not raised in the complaint?

7. ,es. Lirtusio v. Lirtusio , 6?0 SCRA 1(2012)/ 'he " P "nvestigating Co33issioner discovered in the course of the disci& inar# &roceeding against !irtusio that she fai ed to rene her notaria co33ission in 2006 and 200 . Ehi e it as not a su :ect of the co3& aint, the S.C. he d that theinfraction can e scrutini;ed in the investigation. 'he S.C. revo7ed the notaria co33ission of the

a #er, did not a o her to rene the sa3e and sus&ended her fro3 the &ractice of a for

de i erate fa sehood for ho ding out to the &u ic that she has een &ro&er # co33issioned tonotari;ed docu3ents.

Q. What is the culpability of a lawyer for failure to ascertain the identity of an affiant? 7. Wilberto &. "alisic v. Atty. 4rimo . inen* A.C. *o. ? 61, Je ruar# 12, 201K / A a #er snotaria co33ission as revo7ed and he as not a o ed to rene the sa3e for one #ear for fai ure to ascertain the identities of the &arties ho e ecuted an tra +udicia Partition ith Sa e

hich a o ed the transfer to S&ouses Durante of a &arce of and. *otari;ation is not an e3&t#,3eaning ess, routinar# act. "t is invested ith su stantive &u ic interest, such that on # those hoare 9ua ified or authori;ed 3a# act as notaries &u ic.

&arlito Ang v. Atty. ames oseph upana 7.6. o. * * . "ebruar ) 2(1* I'he Su&re3eCourt he d that Att#. @u&ana s revocation of his notaria co33ission, dis9ua ification fro3 eing co33issioned as a notar# &u ic for a &eriod of t o #ears and sus&ension fro3 the &ractice of a for one #ear are in order for fai ure to re9uire the &ersona &resence of the affiant in an Affidavit of

oss &ur&orted # e ecuted in 1--K.

:icerio ,i7on v. Atty. ;arcelino &abucana* +r., A.C. *o. 101?5, $arch 12, 201K . 'he S.C. he d that as a notar# &u ic, Att#. Ca ucana, +r. shou d not notari;e a docu3ent un ess the &erson hosigns it is the sa3e &erson e ecuting it and &ersona # a&&earing efore hi3 to attest to the truth

21

http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/pdf/web/viewer.html?file=/jurisprudence/2014/february2014/8761.pdfhttp://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/pdf/web/viewer.html?file=/jurisprudence/2014/february2014/4545.pdfhttp://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/pdf/web/viewer.html?file=/jurisprudence/2014/march2014/10185.pdfhttp://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/pdf/web/viewer.html?file=/jurisprudence/2014/february2014/8761.pdfhttp://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/pdf/web/viewer.html?file=/jurisprudence/2014/february2014/4545.pdfhttp://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/pdf/web/viewer.html?file=/jurisprudence/2014/march2014/10185.pdf


22/46

of its contents. 'his is to ena e hi3 to verif# the genuineness of the signature of theac7no edging &art# and to ascertain that the docu3ent is the &art# s free and vo untar# act and deed. 'hus, Att#. Ca ucana, +r. as found vio ating Ru e 1.01, Canon 1 of the Code of Professiona Res&onsi i it# and sus&ended fro3 the &ractice of a for three 3onths. 8is notaria co33ission as revo7ed and he as &rohi ited fro3 eing co33issioned as a notar# &u ic for t o #ears.

Q. What is the liability of a lawyer for notari7ing a document when the affiant is already dead?

7. Atty.Florita '. :inco v. Atty. immy ,. :acebral , A.C. *o. 2K1, Octo er 1 , 2011/ A notar# &u ic ho notari;ed a Deed of Donation of another a #er one da# after his death to thedetri3ent of the interests of the surviving a #erHs&ouse, as sus&ended # the S.C.

'm/ortant matters to consider

Jurat 7)ection ule '', and Ac no ledgment 7)ection1 ule '', distinguished(om/etent E6idence of 'dentit* 7)ection 12 ule 2,

%;;< A35,O3 A3, 5A3%"A A35,O3 v. A""+ules G.(1 G.('@

Q. What is the liability of a lawyer for failure to uphold the dignity of the legal profession? 7. The la! er ma be disbarred b the Su%reme 6ourt !hich he tarnishes the image of the legal%rofession !hich tends to erode %ublic trust in the administration of justice.Eeld 'temmeri v. Atty. :eonuel 3. ;as* A.C. ?010, +une 16, 200-/ A a #er as dis arred # ta7ing advantage of the ac7 of 7no edge of Phi i&&ine a s # a foreigner. Att#. $as dre u& aDeed of Sa e of a &ro&ert# in Su ic hich is &art of &u ic do3ain and therefore outside the

co33erce of 3an.O&A v. :iangco* supra / S.C. said/ BEe are a&&a ed # the res&ondent s ignorance of the asic ru es of &rocedure. 8is anton use of court &rocesses in this case ithout regard for the

22

http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/pdf/web/viewer.html?file=/jurisprudence/2015/february2015/5482.pdfhttp://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/pdf/web/viewer.html?file=/jurisprudence/2015/february2015/5482.pdf


23/46

re&ercussions on the rights and &ro&ert# of others c ear # sho s his unfitness to re3ain a 3e3 er of the ar.< %n eG 4actolin* supraG 'he S.C. ru ed/ BAs a ru e, this Court e ercises the &o er to dis ar ithcaution. #et this Court has a so consistent # &ronounced that dis ar3ent is the a&&ro&riate

&ena t# for conviction # fina :udg3ent for a cri3e invo ving 3ora tur&itude. 8is conduct on # e acer ates his offense and sho s that he fa s short of the e acting standards e &ected of hi3 as a vanguard of the ega &rofession.<

