LEGAL

AND
JUDICIAL ETHICS

2014 GOLDEN NOTES

UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW
MANILA
 The UST GOLDEN NOTES is the annual student-edited bar review
material of the University of Santo Tomas, Faculty of Civil Law,
thoroughly reviewed by notable and distinct professors in the
field. Communications regarding the NOTES should be addressed
to the Academics Committee of the Team: Bar-Ops.

ADDRESS: Academics Committee

Team Bar-Ops
Faculty of Civil Law
University of Santo Tomas
Espaa, Manila 1008

TEL. NO.: (02) 731-4027

(02) 4061611 loc. 8578

Academics Committee
Faculty of Civil Law
University of Santo Tomas
Espaa, Manila 1008

All Rights Reserved by the Academics Committee of the Faculty of Civil Law of the
Pontifical and Royal University of Santo Tomas, the Catholic University of the
Philippines.

2014 Edition

No portion of this material may be copied or reproduced in books, pamphlets, outlines

or notes, whether printed, mimeographed, typewritten, copied in different electronic
devises or in any other form, for distribution or sale, without a written permission.

A copy of this material without the corresponding code either proceeds from an illegal
source or is in possession of one who has no authority to dispose the same.

No. __________

Printed in the Philippines, June 2014.

 ACADEMIC YEAR 2014-2015

CIVIL LAW STUDENT COUNCIL

VICTOR LORENZO L. VILLANUEVA PRESIDENT
GLORIA ANASTASHA T. LASAM VICE PRESIDENT INTERNAL
JOHN ROBIN G. RAMOS TREASURER
RAE GENEVIEVE L. ACOSTA AUDITOR
RAFAEL LORENZ S. SANTOS CHIEF-OF-STAFF

TEAM: BAR-OPS
VANESSA ANNE VIRAY CHAIRPERSON
ERIKA PINEDA HEAD, DOCUMENTATIONS & BAR REQUIREMENTS
JOHN LESTER TAN ASST. HEAD, DOCUMENTATIONS & BAR REQUIREMENTS
HAZEL NAVAREZ HEAD, HOTEL ACCOMODATIONS COMMITTEE
HANNAH QUIAMBAO ASST. HEAD, HOTEL ACCOMMODATIONS COMMITTEE
JULIA THERESE MAGARRO ASST. HEAD, HOTEL ACCOMMODATIONS COMMITTEE
RAFAEL LORENZ SANTOS HEAD, FINANCE COMMITTEE
DEXTER SUYAT ASST. HEAD, FINANCE COMMMITTEE
AL MAYO PAGLINAWAN HEAD, LOGISTICS COMMITTEE
ALBERTO VERNON VELASCO ASST. HEAD, LOGISTICS COMMITTEE
KEVIN TIMOTHY PILE ASST. HEAD, LOGISTICS COMMITTEE
JEAN PEROLA HEAD, PUBLIC RELATIONS
PATRICIA LACUESTA ASST. HEAD, PUBLIC RELATIONS
REINALD VILLARAZA ASST. HEAD, PUBLIC RELATIONS
VANESSA ANNE VIRAY CHAIRPERSON

ATTY. AL CONRAD B. ESPALDON

ADVISER
 ACADEMICS COMMITTEE
MARY GRACE L. JAVIER
JAMES BRYAN V. ESTELEYDES EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE
MA. SALVE AURE M. CARILLO

WILLIAM RUSSEL S. MALANG SECRETARY GENERAL

KAREN T. ELNAS ADMINISTRATION AND FINANCE

RAFAEL LORENZ SANTOS LAYOUT AND DESIGN
VICTOR LORENZO L. VILLANUEVA

LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS COMMITTEE

DONNA MARIE P. CABARRUBIAS
MARIOLE ANA SANTIAGO
MARICHIE ALARAS
GLENN CHUA
AVIEN RAINEL GARCIA
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS COMMITTEE HEAD
ASST. LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS COMMITTEE HEAD
ASST. LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS COMMITTEE HEAD
MEMBER
MEMBER

JUSTICE MYRA V. GARCIA-FERNANDEZ

ADVISER
 FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS

ACADEMIC OFFICIALS

ATTY. NILO T. DIVINA REV. FR. ISIDRO C. ABAO, O.P.

DEAN REGENT

ATTY. ARTHUR B. CAPILI

FACULTY SECRETARY

ATTY. ELGIN MICHAEL C. PEREZ

LEGAL COUNSEL
UST CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTO CONCEPCION LEGAL AID CLINIC

JUDGE PHILIP A. AGUINALDO

SWDB COORDINATOR

LENY G. GADANIA, R.G.C.

GUIDANCE COUNSELOR
 COVERAGE
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
2014 BAR EXAMINATIONS

I. LEGAL ETHICS
A. Practice of Law (Rule 138)............................................................................................................... 1
1. Concept.................................................................................................................................... 1
a) Privilege..................................................................................................................... 3
b) Profession, not Business............................................................................................ 3
2. Qualifications............................................................................................................................ 3
3. Appearance of Non-Lawyers.................................................................................................... 6
a) Law Student Practice (Rule 138-A)............................................................................. 6
b) Non-Lawyers in Court................................................................................................ 6
c) Non-Lawyers in Administrative Tribunals.................................................................. 7
4. Sanctions from practice or appearance without authority...................................................... 8
a) Lawyers without authority......................................................................................... 8
b) Persons not lawyers................................................................................................... 8
5. Public Officials and the practice of law ................................................................................. 10
a) Prohibition or disqualification of former government attorneys............................... 10
b) Public officials who cannot practice law/ restrictions................................................ 10
6. Lawyers authorized to represent the Government.................................................................. 12
7. Lawyer's Oath............................................................................................................................ 12

B. Duties and Responsibilities of a Lawyer............................................................................................. 13

1. To Society.................................................................................................................................. 14
a) Respect for Law and Legal Processes........................................................................ 14
b) Efficient and Convenient legal services...................................................................... 19
c) True, Honest, Fair, Dignified information on legal services........................................ 22
2. To the legal profession.............................................................................................................. 28
a) Integrated Bar of the Philippines................................................................................ 28
b) Upholding the Dignity and Integrity of the profession............................................... 32
c) No assistance in unauthorized practice of law........................................................... 35
3. To the Courts............................................................................................................................ 36
a) Candor, Fairness and Good Faith to the courts.......................................................... 36
b) Respect for the courts and judicial officers........................................................... 38
c) Avoidance of impropriety which tends to influence the courts.................................. 46
4. To the Clients............................................................................................................................. 47
a) Availability of services without discrimination............................................................ 47
(1) Services regardless of persons status................................................................. 48
(2) Services as counsel de oficio............................................................................... 48
(3) Valid grounds for refusal..................................................................................... 49
b) Candor, Fairness and Loyalty to Clients....................................................................... 51
(1) Confidentiality Rule............................................................................................ 51
(2) Privileged Communications................................................................................ 51
(3) Conflict of Interest.............................................................................................. 53
c) Client's Money and Properties..................................................................................... 57
(1) Fiduciary Relationship......................................................................................... 58
(2) Co-Mingling of Funds.......................................................................................... 59
(3) Delivery of Funds................................................................................................ 59
(4) Borrowing/Lending............................................................................................. 60
d) Fidelity to client's cause............................................................................................... 61
e) Competence and Diligence.......................................................................................... 61
(1) Adequate Protection.......................................................................................... 61
(2) Negligence.......................................................................................................... 62
(3) Collaborating Counsel......................................................................................... 62
 (4) Duty to apprise client............................................................................ 63
f) Representation with zeal within legal bounds................................................ 63
(1) Use of Fair and Honest Means.............................................................. 64
(2) Client Fraud........................................................................................... 64
(3) Procedure in handling the case............................................................. 65
g) Attorney's Fees............................................................................................... 65
(1) Kinds of payment................................................................................... 66
(2) Contingency Fee.................................................................................... 69
(3) Attorney's Lien....................................................................................... 71
(4) Charging Lien......................................................................................... 71
h) Client Confidences......................................................................................... 75
(1) Prohibited disclosures........................................................................... 75
(2) Disclosure, when allowed..................................................................... 76
C. Suspension, Disbarment and Discipline of Lawyers (Rule 139-B)............................................... 80
1. Nature and Characteristic of Action.............................................................................. 80
a) Sui Generis...................................................................................................... 81
b) Prescription..................................................................................................... 81
2. Grounds......................................................................................................................... 81
3. Proceedings................................................................................................................... 83
D. Readmission to the Bar............................................................................................................... 90
1. Suspended Lawyers....................................................................................................... 90
2. Disbarred Lawyers......................................................................................................... 91
3. Repatriated Lawyers...................................................................................................... 92
E. Mandatory Continuing Legal Education....................................................................................... 93
1. Purpose.......................................................................................................................... 93
2. Requirements................................................................................................................ 93
3. Compliance.................................................................................................................... 93
4. Exemptions.................................................................................................................... 93
5. Sanctions....................................................................................................................... 94
6. Legal Aid Service............................................................................................................ 94
F. Notarial Practice........................................................................................................................... 97
1. Qualifications................................................................................................................. 97
2. Term of Office................................................................................................................ 99
3. Powers and Limits.......................................................................................................... 99
4. Administer Oaths........................................................................................................... 103
5. Jurisdiction..................................................................................................................... 105
6. Revocation of Commission............................................................................................ 105
7. Competent Evidence of Identity.................................................................................... 106
8. Sanctions........................................................................................................................ 106
G. Canons of Professional Ethics....................................................................................................... 107

