Legal Ethics Bar Reviewer

UST LAW PRE-WEEK NOTES 2014
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
A. LEGAL ETHICS
1.
Practice of Law; Privilege
Practice of law means any activity, in or out of

court, which requires the application of law, legal
procedure, knowledge, training, and experience. (Cayetano
v. Monsod, G.R. No. 100113, Sept. 3, 1991)
The practice of law is not a natural, property or
constitutional right but a mere privilege. It is not a right
granted to anyone who demands it but a privilege to be
extended or withheld in the exercise of sound judicial
discretion. It is a privilege accorded only to those who
measure up to certain rigid standards of mental and moral
fitness.
Practice of law; Profession
A legal profession is not a business. It is not a money-making
trade just like a businessman employing strategy for the
purpose of monetary gain. It is a sacred profession imbued
with public interest whose primary objective is public
service , as it is an essential part in the administration of
justice and a profession in pursuit of which pecuniary
reward is considered merely incidental.
2.
Qualifications
Any person heretofore duly admitted as a member of the

bar, or hereafter admitted as such in accordance with the
provisions of the rule, and who is in good and regular
standing, is entitled to practice law. (Sec. 1, Rule 138,
Revised Rules of Court (RRC)
Under Sections 2, 5 and 6 of Rule 138, the applicant
must be:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Citizen of the Philippines;

At least 21 years of age;
Of Good moral character;
Resident of the Philippines;
Must produce before the SC satisfactory Evidence
of good moral character;
6. No charges against him, involving moral turpitude,
have been filed or are pending in any court in the
Philippines (Sec. 2, Rule 138, RRC);
7. Must have complied with the Academic
requirements;
8. Must Pass the bar examinations;
9. Take the lawyers Oath; and
10. Sign the Roll of Attorneys.
3.
Appearance of Non-Lawyers
GR: No. Only those who are licensed to practice law can
appear and handle cases in court.
1|
A: No, because the practice of law is only reserved for those

qualified for the same. Erics appearance in court on behalf
of another is not sanctioned by the rules. A non-lawyer may
only be allowed to appear in court if he is representing
himself not that of another (Sec. 34, Rule 138, Rules of
Court).
Law Student Practice Rule ( Rule 138)
Q: What is the Student Practice Rule?
A: It is the rule authorizing a law student who has
successfully completed his 3rd year of the regular four year
prescribed law curriculum and is enrolled in recognized law
schools clinical legal education program approved by the
Supreme Court, to appear without compensation in any
civil, criminal or administrative case before any trial court,
tribunal, board or officer, to represent indigent clients
accepted by the legal clinic of the law school, under the
direct supervision and control of a member of the IBP
accredited by the law school. (2009 Bar Question)
Q: Bong Tupak, a second year law student, was charged in
the RTC for Forcible Abduction with Rape. Having
knowledge of criminal law ad procedure, he dismissed the
counsel de oficio assigned and appeared for himself. HE
asserted that there was lack of force. Eventually, the RTC
found him guilty of consented abduction and imposed the
penalty. Bong Tupak now assails the decision, saying that
there was violation of due process because he was
allowed to appear for himself and he did not know that
consented abduction is a crime. Decide.
A: The RTC should have appointed a counsel de oficio to
assist the accused even if it was not sought or requested by
the accused. (2012 Bar Question, MCQ)
4.
Law student practice

Non-lawyers in court can appear for a party in MTC
Non-lawyers in administrative tribunal can
represent parties in tribunals such as NLRC,
DARAB, Cadastral Courts.
The 5 Strike Rule in taking the Bar
The Former 5-Strike Rule was lifted by the Supreme Court

en banc in a resolution on September 3, 2013. Thus, to this
day, the taking of the bar has no limit.
Non Lawyers in Court
a.
XPN:
a.
b.
c.
Q: Eric, a labor federation president, represented Luisa, a

dismissed WXT employee, before the NLRC. Atty. John
represented Luisa's two co-complainants. In due course,
the NLRC reinstated the three complainants with
backwages and awarded 25% of the backwages as
attorneys fees, 15% for Atty. John and 10% for Eric, a nonlawyer. When WXT appealed to the Court of Appeals, Atty.
John questioned Erics continued appearance before that
court on Luisas behalf, he not being a lawyer. Is Eric's
appearance before the Court of Appeals valid? (2011 Bar
Question)
Law student practice

b. Non-lawyers in court can appear for a party in MTC
Note: Section 34, Rule 138 of the Revised Rules of
Court expressly allows pro se practice or the right
of a non-member of the bar to engage in limited
practice of law. (Antiquiera, CPR, p. 9)
UST LAW| ACADEMICS COMMITTEE

c.
Non-lawyers in administrative tribunal can

represent parties in tribunals such as NLRC,
DARAB, Cadastral Courts.
Limits on the Appearance of Non-Lawyers

1.
He should confine his work to non- adversary

contentions;
2.
He should not undertake purely legal work, such as the

examination or cross- examination of witnesses, or the
presentation of evidence; and
3.
His services should not be habitually rendered. He

should not charge or collect attorneys fees. (PAFLU v.
Binalbagan Isabela Sugar Co., G.R. No. L-23959, Nov.
29,1971)
Non Lawyers in Administrative Bodies

1. Non-lawyers may be allowed by law to appear, such as
union representatives allowed to represent union
member in the NLRC, but subject to three limitations:
a. should not undertake purely legal work;
b. should not render services habitually; and
c. Should not charge or collect attorneys fees.
2. Proceedings
appearing:
where
lawyers
prohibited
from
Allowed to practice
but
subject
to
restrictions
Approval
department
required
of
head
8.
1.
2.
Mayors
Senators
members of the House
of Representatives,
3. Vice-Governors
4. Vice Mayors
5. members
of
the
Sanggunians
Civil Service employees (Catu v.
Rellosa, AC 5738, Feb. 9, 2008
[punong barangay]; Abella v.
Cruzaba, AC 5088, June 3, 2009
[Register of Deeds employee])
Q: Atty. Fred is a law practitioner and headed a law firm

bearing his name and those of his partners. When Atty.
Fred was elected Congressman, his clients needs were
handled by the other partners. Later, A, a newly
proclaimed congressman-friend, faced an election protest
before the HRET, and sought the help of Congressman
Fred who immediately directed his law firm to appear for
A. B, the protestant, sought the disqualification of Cong.
Freds law firm from appearing before the HRET because
Cong. Fred is prohibited from practicing his profession.
Decide.
A: No, the prohibition is on Cong. Fred from personally
appearing and not to his partners. (2012 Bar Question,
MCQ)
4. Small claims proceedings (Secs. 16 & 17, Rule on Small

Claims Cases)
Q: Vice Mayor Ron is a well-loved law practitioner because

he assists his constituents especially the indigents. Ed, one
of his friends, who is employed in as Cashier in the Register
of Deeds, sought his assistance because he was charged
with Malversation in court. Can Vice Mayor Ron appear as
counsel of Ed?
4. Sanctions for practice or appearance without

authority
A: No, because Ed is charged with an offense in relation to

his office. (2012 Bar Question, MCQ)
3. Proceedings before the Katarungan Pambarangay (Art.

415, Local Government Code)
Lawyers
without
authority
this
constitutes
malpractice
and
violation
of
the
lawyers oath, for
which he may be
suspended
or
disbarred
5.
Persons not lawyers

may be punished for
contempt of court
Public Officials and the Practice of Law
Prohibited
practicing
from
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
2|
President
Department
secretaries
judges and justices
prosecutors
Solicitor General and
members of the OSG
members
of
Constitutional
Commissions
Governors
Prohibitions and disqualifications of former government

attorneys:
(a) Under R.A. 6713 retired government officials are
allowed to practice their professions, but for a period of one
year after their retirement, they are not allowed to practice
in the office where they had previously been connected.
(b) Under the Code of Professional Responsibility - A
lawyer may not, after leaving government service, accept
engagement or employment in connection with any matter
in which he had intervened while in said service (Rule 6.03;
PCGG v. Sandiganbayan, 455 SCRA 526).
(c) Under the Judiciary Retirement Act (R.A. 910)
retired members of the judiciary cannot appear as counsel
in cases, civil, criminal or administrative, where the
government is the adverse party.

A. Lawyers
authorized
government:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
to
represent
the
Members of the Office of the Solicitor General

State prosecutors
Members of the Office of the Government
Corporate Counsel
Officers who may be authorized by law.
Private lawyers retained by government
entities with the approval of the OSG or GOCC
and the Commission on Audit (Rey A. Vargas
v. Atty. Michael A. Ignes, A.C. No. 8096, July 5,
2010).
B. Lawyers Oath:
I, ______ do solemnly swear that: I will maintain
allegiance to the Republic of the Philippines; will support
the Constitution and obey the laws as well as the legal order
of duly constituted authorities therein; I will do no
falsehood nor consent to the doing of the same in court;
I will not wittingly or willingly promote or sue any
groundless, false or unlawful suit, not give aid nor consent
to the same; I will delay no man for money or malice, and
will conduct myself as a lawyer according to the best of my
knowledge and discretion, with all good fidelity as well to
the courts as to my clients; and I impose upon myself this
voluntary obligation, without any mental reservation or
purpose of evasion,
SO HELP ME GOD.
DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF A LAWYER
First and Most Important Duty of a Lawyer:
Duty to the court. The lawyer is an officer of the
court who sets the judicial machinery with the main mission
of assisting the court in the administration of justice. His
public duties take precedence over his private duties.
Q: True or False, the duty of a lawyer to his client is more
paramount that his duty to the Court.
A: False, a lawyers paramount duty is to the Court. This is
because he is an officer of the court. (2009 Bar Question)
1. Duties to Society
1. Uphold the Constitution, Obey the laws of the
land, and Promote respect for the law and legal
processes (Canon 1, CPR. (Canon
a. Not engage in unlawful, dishonest,
immoral and deceitful conduct. Rule
1.01)
a. Not counsel or abet activities aimed at
defiance of the law and lessening
confidence in the legal system, (Rule
1.02)
b. Not encourage any suit or proceeding
or delay and any mans cause. (Rule
1.03)
3|
c.
Encourage his clients to avoid, and/or

settle a controversy if it will admit of a
fair settlement. (Rule 1.04)
Deceitful Conduct is an act that has the proclivity for

fraudulent and deceptive misrepresentation, artifice or
device that is used upon another who is ignorant of the fact,
to the prejudice and damage of the party imposed upon.
(CPR Annotated, PhilJA)
Unlawful Conduct is a transgression of any provision of law,
which need not be a penal law. The presence of evil intent
on the part of the lawyer is not essential in order to bring
his act or omission within the terms of this Rule.
Immoral Conduct refers to a conduct which is willful,
flagrant, or shameless, and which shows a moral
indifference to the opinion of the good and respectable
members of the community. To warrant disciplinary action,
the act must not only be merely immoral but GROSSLY
IMMORAL.
Moral Turpitude
Q: Atty. Candido commented in a newspaper that the
decision of the decision of the Court of Appeals was
influenced by a powerful relative of the prevailing party.
The appellate court found him guilty of indirect contempt.
Does this involve moral turpitude? Explain.
A: Moral Turpitude has been defined as everything which is
done contrary to justice, modesty or good morals, an act of
baseness, vileness or depravity in the private and social
duties which a man owes his fellowmen, or to society in
general, contrary to justice, modesty or good morals.
(Soriano v. Dizon). Based on this definition, it would appear
that the published comment of Atty. Candido does not
constitute Moral Turpitude although contemptuous.
(2010 Bar Question)
Canon 2
1.
A lawyer shall make his services available in an

efficient and convenient manner
a. Shall not reject, except for valid reasons,
the cause of the defenseless or
oppressed (Rule 2.01). But should not
accept more cases than he can handle
(Canoy v. Ortiz, 453 SCRA 410).
b. In case he cannot accept the case, at
least give legal advice to the extent
necessary to safeguard his rights. (Rule
2.02)
c. Shall not do or permit to be done any act
primarily designed to solicit legal
business. (Art. 2.03) (Tan Tek Beng v.
David, 126 SCRA 289; Linsangan vs.
Tolentino (A.C. 6672, Sept. 4, 2009)
d. Shall not charge rates lower than those
customarily prescribed unless the
circumstances so warrant (Rule 2.04)