4. (ourtes* fairness and candor to ards /rofessional colleagues67 F ? 7 la! er shall conduct himself !ith courtes ) fairness and candor to!ards his%rofessional colleagues) and shall avoid harassing tactics against o%%osing counsel. >+ules ?.(1?.(2@

Q. &an a lawyer share his professional fees with a non-lawyer? 7. o. 7s a general rule a la! er is not allo!ed to his %rofessional fees !ith a non la! er.Lillatuya v. "abalingcos , 6 6 SCRA (2012)/ 'his dis ar3ent case is hinged on theco3& ainant s de3and fro3 res&ondent a #er to sett e 3one# o igations out of their usinesstransactions. 'he first ground he raised invo ves nonH&a#3ent of agreed fees for ever# Sta# Order

o tained fro3 the court and 10N co33ission fro3 ever# referra 4 the second is that the a #er set u& t o financia co3&anies as fronts to so icit ega services and co33itting t o counts of iga3# for having 3arried t o other o3en hi e his first 3arriage as sti su sisting.On the first issue , the Court said that there is vio ation here a a #er shares his fees ith a nonH

a #er. "n this case, co3& ainant fai ed to &roffer evidence. On the issue of solicitation , the Court he d that it ou d a&&ear that there as an atte3&t to circu3vent the &rohi ition on advertising one s services, re&ri3and is the &ro&er &ena t# ecause there is no evidence on the &reva ence touse the t o financia co3&anies to so icit. 'he Court re3inded a #er to e c ear as to hat services the# are rendering if the# have 3u ti& e &rofessions. On the issue of gross immorality ,the e ated 3ove of the a #er to institute civi actions to annu his 3arriages i not e cu &atehi3. 'he Court he d/ B res&ondent e hi ited a de& ora e ac7 of that degree of 3ora it#

re9uired of hi3 . 8e 3ade a 3oc7er# of 3arriage, . 8is acts of co33itting iga3# t iceconstituted gross i33ora conduct and are grounds for dis ar3ent under Section 2 , Ru e 1 ? of the Revised Ru es of court.< "umbo on v. 4efianco* 6 ? SCRA 60 (2012)/ 'his case a so dea s ith the a #er s co33it3ent to share a &ortion of his ega fees ith a nonH a #er in a case for &artition of estate hichco3& ainant referred to Pefianco. 'he a #er as found gui t# of this vio ation # his ad3ission ina etter he rote to the &arties in the &artition case. On the second charge of a andoning his ega

ife to coha it ith his 3istress ith ho3 he has four chi dren, the Court that it as a c ear B etra#a of the 3arita vo of fide it# or se ua re ations outside 3arriage< and is Bconsidered disgracefu and i33ora as it 3anifests de i erate disregard of the sanctit# of 3arriage and 3arita vo s &rotected # the Constitution and affir3ed # our a s.<

5. #o assistance in the unauthorized /ractice of la67 F 3 7 la! er shall not) directl or indirectl ) assist in the unauthori ed %ractice of la!.>+ules 3.(1 3.(2@

Q. What constitutes unauthori7ed practice of law? A. !a/a* et al v. Attys. &harlie :. =ancolo et al* A. C. *o. -60K, $arch 20, 201 I A a #er hoa o ed his secretar# to sign his & eading in the Office of the O3 uds3an is gui t# of vio ation of Canon -.On # a #ers are a o ed to sign & eadings and the sa3e cannot e de egated.

Atty. (dita 3oe :acsamana v. Atty.


24/46

(. =ut* to the (ourts1. (andor fairness and good faith to ards the courts67 F 1( 7 la! er o!es candor) fairness and good faith to the court. >+ules 1(.(1 1(.(2@Read a so Ru e 1 ?, Section 20(c) and (d), Ru es of Court, Duties of Attorne#s

Q. &an a 'enator be e)onerated from any liability for calling the 'upreme &ourt as a Hcourt of idiotsI?

7. Antero . 4obre v. 'en. ;iriam ,efensor-'antiago* A.C. *o. --, August 25, 200-. S.C.e onerated the res&ondent for ca ing the S.C. :ustices as a Bcourt of idiots+ules 11.(1 11.( @

Q. Are professors of law considered engaged in the practice of profession and aretherefore sub!ect to disciplinary action of the 'upreme &ourt? ,e &astro* .

7. ,es. eG :etter of the 5.4. :aw Faculty on Allegations of 4lagiarism and ;isrepresentation of the '.&.* A. $. *o. 10H10HKHSC, $arch ?, 2011. 'he S.C. re3inded thefacu t# 3e3 ers of the %.P.Co ege of a to e 3ore circu3scri ed ith the fi ing of si3i ar co3& aint against the 3e3 ers of the :udiciar#. "t noted that the concerned :ustice a read#

ad3itted the a&se and that it as not done ith 3a ice. 8is good faith re ieved hi3 fro3 an# 7ind of ad3inistrative ia i it#.

3. Assistance in the s/eed* and efficient administration of Custice67 F 12 7 la! er shall exert ever effort and consider it his dut to assist in the s%eed andefficient administration of justice. >+ules 12.(1 12.(?@

ead also ule 13; )ection 207g, ules of (ourt $ =uties of Attorne*sD andArticle ''' )ection 1 (onstitution $ ight to s/eed* dis/osition of cases.

4. eliance on merits of his cause and a6oidance of an* im/ro/riet* hich tends toinfluence the a//earance of influence u/on the courts67 F 1' 7 la! er shall rel u%on the merits of his cause refrain from an im%ro%riet !hichtends to influence or gives the a%%earance of influencing court. >+ules 1'.(1 1'.('@

Q. &an a lawyer be held liable for drafting the decision on behalf of a !udge in an effort tohelp declog court doc ets?

7. ,es. :antoria v. =unyi* A.$. 6ase *o. 1 6-, +une ?, 1--2. A a #er shou d not ta7e it u&onhi3se f to &re&are a draft decision on eha f of a :udge. Such an action of the counse under3inesthe co3&etence of the :udiciar# and i tend to erode confidence in the :udicia s#ste3.