II. Judicial Ethics

A. Sources.......................................................................................................................................... 109
1. New Code of Judicial Conduct for the Philippine Judiciary (Bangalore Draft) 109
2. Code of Judicial Conduct................................................................................................. 110
B. Qualities........................................................................................................................................ 115
1. Independence................................................................................................................. 115
2. Integrity........................................................................................................................... 117
3. Impartiality...................................................................................................................... 119
4. Propriety......................................................................................................................... 125
5. Equality............................................................................................................................ 132
6. Competence and Diligence.............................................................................................. 134
C. Discipline of the Members of the Judiciary.................................................................................. 139
1. Members of the Supreme Court..................................................................................... 139
a) Impeachment.................................................................................................... 139
b) Ethical Lessons from the Impeachment of Former Chief Justice Corona. 140
 2. Lower Court Judges/ Court of Appeals and Sandiganbayan........................................ 142
3. Grounds....................................................................................................................... 143
4. Sanctions on erring members of the Judiciary............................................................ 148
D. Disqualifications of Justices and Judges (Rule 137)................................................................... 150
1. Compulsory.................................................................................................................. 150
2. Voluntary..................................................................................................................... 150
E. Legal Fees................................................................................................................................... 153
F. Costs........................................................................................................................................... 156
 DISCLAIMER

THE RISK OF USE, MISUSE OR NON-

USE OF THIS BAR REVIEW MATERIAL
SHALL BE BORNE BY THE USER/
NON-USER.
 PRACTICE OF LAW
LEGAL ETHICS
Legal Ethics
It is a branch of moral science which treats of the duties
which an attorney owes to the court, to his client, to his
colleagues in the profession and to the public as
embodied in the Constitution, Rules of Court, the Code
of Professional Responsibility, Canons of Professional
Ethics, jurisprudence, moral, law and special laws
(Justice George Malcolm).
Sources of ethical standards for the Judiciary
1. Primary
a. Bar
i. Code of Professional Responsibility
ii. Constitution
iii. Rules of Court
b. Bench
i. New Code of Judicial Conduct for the
Philippine Judiciary
ii. Rules of Court
c. Other personnel Code of Conduct for Court
Personnel
2. Secondary
a. Decisions/Resolutions of the Supreme Court
b. Supreme Court Circulars
c. Order/Resolution of other courts
d. IBP Issuances
e. Treatises and Publications
PRACTICE OF LAW
Concept
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 following acts constitute practice of law:
a. Giving of advice or rendering any kind of service
that involves legal knowledge.
b. Appearance in court and conduct of cases in court.
c. Preparation of pleadings and other papers incident
to actions as well as drawing of deeds and
instruments of conveyance.
Essential criteria in determining whether a person is
engage in the practice of law (CAHA)
1. Compensation implies that one must have
presented himself to be in the active practice and
1 FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW
that his professional services are available to the
public for compensation, as a source of livelihood or
in consideration of his said services.
2. Application of law, legal principle, practice or
procedure which calls for legal knowledge, training
and experience;
3. Habituality implies customary or habitually holding
oneself out to the public as a lawyer. Practice of law
is more than an isolated appearance for it consists in
frequent or customary action; and
4. Attorney-Client relationship - engaging in the
practice of law presupposes the existence of a
lawyer-client relationship. Ten (10) years of practice
of law includes work as a litigator, in-house counsel,
giving of legal advice, teaching of law and even
foreign assignment which requires the knowledge
and application of the laws.
Q: Ronnie, a paralegal in a law firm, helped Beth in a
property dispute in which she was involved by giving
her legal advice and preparing a complaint that she
eventually filed in court under her own signature.
When the lawyer for the defendant learned of it, he
told Ronnie to desist from practicing law. But he
disputed this, claiming that he had not practiced law
since he did not receive compensation from Beth for his
help. Is Ronnie correct? (2011 Bar Question)
A: No, because receipt of compensation is not the sole
determinant of legal practice. Giving of advice or
rendering any kind of service that involves legal
knowledge is also considered as practice of law. As such,
Ronnie should desist from giving legal advices since the
same is considered a practice of law to which he is not
qualified.
Q: Judge Anna has many law-related activities. She
teaches law and delivers lectures on law. Some people
in the government consult her on their legal problems.
She also serves as director of a stock corporation
devoted to penal reform, where she participates in
both fund raising and fund management. Which of the
aforesaid activities is she allowed to do? (2011 Bar
Question)
A: She can teach law and deliver lectures on law (Sec.
10(a) Canon 4 New Code of Judicial Conduct) but cannot
give legal advice since it is a practice of law to which
judges are prohibited to do (Sec. 11 Canon 4, New Code
of Judicial Conduct). Also, she cannot serve as director
of a stock corporation since the same is incompatible
with the diligent discharge of judicial duties (Sec. 7
Canon 6, New Code of Judicial Conduct). She can be a
director of her Family Corporation but not part of the
management.
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
 Legal Ethics

Persons excluded in the term Practicing Lawyer 4. Counsel de oficio

Practicing Lawyer excludes: An attorney appointed by the court to defend an

1. Government employees and incumbent elective
officials not allowed by law to practice;
2. Lawyers who by law are not allowed to appear in
court;
3. Supervising lawyers of students enrolled in law
student practice in duly accredited legal clinics of law
schools and lawyers of Non-Government
Organizations (NGOs) and Peoples Organizations
(POs) who by the nature of their work already render
free legal aid to indigent and pauper litigants; and
4. Lawyers not covered under subparagraphs (i) to (iii)
(of Sec. 4, B.M. 2012) including those who are
employees in the private sector but do not appear
for and in behalf of parties in courts of law and quasi-
judicial agencies.
Definitions
1. Bar v. Bench
BAR BENCH
Refers to the whole Refers to the whole
body of attorneys and body of judges and
counselors. Collectively, justices.
the members of the
legal profession.
2. Attorney-at-law v. Attorney-in-fact
indigent defendant in a criminal action.
5. Counsel de parte
A private counsel of a party, secured by him, without
intervention from the government.
6. Amicus Curiae
An experienced and impartial attorney invited by the
court to appear and help in the disposition of the issues
submitted to it. An amicus curiae appears in court not to
represent any particular party but only to assist the
court (plural: Amici Curiae).
7. Amicus Curiae par excellence
A bar association who appears in court as amicus curiae
or a friend of the court. It acts merely as a consultant to
guide the court in a doubtful question or issue pending
before it.
8. Trial lawyer
One who personally handles cases in court,
administrative agencies or boards and engages in actual
trial work, either for the prosecution or for the defense
of cases of clients.

ATTORNEY-AT-LAW ATTORNEY-IN-FACT 9. Lead counsel v. In house counsel v. Of counsel

Class of persons who are Simply an agent whose
licensed officers of the authority is strictly IN HOUSE /
court empowered to limited by the LEAD COUNSEL HOUSE OF COUNSEL
appear, prosecute and instrument appointing COUNSEL
defend, and upon whom him. His authority is A lead counsel He is one who He is an
peculiar duties, provided in a special is a lawyer on acts as attorney experienced
responsibilities and power of attorney or either side of a for a business lawyer, usually
liabilities are developed general power of litigated action though carried a retired
by law as consequence. attorney or letter of who is charged as an employee member of the
attorney. He is not with the of that business judiciary,
necessarily a lawyer. principal and not as an employed by
management independent law firms as
3. Attorney of record v. Attorney ad hoc and direction of lawyer. consultants.
a partys case,
ATTORNEY OF RECORD ATTORNEY AD HOC as distinguished
Attorney of record is an An attorney ad hoc is a from his juniors
attorney whose name is person appointed by the or
entered in the records court to defend an subordinates.
of an action or suit as absentee defendant in
the lawyer of a the suit in which the
designated party appointment was made.
thereto.

UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS

2014 GOLDEN NOTES
2
 PRACTICE OF LAW

10. Public prosecutor v. Private prosecutor A legal profession is not a business. It is not a money-
making trade just like a businessman employing strategy
PUBLIC PROSECUTOR PRIVATE PROSECUTOR for the purpose of monetary gain. It is a sacred
He is a quasi-judicial A private prosecutor is a profession imbued with public interest whose primary
officer who represents lawyer engaged by a objective is public service, as it is an essential part in the
the state in criminal litigant to intervene in administration of justice and a profession in pursuit of
proceedings. the prosecution of a which pecuniary reward is considered merely incidental.
criminal action when the
offended party is QUALIFICATIONS
entitled to indemnity
and has not waived Who may practice law
expressly, reserved or
instituted the civil action Any person heretofore duly admitted as a member of
for damages. He is under the bar, or hereafter admitted as such in accordance
the direction and control with the provisions of the rule, and who is in good and
of the public prosecutor regular standing, is entitled to practice law (RRC, Rule
(Sec. 5 Rule 110 RRC as 138, Sec. 1).
amended, May 1, 2002).
Q: A criminal case was filed against Atty. Javellana,
11. Assumpsit (2006 Bar Question) which resulted to his arrest and temporary detention
at the house of the clerk of court where his case was
Literally means he has undertaken. It is an action for pending. Despite his detention, Atty. Javellana
the recovery of damages by reason of the breach or non- continues with his normal activities including his
performance of a simple contract, either express or practice of law, in appearing as counsel for certain
implied, or whether made orally or in writing. Assumpsit cases. Can Atty. Javellana still engage in the practice of
is the word always used in pleadings by the plaintiff to law despite his arrest and detention?
set forth the defendants undertaking or promise.
A: As a detention prisoner, Javellana is not allowed to
NOTE: Claims in action of assumpsit were ordinarily divided practice his profession as a necessary consequence of
into (a) common or indebitatus assumpsit, brought usually on his status as a detention prisoner. The trial court's order
an implied promise, and (b) special assumpsit, founded on an was clear that Javellana "is not to be allowed liberty to
express promise. roam around but is to be held as a detention prisoner."
The prohibition to practice law referred to all other
12. Pro Se cases, except in cases where Javellana would appear in
court to defend himself (Pro Se).
A party to a lawsuit who represents himself, is appearing
in the case "pro se." All prisoners whether under preventive detention or
serving final sentence cannot practice their profession
PRIVILEGE
nor engage in any business or occupation, or hold office,
elective or appointive, while in detention. This is a
Nature of the practice of law
necessary consequence of arrest and detention (People
v. Maceda, G.R. Nos. 89591-96, Jan. 24, 2000).
The practice of law is not a natural, property or
constitutional right but a mere privilege. It is not a right
Legislature is not allowed to regulate the practice of
granted to anyone who demands it but a privilege to be
law
extended or withheld in the exercise of sound judicial
discretion. It is a privilege accorded only to those who
The 1987 Constitution no longer provides for the power
measure up to certain rigid standards of mental and
of the legislature to repeal, alter and supplement the
moral fitness.
Rules promulgated by the Supreme Court.
NOTE: It becomes a property right if there is a contract for
Attorneys Fees. Practice of law by the clerk of court