Canon 3
In making known his legal services, use only true, honest,
fair, dignified and objective information
1. Not use any false, fraudulent, misleading, deceptive,
undignified, self-laudatory or unfair statement of
claim. (Rule 3.01) (Khan v. Simbillo, 409 SCRA 209)
2. Continued use of name of deceased partner permitted
provided firm indicates that he is deceased. (Rule 3.02)
(In re Sycip, Salazar, 92 SCRA 1)
3. When partner joins public office, his name should be
dropped, unless he is allowed to practice law
concurrently (Rule 3.03)
4. Not pay members of media in return for publicity (Rule
3.04)
5.
A lawyer shall participate in the development of the

legal system by initiating or supporting efforts in law
reform and in the improvement of the administration
of justice (Canon 4)
6.
A lawyer shall keep abreast of legal developments;

participate in continuing legal education programs,
support efforts to achieve high standards in law
schools as well as in the practical training of students
and assist in disseminating the law and jurisprudence.
(Dulalia v. Cruz, AC 6854, Aug. 20, 2007)
Examples of Advertisements considered as deceptive

1.
2.
3.
4.
Misstatements of fact
Suggestions that the ingenuity or prior record of a
lawyer rather than the justice of the claim are the
principal factors likely to determine the result
Inclusion of information irrelevant on selecting a
lawyer
Representations concerning the quality of service,
which cannot be measured or verified.
Barratry is an offense of frequently exciting and stirring up

quarrels and suits, either at law or otherwise; lawyers act
of fomenting suits among individuals and offering his legal
services to one of them. Barratry is not a crime under the
Philippine laws. However, it is proscribed by the rules of
legal ethics.
Ambulance chasing is an act of chasing victims of accidents
for the purpose of talking to the said victims (or relatives)
and offering his legal services for the filing of a case against
the person(s) who caused the accident(s). It has spawned a
number of recognized evils such as:
2.
3.
4.
4|
Q: Atty. Melissa witnessed the car accident that resulted

in injury to Manny, a friend of hers. While visiting him at
the hospital, she advised him about what action he
needed to take regarding the accident. Is Atty. Melissa
subject to disciplinary action if she eventually handles the
case for him?
A: No. It is unprofessional for a lawyer to volunteer advice
to bring a lawsuit, except in rare cases where ties of blood,
relationship or trust make it his duty to do so (Canon 28,
CPE). In the case at hand, since Atty. Melissa is a friend of
the injured person, she may not be admonished for
extending some legal advice to a friend in need. (2011 Bar
Question)
Q: Atty. Nelson recently passed the Bar and wanted to
specialize I marine labor law. He gave out calling cards
with his name, address and telephone number in front,
and the following words at the back: We provide legal
assistance to overseas seamen who are repatriated due to
illness, injury or death. We also offer FINANCIAL
ASSISTANCE. Does this constitute ethical misconduct?
A: Yes, because the offer of financial assistance is an
undignified way of luring clients. (2012 Bar Question, MCQ)
Duties to the Legal Profession

The Integrated Bar of the Philippines
Membership in the IBP is Mandatory, even for lawyers
abroad.
Integration of the Bar is the official unification of the entire
lawyer population ordained by the Supreme Court on
January 16, 1973.
Barratry v. Ambulance Chasing
1.
costs and expenses and by settlement made for quick

returns of fees and against just rights of the injured
persons (Hightower v. Detroit Edison Co. 247 NW 97,
1993)
Fomenting of litigation with resulting burdens on the

courts and the public;
Subordination of perjury;
Mulcting of innocent persons by judgments, upon
manufactured causes of action; and
Defrauding of injured persons having proper causes of
action but ignorant of legal rights and court procedures
by means of contracts which retain exorbitant
percentages of recovery and illegal charges for court
Integration is constitutional (In re Integration, 49 SCRA 22)

Membership and Dues
Q: Atty. Gelly passed the Bar in 1975. After taking his oath,
he did not enlist in any IBP chapter because he went to the
USA topursue a Masters Degree. Eventually, he passed
the state bar and specialized in Immigration Law. In 2005,
he returned to the Philippines and was hired by a law firm.
He wishes to pay his IBP dues for the current year but the
IBP is charging him rom 1975 up to the present and
threatening him with expulsion if he does not comply. Is
the IBP correct?
A: Atty. Gelly should pay the dues from 1975 to the present
since membership in the IBP is compulsory. (2012 Bar
Question)

Effect of Non-Payment of Dues
Canon 8
Default in the payment of annual dues for six months shall

warrant suspension of membership in the Integrated Bar,
and default in such payment for one year shall be a ground
for the removal of the name of the delinquent member
from the Roll of Attorneys (Sec. 10, Rule 139-A, RRC) subject
to the requirement of due process
Q: Atty. Y, in his Motion for Reconsideration of the

Decision rendered by the National Labor Relations
Commission (NLRC), alleged that there was connivance of
the NLRC Commissioners with Atty. X for monetary
considerations in arriving at the questioned Decision. He
insulted the Commissioners for their ineptness in
appreciating the facts as borne by the evidence presented.
Atty. X files an administrative complaint against Atty. Y for
using abusive language. Atty. Y posits that as lawyer for
the down-trodden laborers, he is entitled to express his
righteous anger against the Commissioners for having
cheated them; that his allegations in the Motion for
Reconsideration are absolutely privileged; and that
proscription against the use of abusive language does not
cover pleadings filed with the NLRC, as it is not a court, nor
are any of its Commissioners Justices or Judges. Is Atty. Y
administratively liable under the Code of Professional
Responsibility? Explain.
The IBP and its Processes

Principle of Rotation
Pursuant to the principle of rotation, the governorship of a
region shall rotate once in as many terms as the number of
chapters there are in the region, to give every chapter a
chance to represent the region in the Board of Governors.
Thus, in a region composed of 5 chapters, each chapter is
entitled to the governorship once in every 5 terms, or once
every ten (10) years, since a term is two (2) years (Atty.
Magsino et al. v. Atty. Vinluan, A.M. No. 09-5-2-SC,
December 14, 2010)
Prohibited Practice
Q: In the election of national officers of the IBP, the
Supreme Court received reports of electioneering and
extravagance that characterized the campaign conducted
by the 3 candidates (Paculdo, Nisce and Mrs. Drilon) for
President of the IBP. It is alleged that they used
government planes, give free accommodations to voters
to expensive hotels and there has been intervention of
public officials to influence the voting. Is there a violation
of the IBP by-laws? Is there sufficient ground for the
Supreme Court to suspend the oath taking of the officials?
A: Yes. The candidates for the national positions in the IBP
conducted their campaign preparatory to the election on
June 3, 1989 in violation of Section 14 of the IBP by-laws
and the Rules of Court, that the IBP shall be strictly nonpolitical. Also the ethics of the legal profession imposed on
all lawyers has been violated corollary to their obligation to
obey and uphold the constitution and the laws, the duty to
promote respect for law and legal processes and to abstain
activities aimed at the defiance of the law or at lessening
confidence in the legal system. (In Re: IBP Elections, B.M.
491, Oct. 6, 1989
IBP Election
Q: Atty. Aga was appointed as treasurer by the IBP
President with the approval of the Board of Governors for
a term coterminous with that of the President. A year
thereafter, Atty. Aga ran as barangay chairman of their
place, and took a leave of absence of two week to
campaign. May Atty. Aga re-assume as treasurer after his
leave of absence?
A: Atty. Y clearly violated Canon 8 of the CPR and is

administratively liable. A lawyer shall not in his professional
dealings, use language which is abusive, offensive or
otherwise improper. A lawyer shall abstain from
scandalous, offensive or menacing language or behaviour
before the courts. In the case of Johnny Ng v. Atty. Banjamin
Alar, which involves the same facts, the SC held that the
argument that the NLRC is not a court is unavailing. The
lawyer remains a member of the Bar, an oath-bound
servant of the law whose first duty is not to his client but to
the administration of justice and whose conduct ought to
be and must be scrupulously observant of the law and
ethics. (2010 Bar Question)
Canon 9
Q: Atty. Monica Santos-Cruz registered in the firm name
Santos-Cruz Law Office with the DTI as a single
proprietorship. In her stationery, she printed the name o
her husband and a friend who were both non-lawyers as
her senior partners in light of their investments in the firm.
She allowed her husband to give out calling cards bearing
his name as senior partner of the firm and to appear in
courts to move for postponements. Dis Atty. Santos-Cruz
violate the Code of Professional Responsibility? Why?
A: Yes, she did. In the case of Cambaliza v. Tenorio (2004),
which involves the same facts, the Supreme Court held that
a lawyer who allows a non-member of the bar to
misrepresent himself as a lawyerand to practice law is guilty
of violating Canon 9 and Rule 9.01 of the Code of
Professional Responsibility which provides as follows:
Canon 9. A lawyer shall not directly or
indirectly assist in the unauthorized practice of law and
Rule 9.01: A Lawyer shall not delegate to any unauthorized
person the performance of any task which by law may only
be performed by a member of the bar in good standing.
(2010 Bar Question)
A: No, because he is deemed resigned upon the filing of his

certificate of candidacy. (2012 Bar Question, MCQ)
5|

3.
Duty to the Courts
Canon 13
Q: On a Saturday, Atty. Paterno filed a petition for Writ of
Amparo with the CA. Impelled by the urgency of the
issuance of the writ, Atty. Paterno persuaded his friend,
CA Justice Johnny Dela Cruz, to issue the Writ of Amparo
and the notice of hearing without the signature of the two
other Justices members of the CA division. Are Atty.
Paterno and Justice Dela Cruz guilty of unethical conduct?
Explain.
A: Yes. Atty. Paterno violated Canon 13 of the CPR which
provides that a lawyer shall rely on the merits of his cause
and refrain from any impropriety which tends to influence
or gives the appearance of influencing the court. Atty.
Paterno has relied on his friendship with the Justice to
obtain a Writ of Amparo without a hearing. He thus makes
it appear that he can influence the court. Justice Dela Cruz
violated sec. 3, canon 4 of the Code of Judicial Conduct for
the Philippine Judiciary, which provides that judges shall,
in their personal relations with individual members of the
legal profession who practice regularly in their courts, avoid
situations which might reasonable give rise to the suspicion
or appearance of favoritism or partiality. (2009 Bar
Question)
Q: Rico, an amiable, sociable lawyer, owns a share in
Marina Golf Club, easily one of the more posh golf courses.
He relishes hosting parties for government officials and
members of the bench. One day, he had a chance meeting
with a judge in the Intramuros golf course. The two readily
got along well and had since been regularly playing golf
together at the Marina Golf Club. If Atty. Rico does not
discuss cases with members of the bench during parties
and golf games, is he violating the Code of Professional
Responsibility? Explain. How about the members of the
bench who grace the parties of Rico, are they violating the
Code of Judicial Conduct? Explain.
A: Yes. A lawyer shall not extend extraordinary attention or
hospitality to, nor seek opportunity for cultivating
familiarity with judges. Moreover, he should refrain from
any impropriety which gives the appearance of influencing
the court. In regularly playing golf with the judges, Atty.
Rico will certainly raise the suspicion that they discuss cases
during the game, although they actually do not. However, if
Rico is known to be a non-practicing lawyer, there is not
much of an ethical problem.
Members of the bench who grace the parties of
Atty. Rico will be guilty of violating Canon 4 of the New Code
of Judicial Conduct which provides that judges shall, in their
personal relations with individual members of the legal
profession who practice regularly in their court, avoid
situations which might reasonably give rise to the suspicion
of or appearance of partiality. It has been held that if a
judge is seen eating or drinking in public places with a
lawyer who has a case pending in his sala, public suspicion
may be aroused, thus tending to erode the trust of litigants
in the impartiality of the judge. (2010 Bar Question)
Q: Members of the faculty of the UP College of Law
published a statement on the allegations of plagiarism and
misrepresentation relative to the Courts decision
in Vinuya v. Executive Secretary. The authors directly
6|
accused the Court of perpetrating extraordinary injustice