Q. %s it proper for a lawyer to ma e pronouncements in the media regarding a pending case?

7. o. &ru7 v. 'alva* @. R. 12? 1, +u # 25, 1-5-, 105 Phi . 115. 'he S.C. cautioned a #ers fro3attracting 3edia attention over a &ending case.

24


25/46

Q. Are court decisions sub!ect to criticism? 7. ,es. %n eG Almacen @.R. *o. H2 65K, Je . 1?, 1- 0. a #ers as &art of free s&eech 3a# critici;e decisions of the Court ut such &ost itigation utterances 3ust never e resorted in order to 3a ign the Court.

=. =ut* to (lients

7i, )er6ices regardless of a /erson+s status67 F 1* 7 la! er shall not refuse his services to the need . >+ules 1*.(1 1*.(*@+eadI ule 13; )ection 20 ules of (ourt on =uties of Attorne*s 7h, and 7i,

ule 13; )ection 31 ules of (ourt on Attorne*s for =estitute Litigant7ii, )er6ices as counsel de oficio primarily in & %;%3A: &A'('

- A//ointment as (ounsel de oficio 7to re/resent accused in criminal /roceedings,ead ule 11 )ection ules of (ourt ight to (ounsel of an Accusedule 118 )ection 8 ules of (ourt A//ointment of (ounsel de oficio during trial

Q. Who may be appointed as counsel de oficio? 7. 7 la! er in good standing/ or an %erson !ho resides !here the case is filed) of good re%ute for

%robit and abilit !here there is no la! er in the jurisdiction.Q. What factors are considered in the appointment of a counsel de oficio?

7. The follo!ing factors are consideredI gravit of the offense) difficult of the issues involved andex%erience and abilit of the a%%ointee.

Q. What is the rule of the designation of &ounsel de officio before an appellate court? 7.+ule 12*) Section 2) +ules of 6ourtI Conditions for a&&oint3ent I accused is in %rison) there isno counse de &arte on a%%eal and accused signed notice of a%%eal himself.

Q. What are valid grounds for refusal to be engaged as counsel?

7. The follo!ing grounds ma be invokedI !here engagement ma result into conflict of interest)!hen la! er is unable to re%resent a %art due to %ressing %rofessional matters that need hisattention) !hen !hat the client !ishes the client to undertake is %atentl illegal) !hen the clientagrees in !riting to retire his re%resentation or !here after due notice and hearing) the court allo!sthe counsel to !ithdra! his a%%earance in an action or s%ecial %roceeding) other similar grounds.

2. (andor fairness and lo*alt* to clients67 F 21 7 la! er shall %reserve the confidence and secrets of his client even after theattorne client relation is terminated.7i, (onfidentialit* rule ule ill co6er /artners in legal /rofession and non legal staff

or ing for the la *er.7ii, Pri6ileged communications. )ec.2179, ule 130 E6idence ill a//l*.7iii, (onflict of interest =isclose matters that ould gi6e rise to re/resentation of t oad6erse interests.(onflict of 'nterest conce/tD hen la *er ma* la *er ma* heldaccounta9leD lia9ilit*

Q. When can a lawyer be found liable for conflict of interest? A. 4acana v. 4ascual-:Rpe7 , A.C. *o. ?2K , +u # 2K, 200-. A a #er ho acted as a retained counse of a co3&an# as dis arred for a so rendering advice to the creditors of the co3&an#.'he S.C. re3inded a #ers to avoid at a ti3es an# occasion here the# i re&resent t oadverse interests.3otes on %ssue of &onflict of %nterestG 'he nature of a #er and c ient re ationshi& is one of trust and confidence of the highest degree.

1. A a #er ou d e re&resenting a c ient hose interest is direct # adverse to an# of his &resent or for3er c ients.

25


26/46


27/46

his %eers) thereb seriousl tarnishing the image of the %rofession !hich he should hold in highesteem.

Q. What instances would indicate violation of a lawyer’s fiduciary duty? 7. =ayonla et al v. Atty. 4urita A. eyes ) A. C. *o. K?0?, *ove3 er 22, 2011. Jor her fai ure toturn over to her c ients the :ust co3&ensation in an e &ro&riation case, S.C. dis arred theres&ondent a #er.Freeman v. Atty. 8enaida 4. eyes , A. C. *o. 62K6, *ove3 er 15, 2011. S.C. dis arred res&ondentH a #er for e3& o#ing deceit to &ersona # gain fro3 the &roceeds of the insurancec ai3s and retire3ent enefits of the deceased ritish s&ouse of the co3& ainant.

'm/ortant matters to consider on fiduciar* dut*71,. La *ers are 9ound to /rom/tl* account for mone* or /ro/ert* recei6ed in the course of his engagement as counsel.72,. E6en if a la *er has a lien for fees he is 9ound to turno6er an* /ro/ert* or mone*recei6ed on 9ehalf of his client.73,. !he turno6er of mone* or /ro/ert* to his client is su9Cect to la *er+s lien.All costs of litigation must 9e 9orne 9* the client.

5. idelit* to client+s cause67 F 1G 7 la! er o!es fidelit to the cause of his client and shall be mindful of the trust andconfidence re%osed in him.

Q. What is the nature of a lawyer-client relationship? 7. osefina &arran7avida de 8aldSvar v. Atty. amon ' &abanes* r. , A.C. *o. K-, +u # ?,201 . S.C. sus&ended res&ondent a #er for gross neg igence in vio ation of Canon 1 , and Ru es1?.0 and 1?.0K of Canon 1? of the CPR. S.C. reiterated that the re ationshi& et een an attorne# and his c ient is one imbued with utmost trust and confidence . Ehether his services are &aid or rendered &ro ono, a a #er s dut# of co3&etence and di igence inc udes not 3ere # revie ing the cases entrusted to the counse s care or giving sound ega advice, ut a so consists of

&ro&er # re&resenting the c ient efore an# court or tri una , attending schedu ed hearings or conferences, &re&aring and fi ing the re9uired & eadings, &rosecuting the hand ed cases ithreasona e dis&atch, and urging their ter3ination ithout aiting for the c ient or the court to &rod hi3 or her to do so. Ehi e such neg igence or care essness is inca&a e of e act for3u ation, theCourt has consistent # he d that the a #er s 3ere fai ure to &erfor3 the o igations due his c ient is &er se a vio ation.