PROFESSION, NOT BUSINESS GR: The practice of law by a clerk of court is not allowed,
except isolated practice.
Law is a profession and not a trade
XPNs:
1. Written permission which must be approved by the
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
3 FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW
 Legal Ethics
Supreme Court; and
2. Approved leave of absence with justifiable reasons
NOTE: Notarial act is practice of law. Notarization of a single
document is not an isolated transaction, therefore, a permit
must be secured in order to prevent the violation of law.
Q: Atty. Ladaga, a clerk of court, appeared as counsel
for and in behalf of his cousin in a criminal case for
falsification of public documents before the METC of
Quezon City. The appearance of Atty. Ladaga in said
case was without the previous permission of the Court.
Did Atty. Ladaga violate the Code of Conduct and
Ethical Standards for Public Officials and Employees by
engaging in private practice?
A: Yes. "Private practice" of a profession, which is
prohibited, does not pertain to an isolated court
appearance; rather, it contemplates a succession of acts
of the same nature habitually or customarily holding
one's self to the public as a lawyer. It is true that he filed
leave applications corresponding to the dates he
appeared in court but he failed to obtain a prior
permission from the head of the Department (Oca v.
Atty. Ladaga, A.M. No. P-99-1287, Jan. 26, 2001).
Requirements for admission to the Bar
Under Sections 2, 5 and 6 of Rule 138, the applicant must
be (C21GRENAPOS):
1. Citizen of the Philippines;
2. At least 21 years of age;
3. Of Good moral character;
4. Resident of the Philippines;
5. 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.
Requirements for a Filipino who graduated from a
foreign law school to be admitted to the Bar
He may be admitted to the bar only upon submission to
the Supreme Court of certifications showing:
a) Completion of all courses leading to the degree of
Bachelor of Laws or its equivalent degree;
b) Recognition or accreditation of the law school by
the proper authority; and
c) Completion of all fourth year subjects in the
Bachelor of Laws academic program in a law school
duly recognized by the Philippine Government.
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
2014 GOLDEN NOTES
4
A Filipino citizen who completed and obtained his or her
degree in Bachelor of Laws or its equivalent in a foreign
law school must also present proof of completion of a
separate bachelors degree (Bar Matter No. 1153, Re:
Letter of Atty. Estelito P. Mendoza Proposing Reforms in
the Bar Examinations through Amendments to Rule 138
of the Rules of Court, Mar. 9, 2010).
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.
Q: Ching was born on April 1964 of Filipino mother and
Chinese father. He was conditionally admitted to take
the bar examination because of questions arising to his
citizenship. Upon passing the bar he was required to
take further proof of citizenship and was not allowed
to take the oath. Can he elect Philippine citizenship, 14
years after reaching the age of majority (required
under the 1935 Constitution)?
A: No, Ching is not qualified to be a lawyer for having
elected Philippine citizenship 14 years after reaching the
age of majority. Ching offered no reason why he delayed
the election of Philippine citizenship. The procedure is
not a tedious process. All that is required is to execute
an affidavit and file the same in the nearest registry (In
Re: Application for Admission to the Philippine Bar of
Vicente Ching, B.M. 914, Oct. 1, 1999).
Q: Atty. Melendrez filed a petition to disqualify Meling
from taking the bar exams and to impose disciplinary
penalty as a member of the Philippine Shari'a Bar. He
alleges that Meling, in his application to take the bar,
failed to disclose the fact that he has 3 pending criminal
cases. Also, Meling has been using the title Attorney"
in his communications as secretary to the Mayor.
Should Meling be disqualified from admission to the
Bar?
A: Meling's deliberate silence and non-revelation of his
pending criminal cases constitute concealment. The
disclosure requirement is imposed to determine
whether there is satisfactory evidence of good moral
character of the applicant. By concealing the existence
of such cases, the applicant flunks the test of fitness
even if the cases are ultimately proven unwarranted or
insufficient to impugn or affect the good moral character
of the applicant. Further, It was highly improper for
Meling, as member of the Shari'a Bar, to use the title
"Attorney". Only members of the Philippine Bar, who
have obtained the necessary degree in the study of law
and successfully passed the bar exams, been admitted
to the IBP and remain members in good standing are
authorized to practice law and thus use the title (In Re:
 PRACTICE OF LAW
Disqualification of Bar Examinee Haron S. Meling, B.M.
No. 1154, June 8, 2004).
Q: Mike Adelantado disclosed in his petition to take the
2003 bar examinations that there were two civil cases
pending against him for nullification of contract and
damages. He was thus allowed to conditionally take
the bar, and subsequently placed third in the said
exams. In 2004, after the two civil cases had been
resolved, Mike Adelantado filed his petition to take the
Lawyers Oath and sign the Roll of Attorneys before the
Supreme Court. The Office of the Bar Confidant,
however, had received two anonymous letters: the
first alleged that at the time Mike Adelantado filed his
petition to take the bar, he had two other civil cases
pending against him, as well as a criminal case for
violation of B.P. 22; the other letter alleged that Mike
Adelantado, as Sangguniang Kabataan Chairperson,
had been signing the attendance sheets of SK meetings
as Atty. Mike Adelantado. Having passed the Bar, can
Mike already use the appellation attorney? Explain
your answer.
A: No. Passing the Bar examination is not sufficient for
admission of a person to the Philippine Bar. He still has
to take the oath of office and sign the Attorneys Roll as
prerequisites to admission. Only those who have been
admitted to the Philippine Bar can be
called Attorney." Further, he should not be allowed to
take his oath and sign the Attorneys Roll. Rule 7.01 of
the Code of Professional Responsibility provides that a
lawyer shall be answerable for knowingly making a false
statement or suppressing a material fact in connection
with his application for admission to the Bar (Alawi v.
Alauya, A.M. No. SDC-97-2-P, Feb. 4, 1997).
Q: Grande was the private offended party in a criminal
case while Atty. De Silva was the counsel for the
accused. During the course of the proceedings, Atty. De
Silva tendered a check in favor of Grande in order for
the latter to desist from participating as a witness
against her client. Eventually, Grande accepted the
check and refused to participate as a complaining
witness thereby leading to the dismissal of the case.
However, to Grandes consternation, the check
bounced because Atty. De Silvas account was already
closed. When the court ordered Atty. De Silva to
comment on the charges against her, she deliberately
refused to accept all the notices coming from the court.
Is Atty. De Silva guilty of breach of trust? Did she violate
her oath as a lawyer by issuing a bouncing check and by
refusing to accept the notices sent to her coming from
the court?
A: Yes, Atty. De Silva had committed a breach of trust in
issuing a bouncing check, which amounted to deceit and
violation of the lawyers oath. The nature of the office of
5 FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW
an attorney requires that a lawyer shall be a person of
good moral character. Since this qualification is a
condition precedent to a license to enter upon the
practice of law, the maintenance thereof is equally
essential during the continuance of the practice and the
exercise of the privilege. Gross misconduct which puts
the lawyer's moral character in serious doubt may
render her unfit to continue in the practice of law. The
loss of moral character of a lawyer for any reasons
whatsoever shall warrant her suspension or disbarment,
because it is important that members of the legal
brotherhood must conform to the highest standards of
morality. Any wrongdoing, which indicates moral
unfitness for the profession, whether it is professional or
non-professional, justifies disciplinary action.
Moreover, her deliberate refusal to accept the notices
served on her betrays a deplorably willful character or
disposition (Grande v. Atty. De Silva, A.C. No. 4838, July
29, 2003).
Q: Argosino passed the bar examinations held in 1993.
The Court however deferred his oath-taking due to his
previous conviction for Reckless Imprudence Resulting
in Homicide. The criminal case, which resulted in
Argosinos conviction, arose from the death of a
neophyte during fraternity initiation rites. Various
certifications show that he is a devout Catholic with a
genuine concern for civic duties and public service. Also,
it has been proved that Mr. Argosino has exerted all
efforts to atone for the death of Raul. Should Argosino
be allowed to take his lawyer's oath?
A: Yes. The practice of law is a privilege granted only to
those who possess the strict intellectual and moral
qualifications required of lawyers who are instruments
in the effective and efficient administration of justice.
The SC recognizes that Mr. Argosino is not inherently of
bad moral fiber given the various certifications that he is
a devout Catholic with a genuine concern for civic duties
and public service and that it has been proved that he
has exerted all efforts to atone for the death of Raul and
the court gave him the benefit of the doubt, taking
judicial notice of the general tendency of youth to be
rash, temerarious and uncalculating (Re: Petition of Al
Argosino to Take the Lawyers Oath, B.M. No. 712, Mar.
19, 1997).
Good moral character is a continuing requirement
Well-settled is the rule that good moral character is not
only a condition precedent for admission to the legal
profession, but it must also remain intact in order to
maintain ones good standing in that exclusive and
honored fraternity (Tapucar v. Tapucar, A.C. No. 4148,
July 30, 1998).
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
 Legal Ethics
The requirement of good moral character has four
general purposes, namely:
1. To protect the public
2. To protect the public image of lawyers
3. To protect prospective clients
4. To protect errant lawyers from themselves.
Each purpose is as important as the other (Garrido v.
Attys. Garrido and Valencia, A.C. No. 6593, Feb. 4, 2010).
APPEARANCE OF NON-LAWYERS
Appearance of non-lawyers
GR: Only those who are licensed to practice law can
appear and handle cases in court.
XPNs:
1. Law student practice
2. 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, 1992).
3. Non-lawyers in administrative tribunal can
represent parties in tribunals such as NLRC,
DARAB, Cadastral Courts.
LAW STUDENT PRACTICE
Law student practice rule
A law student who has successfully completed his third
year of the regular four-year prescribed law curriculum
and is enrolled in a recognized law school's clinical legal
education program approved by the Supreme Court,
may 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 (Sec. 1, Rule 138-A).
The appearance of the law student authorized by this
rule, shall be under the direct supervision and control of
a member of the Integrated Bar of the Philippines duly
accredited by the law school. Any and all pleadings,