by dismissing the petition of the comfort women said
case. The insult to the members of the Court was
aggravated by imputations of deliberately delaying the
resolution of the said case, its dismissal on the basis of
polluted sources, the Courts alleged indifference to the
cause of petitioners, as well as the supposed alarming lack
of concern of the members of the Court for even the most
basic values of decency and respect.
A: While most agree that the right to criticize the judiciary
is critical to maintaining a free and democratic society,
there is also a general consensus that healthy criticism only
goes so far. The court must insist on being permitted to
proceed to the disposition of its business in an orderly
manner, free from outside interference obstructive of its
functions and tending to embarrass the administration of
justice.
The Court could hardly perceive any reasonable purpose for
the facultys less than objective comments except to
discredit the April 28, 2010 Decision in the Vinuya case and
undermine the Courts honesty, integrity and competence
in addressing the motion for its reconsideration. As if the
case on the comfort womens claims is not controversial
enough, the UP Law Faculty would fan the flames and invite
resentment against a resolution that would not reverse the
said decision. This runs contrary to their obligation as law
professors and officers of the Court to be the first to uphold
the dignity and authority of this Court, to which they owe
fidelity according to the oath they have taken as attorneys,
and not to promote distrust in the administration of justice.
Their actions likewise constitute violations of Canons 10,
11, and 13 and Rules 1.02 and 11.05 of the Code of
Professional Responsibility. (Re: Letter of the UP Law
Faculty entitled Restoring Integrity: A Statement by the
Faculty of the University of the Philippines College of Law on
the Allegations of Plagiarism and Misrepresentation in the
Supreme Court.(A.M. No. 10-10-4-SC, Oct. 19, 2010)
4.
Duty to Clients
Counsel de Oficio
1.
2.
Members of the bar in good standing;

Any person, resident of the province and of good
repute for probity and ability, in localities without
lawyers
Guidelines in appointing a Counsel de Oficio

1.
2.
3.
Gravity of offense
Difficulty of questions that may arise; and
Experience and ability of appointee
Amicus Curiae friend of the court; appointed to advise the

court in complex cases.
Amicus Curiae par Eexcellance the entire bar pro bono
legal service without expecting payment
Lawyers Right to decline employment
GR: A lawyer is not obliged to act as legal counsel for any
person who may wish to become his client. He has the right

1.
to decline employment.
XPN:
1.
2.
3.
A lawyer shall not refuse his services to the needy.

(Canon 14)
He shall not decline to represent a person solely on
account of the latters race, sex, creed or status in life
or because of his own opinion regarding the guilt of
said person (Rule 14.01); (1990, 1993, 2000, 2002,
2006 Bar Questions)
He shall not decline, except for serious and efficient
cause like
a. If he is not in a position to carryout effectively or
competently; and
b. If he labors under a conflict of interest between
him and the prospective client. (Rule 14.03)
Privileged Communication
A privileged communication is one that refers to
information transmitted by voluntary act of disclosure
between attorney and client in confidence and by means
which, so far as the client is aware discloses the information
to no third person other than one reasonably necessary for
the transmission of the information or the accomplishment
of the purpose for which it was given.
Between the attorneys interest and that of a client; or

between a private clients interests and that of the
government or any of its instrumentalities.
Q: What are the three (3) tests to determine conflict of

interest for practicing lawyers? Explain each briefly.
A: (1) When in representation of one client, a lawyer is
required to fight for an issue or claim, but is also dutybound to oppose it for another client; (2) When the
acceptance of the new retainer will require an attorney to
perform an act that may injuriously affect the first client or
when called upon in a new relation o use against the firs
client any knowledge acquired through their professional
connection; (3)When the acceptance of a new relation
would prevent the full discharge of an attorneys duty to
give undivided fidelity and loyalty to the client or would
invite suspicion or unfaithfulness or double-dealing in the
performance of that duty. (2009 Bar Question)
A lawyer shall hold in trust all moneys and properties of his
client that may come into his possession. (Canon 16)
a.
Privileged Client Identity

Client identity is privileged where a strong probability exists
that revealing the clients name would implicate that client
in the very activity for which he sought the lawyers advice.
(Regala v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 105938, Sept. 20, 1996)
b.
Q: After representing Lenie in an important lawsuit from
1992 to 1995, Atty. Jennifer lost touch of her client. Ten
years later in 2005, Evelyn asked Atty. Jennifer to
represent her in an action against Lenie. Such action
involved certain facts, some confidential, to which Atty.
Jennifer was privy because she handled Lenie's old case.
Can Atty. Jennifer act as counsel for Evelyn? (2011 Bar
Question)
A: No. A lawyer shall preserve the confidences or secrets of
his client even after the attorney-client relation is
terminated. He shall not reveal the confidence or secrets of
his client except upon the instances provided for by the
rules. (Rule 21.01, Canon 21, Code of Professional
Responsibility)
Conflict of Interest
XPN: Representation of conflicting interest may be allowed

where the parties consent to the representation after full
disclosure of facts. (Nakpil v. Valdez, A.C. No. 2040, Mar. 4,
1998)
7|
A lawyer will not be ordered to return money given to him

for facilitation fee. (Arellano University v. Mijares, AC
380, Nov. 30. 2009)
Lawyer borrowing money from client
GR: An attorney cannot represent diverse interests.
XPN to XPN: Where the conflict is:
c.
A lawyer shall account for all money or property

collected or received for or received from the
client (Rule 16.01) (Yuhico v. Guttierez, AC8391,
Nov. 23, 2010 ; Tan v. Balon, AC 6483, Aug. 31,
2007)).
a. Money given for a purpose must be
used for such purpose; otherwise,
returned to client immediately.
ii. Failure to do so will raise presumption
that lawyer misappropriated it. (De
Chavez-Blanco v. Lumasag, Jr., AC
5195, Apr. 10, 2009)
A lawyer shall keep the funds of each client
separate and apart from his own and those of
others kept by him. (Rule 16.02)
A lawyer shall deliver the funds and property of
client upon demand. However, he shall have a
lien over the funds and may apply so much
thereof as may be necessary to satisfy his lawful
fees and disbursements, giving notice promptly
thereafter to his client. (Rule 16.03)
A Lawyer may not apply clients funds to
his fees if client is still objecting to the
amount thereof. (Genato v. Adaza, 328
SCRA 694; Lemoine v. Balon, 414
SCRA511).
Not allowed unless the clients interests are fully protected

by the nature of the case or by independent advice.
Lawyer lending money to client

Not allowed except when in the interest of justice, he has
to advance necessary expenses in a legal matter he is

handling for the client. (Rule 16.04, Code of Professional
Responsibiility).
is no reimbursement. Thus, he is investing in the outcome

of the case. (2010 Bar Question)
Attorneys Fees
Attorneys Liens
Q: Atty. Franciscos retainer agreement with RXU said that

his attorney's fees in its case against CRP shall be 15% of
the amounts collected. Atty. Francisco asked the trial court
to issue a temporary restraining order against CRP but this
was denied, prompting him to file a petition for certiorari
with the Court of Appeals to question the order of denial.
At this point, RXU terminated Atty. Franciscos services.
When the parties later settled their dispute amicably, CRP
paid RXU P100 million. Because of this, Atty. Francisco came
around and claimed a 15% share in the amount. What
should be his attorneys fees?
A: A reasonable amount that the court shall fix upon proof
of quantum meruit whc means as much as he deserves.
(2011 Bar Question)
Contingency Fee Contracts
Q: For services to be rendered by Atty. Delmonico as
counsel for Wag Yu in a case involving 5,000 square meters
(sq.m.) of land, the two agreed on a success fee of P50,000
plus 500 sq.m. of the land. The trial court rendered
judgment in favor of Wag Yu which became final and
executory. After receiving P50,000, Atty. Delmonico
demanded the transfer to him of the promised 500 sq.m.
Instead of complying, Wag Yu filed an administrative
complaint charging Atty. Delmonico with violation of the
Code of Professional Responsibility and Article 1491(5) of
the Civil Code for demanding the delivery of a portion of
the land subject of litigation. Is Atty. Delmonico liable
under the Code of Professional Responsibility and the Civil
Code? Explain.
A: Atty. Delmonico is not guilty of violating the CPR and the
Civil Code. He and his client agreed on a success fee of
50,000 plus 500 sq. of the land involved in the case he was
handling. This is a contingent fee contract which is allowed
under Canon 20 of the CPR and Canon 13 of the CPE. A
contingent fee agreement does not violate Art. 1491 of the
Civil Code because the transfer or assignment of the
property in litigation takes effect only after the finality of a
favorable judgment. (2010 Bar Question)
Champertous Contracts
Q: Farida engaged the services of Atty. Garudo to represent
her in a complaint for damages. The two agreed that all
expenses incurred in connection with the case would first
be shouldered by Atty. Garudo and he would be paid for his
legal services and reimbursed for all expenses which he had
advanced out of whatever Farida may receive upon the
termination of the case. What kind of contract is this?
Attorneys Retaining Lien

A retaining lien is the right of an attorney to retain the
funds, documents and papers of his client who have
lawfully come into his possession and may retain the same
until his lawful fees and disbursements have been paid, and
may apply such funds to the satisfaction thereof.
Attorneys Charging Lien
A charging lien is the right of a lawyer to the same extent
upon all judgments for the payment of money, and
executions issued in pursuance of such judgments which he
has secured in a litigation of his client, from and after the
time when he shall have caused a statement of his claim of
such lien to be entered upon the records of the court
rendering such judgment, or issuing such execution, and
shall have caused written notice thereof to be delivered to
his client and to the adverse party; and he shall have the
same right and power over such judgments and executions
as his client would have to enforce his lien and secure the
payment of his fees and disbursements. (Sec. 37, Rule 138,
Revised Rules of Court)
Q: True or False: A charging lien, as distinguished from
a retaining lien, is an active lien which can be enforced by
execution.
A: TRUE. It is active because it requires the lawyer to charge
the judgment and its execution for the payment of his fees.
(2009 Bar Question)
Withdrawal of services
a.
A lawyer may withdraw his services only for good

cause and upon notice appropriate in the
circumstances (Canon 22).
Grounds for withdrawal:

(1) client pursues am illegal or immoral course
of
(2) conduct;
(3) client insists that lawyer violate canons
and rules;
(4) inability to work with co-counsel to
detriment of client;
(5) mental or physical condition of lawyer
makes it
(6) difficult for him to continue;
(1) client deliberately fails to pay attorneys
fees;
(2) election or appointment to public office;
(3) other similar cases (Rule 22.01)
A: This appears to be a Champertous Contract, which is

invalid. Atty. Garudo agreed to shoulder all expenses in
connection with the case and Farida will reimburse him only
out of whatever Farida may receive upon termination of the
case. In other words, Atty. Garudo will be reimbursed only
if he will be successful in winning the case. If he is not, there
8|

C.
SUSPENSION, DISBARMENT AND DISCIPLINE OF

LAWYERS
Rationale: Practice of law is in the nature of a privilege.