7i6, =ut* to a//rise client !he la *er must inform the client of the status of the case.

67 F 1? 7 la! er shall serve his client !ith com%etence and diligence. >+ules 1?.(1 1?.(*@Q. What characteri7es the duty of a lawyer to serve his client with competence and diligence?

A. Felipe &. ,agala v. Atty. ose &. Quesada* r. and Atty. Amado ". AdJuilen , A.C. *o. 50KK,Dece3 er 2, 201 . S.C. reiterated the need for a #ers to e ever 3indfu of the cause of their c ients and according # e ercise the re9uired degree of di igence in hand ing their affairs. Jor his

&art, the a #er is re9uired to 3aintain at a ti3es a high standard of ega &roficienc#, and todevote his fu attention, s7i , and co3&etence to the case, regard ess of its i3&ortance and

hether he acce&ts it for a fee or for free. 8e is e &ected to act ith honest# in a his dea ings,es&ecia # ith the courts. 'hese &rinci& es are e3 odied in Ru e 1.01 of Canon 1, Ru e 10.01 of Canon 10, Canon 1 and Ru e 1?.0 of Canon 1? of the CPR.Att#. uesada s fai ure to attend theschedu ed conference hearings, des&ite due notice and ithout an# &ro&er :ustification, e hi its

27

http://www.scribd.com/doc/196404657/5044http://www.scribd.com/doc/196404657/5044http://www.scribd.com/doc/196404657/5044http://www.scribd.com/doc/196404657/5044


28/46

his ine cusa e ac7 of care and di igence in 3anaging his c ient s cause in vio ation of Canon 1 and Ru e 1?.0 , Canon 1? of the CPR.'tephan =runet and Lirginia omanillo =runet v. Atty. onald :. uaren ) A.C. *o. 1016K,$arch 10, 201K . Jor having vio ated Canons 1 and 1? of the CPR, Att#. @uaren as sus&ended fro3 the &ractice of a for si 3onths. Des&ite acce&tance of the a3ount of P ,000.00 for thetit ing of co3& ainants ot, he fai ed to &erfor3 his o igation and a o ing 5 #ears to e a&se

ithout an# &rogress on the referra . S.C. reiterated that the &ractice of a is not a usiness and it

re3inded a #ers that the dut# to &u ic service and to the ad3inistration of :ustice shou d e the &ri3ar# consideration of a #ers, ho 3ust su ordinate their &ersona interests or hat the# o eto the3se ves. a #ering is not &ri3ari # 3eant to e a 3one#H3a7ing venture, and a advocac# is not a ca&ita that necessari # #ie ds &rofits

ulian 4enilla v. Atty. Quintin 4. Alcid* r.* A.C. *o. -1K-, Se&te3 er K, 201 / 'he Court he d that Att#. A cid, +r. vio ated Canon 1? and Ru es 1?.0 and 1?.0K of the Code of Professiona Res&onsi i it# hen he fi ed a cri3ina case for estafa hen the facts of the case ou d have

arranted the fi ing of a civi case for reach of contract4 hen the case as dis3issed heco33itted another si3i ar under # fi ing a civi case for s&ecific &erfor3ance and da3ages

efore the R'C, hen he shou d have fi ed it ith the $'C4 and he did not a so a&&riseco3& ainant of the status of the cases. Att#. A cid, +r. is not on # gui t# of inco3&etence in hand ing the cases. 8is ac7 of &rofessiona is3 in dea ing ith co3& ainant is gross and ine cusa e. 'he

ega &rofession dictates that it is not a 3ere dut#, ut an o igation, of a a #er to accord thehighest degree of fide it#, ;ea and fervor in the &rotection of the c ient s interest.&arlito 4. &arandang v. Atty. ilbert '. Obmina* 7. 6. o. G?1') 7%r. 21) 200-."n a +une , 201case, S.C. reiterated that the Attorne# s neg igence to fi e an a&&e ate rief and his fai ure toinfor3 the c ient that the case as dis3issed ecause of his neg igence is gui t# of vio ating Canon 1?. Si3i ar #, a a #er ho fa sifies the date of recei&t of the decision to 3a7e it a&&ear that the ti3e as fi ed ithin the &rescri&tive &eriod is a so gui t# of neg igence and as s a&&ed

ith a 3onetar# fine.

(rmelinda :ad vda. ,e ,omingue7* represented by her Attorney-in-Fact* Licente A. 4ichonv. Atty. Arnulfo ;. Agleron Sr., A.C. *o. 5 5-, $arch 10, 201K .'he S. C. he d that once a a #er ta7es u& the cause of his c ient, he is dut# ound to serve his c ient ith co3&etence, and toattend to his c ient s cause ith di igence, care and devotion regard ess of hether he acce&ts it for a fee or for free. 8e o es fide it# to such cause and 3ust a a#s e 3indfu of the trust and confidence re&osed on hi3. Jor his fai ure to &ro3&t # fi e a & eading he a read# signed on theground that his c ient did not send the fi ing fees and 0N of his &rofessiona fees, the S.C. assus&ended for three 3onths 'he Court said that this act e hi ited his ac7 of &rofessiona is3.

!o summarize

"n the =ut* to )er6e ith (om/etence and =iligence7i, AdeKuate /rotection A la *er must ensure the a//ro/riate legal reliefs for his client.7ii, #egligence A client is 9ound 9* the negligence of his counsel.