motions, briefs, memoranda or other papers to be filed,
must be signed by the supervising attorney for and in
behalf of the legal clinic (Rule 138-A, Sec. 2).
NOTE: The law student shall comply with the standards of
professional conduct governing members of the Bar. Failure of
an attorney to provide adequate supervision of student
practice may be a ground for disciplinary action (Circular No.19,
dated Dec. 19, 1986).
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
2014 GOLDEN NOTES
6
Q: Ferdinand Cruz sought permission to enter his
appearance for and on his behalf before the RTC as the
plaintiff in a Civil Case for Abatement of Nuisance. Cruz,
a fourth year law student, anchors his claim on Section
34 of Rule 138 of the Rules of Court that a non-lawyer
may appear before any court and conduct his litigation
personally. Judge Mijares denied the motion with
finality. In the same Order, the trial court held that for
the failure of Cruz to submit the promised document
and jurisprudence and for his failure to satisfy the
requirements or conditions under Rule 138-A of the
Rules of Court, his appearance was denied. Did the
court act with grave abuse of discretion amounting to
lack or excess of jurisdiction when it denied the
appearance of Cruz as party litigant?
A: Yes. The law recognizes the right of an individual to
represent himself in any case to which he is a party. The
Rules state that a party may conduct his litigation
personally or with the aid of an attorney, and that his
appearance must either be personal or by a duly
authorized member of the Bar. The individual litigant
may personally do everything in the course of
proceedings from commencement to the termination of
the litigation. Cruz as plaintiff, at his own instance, can
personally conduct the litigation of his case. He would
then be acting not as a counsel or lawyer, but as a party
exercising his right to represent himself.
The trial court must have been misled by the fact that
Cruz is a law student and must, therefore, be subject to
the conditions of the Law Student Practice Rule. It erred
in applying Rule 138-A, when the basis of Cruz's claim is
Section 34 of Rule 138. The former rule provides for
conditions when a law student may appear in courts,
while the latter rule allows the appearance of a non-
lawyer as a party representing himself (Cruz v. Mijares,
et al., G.R. No. 154464, Sept. 11, 2008).
NON-LAWYERS IN COURT
Non-lawyers in court
The following are the instances whereby non-lawyers
may appear in court:
1. Cases before the MTC: A party to the litigation, may
conduct his own case or litigation in person, with
the aid of an agent or friend appointed by him for
that purpose (RRC, Rule 138, Sec. 34);
2. Before any other court, a party may conduct his
litigation personally. But if he gets someone to aid
him, that someone must be authorized member of
the Bar (RRC, Rule 138, Sec. 34);
NOTE: A non-lawyer conducting his own litigation is
 PRACTICE OF LAW
bound by the same rules in conducting the trial case. He
cannot after judgment, claim that he was not properly
represented.
3. Criminal case before the MTC in a locality where a
duly licensed member of the Bar is not available, the
judge may appoint a non- lawyer who is a:
a. Resident of the province; AND
b. Of good repute for probity and ability to aid
the accused in his defense (RRC, Rule 116, Sec.
7);
4. Any official or other person appointed or designated
to appear for the Government of the Philippines in
accordance with law (RRC, Sec. 33, Rule 138).
NOTE: Such person shall have all the rights of a duly
authorized member of the Bar to appear in any case in
which said government has an interest direct or indirect
(RRC, Sec. 33, Rule 138).
Party-Litigant representing himself
In civil cases, an individual litigant has the right to
conduct his litigation personally. In criminal cases, in
grave and less grave offenses, an accused who is a
layman must always appear by counsel; he cannot
conduct his own defense without violating his right to
due process of law.
NOTE: Where an accused was not duly represented by a
member of the Bar during trial, the judgment should be set
aside, and the case remanded to the trial court for a new trial
(People v. Santocildes, Jr., G.R. No. 109149, Dec. 21, 1999).
With regard to a juridical person, it must always appear in
court through a duly licensed member of the bar, except
before MTC where it may be represented by its agent or officer
who need not be a lawyer.
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 TRIBUNAL
1. Under the Labor Code, non-lawyers may appear
before the NLRC or any Labor Arbiter, if:
a. They represent themselves; or
b. They represent their organization or members
7 FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW
thereof (Art 222, PD 442, as amended) (2002
Bar Question);
c. If they are duly accredited members of any
legal aid office duly recognized by the
Department of Justice, or the Integrated Bar of
the Philippines in cases referred to by the latter.
NOTE: He is not, however, entitled to attorneys fees
under Article 222 of the Labor Code for not being a lawyer
(Five J. Taxi v. NLRC, G.R. No. 111474, Aug. 22, 1994).
2. Under the Cadastral Act, a non-lawyer can
represent a claimant before the Cadastral Court.
(Act No. 2259, Sec. 9)
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
non-lawyer. 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)
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 (RRC, Sec. 34,
Rule 138).
Q: Kanlaon Construction and Reluya, et al. cases were
assigned before two labor arbiters. The Engineers as
co-defendant, without written authority to represent
Kanlaon Construction, admitted the complaints against
them. By virtue of such, the labor arbiters adjudicated
the case in favor of Reluya and the others. Can an
engineer represent a co-defendant in a case before the
Labor Arbiter?
A: No, the appearance of the engineer on behalf of
Kanlaon Construction required written proof of
authorization. It was incumbent upon the arbiters to
ascertain this authority especially since both engineers
were named co-respondents in the cases before the
arbiters. Absent this authority, whatever statements
and declarations the engineers made before the arbiters
could not bind Kanlaon.
Nevertheless, even assuming that the engineers were
authorized to appear as representatives of Kanlaon, they
could bind the latter only in procedural matters before
the arbiters and the Commission. Kanlaon's liability
arose from engineers alleged promise to pay. A promise
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
 Legal Ethics
to pay amounts to an offer to compromise and requires
a special power of attorney or the express consent of
Kanlaon. The authority to compromise cannot be lightly
presumed and should be duly established by evidence
(Kanlaon Construction v. NLRC, G.R. No. 126625, Sept. 18,
1997).
PROCEEDINGS WHERE LAWYERS ARE
PROHIBITED FROM APPEARING
Proceedings where lawyers are prohibited from
appearing
1. Proceedings before the Small Claims Court - No
attorney shall appear in behalf of or represent a
party at the hearing, unless the attorney is the
plaintiff or defendant (Rule of Procedure for Small
Claims Cases, Sec. 17).
NOTE: If the court determines that a party cannot
properly present his/her claim or defense and needs
assistance, the court may, in its discretion, allow another
individual who is not an attorney to assist that party upon
the latters consent (Rule of Procedure for Small Claims
Cases, Sec. 17).
2. Proceedings before the Katarungang Pambarangay
- During the pre-trial conference under the Rules of
Court, lawyers are prohibited from appearing for
the parties. Parties must appear in person only
except minors or incompetents who may be
assisted by their next of kin who are not lawyers
(P.D. No. 1508, Formerly Sec. 9; Local Government
Code of 1991, R.A. 7160, Sec. 415).
SANCTIONS FOR PRACTICE OR
APPEARANCE WITHOUT AUTHORITY
Remedies against unauthorized practice of law (ICE-
DA)
1. Petition for Injunction;
2. Contempt of court;
3. Criminal complaint for Estafa against a person who
falsely represented himself to be an attorney to the
damage of a party;
4. Disqualification and complaints for disbarment; or
5. Administrative complaint against the erring lawyer
or government official.
Q: KWD, a GOCC, hired respondent, Atty. I, as private
legal counsel for one (1) year effective with the consent
of the Office of the Government Corporate Counsel
(OGCC) and the Commission on Audit (COA). The
controversy erupted when two (2) different groups,
herein referred to as the Dela Pea board and
Yaphockun board, laid claim as the legitimate Board of
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
2014 GOLDEN NOTES
8
Directors of KWD. Dela Pea board appointed
respondents Atty. N, V and M as private collaborating
counsels for all cases of KWD and its Board of Directors,
under the direct supervision and control of Atty. I.
Meanwhile, the OGCC had approved the retainership
contract of Atty. C as new legal counsel of KWD and
stated that the retainership contract of Atty. I had
expired. The termination of Atty. Is contract was said
to be justified by the fact that the Local Water Utilities
Administration had confirmed the Yaphockun board as
the new Board of Directors of KWD and that said board
had terminated Atty. Is services and requested to hire
another counsel. Complainants then filed a disbarment
complaint against counsels V and M alleging that
respondents acted as counsel for KWD without legal
authority. Are their contentions tenable?
A: Yes. Attys. N, V and M had no valid authority to
appear as collaborating counsels of KWD. Nothing in the
records shows that Atty. N was engaged by KWD as
collaborating counsel. There is no proof that the OGCC
and COA approved their engagement as legal counsel or
collaborating counsel. In the case of Atty. I, he also
appeared as counsel of KWD without authority, after his
authority as its counsel had expired.
Under Section 27, Rule 138 of the Rules of Court, a
member of the Bar may be disbarred or suspended
from his office as attorney by the Supreme Court for
corruptly or willfully appearing as an attorney for a
party to a case without authority to do so. Disbarment,
however, is the most severe form of disciplinary
sanction, and, as such, the power to disbar must always
be exercised with great caution, and should be imposed
only for the most imperative reasons and in clear cases
of misconduct affecting the standing and moral
character of the lawyer as an officer of the court and
member of the Bar. Accordingly, disbarment should not
be decreed where any punishment less severe such as a
reprimand, suspension or fine, would accomplish the
end desired (Vargas v. Atty. Ignes, Atty. Mann, Atty.
Viajar and Atty. Nadua, A.C. No. 8096, July 5, 2010).
NOTE: In any case, an unauthorized appearance of an attorney
may be ratified by the client either expressly or impliedly.
Ratification retroacts to the date of the lawyers first
appearance and validates the action taken by him (Sps.
Agbulos v. Gutierrez, G.R. No. 176530, June 16, 2009).
PERSONS NOT LAWYERS
Remedies against unauthorized practice of law by
persons not lawyers (ICE)
1. Petition for Injunction;
2. Contempt of court;
3. Criminal complaint for Estafa against a person who
 PRACTICE OF LAW
falsely represented himself to be an attorney to the
damage of a party;
Sanctions for persons who are not lawyers
They shall be punished with contempt of court, severe
censure and three (3) months imprisonment because of
the highly fraudulent and improper conduct tending