Hence, the same may be suspended or removed from the
lawyer for reasons provided in the rules, law and
jurisprudence.
Sui Generis
Does not prescribe
The following are specific grounds for suspension or

disbarment of a lawyer:
a.
b.
c.
d.
Deceit;
Malpractice;
Grossly immoral conduct
Conviction of a crime involving moral
turpitude;
e. Violation of oath of office;
f. Willful disobedience of any lawful order of a
superior court
g. Corrupt or willful appearance as an attorney
for a party to a case without authority to do
so. (Sec. 27, Rule 138, RRC)
h. Non-payment of IBP membership dues
(Santos, Jr. v. Atty. Llas, Adm. Case No. 4749,
January 20, 2000)
HOWEVER, The statutory enumeration is not to be taken as
a limitation on the general power of SC to suspend or disbar
a lawyer. (In Re: Puno, A.C. No. 389, Feb. 28, 1967) HENCE,
the grounds enumerated are NOT exclusive.
Proceedings in Disbarment:
(1) initiated by the Supreme court motu propio or
by the IBP, or upon verified complaint by any
person filed with the Supreme Court or an IBP
Chapter
(2) if complaint prima facie meritorious, referred
to the IBP, or the Solicitor General, any officer
of the Court or a judge of a lower court
(3) IBP Board of Governors assigns complaint to
Commission on Bar Discipline (CBD).
(4) CBD will assign complaint to a Commissioner or
group Commissioners.
(5) If
complaint
found
meritorious,
Commissioner(s) will require respondent to file
an answer.
(6) Commissioner will conduct hearing in which
respondent is accorded due process.
(7) After hearing, Commissioner(s) will submit
Report and Recommendation to IBP Board of
Governors.
(8) Board of Governors will render decision, either
exonerating the respondent and dismissing the
case, or imposing a sanction less than
suspension, or recommending suspension or
disbarment to the Supreme Court.
Exoneration may be appealed by the
complainant to the Supreme Court. Sanction of
less than suspension or disbarment may be
appealed by the respondent to the Supreme
9|
Court. Either one may file a motion for

reconsideration with the IBP Board before
appealing.
(9) Supreme Court renders decision, by division if
penalty is fine of P10,000 less and/or
suspension for one year or less, and by the
court en banc, if penalty is fine of more than
P10,000.00 and/or suspension for more than
one year, or disbarment.
Discipline for Practice in Foreign Jurisdiction:
(1) They may likewise be disciplined in the
Philippines if their misconduct in the foreign
jurisdiction also constitutes ground for
discipline here.
(2) But they are entitled to due process here, and
the decision of the authorities abroad shall only
be considered as prima facie evidence of
misconduct.
Q: Cliff and Greta were law school sweethearts. Cliff
became a lawyer, but Greta dropped out. One day, Cliff
asked Greta to sign a marriage contract. The following day,
Cliff showed Greta the document already signed by an
alleged solemnizing officer and two witnesses. Cliff then
told Greta that they were already married and Greta
consented to go on a honeymoon. Thereafter, the couple
cohabited and begot a child. Two years later, Cliff left
Greta and married a Venezuelan beauty. Incensed, Greta
filed a disbarment complaint against Cliff. Will the case
prosper? Explain.
A: The disbarment case will prosper. In the case of Cabrera
v. Agustin,a lawyer who deceived a woman to believe that
they were already married after they had signed an
application for marriage license, and afterward tok
advantage of her belief to saisfy his lust, until she bore him
a child, was considered by the Supreme Court to e lacking
in integrity and good morals to remain a member of the
Bar. (2009 Bar Question)
Q: Atty. Hyde, a bachelor, practices law in the Philippines.
On long weekends, he dates beautiful actresses in Hong
Kong. Kristine, a neighbor in the Philippines, filed with the
Supreme Court an administrative complaint against the
lawyer because of sex videos uploaded through the
internet showing Atty. Hydes sordid dalliance with the
actresses in Hong Kong.In his answer, Atty. Hyde (1)
questions the legal personality and interest of Kristine to
institute the complaint and (2) insists that he is a bachelor
and the sex videos relate to his private life which is outside
public scrutiny and have nothing to do with his law
practice.Rule on the validity of Atty. Hydes defenses.
A: The legal personality and interest of Kristine to initiate
the complaint for disbarment is immaterial. A disbarment
proceeding is Sui Generis, neither of civil or criminal
character. Its sole purpose is to determine whether or not
a lawyer is still deserving to be a member of the bar. In a
real sense, Kristine is not a plaintiff, hence, interest on her
part is not required.

Atty. Hydes second defense is untenable. His duty
not to engage in unlawful, dishonest, immoral and deceitful
conduct, as well as his duty not to engage in scandalous
conduct to the discredit of the legal profession, is applicable
to his private as well as professional life. (2009 Bar
Question)
4.
5.
Q: Is the defense of Atty. R in a disbarment complaint for
immorality filed by his paramour P that P is in pari delicto
material or a ground for exoneration? Explain.
A: The defense of in pari delicto is immaterial in an
administrative case which is sui generis. The administrative
case is about the lawyers conduct, not the womans. (2010
Bar Question)
Affidavit of Desistance: Effects
Q: Arabella filed a complaint for disbarment against her
estranged husband Atty. P on the ground of immorality
and use of illegal drugs. After Arabella presented evidence
and rested her case before the Investigating
Commissioner of the IBP Committee on Bar Discipline, she
filed an Affidavit of Desistance and motion to dismiss the
complaint, she and her husband having reconciled for the
sake of their children. You are the Investigating
Commissioner of the IBP. Bearing in mind that the family
is a social institution which the State is duty-bound to
preserve, what will be your action on Arabellas motion to
dismiss the complaint?
A: I would still deny the motion to dismiss. The general rule
is that no investigation shall be interrupted or terminated
by reason of desistance, settlement, compromise,
restitution, withdrawal of charges or failure of complainant
to prosecute the same unless the SC motu proprio or upon
recommendation of the IBP Board determines that there is
no compelling reason to continue with the proceedings. An
affidavit of desistance will have no effect on it, being a sui
generis proceeding. (2010 Bar Question)
D. READMISSION TO THE BAR
Reinstatement and its Requirements
Reinstatement is the restoration in disbarment proceedings
a disbarred lawyer the privilege to practice law. The
applicant must, satisfy the Court that he is a person of good
moral character a fit and proper person to practice law.
Suspension
1.
2.
3.
10|
After a finding that the respondent lawyer must be

suspended from the practice of law, the Court
shall render a decision imposing the penalty.
Unless the Court explicitly states that decision is
immediately executory upon receipt thereof, the
respondent has 15 days within which to file a
motion for reconsideration thereof. Denial of the
motion for reconsideration shall render the
decision final and executory.
Upon expiration of the period of suspension, the
respondent shall file a Sworn Statement with the
Court through the Office of the Bar Confidant
stating therein that he or she has desisted from the
6.
practice of law and has not appeared in any court

during the period of his or her suspension.
Copies of the sworn statement shall be furnished
the Local Chapter of the IBP and to the Executive
Judge of the courts where he or she has pending
cases and/or has appeared as counsel.
The Sworn Statement shall be considered as proof
of respondents compliance with the order of
suspension.
Any finding or report contrary to the statements
made by the lawyer under oath shall be ground for
imposition of a more severe punishment, or
disbarment, as may be warranted. (Maniago
vs. Atty. De Dios, A.C. No. 78472, March 30, 2010)
Lifting of Suspension
The lifting of a lawyers suspension is not automatic
upon the end of the period stated in the Courts decision,
and an order from the Court lifting the suspension at the
end of the period is necessary in order to enable [him] to
resume the practice of his profession. (J.K. Mercado and
Sons Agricultural Enterprises, Inc. et al. v. Atty. de Vera, et
al. and Atty. de Vera v. Atty. Encanto, et al.)
Disbarment
Lawyers who have been disbarred: The Supreme Court may
reinstate a disbarred lawyer upon proof that he has
regained his good moral character and can again be
entrusted with the privileges of a lawyer.
Q: X filed proceedings for disbarment against his lawyer,

Atty. C, following the latters conviction for estafa for
misappropriating funds belonging to his client (X). While the
proceedings for disbarment was pending, the President
granted absolute pardon in favor of Atty. C. Atty. C, then,
moved for the dismissal of the disbarment case. Should the
motion be granted?
A: An absolute pardon by the President is one that operates
to wipe out the conviction as well as the offense itself. The
grant thereof to a lawyer is a bar to a proceeding for
disbarment against him, if such proceeding is based solely
on the fact of such conviction. (In re: Parcasio, A.C. No. 100,
Feb. 18, 1976)
But where the proceeding to disbar is founded on the
professional misconduct involved in the transaction which
culminated in his conviction, the effect of the pardon is only
to relieve him of the penal consequences of his act and does
not operate as a bar to the disbarment proceeding,
inasmuch as the criminal acts may nevertheless constitute
proof that the attorney does not possess good moral
character. (In re: Lontok, 43 Phil. 293, Apr. 7, 1922)
Resumption of the Practice of Law

Q: After passing the Philippine Bar in 1986, Atty. Richards

practiced law until 1996 when he migrated to Australia
where he subsequently became an Australian citizen in
2000. As he kept abreast of legal developments, petitioner
learned about the Citizenship Retention and ReAcquisition Act of 2003 (Republic Act No. 9225), pursuant
to which he reacquired his Philippine citizenship in 2006.
He took his oath of allegiance as a Filipino citizen at the
Philippine embassy in Canberra, Australia. Jaded by the
laid back life in the outback, he returned to the Philippines
in December 2008. After the holidays, he established his
own law office and resumed his practice of law. Months
later, a concerned woman who had secured copies of Atty.
Richards
naturalization
papers
with
consular
authentication, filed with the Supreme Court an
anonymous complaint against him for illegal practice of
law.
May the Supreme Court act upon the complaint filed by an
anonymous person? Why or why not? Is respondent
entitled to resume the practice of law? Explain.
MCLE for a newly admitted member of the bar: Starts on

the first day of the month of his admission. (Sec. 5, last par.
Bar Matter No. 850)
Q: Atty. Galing is a Bar topnotcher. He has been teaching
major subjects in a law school for eight (8) years and has
mastered the subjects he is handling. Is he exempt from
the MCLE requirement?
A: No, eight (8) years experience is not enough. (2012 Bar
Question, MCQ)
Q: Atty. Rey has been a professor in the Legal
Management Department of Y University for thirty (30)
years. He teaches Constitution,Obligation and Contracts,
Insurance, Introduction to Law. Is he exempted from the
MCLE requirement?
A: No, because he is not teaching in the College of Law.
(2012 Bar Question, MCQ)
A: Yes, the SC may act upon the complaint filed by an

anonymous complainant, because the basis of the
complaint consists of documents with consular
authentications which can be verified being public records.
There is no need to identify the complainant when the
evidence is documented and verifiable. Besides, the SC or
the IBP may initiate disbarment proceedings motu proprio.
Consequences of Noncompliance
B.
Q: In order to comply with the MCLE requirements, Atty.