7iii, (olla9orating (ounsel ith the consent of the client a colla9orating counsel ma*/artici/ate in an on going case

8. e/resentation ith zeal ithin legal 9ounds

Q. What is the recourse of a party who has lost a case? 28

http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/pdf/web/viewer.html?file=/jurisprudence/2014/march2014/10164.pdfhttp://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/pdf/web/viewer.html?file=/jurisprudence/2014/march2014/10164.pdfhttp://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/pdf/web/viewer.html?file=/jurisprudence/2014/march2014/10164.pdfhttp://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2013/september2013/9149.pdfhttp://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/pdf/web/viewer.html?file=/jurisprudence/2014/march2014/5359.pdfhttp://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/pdf/web/viewer.html?file=/jurisprudence/2014/march2014/10164.pdfhttp://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/pdf/web/viewer.html?file=/jurisprudence/2014/march2014/10164.pdfhttp://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2013/september2013/9149.pdfhttp://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/pdf/web/viewer.html?file=/jurisprudence/2014/march2014/5359.pdf


29/46

A. eG Lerified &omplaint of "omas '. ;erdegia against +on. Licente '.(. Leloso* etc. T eGesolution dated October * #CB/ in O&A %4% 3o. B#-#C$-&A- against Atty. +omobono

Ada7a "", "P" *o. 12H205HCAH+IA.C. *o. 10 00, Dece3 er 10, 201 . S.C. he d ad3inistrativeco3& aints against :ustices cannot and shou d not su stitute for a&&ea and other :udicia re3edies against an assai ed decision or ru ing. Ehi e a a #er has a dut# to re&resent his c ient

ith ;ea , he 3ust do so ithin the ounds &rovided # a . "t found Att#. Ada;a gui t# of indirect conte3&t for his fai ure to i3&ress u&on his c ient the features of the Phi i&&ine adversaria s#ste3, the su stance of the a on ethics and res&ect for the :udicia s#ste3, and his o n fai ureto heed hat his duties as a &rofessiona and as an officer of the Court de3and of hi3 in acting for his c ient efore the courts.

Antonio ;. :oren7ana v. udge ;a. &ecilia %. Austria* "&* =r. #* =atangas &ity* A.$. *o.R'+H0-H2200, A&ri 2, 201K . 'he Court reiterated the ru e that in ad3inistrative cases and dis ar3ent &roceedings, the co3& ainant ears the onus of &roving the aver3ents of hisco3& aint # su stantia evidence. "n this case, the a egations of grave a use of authorit#,irregu arit# in the &erfor3ance of dut#, grave ias and &artia it#, and ac7 of circu3s&ection aredevoid of 3erit ecause the co3& ainant fai ed to esta ish +udge Austria s ad faith, 3a ice or i

i . 'he co3& ainant 3ere # &ointed to circu3stances ased on 3ere con:ectures and su&&ositions. 'hese, # the3se ves, ho ever, are not sufficient to &rove the accusations. (vengranting that the !udge erred in the e)ercise of her !udicial functions* these are legal errorscorrectible not by a disciplinary action* but by !udicial remedies that are readily available tothe complainant. An administrative complaint is not the appropriate remedy for every irregular or erroneous order or decision issued by a !udge where a !udicial remedy isavailable* such as a motion for reconsideration or an appeal.

7i, ?se of fair and honest means A la *er must onl* em/lo* such legal strateg* allo ed 9*

the circumstances.7ii, (lient+s fraud A la *er must not condone an* illegal acts of his client.7iii, Procedure in handling the case !he la *er+s acce/tance and the limits of theengagement of his ser6ices must 9e made clear at the commencement of the la *er clientrelationshi/.67 F 13 7 la! er shall re%resent his client !ith eal !ithin the bounds of the la!.

Q. When will the lawyer be held accountable for violation of the responsibility to serve hisclient with 7eal within the bounds of law? ,imagiba v. ;ontalvo* r . 7dm. 6ase o. 1*2*) Fctober 1 ) 1331. a #er as dis arred for stretching for a 3ost K- #ears a case invo ving a &ro ate of a i fro3 hich 3ore than other tencri3ina and civi suits ere instituted .

7. Ong v. 5nto ) 7dm. 6ase o. 2*1G) "ebruar 0) 2(('. S.C. sus&ended a a #er for si 3onthsfor using harassing tactics to harass a &art# fro3 hi3 his c ient anted to o tain chi d su&&ort.67 F 2( 7 la! er shall charge onl fair and reasonable fees.

&7arina ". ;alvar v. Eraft Foods 4hils.* %nc.* et al ., @.R. *o. 1? -52, Se&te3 er -, 2011/'hecase ste33ed fro3 the e ecution of a fina decision ith the C.A. in a a or itigation. Petitioner $a var, ho ever, entered into a co3&ro3ise agree3ent ith the res&ondents &ending a&&ea

ithout infor3ing her counse . $a var s counse fi ed a $otion to "ntervene to Protect Attorne# sRights.

S.C., on considerations of e9uit# and fairness, disa&&roved of the tendencies of c ientsco3&ro3ising their cases ehind the ac7s of their attorne#s for the &ur&ose of unreasona #

29

http://www.scribd.com/doc/201374491/12-205-CA-Jhttp://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/pdf/web/viewer.html?file=/jurisprudence/2014/april2014/RTJ-09-2200.pdfhttp://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/pdf/web/viewer.html?file=/jurisprudence/2014/april2014/RTJ-09-2200.pdfhttp://www.scribd.com/doc/201374491/12-205-CA-Jhttp://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/pdf/web/viewer.html?file=/jurisprudence/2014/april2014/RTJ-09-2200.pdfhttp://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/pdf/web/viewer.html?file=/jurisprudence/2014/april2014/RTJ-09-2200.pdf


30/46

reducing or co3& ete # setting to naught the sti&u ated contingent fees. "t said that even if theco3&ensation of the attorne# is de&endent on # on inning the itigation, the su se9uent

ithdra a of the case u&on the c ient s initiative ou d not de&rive the attorne# of the egiti3ateco3&ensation for &rofessiona services rendered.