directly to impede, obstruct, degrade, and make a
mockery of the administration of justice (Manangan v.
CFI, G.R. No. 82760, Aug. 30,1990; Lapena, 2009).
NOTE: A Disbarred lawyer still appearing in court is guilty of
indirect contempt (Lemoine v. Atty. Balon, Jr., A.C. No. 5829,
Oct. 28, 2003).
Power of contempt v. Power to disbar
The power to punish for contempt and the power to
disbar are separate and distinct, and that the exercise of
one does not exclude the exercise of the other (People v.
Godoy, G.R. Nos. 115908-09, Mar. 29, 1995).
Q: Dela Cruz misrepresented himself as a lawyer in the
application for habeas corpus of Gamido. What
punishment should the court impose on Dela Cruz?
A: The Court declared him guilty of indirect contempt for
maliciously and falsely portraying himself as a member
of the bar, appearing in court and filing pleadings (In the
Matter of the Application for Habeas Corpus of
Maximino Gamido; Gamido v. New Bilibid Prison, G.R.
146783, July 29, 2002).
Kinds of contempt
1. Direct Consists of misbehavior in the presence of
or so near a court or judge as to interrupt or
obstruct the proceedings before the court or the
administration of justice; punished summarily.
2. Indirect One committed away from the court
involving disobedience of or resistance to a lawful
writ, process, order, judgment or command of the
court, or tending to belittle, degrade, obstruct,
interrupt or embarrass the court; not summary in
nature.
3. Civil Is the failure to do something ordered to be
done by a court or a judge for the benefit of the
opposing party therein. It is remedial in nature.
4. Criminal Conduct directed against the authority
and dignity of a court or of a judge, as in unlawfully
assailing or discrediting the authority or dignity of a
court or of a judge, or in doing a duly forbidden act.
Intent is necessary.
NOTE: Where the punishment imposed, whether against
a party to a suit or a stranger, is wholly or primarily to
9 FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW
protect or vindicate the dignity and power, either by fine
payable to the government or by imprisonment, or both,
it is deemed a judgment in criminal case.
Where the punishment is by fine directed to be paid to a
party in the nature of damages for the wrong inflicted, or
by imprisonment as coercive measure to enforce the
performance of some act for the benefit of the party or in
aid of the final judgment or decree rendered in his behalf,
the contempt judgment will, if made before final decree,
be treated as in the nature of an interlocutory order.
Two-fold aspect of contempt power (1998 Bar
Question)
1. The proper punishment of the guilty party for his
disrespect to the court or its order; and
2. To compel his performance of some act or duty
required of him by the court which he refuses to
perform.
NOTE: The question of whether the contempt committed is
civil or criminal, does not affect the jurisdiction or the power
of a court to punish the same (Halili v. CIR, G.R. No. L-24864,
Nov. 19, 1985).
A practicing lawyer and officer of the court facing contempt
proceedings cannot just be allowed to voluntarily retire from
the practice of law which would negate the inherent power of
the court to punish him for contempt (Montecillo v. Gica, 60
SCRA 234).
Q: A judge cited complainant, a driver at the
Engineering Department of the Makati City Hall, in
contempt for using the formers parking space, and
refused to accept the drivers apology. He sentenced
the driver to five (5) days imprisonment and a fine of
(P1,000.00). Is the judge administratively liable for
grave abuse of authority in citing the driver for
contempt of court?
A: Yes. The Court does not see how the improper
parking by the driver could even in the remotest manner
disrupt the speedy administration of justice. At most, it
would cause the Judge inconvenience or annoyance, but
still, this does not fall under any of the acts for which a
person could be cited for contempt. Neither does it
appear from the records, nor from the evidence
presented, that the complainant intended any
disrespect toward respondent Judge. Worse, the Judge
immediately detained the driver, thereby preventing
him from resorting to the remedies provided under the
Rules of Court. Such abusive behavior on the part of
respondent judge fails to show his integrity, which is
essential not only to the proper discharge of the judicial
office, but also to his personal demeanor (Nunez v. Ibay,
A.M. No. RTJ-06-1984, June 30, 2009).
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
 Legal Ethics
Q: Balajadia filed a criminal case against petitioners. In
paragraph 5 of the complaint-affidavit, Balajadia
appeared to have asserted that he is a "practicing
lawyer. However, certifications issued by the Office of
the Bar Confidant and the Integrated Bar of the
Philippines showed that he has never been admitted to
the Philippine Bar. Hence, petitioners filed a case
against him claiming that he is liable for indirect
contempt for misrepresenting himself as a lawyer.
Balajadia, on his defense, claimed that the allegation
that he is a practicing lawyer was an honest mistake.
He stated that the secretary of Atty. Aquino prepared
the subject complaint-affidavit copying in verbatim
paragraph 5 of Atty. Aquinos complaint-affidavit.
Hence, it was inadvertently alleged that respondent is
a practicing lawyer in Baguio City which statement
referred to the person of Atty. Aquino and his law
office address. Is Balajadia liable for indirect contempt?
A: No. Balajadia never intended to represent himself as
a lawyer to the public. It was a clear inadvertence on the
part of the secretary of Atty. Aquino. The allegation that
he is a practicing lawyer cannot, by itself, establish intent
as to make him liable for indirect contempt (Tan v.
Balajadia, G.R. No. 169517, Mar. 14, 2006).
PUBLIC OFFICIALS AND THE
PRACTICE OF LAW
Prohibited acts or omissions of public officers
1. Accepting or having any member of his family
accept employment in a private enterprise which
has pending official business with him during the
pendency thereof or within one year after
termination (RA 3019, Sec. 3[d]).
2. Own, control, manage or accept employment as
officer, employee, consultant, counsel, broker,
agent, trustee or nominee in any private enterprise
regulated, supervised or licensed by their office
unless expressly allowed by law (RA 6713, Sec. 7[b]).
3. A lawyer shall not, after leaving a government
service, accept engagement or employment in
connection with any matter in which he had
intervened while in said service. (CPR, Rule 6.03).
4. A lawyer should not accept employment as an
advocate in any matter upon the merits which he
has previously acted in a judicial capacity (CPE,
Canon 36).
NOTE: These prohibitions shall continue to apply for a period
of 1 year after resignation, or separation from public office.
The 1-year prohibition shall also apply in connection with any
matter before the office he used to be with.
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
2014 GOLDEN NOTES
10
PROHIBITION OR DISQUALIFICATION OF
FORMER GOVERNMENT ATTORNEYS
Prohibition or disqualification of former government
attorneys
A lawyer shall not, after leaving government service,
accept engagement or employment in connection with
any matter in which he had intervened while in said
service (CPR, Rule 6. 03, Canon 6).
The evil sought to be avoided by this provision is the
possibility of a lawyer who just retired, resigned or
separated from the government of using his influence
for his own private benefit (Antiquiera, 1992).
Theories relating to the disqualification of former
government lawyers in representing a client on a
matter in which they intervened when they were in
office
1. Adverse-Interest Conflict A former government
lawyer is enjoined from representing a client in
private practice in a matter which is substantially
related to another matter which the former dealt
with while employed by the government, and if the
interests of the current and former clients are
adverse.
2. Congruent-Interest Representation Conflict The
lawyer is prohibited from representing a private
practice client even if the interests of the
government (the former employer) and the new
client are entirely parallel (PCGG v. SB, et.al, G.R.
No. 151809-12, April 12, 2005).
NOTE: The restriction against a public official from using his
public position as a vehicle to promote or advance his private
interests extends beyond his tenure on certain matters in
which intervened as a public official (Agpalo, 2004).
PUBLIC OFFICIALS WHO CANNOT PRACTICE LAW
OR WITH RESTRICTIONS
Public officials not allowed to engage in law practice
(JOPPCOMS)
1. Judges and other officials as employees of the
Supreme Court (RRC, Rule 148, Sec. 35).
2. Officials and employees of the OSG. (Ibid.)
3. Government Prosecutors (People v. Villanueva, G.R.
No. L-19450, May 27, 1965).
4. President, Vice-President, members of the cabinet,
their deputies and assistants (1987 Constitution,
Sec. 13, Art VII).
5. Members of the Constitutional Commission (1987
Constitution, Sec. 2, Art IX-A).
6. Ombudsman and his deputies (1987 Constitution,
 PRACTICE OF LAW
Sec. 8 [second par.], Art. IX).
7. All governors, city and municipal Mayors (R.A. No.
7160, Sec. 90).
8. Those prohibited by Special law.
Restrictions on the practice of law to certain
individuals (1992, 2000 Bar Questions)
1. No Senator or member of the House of
Representatives may personally appear as
counsel before any court of justice or before the
Electoral Tribunals, or quasi-judicial and other
administration bodies (1987 Constitution, Art. VI,
Sec. 14).
2. Under the Local Government Code (RA 7160, Sec.
91), Sanggunian members may practice their
professions provided that if they are members of
the Bar, they shall NOT:
a. Appear as counsel before any court in any civil
case wherein a local government unit or any
office, agency, or instrumentality of the
government is the adverse party
b. Appear as counsel in any criminal case wherein
an officer or employee of the national or local
government is accused of an offense
committed in relation to his office
c. Collect any fee for their appearance in
administrative proceedings involving the local
government unit of which he is an official
d. Use property and personnel of the government
except when the Sanggunian member
concerned is defending the interest of the
government.
3. Under Sec. 1, R.A. 910, as amended, a retired justice
or judge receiving pension from the government,
cannot act as counsel:
a. In any civil case in which the Government, or
any of its subdivision or agencies is the adverse
party; or
b. In a criminal case wherein an officer or
employee of the Government is accused of an
offense in relation to his office; nor
c. Collect any fees for his appearance in any
administrative proceedings to maintain an
interest adverse to the government, provincial
or municipal, or to any of its legally constituted
officers (R.A. 910, Sec. 1)
4. Civil service officers and employees without permit
from their respective department heads (Noriega v.
Sison, G.R. No. L- 24548, Oct. 27, 1983).
Q: Atty. Sagucio was the former Personnel Manager
and Retained Counsel of Taggat Industries Inc. until his
appointment as Assistant Provincial Prosecutor of
11
Tuguegarao. Taggat Industries was sequestered by the
PCGG and thus ceased its operations. As Assistant
Provincial Prosecutor, he assigned to conduct the
preliminary investigation over a criminal case filed
against Taggat Industries. He recommended the filing
of 651 informations for violation of the Labor Code. He