Ausente enrolled in a seminar given by an MCLE provider.
Whenever he has court or other professional
commitments, he would send his messenger or a member
of his legal staff to register his attendance at the MCLE
sessions so he could be credited with the required
qualifying attendance. He would also ask them to secure
the printed handouts and the lecturers CDs, all of which
he studied in his free time. Atty. Ausente should be
_________.
Yes, as long as he observes the procedure laid down in

Petition for Leave to Resume Practice of Law of
Benjamin M. Dacanay, to wit;
A. Updating and payment in full of the
annual membership dues in the IBP;
B. Payment of professional tax
C. Completion of atleast 36 credit hours of
mandatory continuing legal education
and;
D. Pretaking of the lawyers oath. (2010 Bar
Question)
E. MANDATORY CONTINUING LEGAL EDUCATION
A member who fails to comply with the requirements after

the 60-day period shall be listed as delinquent member by
the IBP Board of Governors upon recommendation of the
Committee on MCLE.
A: Sanctioned because he circumvented or evaded full

compliance with the MCLE requirements. (2013 Bar
Question)
Requirements of completion of MCLE

Members of the IBP, unless exempted under Rule 7, shall
complete every 3 years at least 36 hours of continuing legal
education activities. The 36 hours shall be divided as
follows:
1. 6 hours legal ethics
2. 4 hours trial and pretrial skills
3. 5 hours alternative dispute resolution
4. 9 hours updates on substantive and procedural
laws and jurisprudence
5. 4 hours legal writing and oral advocacy
6. 2 hours international law and international
conventions
7. Remaining 6 hours such other subjects as may be
prescribed by the Committee on MCLE
11|
Exemptions:
1. President and Vice-President, Secretaries
and Undersecretaries of Executive
Departments
2. Senators and Members of the House of
Representatives
3. Chief Justice and Associate Justices of the
Supreme Court, incumbent and retired
members of the judiciary, incumbent
members of the Judicial and Bar Council,
incumbent court lawyers covered by the
Philippine Judicial Academy
4. Chief State Counsel, Chief State
Prosecutor, and Assistant Secretaries of
the Department of Justice
5. Solicitor General and Assistant Solicitor
General
6. Government Corporate Counsel, Deputy
an Assistant Government Corporate
Counsel

7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
Chairmen and Members of Constitutional

Commissions
The Ombudsman, over-all Deputy
Ombudsman, Deputy Ombudsman and
Special Prosecutor of the Office of the
Ombudsman
Heads of government agencies exercising
quasi-judicial functions
Incumbent deans, bar reviewers and
professors of law who have teaching
experience for a lest ten years in
accredited law schools
The Chancellor, Vice-Chancellor and
members of the Corps of Professors and
Professorial Lecturers of the Philippine
Judicial Academy
Governors and mayors
Those who are not in law practice, private
or public
Those who have retired from law practice
approved by the IBP Board of Governors
Good cause
F. LAW ON NOTARIAL PRACTICE
Qualifications:
1. Citizen of the Philippines
2. Over 21 years of age
3. Resident of the Philippines for at least 1 year
4. Maintains a regular place of work In the city or
province where the commission is to be issued,
5. Member of the Philippine bar in good standing
6. Has not been convicted in the first instance of
a crime involving moral turpitude.
Term of office: two (2) years, commencing from the first
day of January of the year in which the commission was
issued.
Powers :
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
Acknowledgments
Oaths and affirmations
Jurats
Signature witnessing
Copy certifications
Any other act authorized by the Rules
Witnessing signing by thumbmark
Signing on behalf of disabled person.
Limitations:
1. A notary shall not perform a notarial act if the
person involved as signatory of the
instrument:
(a) is not in the notarys presence personally
at the time of notarization, (Heirs of
Villanueva v. Beradio, AC 6270, Jasn 23,
2007)
(b) is not personally known to the notary or
identified through competent document
of identity. (Gonzales v. Padiernos, AC
6713, Dec. 8, 2008)
12|
2.
A notary is disqualified from performing a

notarial act if he:
(a) is a party to the document or instrument
to be notarized;
(b) will receive as a direct or indirect result
any advantage, right, title, interest, cash,
property or other consideration;
(c) is a spouse, common law partner,
ancestor, descendant or relative by
affinity or consanguinity of the principal
within the fourth civil degree
3. A Notary public shall not perform a notarial
act if
(a) he knows or has good reason to believe
that the transaction is unlawful or
immoral,
(b) the signatory shows a demeanor which
engenders reasonable doubt as to the
consequence of the transaction,
(c) The signatory is not acting of his own free
will.
4. A Notary Public shall not
(a) execute
a
certificate
containing
information known or believed to be
false,
(b) affix an official signature or seal on a
notarial certificate that is incomplete.
Notarial Register a permanently bound book
containing a chronological record of notarial acts,
with the following particulars:
1. Entry number
2. date and time of act
3. type of notarial act
4. type and description of instrument
5. name and address of each principal
6. name or address of each witness
7. fee charged
8. address where notarization was
performed if not in regular place of
work
9. any other circumstance.
Jurisdiction of Notary Public and place of
notarization:
1. Jurisdiction territorial jurisdiction of the
commissioning court. (TanTiong Bio v.
Gonzales, AC 6634, Aug. 23, 2007)
2. Place of notarization regular place of work,
except:
i. public office, convention halls,
and similar places where oaths
of office may be administered,
ii. public function areas in hotels
and similar places for the signing
of documents or instruments
requiring notarization,
iii. hospitals and other medical
institutions where a party to an
instrument is confined for
treatment.,
iv. any place where a party to an
instrument is under detention.

Revocation of Commission Executive judge may

revoke commission:
1. For any ground for which an application
for a commission may be denied;
2. Where the notary public
i. fails to keep a notarial register;
ii. fails to make a proper entry in
his notarial register;
iii. fails to send a copy of his entries
to the Executive within10 days
of the following month;
iv. fails
to
affix
to
acknowledgments
date
of
expiration of his commission;
v. fails to submit his notarial
register, when filled, to the
Executive Judge;
vi. fails to make his report to the
Executive Judge within a
reasonable time, concerning the
performance of his duties, as
may be required by the Judge;
vii. fails to require the presence of a
principal at the time of a notarial
act;
viii. fails to identify a principal on the
basis of personal knowledge or
competent evidence;
ix. executes a false or incomplete
certificate;
x. knowingly perform or fails to
perform
any
other
act
prohibited or mandated by the
Rules;
xi. commits any other dereliction or
act which in the judgment of the
Executive Judge constitutes
good cause for revocation of
commission or imposition of
administrative sanction.
Q: Enumerate the instances when a Notary Public may
authenticate documents without requiring the physical
presence of the signatories.
1.
2.
3.
13|
If the signatory is old or sick or otherwise

unable to appear, his presence may be
dispensed with if one credible witness
not privy to the instrument and who is
known to the notary public, certifies
under oath or affirmation the identity of
the signatory.
If two credible witnesses neither of
whom is privy to the instrument, not
known to the notary public but can
present their own competent evidence
of identity of the signatory.
In cases of copy certification and
issuance of certified true copies. (2010
Bar Question)
Q: A party to a contract does not know how to write.

Neither can he affix his thumbmark because both hands
were amputated. How will that person execute the
contract?
A: The party may ask the notary public to sign in his behalf.
(2012 Bar Question, MCQ)
Q: Raul sought Elys disbarment for notarizing a deed of

sale knowing that four of the sellers were dead. Ely
admitted that he notarized the deed of sale but only after
his client assured him that the signatures of the others
were authentic. Later, Raul moved to have the complaint
against him dismissed on the ground that it was filed
because of a misunderstanding which had already been
clarified. This prompted the IBP to recommend the
dismissal of the complaint. Can the dismissal be allowed?
A: No. given Elys admission that he notarized the
document when some signatories were absent. (Sec. 2, Rule
IV, A. M. No. 02-8-13-SC) (2011 Bar Question)
Regular place of work or business of a notary public
The regular place of work or business refers to a stationary
office in the city or province wherein the notary public
renders legal and notarial services. (Sec. 11, Rule II, 2004
Rules on Notarial Practice)
Q: Atty. Sabungero obtained a notarial commission. One
Sunday, while he was at the cockpit, a person approached
him with an affidavit that needed to be notarized. Atty.
Sabungero immediately pulled out from his pocket his
small notarial seal, and notarized the document. Was the
affidavit validly notarized? Explain.
A: Sec. 2 Rule IV of the 2004 Rules on Notarial Practice
provides that a Notary Public shall not perform a notarial
act outside his regular place of work, except in few
exceptional occasions, at the request of the parties.
Notarizing in a cockpit is not one of such exceptions. The
prohibition is aimed to eliminate the practice of ambulatory
notarization. However, assuming that the cockpit is within
his notarial jurisdiction, the notarization may be valid but
the notary may be disciplined. (2009 Bar Question)
Competent Evidence of Identity refers to the identification
of an individual based on:
1.
2.
At least one current identification document issued by

an official agency bearing the photograph and
signature of the individual such as but not limited to
those enumerated in the law.
The oath or affirmation of one credible witness not
privy to the instrument, document or transaction who
is personally known to the notary public and who
personally knows the individual, or of two credible
witnesses neither of whom is privy to the instrument,
document or transaction who each personally knows
the individual and shows to the notary public
documentary identification. (Amendment to Sec. 12
(a), Rule II of the 2004 Rules on Notarial Practice, Feb.
19, 2008).

Q: Under the 2004 Rules of Notarial Practice, what may
used to satisfy the requirement of "competent evidence
of identity"?
A: (C) Voters ID, NBI clearance, Drivers license.(2013 Bar
Question)
b.
Sanctions:
1. The Executive Judge shall cause the
prosecution of any person who:
i. knowingly acts or impersonates
a notary public;
ii. knowingly obtains, conceals,
defaces, or destroys the seal,
notarial register, or official
records of a notary public, and
iii. knowingly solicits, coerces, or in
any way influences a notary
public to commit official
misconduct.
The Executive Judge concerned shall submit semestral
reports to the Supreme Court on discipline and prosecution
of notaries public.
Draft of the Code of Judicial Conduct is intended to be a

Universal Declaration of Judicial Standards applicable in all
judiciaries. As such, it was adopted by the Supreme Court
as its Code of Judicial Conduct, in solidarity with the other
jurisdictions in the world. (2009 Bar Question)
The six (6) canons under the New Code of Judicial Conduct
for the Philippine Judiciary
1. Independence
2. Integrity
3. Impartiality
4. Propriety
5. Equality
6. Competence and Diligence
Independence pre-requisite for the rule of law and
fundamental guarantee of a fair trial (Canon 1).
G. CANONS OF PROFESSIONAL ETHICS

The Canons of Professional Ethics (CPE) were
framed by the American Bar Association in 1908 and
were adopted in the Philippines in 1917 and
subsequently revised in 1946. It is one of the sources
or the main basis of our legal ethics at the present
which is the Code of Professional Responsibility (CPR).
While the CPE is superseded by the CPR, the CPE
continues to be an invaluable source of knowledge and
understanding of legal ethics.
Note: Most of the provisions of the Code of
Professional Ethics are incorporated in the Code of
Professional Responsibility.
Covers individual and institutional independence

of judges and the judiciary.
Sec. 1 judges shall exercise functions on the basis
of facts and law, independently, free from
influence from any quarter.
o Go vs. CA, 206 SCRA 165 public opinion
o Ramirez v. Corpuz-Macandog, 144 SCRA
462 public official
o Sec. 2 judges shall be independent from
judicial colleagues.
o
Sabitsana v. Villamor, 202 SCRA 405 pressuring

MTC judge
o Sec. 4 - judicial prestige should not be
used to advance private interests of
others.
o
Sec. 5 judges shall be free from

inappropriate connection with the
executive and judicial branches.
Sec. 6 judges shall be independent in

relation to society in general.
Sec. 7 judges shall maintain and

enhance institutional and operational
independence of the judiciary.
Sec. 8 - judges shall promote high

standards of judicial conduct in order to
promote public confidence in the
judiciary which is fundamental to the
maintenance of judicial independence.
II. JUDICIAL ETHICS

The two sources of judicial ethics are:
a.
New Code of Judicial Conduct for the Philippine

Judiciary (Bangalore Draft);
b.
Sec. 3 - judges shall refrain from

influencing
another
court
or
administrative agency.
Promulgated April 27, 2004; effective June 1, 2004.
Code of Judicial Conduct
Promulgated by the Supreme Court of the

Philippines on
September , 1989; effective
October 20, 1989.
Q: True or False: The Bangalore Draft, approved at a