Attorne*+s fees 7i, Acce/tance feesD 7ii, (ontingenc* fee arrangementsD 7iii, Attorne*+s

liensD 7i6, ees and contro6ersies ith clientsD 76, (once/ts of attorne*+s fees 7a, ordinar*conce/t and 79, extraordinar* conce/t.

"n La *er+s fees and other chargesead ule B/ * 'ection #1* ules of &ourt on &ompensation of Attorneysule B/ * 'ection B#* ules of &ourt on &ompensation for Attorneys de officioule B/ * 'ection /0* ules of &ourt on &harging :ien

Q. What is a charging lien? 7. 7 charging lien is the right !hich the attorne has u%on all judgments for %a ment of mone )and executions in %ursuance of such judgments) obtained in favor of the client) to securereimbursement for advances made and %a ment of attorne -s fees.

Q. What is a retaining fee? 7. 7 retaining fee can %artake of an acce%tance fee and covers %rofessional fees for servicesrendered including the %a ment of such amount as ma be agreed u%on b the %arties in thecourse of handling a legal matter for the client.

ead ule #C.CB of &4 and ule B/ * 'ection #1 on factors to consider in charging feesimportance of the sub!ect matter of controversy* e)tent of services rendered* professional

standing2

Q. What is the concept of Quantum ;erui t: 7. 7 la! er !ill receive such amount commensurate the services he rendered during the %eriod of la! er client relationshi% !hich ma have been severed b either %art during the %endenc of thereferral. &t ma also collected in event of the death of counsel before the resolution of the case.

Q. What is champerty? 7. 7 cham%ertous contract ma result !here a la! er assumes all ex%enses for litigation andreimbursement is contingent on the outcome of the case. This is strictl %rohibited under +ule 10(* of the 65+.&hamperty is different from a contingent fee contract because in the latter the lawyer getsreimbursed for the advances made for the client in the course of representation* whether

he wins the suit or notN only the amount of professional fees is contingent upon winning .Q. ;ay a lawyer have a lien on a !udgment to protect his professional fees?

7. ,es. &onchita =alta7ar* et al. v. Atty. uan =. =aUe7* r.* A.C. *o. -0-1, Dece3 er 11, 201 .Section 26, Ru e 1 ? of the Ru es of Court a o s an attorne# to intervene in a case to &rotect hisrights concerning the &a#3ent of his co3&ensation. 'he court, 3a# at its discretion, a o the

a #er to have a ien u&on a :udg3ents for the &a#3ent of 3one# rendered in a case in hich hisservices have een retained # the c ient. "n this case, ho ever, the contract for ega services isin the nature of a cha3&ertous contract L an agree3ent here # an attorne# underta7es to &a# the e &enses of the &roceedings to enforce the c ient s rights in e change for so3e argain tohave a &art of the thing in dis&ute. Such contracts are &rohi ited under Canon 16.0K of the CPR,

hich states that a #ers sha not end 3one# to a c ient, e ce&t hen in the interest of :ustice,the# have to advance necessar# e &enses in a ega 3atter the# are hand ing for the c ient.

Q. What is the nature of a champertous contract? 30

http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/pdf/web/viewer.html?file=/jurisprudence/2013/december2013/9091.pdfhttp://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/pdf/web/viewer.html?file=/jurisprudence/2013/december2013/9091.pdf


31/46

A. %n eG "he &on!ugal 4artnership of the 'pouses Licente &adavedo and =enita Arcoy- &adavedo both deceased2* substituted by their +eirs* namelyG +erminia* 4astora* +eirs of Fructiosa* +eirs of aJuel* (vangeline* Licente* r.* and Armand* all surnamed &adavedo , @.R. *o. 1 1??. +anuar# 15, 201K. 'he Court he d that the contingent fee of P2000 shou d contro the agree3ent of counse and his c ients a though the sa3e as contingent u&on inning the case. 'he Court said that granting arguendo that the s&ouses Cadavedo and Att#. aca#aindeed entered into an ora contingent fee agree3ent securing to the atter oneHha f of the su :ect

ot, the agree3ent is void. 'he agree3ent is cha3&ertous and is contrar# to &u ic &o ic#. An# agree3ent # a a #er to Bconduct the itigation in his o n account, to &a# the e &enses thereof or to save his c ient therefro3 and to receive as his fee a &ortion of the &roceeds of the :udg3ent is o no ious to the a .<

;. Preser6ation of client+s confidences 7i, Prohi9ited disclosures and useD 7ii, =isclosureshen allo ed "he disclosures made a client to a lawyer are covered by the privileged

communications rule. "he lawyer may* however* disclose information relayed to him by aclient when the latter is about to commit a crime or when there is a dispute between thelawyer and his client and the information is vital in the defense of the lawyer.

Q. When is lawyer released from his non-disclosure duty? A. 4alm v. Atty. Felipe %ledan* r. A.C. *o. ?2K , +u # 2K, 200-. 'he S.C . he d that a a #er isre eased fro3 his nonHdisc osure dut# hen he fi es ith a govern3ent agenc# a & eading or an# docu3ent on eha f of his c ient. 'he Court said that the right to infor3ation is &rotected under the

i of Rights.