was charged for violating Rule 15.03 of the Code of
Professional Responsibility and for defying the
prohibition against private practice of law while
working as government prosecutor. Is Atty. Sagucio
guilty of engaging in private practice of law while
working as an Assistant Provincial Prosecutor?
A: Yes. Private practice of law contemplates a
succession of acts of the same nature habitually or
customarily holding ones self to the public as a lawyer.
Atty. Sagucio admitted that he rendered his legal
services to complainant while working as a government
prosecutor. Even the receipts he signed stated that the
payments by Taggat were for "Retainers fee. Thus, as
correctly pointed out by complainant, Atty. Sagucio
clearly violated the prohibition in RA 6713.
Atty. Sagucios violation of RA 6713 also constitutes a
violation of Rule 1.01 of Canon 1, which mandates that
[a] lawyer shall not engage in unlawful, dishonest,
immoral or deceitful conduct. His admission that he
received from Taggat fees for legal services while serving
as a government prosecutor is an unlawful conduct,
which constitutes a violation of Rule 1.01 (Lim- Santiago
v. Saguico, A.C. No. 6705, Mar. 31,2006).
NOTE: Violations of RA 6713 are not subject to disciplinary
action under the Code of Professional Responsibility unless the
violations also constitute infractions of specific provisions of
the Code of Professional Responsibility. Certainly, the IBP has
no jurisdiction to investigate violations of RA 6713 the Code
of Conduct and Ethical Standards for Public Officials and
Employees unless the acts involved also transgress provisions
of the Code of Professional Responsibility.
Q: Atty. Eliseo represented Allan in a collection suit
against the Philippine Charity Sweepstakes Office
(PCSO). After his election as sangguniang bayan
member, the court rendered a decision in PCSOs favor.
Still, Atty. Eliseo appeared for Allan in the latters
appeal, prompting the PCSO to question his right to do
so. In response, Atty. Eliseo claimed that the local
government code authorizes him to practice law as
long it does not conflict with his duties. Is Atty. Eliseo
correct? (2011 Bar Question)
A: No, because he cannot appear against a government
instrumentality in a civil case.
NOTE: While certain local elective officials (like governors,
mayors, provincial board members and councilors) are
expressly subjected to a total or partial proscription to practice
their profession or engage in any occupation, no such
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW
 Legal Ethics
interdiction is made on punong barangay and the members of
the Sangguniang Barangay. Expressio unius est exclusio
alterius. Since they are excluded from any prohibition, the
presumption is that they are allowed to practice their
profession. However, he should procure prior permission or
authorization from the head of his Department, as required by
the Civil Service Regulations (Catu v. Rellosa, A.C. No. 5738, Feb.
19, 2008).
LAWYERS AUTHORIZED TO REPRESENT
THE GOVERNMENT
Lawyers authorized to represent the government
Solicitor General (Sol Gen) for the National Government,
and any person appointed to appear for the government
of the Philippines in accordance with law (RRC, Rule 138,
Sec. 33).
In case of Local Government Units (LGU), they are
represented by a legal officer which provides legal
assistance or support to the mayor or governor and
represents the LGU in all civil actions and special
proceedings wherein it or any of its officials are involved
in an official capacity (LGC, Sec. 481).
NOTE: In criminal cases, Sol Gen steps in only when the case
has already reached the Court of Appeals. While it is with the
lower courts, it is the public prosecutor which represents the
government.
Duties of the Solicitor General
The Solicitor General, in his discretion, may pursue any
of the following actions:
1. Prosecute;
2. Not to prosecute;
3. To abandon a prosecution already started; or
4. To take a position adverse to the People of the
Philippines in a criminal case or to that of a
government agency or official, when he believes
that justice will be served by taking a different
stand.
Duty of the Solicitor General to represent one party
whereby two government agencies are in conflict
It is incumbent upon the Solicitor General to present to
the court what he considers as would legally uphold the
best interest of the government. The other government
agency adversely affected, if it still believes in the merits
of its case, may appear on its own behalf through its
legal officer or representative.
LAWYERS OATH
I, (name) , of (place of birth) do solemnly swear that
I will maintain allegiance to the Republic of the
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
2014 GOLDEN NOTES
12
Philippines; I will support its Constitution and obey the
laws as well as the legal orders of the duly constituted
authorities therein; I will do no falsehood, nor consent
to the doing of any in court; I will not wittingly nor
willingly promote or sue any groundless, false or
unlawful suit, or 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
these voluntary obligations without any mental
reservation or purpose of evasion. So help me God.
Q: An administrative complaint was filed against Atty.
Contawi for having violated his oath as a lawyer,
causing him damage and prejudice. Respondent had
undeniably mortgaged and sold the property of his
client without the latter's knowledge or consent,
facilitated by the use of a falsified Special Power of
Attorney. Did respondent violate his lawyer's oath
when he mortgaged and sold complainant's property,
which was entrusted to him, without the latter's
consent?
A: Yes. Respondent disposed of complainant's property
without his knowledge or consent, and partook of the
proceeds of the sale for his own benefit. Respondent's
established acts exhibited his unfitness and plain
inability to discharge the bounden duties of a member
of the legal profession. He failed to prove himself worthy
of the privilege to practice law and to live up to the
exacting standards demanded of the members of the
bar. It bears to stress that the practice of law is a
privilege given to lawyers who meet the high standards
of legal proficiency and morality. Any violation of these
standards exposes the lawyer to administrative liability
(Brennisen v. Atty. Contawi, A.C. No. 7481, April 24,
2012).
Importance of the lawyers oath
By taking the lawyers oath, a lawyer becomes the
guardian of truth and the rule of law and an
indispensable instrument in the fair and impartial
administration of justice. Good moral character includes,
at least, common honesty. Deception and other
fraudulent acts are not merely unacceptable practices
that are disgraceful and dishonorable; they reveal a
basic moral flaw (Olbes v. Deciembre, A.C. No. 5365, Apr.
27, 2005).
NOTE: The lawyers oath is not a mere ceremony or formality
for practicing law to be forgotten afterwards nor is it mere
words, drift and hollow, but a sacred trust that every lawyer
must uphold and keep inviolable at all times.
 DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF A LAWYER
DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES
OF A LAWYER
Four-fold duty of a lawyer
1. Public/Society He must not undertake any action
which violates his responsibility to the society as a
whole, he must be an example in the community
for his uprightness as a member of the society.
The lawyer must be ready to render legal aid,
foster legal reforms, be guardian of due process,
and aware of his special role in the solution of
special problems and be always ready to lend
assistance in the study and solution of social
problems (CPR, Canon 1-6).
2. Bar/Legal Profession Observe candor, fairness,
courtesy and truthfulness in his conduct towards
other lawyers, avoid encroachment in the
business of other lawyers and uphold the honor of
the profession (CPR, Canon 7-9).
3. Courts A lawyer must maintain towards the
court a respectful attitude, defend against unjust
criticisms, uphold the courts authority and
dignity, obey court orders and processes, assists
in the administration of justice (CPR, Canon 10-
13).
4. Clients The lawyer owes entire devotion to the
interest of his client, warm and zeal in the
maintenance of the defense of his rights and
exertion of utmost learning ability to the end that
nothing be taken or withheld from his client
except in accordance with law. He owes a duty of
competent and zealous representation to the
client, and should preserve his clients secrets,
preserve his funds and property and avoid
conflicts of interest (CPR, Canon 14- 22).
Duties of attorneys under the Rules of Court (2006
Bar Question)
The following are the duties of an attorney under the
Rules of Court (ADA- RECORD):
1. To maintain Allegiance to the Republic of the
Philippines and to support the Constitution and
obey the laws of the Philippines;
2. Not to encourage either the commencement
or the continuance of an action or proceeding,
or Delay any mans cause, from any corrupt
motive or interest;
3. To counsel and maintain such Actions or
proceedings only as appear to him to be just,
and such defenses only as he believes to be
honestly debatable under the law;
4. To observe and maintain the Respect due to
the courts of justice and judicial officers;
5. To Employ, for the purpose of maintaining the
13
causes confided to him, such means only as are
consistent with truth and honor, and never
seek to mislead the judge or any judicial officer
by an artifice or false statement of fact or law;
6. To maintain inviolate the Confidence and at
every peril to himself, to preserve the secrets
in connection with his client and to accept no
compensation in connection with his clients
business except from him or with his
knowledge and approval;
7. To abstain from all Offensive personality and to
advance no fact prejudicial to the honor and
reputation of a party or witness unless
required by the justice of the cause with which
he is charged;
8. Never to Reject, for any consideration personal
to himself, the cause of the defenseless or
oppressed; and
9. In the Defense of a person accused of a crime,
by all fair and honorable means, regardless of
his personal opinion as to the guilt of the
accused, to present every defense that the law
permits to the end that no person may be
deprived of life, liberty, but by due process of
law (RRC, Rule 138, Sec. 20).
Privileges of a lawyer (PSP-IS-12)
1. To Practice law during good behavior before any
judicial, quasi-judicial, or administrative agency;
2. First one to Sit in judgment on every case, to set
the judicial machinery in motion;
3. Enjoys the Presumption of regularity in the
discharge of his duty;
4. He is Immune, in the performance of his
obligations to his client, from liability to third
persons, insofar as he does not materially depart
from his character as a quasi-judicial officer;
5. His Statements, if relevant, pertinent or material
to the subject of judicial inquiry are absolutely
privileged regardless of their defamatory tenor
and of the presence of malice;
6. 1st grade civil service eligibility for any position in
the classified service in the government the duties
of which require knowledge of law; and
7. 2nd grade civil service eligibility for any other
governmental position, which does not prescribe
proficiency in law as a qualification.
CANONS OF PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY
CHAPTER 1
LAWYER AND SOCIETY
Canons 1-6
1. Uphold the Constitution and obey the laws of the
land and legal processes
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW
 Legal Ethics