Roundtable Meeting of Chief Justices held at The Hague, is
now the New Code of Judicial Conduct in the Philippines.
Integrity essential in the official and personal demeanor

of judges. (Canon 2)
A: TRUE. The whereas clause of the New Code of Judicial

Conduct in the Philippines provides that the Bangalore
14|

o
Sec. 1 judges conduct should not only

be above reproach but perceived to be
above reproach.
(b) The judge has previously served as

a lawyer or was a material witness
in the matter in controversy.
(c) The judge or member of his family
has an economic interest in the
outcome of the matter in
controversy.
(d) The judge served as executor,
administrator, guardian, trustee or
lawyer in the matter in controversy,
or a former associate of the judge
served as counsel during their
association, or the judge or lawyer
was a material witness therein.
(e) The judges ruling in a lower court
is the subject of review.
Sandoval v. CA, 260 SCRA
283 partial participation
(f) The
judge
is
related
by
consanguinity or affinity to a party
litigant within the sixth civil degree
or to counsel within the fourth civil
degree.
Villaluz v. Mijares, 288 SCRA
594 petitioner is judges
daughter
In the judiciary, moral integrity is

more than a cardinal virtue. It is a
necessity. (Fernandez v. Hamoy, 436 SCRA
186)
Ignorance of the law is a mark of
incompetence, and where the law
involved is elementary, ignorance thereof
is considered an indication of lack of
integrity (Macalintal v. Teh, 280 SCRA
623)
o
Sec. 2 - conduct of judges must reaffirm

peoples faith in the integrity of the
judiciary.
Sec. 3 - judges should take appropriate

disciplinary measures against lawyers
and court personnel.
Impartiality essential to the proper discharge of the

judicial office. (Canon 3)
o
Sec. 1 Judges shall perform duties without

favor, bias or prejudice.
Sec. 2 - Judges should ensure that their

conduct maintains and enhances the
confidence of the public in the impartiality of
the judge and the judiciary.
Pimentel v. Salanga, 21 SCRA 160
peoples faith in the judiciary
Parayno v. Meneses, 231 SCRA 807
duty to sit
15|
Sec. 3 Judges shall conduct themselves so as

to minimize occasions in which it will be
necessary for them to be disqualified from
hearing or deciding a case.
Sec. 4 Judges shall not make any comment

might be expected to influence the outcome
of the proceeding before him.
Sec. 5 Judges shall disqualify themselves in

any proceedings in which they are unable to
decide the matter impartially or in which it
may appear to a reasonable observer that
they are unable to decide the matter
impartially. (Ref. Sec. 1, Rule 137, Rules of
Court)
(a) The judge has actual bias or
prejudice concerning a party or
personal knowledge of disputed
evidentiary facts.
Q: True or False: A companion or employee of the judge

who lives in the judges household is included in the
definition of the "judges family."
A: True. A judges family includes the spouse, son, daughter,
son in law, daughter in law and any other relative by
consanguinity or affinity within the sixth civil degree, or a
person who is a companion or employee of the judge and
who lives in his household. (2009 Bar Question)
(g) The judge knows that his or her
spouse or child has a financial
interest as heir, legatee, creditor,
fiduciary, or otherwise, in the
subject matter in controversy, or in
a party to the proceeding, or any
other interest that could be
substantially affected by the
outcome of the proceedings.
o
Sec. 6. If the parties and lawyer, independently of

the judges participation, all agree in writing that
the reason for the inhibition is immaterial or
unsubstantial, the judge may then participate in the
proceedings. The agreement, signed by all the
parties and lawyers, shall be incorporated in the
record of the proceedings.
Remittal of disqualification Code of Judicial
conduct
Propriety essential to all activities of a judge. (Canon 4)
o
Sec. 1 Judges shall avoid impropriety and

appearance of impropriety in all their activities.
a. Acts not per se improper can be perceived
by the larger community as such.

b.
Judge who heard case while on vacation

and dressed only in a polo shirt (Liwanag
v. Lusre, A.M> MTJ-08-98-1168, April 21,
1999); tasteless jokes in a wedding
ceremony (Hadap v. Lee, 114 SCRA 559).
Sec. 2 - Judges must accept personal restrictions
that might be viewed as burdensome by ordinary
citizens, and in particular conduct themselves in a
way that is consistent with the dignity of the judicial
office.
o Sec. 3 In their relations with lawyers who
practice regularly before their courts, judges
shall avoid situations giving rise to suspicions or
appearance of favoritism or partiality.
o Sec. 4 A judge shall not participate in
determination of a case in which any member
of their family represents a litigant or is in any
manner associated with the case.
o Sec. 5 - A judge shall not allow the use of his
residence by members of the legal profession
to receive clients of the latter or of other
members of the legal profession.
o Sec. 6 In exercising freedom of expression,
belief, association and assembly, judges shall
conduct themselves in such a manner as to
preserve the dignity, impartiality and
independence of the judicial office.
Macias v. Arula, 115 SCRA 135 participating in a

political rally
In re Judge Acua, 464 SCRA 250 use of expletives
o
Sec. 7 Judges shall inform themselves about their

personal fiduciary and financial interests and those
of the members of their family.
Sec. 8 Judges shall not use or lend the prestige of
the judicial office to advance their private interests
or those of a member of their family, or any one
else.
Vistan v. Nicolas, 201 SCR 524 filed
complaint for estafa in his own sala and assisted in
issuance of warrant of arrest.
Dionisio v. Escao, 302 SCRA 411 posting
notices for family restaurnt business in court
bulletin board
otherwise interfere with the performance of

judicial duties.
In re Designation of Judge Rodolfo Manzano,
AM 88-7-861-RTC consitutional prohibition
against designation of judges to agencies
performing quasi-judicial or administrative
functions.
o
MTC judges as notaries public ex officio, may

not notarize private documenrts, except (1) when
no lawyers available in the municipality, and (2)
notarial feees are paid to the governments
account.
o
Sec. 12 Judges may form or join associations of

judges or participate in other organization
representing the interests of judges.
o Sec. 13 Judges and members of their families
shall neither ask for nor accept any gift, bequest,
loan or favor in relation to anything done or to be
done or entitled to be done by him in connection
with the performance of his judicial duties.
o Sec. 14. Judges shall not knowingly permit court
staff or others subject to their influence, direction
or authority, to ask for or accept any gift, bequest,
loan or favor in relation to anything done or to be
done or entitled to be done in connection with
their duties and functions.
o Sec. 15. Subject to law and to any local
requirements of public disclosure, judges may
receive a token gift, award or benefit as
appropriate to the occasion on which it is made,
provided that such gift, award or benefit might not
be reasonably perceived as intended to influence
the judge in the performance of official duties or
otherwise give rise to an appearance of partiality.
Gifts from foreign sources governed by Sec. 7 (d) of
R.A. 6713.
Equality - essential to the due performance of judicial
duties. (Canon 5)
o
Sec. 1 Judges shall be aware of and understand

diversity in society and differences arising from
various sources.
a. Awareness of international instruments
concerning equality of humn beings, and
rights of women and children.
b. Gender and Development Mainstreaming
Plan for the Philippine Judicial System
adopted on December 9, 2003.
c. Judges should avoid first impressions,
hasty conclusions and prejudgments.
Sec. 2 Judges shall not in performance of judicial

duties manifest bias or prejudice on irrelevant
grounds.
Q: A retired member of the Judiciary is now engaged in

private practice. In attending hearings, he uses his car
bearing his protocol plate which was issued to him while
still in the service. Pass on the ethical aspect of the judges
use of the protocol plate.
A: The judges use of his protocol plate after his retirement
is unethical. He is no longer entitled to use such plate after
his retirement. As a practicing lawyer, he should not engage
in unlawful, immoral or deceitful conduct. His continued
use of such plate is dishonest conduct. (2010 Bar Question)
o
16|
Sec. 9 Confidential information acquired by a

judges in their official capacity shall not be used for
any other purpose related to their judicial duties.
Sec. 10 Judges may engage in activities that do
not detract from the dignity of the judicial office or
Sec. 11 - Judges shall not practice law while the

holder of judicial office.

o
Sec.3 - Judges shall carry out judicial duties with

appropriate consideration for all persons, without
differentiation on any irrelevant ground.
Sec. 4. Judges shall not permit court staff to

differentiate between persons concerned in a
matter before the judge on any irrelevant ground.
Sec. 5 Judges shall require lawyers in proceedings

before the court to refrain from manifesting bias
or prejudice based on irrelevant grounds.
Competence and diligence prerequisite to the due

performance of judicial duties. (Canon 6)
o
o
Sec. 1 Judicial duties of a judge shall take

precedence over all other activities.
Sec. 2 Judges shall devote their professional
activity to judicial duties, which include other tasks
relevant to the judicial office or the courts
operations.
Sec. 3 Judges shall take reasonable steps to
maintain and enhance their knowledge, skill and
personal qualities for the proper performance of
judicial duties.
Sec. 4 Judges shall keep themselves informed
about relevant developments of international law,
including international conventions and other
instruments establishing human rights norms.
Two general source of international law
custom art and conventional norms.
Sec. 5 Judges shall perform all judicial duties,

including the delivery of reserved decisions,
efficiently, fairly and with reasonable promptness.
Sec. 6. Judges shall maintain order and decorum in

all proceedings before the court, and be patent,
dignified and courteous in relation to litigants,
witnesses, lawyers and others with whom the
judge deals in an official capacity.
Sec. 7 Judges shall not engage in conduct

incompatible with the diligent discharge of judicial
duties.
Q: After being diagnosed with stress dermatitis, Judge

Rosalind, without seeking permission from the
Supreme Court, refused to wear her robe during court
proceedings. When her attention was called, she
explained that whenever she wears her robe she is
reminded of her heavy caseload, thus making her
tense. This, in turn, triggers the outbreak of skin
rashes. Is Judge Rosalind justified in not wearing her
judicial robe? Explain.
A: Judge Rosalind is no justified. In Chan v. Majaducon,
the Supreme Court emphasized that the wearing of
robes by judges as required by Adm. Circular No. 25,
serves the dual purpose of heightened public
consciousness on the solemnity of judicial proceedings
and in impressing upon the judge the exacting
17|
obligations of his office. The robe is a part of the judges

appearance and is as important as the gavel. The
Supreme Court added that while circumstances, such
as a medical condition claimed by the respondent
judge, may exempt one from complying with A.C. no.
25, he must first secure the Courts permission for such
exemption. He cannot simply excuse himself, like
respondent judge, from complying with the
requirement. (2009 Bar Question)
Liabilities
Q: Reacting to newspaper articles and verbal complaints
on alleged rampant sale of Temporary Restraining Orders
by Judge X, the Supreme Court ordered the conduct of a
discreet investigation by the Office of the Court
Administrator. Judges in the place where Judge X is
assigned confirmed the complaints. What administrative
charge/s may be leveled against Judge X? Explain.
A: He could be charged with gross misconduct, arising from
violations of the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act. He
could also be charged with violations of Canon 4 of the New
Code of Judicial Conduct for the Philippine Judiciary which
provides that judges and members of their families shall
neither ask for, nor accept, any gift, bequest, loan or favor
in relation to anything done or to be done or omitted to be
done by him or her inj connection with the performance of
judicial duties. (2010 Bar Question)
Q: Judge X was invited to be a guest speaker during the

annual convention of a private organization which was
covered by media. Since he was given the liberty to speak
on any topic, he discussed the recent decision of the
Supreme Court declaring that the President is not, under
the Constitution, proscribed from appointing a Chief
Justice within two months before the election. In his
speech, the judge demurred to the Supreme Court
decision and even stressed that the decision is a serious
violation of the Constitution. Did Judge X incur any
administrative liability? Explain.
If instead of ventilating his opinion before the private
organization, Judge X incorporated it, as an obiter dictum,
in one of his decisions, did he incur any administrative
liability? Explain.
A: He did not incur administrative liability. Judges, like any
other citizen, are entitled to freedom of expression, but in
exercising such rights, they shall always conduct themselves
in a manner as to preserve the dignity of the judicial office
and the impartiality and independence of the judiciary.
In deciding cases, a judge is supposed to be faithful to the
law, which includes decisions of the SC. If he feels that a
doctrine enunciated by the SC is against his way of
reasoning, he may state his personal opinion but should
decide the case in accordance with the law. The fact that
Judge X ventilated his personal opinion in an obiter dictum
indicates that he did not decide the case in his personal
opinion. But still, it undermines the authority of the SC and
he may incur administrative liability for it. (2010 Bar
Question)