67 F 22 7 la! er shall !ithdra! his services onl for good cause and u%on noticea%%ro%riate in the circumstances.

2@)article A&&&) 13?G 6onstitution %rovides that 6ongress shall %rovide for #ualifications but one mustbe citi en of the 5hili%%ines and member of the 5hili%%ine Bar.3. (ommon Kualification for all mem9ers of the Cudiciar* )ection 873, Article V''' 1


32/46

Q. ,oes &ongress get one representative for the +ouse of epresentatives and onerepresentative for the 'enate at the =&? 3o. &have7 v. =&* et al.* . . 3o. #C##1#* uly B0* #CB# / Congress( the 8ouse of Re&s. and the Senate) is entit ed on # to one seat in the + C and not one for each house.+ecent rulings related to the JB6IQ. ;ay the =& reJuire that first level court !udges render $ years of service before being Jualified for a promotion to the "&?

A.


33/46

Q.&an mere allegations be the basis of administrative complaints? A. 3o. %n eG '.&. esolution dated # April #CC/ in . . 3os. B1M B0 and B1$ ##* Atty.4ena2 MM SCRA $/C #CB#2G A 3otion to inhi it the &onente in a &ending case efore the S.C.

ased on sus&icion of ri er# in the for3 of a rand ne $ercedes en; and co usion ithanother senior associate :ustice of S.C. cannot e given due course. Counse 3ust sho &roof that a connection and direct corre ation e ists et een his fai ure to receive a co of its $otionfor C arification of the other &art#. 8e a eged that the incident did not a o hi3 to refute thea egations therein. 'he Court said that such i3&utation is Bco3& ete # untena e and irres&onsi e.<Q.%s se)ual harassment of a cler of court sufficient for dismissal from service?

A.


34/46

Q. &an a !udge hold a person who par ed his car in the slot reserved for said !udge incontempt? 3o. %nonog v. udge %bay* A. $. *o. R' +H0-H21 5, +u # 2?, 200-, 5-K SCRA 16? . A :udge asfined # the Court for Bo&&ressive< conduct for citing a driver in conte3&t of court for having

&ar7ed the car of his e3& o#er in the &ar7ing s ot assigned to the :udge. 'he :udge i3&osed u&onthe driver a 3onetar# fine.

Q. %s a !udge reJuired to supervise his staff in their performance of duties?

A. Sections 1 0@Q. ;ay a !udge with a tendency to collect money from litigants be dismissed?

A. &oncerned :awyers of =ulacan v. udge Lilalon-4ornillos , 5-2 SCRA 6/ A :udge asdis3issed fro3 service for gross 3isconduct. vidence as &resented to esta ish the &ro&ensit# to e act 3one# fro3 itigants and a #ers. She a so e hi ited 3anifest ias in her de3eanor incourt.;ay a !udge be allowed to propound Juestions? %t depends. 4aco v. Quilala , et. A ., A. $. *o. R' +H02H16--, K1 SCRA 6K. A :udge together

ith the C er7 of Court and the court stenogra&her assigned to his court ere a so sanctioned # the S.C. 'he Court said that e)cept for clarificatory Juestions , the :udge 3a# not e a o ed toas7 9uestions that ou d e icit ans ers to favor one of the &arties to the case. *ote/ "t is not a so

34

http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/pdf/web/viewer.html?file=/jurisprudence/2014/march2014/RTJ-08-2151.pdfhttp://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/pdf/web/viewer.html?file=/jurisprudence/2014/april2014/RTJ-09-2200.pdfhttp://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/pdf/web/viewer.html?file=/jurisprudence/2014/april2014/RTJ-09-2200.pdfhttp://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/pdf/web/viewer.html?file=/jurisprudence/2014/march2014/RTJ-08-2151.pdfhttp://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/pdf/web/viewer.html?file=/jurisprudence/2014/april2014/RTJ-09-2200.pdfhttp://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/pdf/web/viewer.html?file=/jurisprudence/2014/april2014/RTJ-09-2200.pdf


35/46

&ro&er for the :udge to a o the C er7 of Court to conduct an# &roceeding in the a sence of the :udge and for the stenogra&her to transcri e such &roceedings.Q. ,o Juestions of impartiality raised against a member of the &ourt become moot after said member is impeached?

A. Sections 1 1 @Q. ;ay a disciplinary case be filed if a !udge forgets to sign an order granting provisional freedom?


36/46

four (K) cases hich cou d no onger e ocated or reconstituted des&ite di igent efforts # hissuccessor. +udge Soriano as res&onsi e for 3anaging his court efficient # to ensure the &ro3&t de iver# of court services, es&ecia # the s&eed# dis&osition of cases. 'hus, +udge Soriano asfound gui t# of gross inefficienc# and gross ignorance of the a , and fined PK0,000 to e ta7enfro3 the a3ount ithhe d fro3 his retire3ent enefits.

eG Failure of Former udge Antonio A. &arbonell to ,ecide &ases 'ubmitted for ,ecisionand esolve 4ending ;otions in the "&* =ranch #0* 'an Fernando* :a 5nion , A.$. *o. 0?H5H 05HR'C, +u # -, 201 .'he S. C. said that Car one s fai ure to decide cases ithin thereg a3entar# -0Hda# &eriod ithout an# :ustifia e and credi e reasons constitutes grossinefficienc#. 'he reiterated that as a front ine officia of the +udiciar#, a tria :udge shou d a a#sact ith efficienc# and &ro it#. 8e is dut#H ound not on # to e faithfu to the a , ut a so to3aintain &rofessiona co3&etence. 'he &ursuit of e ce ence ought a a#s to e his guiding

&rinci& e. Such dedication is the east that he can do to sustain the trust and confidence that the &u ic have re&osed in hi3 and the institution he re&resents. 'he Court reduced thereco33ended &ena t# of fine fro3 P50,000 to P20,000 considering that +udge Car one hasretired due to disa i it#, his &oor hea th condition 3a# have great # contri uted to his ina i it# toefficient # &erfor3 his duties as a tria :udge.

elated case on (!ectmentG ershon 3. ,ulang v. udge ;ary ocelyn . egencia* ;&"&* Asturias-=alamban* &ebu* A.$. *o. $'+H1KH1?K1, +une 2, 201K . 'he Su&re3e Court he d that &ursuant to Ru e .05, Canon of the Code of +udicia Conduct, &ro3&t dis&osition of cases isattained asica # through the efficienc# and dedication to dut# of :udges. "n this case, the civi case as a read# su 3itted for reso ution. eing an e:ect3ent case, it is governed # the Ru es of Su33ar# Procedure hich c ear # sets a &eriod of 0 da#s fro3 the su 3ission of the ast affidavit or &osition &a&er ithin hich a decision 3ust e issued. "n vio ation of this ru e, +udgeRegencia rendered :udg3ent on # 3ore than t o #ears ater the :udge fai ed to &roffer an# acce&ta e reason in de a#ing the dis&osition of the e:ect3ent case, thus, 3a7ing her ad3inistrative # ia e for undue de a# in rendering a decision. .

Q. %s the failure to decide a case within the C day period an automatic ground for discipline in all cases?

3o. ,anilo (. :ubaton v. udge ;ary osephine 4. :a7aro* egional "rial &ourt* =r. 01* Antipolo* i7al , A.$. R'+H12H2 20, Se&te3 er 2, 201 . 'he S.C. he d that the -0Hda# &eriod

ithin hich a sitting tria +udge shou d decide a case or reso ve a &ending 3atter is 3andator#. "f the +udge cannot decide or reso ve ithin the &eriod, she can e a o ed additiona ti3e to do so,

&rovided she fi es a ritten re9uest for the e tension of her ti3e to decide the case or reso ve the &ending 3atter. 'he ru e, a eit 3andator#, is to e i3& e3ented ith an a areness of the

i3itations that 3a# &revent a +udge fro3 eing efficient. %nder the circu3stances s&ecific to thiscase, it ou d e un7ind and inconsiderate on the &art of the Court to disregard +udge a;aro s

i3itations and e act a rigid and itera co3& iance ith the ru e. Eith her undenia # heav# inherited doc7et and the arge vo u3e of her officia or7 oad, she 3ost &ro a # fai ed to note theneed for her to a&& # for the e tension of the -0Hda# &eriod to reso ve the $otion to Dis3iss.

E. =ut* to A6oid (onflict ith Judicial es/onsi9ilities

67 F I 7 judge should regulate extra judicial activities to minimi e the risk of conflict of judicialduties. >Sections 1 @Q. &an a !udge convicted be immediately suspended?

36

http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/pdf/web/viewer.html?file=/jurisprudence/2014/june2014/MTJ-14-1841.pdfhttp://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2013/september2013/RTJ-12-2320.pdfhttp://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/pdf/web/viewer.html?file=/jurisprudence/2014/june2014/MTJ-14-1841.pdfhttp://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2013/september2013/RTJ-12-2320.pdf


37/46

A. 3o. e. &onviction of udge Angeles , A. $. *o. R' +H06H-H5215, 5K SCRA. 'he Court he d that a :udge cannot e sus&ended in the discharge of her res&onsi i ities unti after conviction of acri3ina offense she a eged # co33itted has eco3e fina and e ecutor#.Q. %s the udge free to use any vulgar language in court?

A. 3o. uan7on v. udge ufon , 5 SCRA ?. 'he Court re3inded the fa3i # court :udge toavoid using vu gar anguage in the course of the tria . %se of vu gar anguage insu ts a itness and 3a# a so di3inish the res&ect of the itigants to ards the court ecause court &roceedings arehe d in &u ic.Q. ;ay a !udge be disciplined for being seen dining with a person that has a pending casebefore his court?

A.


38/46

'V. =isKualification of Justices and Judges 7 ule 138,Prohi9ition on /ractice of /rofession #o mem9er of the Cudiciar* ma* /ractice their /rofession during their incum9enc*.

A. Prescri/ti6e =ut* to resol6e /ending mattersAll matters /ending ith the )u/reme (ourt must 9e resol6ed ith 24 monthsD ! el6e 712, months for all collegiate a//ellate courtsD and!hree 73, months for all other lo er courts. 7)ection 1571, 1ex. &f judge served as !eddings%onsor to one of the litigants or litigant is his :kasambaha .=@

&anon / of the 3ew &ode of udicial &onduct for the 4hilippine udiciary statesG:+ule '.12. 7 Judge should take no %art in %roceeding !here the judge-s im%artiall mightreasonabl be #uestioned. These cases include) among others) %roceedings !hereIThe judge has %ersonal kno!ledge of dis%uted evidentiar facts concerning the %roceeding/The judge served as executor) administrator) guardian) trustees or la! er in the case or matter in controvers )or a former associate of the judge served as counsel during their association) or the judge

or la! er !as a material !itness therein/The judge-s ruling in a lo!er court is the subject of revie!/The judge is related b consanguinit or affinit to a %art litigant !ithin the sixth degree or to co counsel !ithin the fourth degree/The judge kno!s that his s%ouse or child has a financial interest) as heir) legatee) creditor)fiduciar ) or other!ise) in the subject matter in controvers or in a %art to the %roceeding)or an other interest that could be substantiall affected b the outcome of the %roceeding.=

1. Voluntar* 'nhi9ition When is voluntary inhibition allowed? 7 judge is allo!ed under thesecond %aragra%h of Section 1 of +ule 1'G of the +ules of 6ourt) su%ra) to voluntar inhibitfrom a case for just or valid reasons other than those grounds of dis#ualification.

Q.%s a member of the !udiciary reJuired to give notice of his inhibition to the party litigants? A.


39/46

7. 7 judge ma motu %ro%rio or on motion of a %art voluntaril recluse from a case if he has goodor valid reasons !hich render him inca%able of acting objectivel on the case.Q. When should a !udge not inhibit himself P

7. 7bsent an ground for dis#uali

Legal Ethics Bar Exams 2015 Pointers (1)

Documents

Transcript of Legal Ethics Bar Exams 2015 Pointers (1)