Financial Activities
Q: Judges of the first and second level courts are allowed
to receive assistance from the local government units
where they are stationed. The assistance could be in the
form of equipment or allowance. Justices at the Court of
Appeals in the regional stations in the Visayas and
Mindanao are not necessarily residents there, hence, they
incur additional expenses for their accommodations. Pass
on the propriety of the Justices receipt of
assistance/allowance from the local governments.
A: In Dadole v. COA and Leynes v. COA, the SC upheld the
grant of allowances by LGUs to judges, prosecutors, public
elementary and high school teachers and other national
government officials assigned in such locality pursuant to
the Local
Government Code. The SC held that to rule against the
power of the LGUs will subvert the principle of local
autonomy zealously granted by the constitution. Hence, it
is not improper for judges to receive allowances. (2010 Bar
Question)
Q: On the proposal of Judge G, which was accepted, he and
his family donated a lot to the city of Gyoza on the
condition that a public transport terminal would be
constructed thereon. The donation was accepted and the
condition was complied with. The family-owned tracts of
land in the vicinity of the donated lot suddenly
appreciated in value and became commercially viable as
in fact a restaurant and a hotel were soon after built. Did
the Judge commit any violation of the Code of Judicial
Conduct?
A: In Salunday v. Labitoria, the SC held that the act of Justice
Labitoria of recommending the construction of the Hall of
Justice in a parcel of land close to a hotel owned by a
corporation which his wife is a stockholder was not
improper because there is no clear indication that in
recommending such, the respondent was impelled by a
desire to benefit financially. In the instant case, it seems
clear that the judge and his family is motivated by and
anticipated increase in the value of the property. He is then
liable for violation Canon 4 of the New Code of Judicial
Conduct which provides that judges shall not use the
prestige of the judicial office to advance their private
interests or those members of their families or anyone else
nor convey the impression that they are in a position to
influence them in a performance of official duty. (2010 Bar
Question)
Discipline of Members of the Supreme Court

Impeachment
It is a constitutional process of removing public servants
from office as an assurance against abusive officials in the
country (Impeachment Primer, Official Gazette, 2012).
Object of impeachment
The object of impeachment is solely to determine whether
or not the official is worthy of the trust conferred upon
him/her. It is not determination of criminal guilt or
innocence as in criminal case (Ibid.).
Grounds for Impeachment
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Treason
Bribery
Other High Crimes
Graft and Corruption
Betrayal of Public Trust (Sec. 2 Art. XI, 1987
Constitution)
Procedure:
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
A verified complaint for impeachment may be filed

by any member of the House of Representatives or
by any citizen upon a resolution of endorsement
by any member thereof.
The complaint is referred to the proper
committee, and after hearing and a majority vote
of it member, the committee shall submit its
report to the House.
A vote of at least one-third of all the members of
the house shall be necessary either to affirm a
favorable resolution of the committee with the
articles of impeachment, or override its contrary
resolution.
The Senate shall have the sole power to try and
decide all cases of impeachment while sitting for
that purpose.
No person shall be convicted without the
concurrence of two thirds of all the members of
the Senate.
Judgment in cases of impeachment shall not extend further

than removal from office and disqualification to hold any
office under the Republic of the Philippines. But the party
convicted shall be liable and subject to prosecution, trial
and punishment according to law. (Secs. 2, 3, 6 and 7,
Article XI, 1987 Constitution)
Disbarment of judges and justices
Judges and justices, being lawyers, may also be disbarred, if
found guilty of certain crimes and/or other causes for
disbarment under the Rules of Court.
Justices of the Supreme Court however may not be
disbarred unless and until they shall have been first
impeached in accordance with the Constitution.
18|

Q: Is the Law on Secrecy of Foreign Currency Deposit

Account (FCDA) a defense in failing to include a dollar
deposit in a SALN?
A: No. The issue is not the conflict between the FCDA
requiring secrecy of foreign currency deposits and the
disclosure required by the SALN law, but the Constitution
which requires public officials to declare their assets and
does not distinguish between peso and foreign accounts
(Senator Judge Pangilinan).
The Supreme Court in one case said that the FCDA cannot
be used as a haven for the corrupt and the criminals. To
interpret it in the manner that the Chief Justice would want
is to say that the law could be used as a haven to hide
proceeds of criminal acts. (Senator Judge Drilon)
Ethical Lessons from Former Chief Justice Coronas
Impeachment:
1.
2.
19|
The Senate, sitting as an impeachment court,

found former Chief Justice Corona guilty of the
failure to disclose to the public his statement of
assets, liabilities, and net worth as required under
sec. 17, Art. XI of the 1987 Constitution, by a vote
of 20-3.
Note: It is the "obligation" of an employee to
submit a sworn statement, as the "public has a
right to know" the employee's assets, liabilities,
net worth and financial and business interests.
Hence, a court interpreter who failed to include in
her SALN rental payments she received from a
market stall was dismissed from service (Rabe v.
Flores, A.M. No. P-97-1247, May 14, 1997). The
Senator judges ruled that the law applies to all,
including the Chief Justice of the Philippines, thus,
his failure to include his dollar accounts in his SALN
warrants his impeachment from office.
Mandate upon the Chief Justice to disclose his
Statement of Assets and Liabilities (SALN):
1987 Constitution - A public officer or employee
shall, upon assumption of office submit a
declaration under oath of his assets, liabilities, and
net worth. This includes members of the Supreme
Court among others.
R.A. 6713 - Section 8. Statements and Disclosure.
Public officials and employees have an obligation
to accomplish and submit declarations under oath
of, and the public has the right to know, their
assets, liabilities, net worth and financial and
business interests including those of their spouses
and of unmarried children under eighteen (18)
years of age living in their households.
The basis of the publics right to inquire upon the
statement of assets and liabilities or public officers
rests upon the postulate of public office is a public
trust, which is institutionalized in the Constitution
to protect the people from abuse of governmental
power.
Note: While providing guaranty for that right, the

Constitution also provides that the peoples right
to know is limited to matters of public concern
and is further subject to such limitations as may be
provided by law.
Custodians of public documents must not concern
themselves with the motives, reasons and objects
of the persons seeking access to the records. While
public officers in the custody or control of public
records have the discretion to regulate the manner
in which records may be inspected, examined or
copied by interested persons, such discretion does
not carry with it the authority to prohibit access,
inspection, examination, or copying of the records.
Canons 3 and 4 of the new Code of Judicial
Conduct mandate, respectively, that judges shall
ensure that not only is their conduct above
reproach, but that it is perceived to be so in the
view of the reasonable observer and that judges
shall avoid improprieties and the appearance of
impropriety in all of their activities. These very
stringent standards of decorum are demanded of
all magistrates and employees of the courts. As
such, those who serve in the judiciary, particularly
justices and judges, must not only know the law
but must also possess the highest degree of
integrity and probity, and an unquestionable
moral uprightness both in their public and private
lives (Veloso vs. Caminade, A.M. No. RTJ- 011655, July 8, 2004)
In the Judiciary, moral integrity is more than a
cardinal virtue, it is a necessity. The exacting
standards of conduct demanded from judges are
designed to promote public confidence in the
integrity and impartiality of the judiciary.
The integrity of the Judiciary rests not only upon
the fact that it is able to administer justice, but also
upon the perception and confidence of the
community that the people who run the system
have administered justice. In order to create such
confidence, the people who run the judiciary,
particularly judges and justices, must not only be
proficient in both the substantive and procedural
aspects of the law, but more importantly, they
must possess the highest integrity, probity, and
unquestionable moral uprightness, both in their
public and in their private lives. Only then can the
people be reassured that the wheels of justice in
this country run with fairness and equity, thus
creating confidence in the judicial system. (Tan vs.
Pacuribot, A.M. No. RTJ-06-1982, December 14,
2007).
Ethical Aspect of Impeachment
Public officers and employees must at all times be

accountable to the people, serve them with

utmost responsibility, integrity, loyalty, and

efficiency, act with patriotism and justice, and lead
modest lives (Sec. 1, Article XI 1987 Constitution).
The principle of accountability provides that all
government officials and employees, whether
they be the highest in the land or the lowliest
public servants, shall at all times be answerable for
their misconduct to the people from whom the
government derives its powers.
The purpose of impeachment is to protect the
people
from
official
delinquencies
or
malfeasances. It is therefore primarily intended for
the protection of the State, not for the punishment
of the offender.
It is essential that responsible and competent
public officers be chosen for public office to
maintain the faith and confidence of the people to
the government otherwise it becomes ineffective.
No popular government can survive without the
confidence of the people. It is the lone guarantee
and justification of its existence.
Discipline of Members of the Judiciary
a.
b.
Note: There is misconduct when there is reliable evidence

showing that judicial actions are corrupt or inspired by
intent to violate the law or in persistent disregard of legal
rules.
2.
Inefficiency implies negligence, incompetence,

ignorance and carelessness. A judge would be
inexcusably negligent if he failed to observe in the
performance of his duties that diligence, prudence and
circumspection which the law requires in the rendition
of any public service.
Classifications of Administrative charges

1.
2.
3.
Serious
Less serious
Light
1.
If the judge is guilty of a serious charge:

(a) dismissal from the service,
(b) forfeiture of all or part of the benefits as
the Court may determine, except accrued
leave benefits;
(c) disqualification from reinstatement or
appointment to any public office,
including
government
owned
or
controlled corporation,
(d) Suspension from office without salary and
other benefits for more than 3 but not
exceeding 6 months. and
(e) A fine of more than P20,000.00 but not
exceeding P40,000.00.
2.
If the judge is guilty of a less serious charge:

(a) Suspension from office without salary and
other benefits for not less than 1 nor
more than 3 months, or
(b) A fine of more than P10,000.00 but no
exceeding P20,000.00.
3.
If the judge is guilty of a light charge:

(a) A fine of not less than P1,000.00 but not
exceeding P10,000.00, and/or
(b) Censure,
(c) Reprimand,
(d) Admonition with warning.
Discipline of the Members of the Lower Court Judges,

Justices of the Court of Appeals and the Sandiganbayan
The acts of a judge in his judicial capacity are not subject to
disciplinary action. In the absence of fraud, malice or
dishonesty in rendering the assailed decision or order, the
remedy of the aggrieved party is to elevate the assailed
decision or order to the higher court for review and
correction. However, an inquiry into a judges civil, criminal
and/or administrative liability may be made after the
available remedies have been exhausted and decided with
finality. (Republic v. Caguioa, A.M. No. RTJ-07-2063, June
26, 2009)
Institution of proceedings for the discipline of judges and
justices:
Proceedings for the discipline of judges of regular and
special courts and justices of the Court of Appeals and the
Sandiganbayan may be instituted:
1.
2.
3.
Motu proprio by the Supreme Court;

Upon a verified complaint filed before the Supreme
Court supported by:
a. Affidavit of persons who have personal
knowledge of the facts alleged therein; or
b. Documents which may substantiate said
allegations.
Anonymous complaint supported by public records of
indubitable integrity filed with the Supreme Court.
Grounds for discipline of judges and justices:

1.
Serious Misconduct implies malice or wrongful

intent, not mere error of judgment.
Judicial acts complained of:
20|
Must be corrupt or inspired by an intention to

violate the law; or
Were in persistent disregard for well-known
legal rules.
Res Ipsa Loquitor vis--vis Discipline of Judges

Q: In Administrative Circular No. 1 addressed to all lower
courts dated January 28, 1988, the Supreme Court
stressed that all judges are reminded that the Supreme
Court has applied the Res Ipsa Loquitor rule in the removal
of judges even without any formal investigation whenever
a decision, on its face, indicates gross incompetence or
gross ignorance of the law or gross misconduct (Cathay
Pacific Airways v. Romillo, G.R. No. 64276, 12 August

1986). The application of the res ipsa loquitor rule in the

removal of judges is assailed in various quarters as
inconsistent with due process and fair play. Is there any
basis for such a reaction? Explain.
A:
1. First view - there is a basis for the reaction against
the res ipsa loquitor rule on removing judges.
According to the position taken by the Philippine Bar
Association, the res ipsa loquitor rule might violate the
principle of due process that is the right to be heard
before one is condemned.
Moreover, Rule 140 of the Rules of Court provides for
the procedure for the removal of judges. Upon service
of the complaint against him, he is entitled to file an
answer. If the answer merits a hearing, it is referred to
a justice of the Court of Appeals for investigation, the
report of the investigation is submitted to the Supreme
Court for proper disposition.
The danger in applying the res ipsa loquitor rule is that
the judge may have committed only an error of
judgment. His outright dismissal does violence to the
jurisprudence set in. (In Re Horilleno, 43 Phil. 212,
March 20, 1922)
2. Second view- According to the Supreme Court the
lawyer or a judge can be suspended or dismissed based
on his activities or decision, as long as he has been
given an opportunity to explain his side. No
investigation is necessary.
Quantum of evidence required
The ground for removal of a judicial officer should be
established beyond reasonable doubt. Such is the rule
where the charge on which the removal is sought is
misconduct in office, willful neglect, corruption or
incompetence. The general rules in regard to admissibility
of evidence in criminal trials apply.
Disqualification of Justice and Judges (Rule 137)
Mandatory or compulsory instances that a judge may be
disqualified:
1.
2.
3.
4.
The judge, or his wife, or child is pecuniarily interested

as heir, legatee, creditor or otherwise
The judge is related to either party of the case within
the sixth degree of consanguinity or affinity, or to the
counsel within the fourth degree (computed according
to the rule of civil law)
The judge has been an executor, administrator,
guardian, trustee or counsel
The judge has presided in any inferior court when his
ruling or decision is the subject of review (Section 1 of
Rule 317)
Rationale: there is a conclusive presumption that the judge

cannot objectively or impartially try the case. The law
expressly prohibits him and strikes at the judges authority

to hear and decide the case.
Exception to the aforementioned grounds: If despite the
parties knowledge of the disqualification gave their written
consent that the otherwise disqualified judge would hear
and decide their case.
Voluntary Inhibition according to the Rules of Court states
that a judge through the exercise of sound discretion may,
for just or valid reasons to inhibit himself.
Note: A presiding judge must maintain and preserve the
trust and faith of the parties-litigants. He must hold himself
above reproach and suspicion. At the very sign of lack of
faith and trust in his actions, whether well-grounded or not,
the judge has no other alternative but to inhibit himself
from the case (Gutang v. Court of Appeals, 292 SCRA 76).
Q: In a case for homicide filed before the Regional Trial
Court (RTC), Presiding Judge Quintero issued an order for
the arrest of the accused, granted a motion for the
reduction of bail, and set the date for the arraignment of
the accused. Subsequently, Judge Quintero inhibited
himself from the case, alleging that even before the case
was raffled to his court, he already had personal
knowledge of the circumstances surrounding the case. Is
Judge Quinteros inhibition justified? Explain.
A: Judge Quinteros inhibition is justified. One of the
grounds for inhibition under Section 5, Canon 3 of the New
Code of Judicial Conduct for the Philippine Judiciary is
where a judge has actual bias or prejudice concerning a
party or personal knowledge of disputed evidentiary facts
concerning the proceedings. (2009 Bar Question)
Q: Rebeccas complaint was raffled to the sala of Judge A.
Rebecca is a daughter of Judge As wife by a previous
marriage. This is known to the defendant who does not,
however, file a motion to inhibit the Judge. Is the Judge
justified in not inhibiting himself from the case?
A: The Judge is not justified in not inhibiting himself. It is
mandatory for him to inhibit as he is related to any of the
parties by consanguinity or affinity within the sixth civil
degree. Judge A, being the stepfather of Rebecca, is related
to her by affinity of just one degree. Judges shall disqualify
themselves from participating in any proceeding in which
they are unable to decide the matter impartially or in which
it may appear to a reasonable observer that they are unable
to decide the matter impartially. (2010 Bar Question)
Powers and Duties of Courts and Judicial Officers (Rule
135)
GR: Courts of justice shall always be open; Justice to be
promptly and impartially administered.
XPN: Legal holidays
Requirement of public hearing:
GR: The sitting of every court of justice shall be public
21|

XPN: When the evidence to be adduced is of such nature as
to require their exclusion in the interest of morality or
decency.
morning or afternoon session, all the notes he has taken, to

be attached to the record of the case.(Sec. 17, Rule 136,
Rules of Court)
Note: all trials on merits shall be conducted in open court

or regular court room.
Note: Transcript of notes delivered to the clerk, must be

duly initialed on each page, to be attached to the record of
the case.
Availability to the public of court records:

GR: The records of every court of justice shall be public
records and shall be available for the inspection of any
interested person, at all proper business hours, under the
supervision of the clerk having custody of such records.
XPN: Unless the court shall, in any special case, have
forbidden their publicity, in the interest of morality or
decency.
Enforceability of inferior courts processes:
GR: Within the province where the municipality or city lies.
XPN: the approval of judge of Regional Trial Court of the
province where it would be enforced.
Court Records and General Duties of Clerks and
Stenographer (Rule 136)
Records kept by the clerk:
1.
General Docket
2.
Judgment and Entries Book
3.
Execution Book
Note: records may not be taken from the clerks office

except by order of the court. However, the Solicitor General
or any of his assistants, the provincial fiscal or his deputy,
and the attorneys de officio shall be permitted, upon proper
receipt, to withdraw from the clerks office the record of
any case in which they are interested.
Duties of clerks in general:
1.
The clerk shall safely keep all records, papers, files,

exhibits and public property committed to his charge,
including the library of the court, and the seal and
furniture belonging to his office (Sec. 7, Rule 136, Rules
of Court);
2. Demand that the stenographer deliver notes of the
session of the court to him immediately after each
session (Sec. 17, Rule 136, Rules of Court).
Furthermore, in the absence of the judge, the clerk may:
1.
2.
Perform all the duties of the judge in receiving

applications, petitions, inventories, reports;
Issue orders and notices(Sec. 5, Rule 136, Rules of
Court)
Legal Fees (RULE 141, A.M. NO. 04-2-04-SC)

Payment should be made upon filing of the
pleading or other application and the prescribed fee to be
paid in full upon filing of said same. If the fees are not paid,
the Court may refuse to proceed with the action until they
are paid and may dismiss the action or proceeding.
Fees in Lien
If the Court awards claim not alleged or more than
that claimed, the amount shall be considered fees in lien
and the party concerned shall pay the additional fees which
shall constitute a lien on the judgment in the satisfaction of
said lien.
Persons authorized to collect legal fees (list exclusive):
1.
Clerks of the Supreme Court, Court of Appeals,

Sandiganbayan and Court of Tax Appeals
2. Clerks of Regional Trial Courts
3. Clerks of Court of the First Level Courts
4. Sheriffs, process servers and other persons serving
processes
5. Notaries
6. Other officers taking depositions
Note: The persons herein authorized to collect legal fees
shall be accountable officers and shall be required to post
bond in such amount as prescribed by the law.
Exempt from payment of Legal Fees:
Indigent litigants - the legal fees shall be a

lien on any judgment rendered in the case
favorable to the indigent litigant unless the court
otherwise provides.
Republic of the Philippines but does not

include local governments and governmentowned or controlled corporations with or without
independent charters.
Costs (Rule 142)
Recovery of Costs
Costs shall be allowed to a prevailing party as a matter of
course. However, the court shall have power, for special
reasons, to adjudge that either party shall pay the costs of
an action, or that the same be divided, as may be equitable
Note: costs cannot be adjudged against the Republic of the
Philippines.
Duty of stenographer:
It shall be the duty of the stenographer to deliver
to the clerk of court, immediately at the close of such
22|

Dismissed appeal or action

Court retains the power to render judgment for
costs as justice may require.
Frivolous Appeal
Double or Treble Costs shall be imposed on the
plaintiff or appellant, which shall be paid by his attorney, if
so ordered by the Court
False Allegations
False Allegation made without reasonable cause
and found untrue shall subject the offending party to the
reasonable expenses as may have been necessarily incurred
by the other part by reason of such untrue pleading.
Non-appearance of Witnesses
If a Witness fails to appear at the time and place
specified in the subpoena issued by any inferior court, the
costs of the warrant of arrest and of the arrest of the
witness shall be borne by him, if the court determines that
his failure to answer the subpoena was willful and without
excuse.
23|

Legal Ethics Bar Reviewer

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Legal Ethics Bar Reviewer

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

UST LAW PRE-WEEK NOTES 2014

LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS

Practice of Law; Privilege

Practice of law means any activity, in or out of

Any person heretofore duly admitted as a member of the

Citizen of the Philippines;

A: No, because the practice of law is only reserved for those

Law student practice

The 5 Strike Rule in taking the Bar

The Former 5-Strike Rule was lifted by the Supreme Court

Q: Eric, a labor federation president, represented Luisa, a

Law student practice

UST LAW| ACADEMICS COMMITTEE

UST LAW PRE-WEEK NOTES 2014

Non-lawyers in administrative tribunal can

Limits on the Appearance of Non-Lawyers

He should confine his work to non- adversary

He should not undertake purely legal work, such as the

His services should not be habitually rendered. He

Non Lawyers in Administrative Bodies

Q: Atty. Fred is a law practitioner and headed a law firm

4. Small claims proceedings (Secs. 16 & 17, Rule on Small

Q: Vice Mayor Ron is a well-loved law practitioner because

4. Sanctions for practice or appearance without

A: No, because Ed is charged with an offense in relation to

3. Proceedings before the Katarungan Pambarangay (Art.

Persons not lawyers

Public Officials and the Practice of Law

Prohibitions and disqualifications of former government

UST LAW| ACADEMICS COMMITTEE

UST LAW PRE-WEEK NOTES 2014

Members of the Office of the Solicitor General

Encourage his clients to avoid, and/or

Deceitful Conduct is an act that has the proclivity for

A lawyer shall make his services available in an

UST LAW| ACADEMICS COMMITTEE

UST LAW PRE-WEEK NOTES 2014

A lawyer shall participate in the development of the

A lawyer shall keep abreast of legal developments;

Examples of Advertisements considered as deceptive

Barratry is an offense of frequently exciting and stirring up

Q: Atty. Melissa witnessed the car accident that resulted

Duties to the Legal Profession

Barratry v. Ambulance Chasing

costs and expenses and by settlement made for quick

Fomenting of litigation with resulting burdens on the

Integration is constitutional (In re Integration, 49 SCRA 22)

UST LAW| ACADEMICS COMMITTEE

UST LAW PRE-WEEK NOTES 2014

Effect of Non-Payment of Dues

Default in the payment of annual dues for six months shall

Q: Atty. Y, in his Motion for Reconsideration of the

The IBP and its Processes

A: Atty. Y clearly violated Canon 8 of the CPR and is

A: No, because he is deemed resigned upon the filing of his

UST LAW| ACADEMICS COMMITTEE

UST LAW PRE-WEEK NOTES 2014

Duty to the Courts

accused the Court of perpetrating extraordinary injustice

Members of the bar in good standing;

Guidelines in appointing a Counsel de Oficio

Amicus Curiae friend of the court; appointed to advise the

UST LAW| ACADEMICS COMMITTEE

UST LAW PRE-WEEK NOTES 2014