2. Make legal services available in an efficient and First and most important duty of a lawyer
convenient manner
3. Use of true, honest, fair, dignified and objective The first and most important duty of a lawyer is his
information in making known legal services duty to the court. The lawyer is an officer of the court
4. Participate in the improvement of the legal who sets the judicial machinery with the main mission
system of assisting the court in the administration of justice.
5. Keep abreast of legal development and His public duties take precedence over his private
participate in continuing legal education program duties.
and assist in disseminating information regarding
the law and jurisprudence Q: After representing Lenie in an important lawsuit
6. Applicability of the CPR to lawyers in the from 1992 to 1995, Atty. Jennifer lost touch of her
government service client. Ten years later in 2005, Evelyn asked Atty.
Jennifer to represent her in an action against Lenie.
CHAPTER 2 Such action involved certain facts, some confidential,
THE LAWYER AND THE LEGAL PROFESSION to which Atty. Jennifer was privy because she
Canons 7-9 handled Lenie's old case. Can Atty. Jennifer act as
7. At all times uphold integrity and dignity of the counsel for Evelyn? (2011 Bar Question)
profession and support the activities of the IBP
8. Conduct himself with courtesy, fairness and A: No. A lawyer shall preserve the confidences or
candor toward his colleagues and avoid harassing secrets of his client even after the attorney-client
tactics against opposing counsel relation is terminated. He shall not reveal the
9. Not to directly or indirectly assist in the confidence or secrets of his client except upon the
unauthorized practice of law instances provided for by the rules (CPR, Canon 21,
Rule 21.01).
CHAPTER 3
THE LAWYER AND THE COURTS DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF A
Canons 10-13 LAWYER TO SOCIETY
10. Owes candor, fairness and good faith to the court
11. Observe and maintain the respect due to the
courts and judicial officers and insist in similar Canon 1
conduct A lawyer shall uphold the Constitution, obey the
12. Duty to assist in the speedy and efficient laws of the land and promote respect for law and
administration of justice legal processes.
13. Rely upon the merits of his cause, refrain from any
impropriety which tends to influence courts, or Two-fold duty under Canon 1
give the appearance of influencing the courts
1. Obey the laws and the legal processes
CHAPTER 4 2. Inspire others to maintain respect and obedience
THE LAWYER AND THE CLIENT thereto.
Canons 14-22
14. Not to refuse his services to the needy NOTE: The portion of Canon 1, which calls for lawyers to
15. Observe candor, fairness and loyalty in all his promote respect for law and for legal processes, is a call to
uphold the Rule of Law (Funa, 2009).
dealings and transactions with clients
16. Hold in trust all the moneys and property of his
Concept of Rule of Law
client that may come to his possession
17. Owes fidelity to clients cause and be mindful of
The supremacy of the law provides that decisions
the trust and confidence reposed in him
should be made by the application of known legal
18. Serve client with competence and diligence
principles or laws without the intervention of
19. Represent client with zeal and within the bounds
discretion in their application (Blacks Law Dictionary).
of law
20. Charge only fair and reasonable fees
NOTE: A lawyers oath to uphold the cause of justice is
21. Preserve the confidence and secrets of client even superior to his duty to his client; its primacy is indisputable
after the attorney-client relation is terminated (Cobb-Perez v. Lantin, No. L-22320, July 29, 1968).
22. Withdraw services only for good cause and upon
notice Q: Peter Donton filed a complaint against Atty.
Tansingco and others, as the notary public who

UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS

2014 GOLDEN NOTES
14
 DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF A LAWYER
notarized the Occupancy Agreement, for estafa thru
falsification of public document. Atty. Tansingco in
his complaint stated that he prepared and notarized
the Occupancy Agreement at the request of Mr. Stier,
an owner and long-time resident of a real property
located at Cubao, Quezon City. Since Mr. Stier is a U.S.
Citizen and thereby disqualified to own real property
in his name, he agreed that the property be
transferred in the name of Mr. Donton, a Filipino.
Donton averred that Atty. Tansingcos act of
preparing the Occupancy Agreement, despite
knowledge that Stier is a foreign national, constitutes
serious misconduct and is a deliberate violation of
the Code. Donton prayed that Atty. Tansingco be
disbarred. Is Atty. Tansingco guilty of serious
misconduct?
A: Yes. Atty. Tansingco is liable for violation of Canon
1 and Rule 1.02 of the Code. A lawyer should not
render any service or give advice to any client, which
will involve defiance of the laws which he is bound to
uphold and obey. Atty. Tansingco had sworn to uphold
the Constitution. Thus, he violated his oath and the
Code when he prepared and notarized the Occupancy
Agreement to evade the law against foreign ownership
of lands. Atty. Tansingco used his knowledge of the law
to achieve an unlawful end. Such an act amounts to
malpractice in his office, for which he may be
suspended (Donton v. Atty. Tansingco, A.C. No. 6057,
June 27, 2006).
Q: Prosecutor Coronel entered his appearance on
behalf of the State before a Family Court in a case for
declaration of nullity of marriage, but he failed to
appear in all the subsequent proceedings. When
required by the Department of Justice to explain, he
argued that the parties in the case were ably
represented by their respective counsels and that his
time would be better employed in more substantial
prosecutorial functions, such as investigations,
inquests and appearances in court hearings. Is
Atty. Coronels explanation tenable? (2006 Bar
Question)
A: Atty. Coronels explanation is not tenable. The role
of the States lawyer in nullification of marriage cases
is that of protector of the institution of marriage (Art
48, FC). The task of protecting marriage as an
inviolable social institution requires vigilant and
zealous participation and not mere pro forma
compliance (Malcampo-Sin v. Sin, G.R. No. 137590,
Mar. 26, 2001). This role could not be left to the
private counsels who have been engaged to protect
the private interest of the parties.
15
Rule 1.01, Canon 1,
A lawyer shall not engage in unlawful, dishonest,
immoral and deceitful conduct.
Definitions:
1. Deceitful conduct
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)
2. Unlawful conduct
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.
3. Immoral conduct
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.
NOTE: Grossly immoral conduct is one that is so corrupt
and false as to constitute a criminal act or so
unprincipled or disgraceful as to be reprehensible to a
high degree (Figueroa v. Barranco, SBC Case No. 519,
July 31, 1997).
Instances of gross immorality and the resulting
consequences
1. Abandonment of wife and cohabiting with
another woman. DISBARRED (Obusan v. Obusan,
Jr., Adm. Case No. 1392, Apr. 2, 1984).
2. A lawyer who had carnal knowledge with a
woman through a promise of marriage which he
did not fulfill. DISBARRED (In re: Disbarment of
Armando Puno, A.C. No. 389, Feb. 28, 1967).
3. Seduction of a woman who is the niece of a
married woman with whom respondent lawyer
had an adulterous relation. DISBARRED (Royong v.
Oblena, A.C. No. 376, Apr. 30, 1963).
4. Lawyer arranging marriage of his son to a woman
with whom the lawyer had illicit relations.
DISBARRED (Mortel v. Aspiras, A.M. No. 145, Dec.
28, 1956).
5. Lawyer inveigling a woman into believing that
they have been married civilly to satisfy his carnal
desires. DISBARRED (Terre v. Terre, A.M. No. 2349,
July 3, 1992).
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW
 Legal Ethics
6. Lawyer taking advantage of his position as
chairman of the college of medicine and asked a
lady student to go with him to Manila where he
had carnal knowledge of her under threat that if
she refused, she would flunk in all her subjects.
DISBARRED (Delos Reyes v. Aznar, A.M. No. 1334,
Nov. 28, 1989).
7. Bigamy perpetrated by the lawyer. DISQUALIFIED
FROM ADMISSION TO THE BAR (Royong vs.
Oblena, A.C. No. 376, Apr. 30, 1963).
8. Concubinage coupled with failure to support
illegitimate children. SUSPENDED INDEFINITELY
(Laguitan v. Tinio, A.M. No. 3049, Dec. 4, 1989).
9. Maintaining adulterous relationship with a
married woman. SUSPENDED INDEFINITELY
(Cordova v. Cordova, A.M. No. 3249, Nov. 29,
1989).
10. A retired judge who penned a decision 7 months
after he retired, antedating the decision and
forcing his former court staff to include it in the
expediente of the case. DISBARRED (Radjaie v.
Alovera, A.C. No. 4748, Aug. 4, 2000).
11. Forging a Special Power of Attorney. SUSPENDED
FOR 3 YEARS (Rural Bank of Silay, Inc. v. Pilla, A.C.
No. 3637, Jan. 24, 2001).
12. Attempting to engage in an opium deal
SUSPENDED FOR 1 YEAR (Piatt v. Abordo, 58 Phil.
350, Sept. 1, 1933).
13. Facilitating the travel of a person to the U.S. using
spurious travel documents. DISBARRED
(Sebastian v. Calis, A.C. No. 5118, Sept. 9, 1999).
Q: Atty. Danilo Velasquez was charged before IBP
Committee on Bar Discipline with Gross Misconduct
and Gross Immoral Conduct by complainant Mecaral.
Complainant Mecaral was his secretary and she
became his lover and common-law wife. Atty.
Velasquez then brought her to the mountainous
Upper San Agustin in Caibiran, Biliran where he left
her with a religious group known as the Faith Healers
Association of the Philippines, of which he was the
leader. Although he visited her daily, his visits
became scarce, prompting her to return home to
Naval, Biliran. Furious, Atty. Velasquez brought her
back to San Agustin where, on his instruction, his
followers tortured, brainwashed and injected her
with drugs. When she tried to escape, the members
of the group tied her spread-eagled to a bed. Made
to wear only a T- shirt and diapers and fed stale food,
she was guarded 24 hours a day by the women
members. Her mother sought the help of the
Provincial Social Welfare Department which
immediately dispatched two women volunteers to
rescue her. The religious group refused to release her
without the instruction of Atty. Velasquez. Is Atty.
Velasquez guilty of gross immoral conduct and
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
2014 GOLDEN NOTES
16
violated Canon 1 of the Code of Professional
Responsibility?
A: Yes. Atty. Velasquez act of converting his secretary
into a mistress is grossly immoral which no civilized
society in the world can countenance. The subsequent
detention and torture of the complainant is gross
misconduct only a beast may be able to do. Certainly,
the Atty. Velasquez had violated Canon 1 of the Code
of Professional Responsibility.
When a lawyers moral character is assailed, such that
his right to continue practicing his cherished
profession is imperiled, it behooves him to meet the
charges squarely and present evidence, to the
satisfaction of the investigating body and this Court,
that he is morally fit to keep his name in the Roll of
Attorneys. Atty. Velasquez has not discharged the
burden (Mecaral v. Velasquez, A.C. No. 8392, June 29,
2010).
Q: An administrative complaint for disbarment
against Atty. Iris was filed for allegedly carrying an
immoral relationship with Carlos, husband of
complainant Leslie. Atty. Iris contended that her
relationship with Carlos is licit because they
were married. And when she discovered Carlos true
civil status, she cut off all her ties with him. Is Atty.
Iris guilty of committing gross immoral conduct
warranting her disbarment?
A: No, her relationship with Carlos, clothed as it was
with what Atty. Iris believed was a valid marriage,
cannot be considered immoral. Immorality connotes
conduct that shows indifference to the moral norms of
the community. Moreover for such conduct to warrant
disciplinary action, the same must be grossly
immoral, that is it must be so corrupt and false as to
constitute a criminal act or so unprincipled as to be
reprehensible to a high degree. Atty. Iris act of
immediately distancing herself from Carlos upon
discovering his true civil status belies that alleged
moral indifference and proves that she had no
intention of flaunting the law and the high moral
standard of the legal profession (Ui v. Atty. Bonifacio,
A.C. No. 3319, June 8, 2000).
Acts NOT constituting gross immorality
1. Stealing a kiss from a client (Advincula v.
Macabata, A.C. No. 7204, Mar. 7, 2007).
2. Live-in relationship involving two unmarried
persons.
3. Failure to pay a loan
GR: A lawyer may not be disciplined for failure to
 DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF A LAWYER
pay a loan. The proper remedy is the filing of an
action for collection of a sum of money in regular
courts (Toledo v. Abalos, A.C. No. 5141, Sept. 29,
1999).
XPN: A deliberate failure to pay just debts and
the issuance of worthless checks (Lao v.
Medel, A.C. No. 5916, July 1, 2003).
Having incurred just debts, a lawyer has the moral
duty and legal responsibility to settle them when
they become due. He should comply with his just
contractual obligations, act fairly and adhere to
high ethical standards to preserve the courts
integrity, since he is an employee thereof (Cham v.
Paita-Moya, A.C. No.7494, June 27, 2008).
NOTE: Just debts include unpaid rentals, electric bills,
claims adjudicated by a court of law, and claims the
existence and justness which are admitted by the debtor
(Cham v. Paita-Moya, A.C. No.7494, June 27, 2008).
Q: Patricia and Simeon were teen sweethearts. It was
after their child was born that Simeon first promised
he would marry her after he passes the bar
examinations. Their relationship continued and
Simeon allegedly made more than twenty or thirty
promises of marriage. Patricia learned that Simeon
married another woman. Meanwhile, Simeon
successfully passed the 1970 bar examinations after
four attempts. But before he could take his oath,
Patricia filed a petition to disqualify Simeon to take
the Lawyers Oath on the ground of gross
immoral conduct. Does the act of Simeon in engaging
in premarital relations with Patricia and making
promises to marry her constitute gross immoral
conduct?
A: The SC ruled that the facts do not constitute gross
immoral conduct warranting a permanent exclusion of
Simeon from the legal profession. His engaging in
premarital sexual relations with complainant and
promises to marry suggests a doubtful moral character
on his part but the same does not constitute grossly
immoral conduct. The Court has held that to justify
suspension or disbarment the act complained of must
not only be immoral, but grossly immoral. A grossly
immoral act is one that is so corrupt and false as to
constitute a criminal act or so unprincipled or
disgraceful as to be reprehensible to a high degree. It
is willful, flagrant, or shameless act, which shows a
moral indifference to the opinion of respectable
members of the community (Figueroa v. Barranco, Jr.,
G.R. No. 97369, July 31, 1997).
NOTE: Mere intimacy between a man and woman, both of
whom possess no impediment to marry, voluntarily carried
17
on and devoid of any deceit on the part of the former, is
neither so corrupt nor so unprincipled as to warrant the
imposition of disciplinary sanction against him, even if as a
result of such relationship a child was born out of wedlock.
Morality v. Immoral conduct
MORALITY IMMORAL CONDUCT
Morality as understood Immoral conduct has been
in law is a human defined as that conduct
standard based on which is willful, flagrant, or
natural moral law shameless and which
which is embodied in shows a moral indifference
mans conscience and to the opinion of the good
which guides him to do and respectable members
good and avoid evil. of the community (Arciga
v. Maniwang, A.M. No.
1608, Aug. 14, 1981).
Q: Catherine and Atty. Rongcal maintained an illicit
affair. Catherine filed a case for disbarment against
Atty. Rongcal based on gross immoral conduct
alleging that he misrepresented himself to be single
when he was in fact married, and due to the false
pretenses she succumbed to his sexual advances. Will
her petition prosper?
A: Yes. Good moral character is a continuing condition
in a privilege of law practice. The mere fact of sexual
relation between two unmarried adults is not
sufficient to warrant administrative sanction for such
illicit behavior, it is with respect to betrayal of the
marital vow of fidelity. Atty. Rongcal is guilty of
immorality in violation of Rule 1.01 that a lawyer
should not engage in unlawful, dishonest, immoral or
deceitful conduct. But his remorse over his indiscretion
and the fact of ending the illicit relationship mitigates
the liability. Hence a penalty of imposing a fine will
suffice with a warning that the same will be dealt with
more severely (Vitug v. Rongcal, A.C. No. 6313,
September 7, 2006).
NOTE: Any errant behavior on the part of a lawyer, be it in
his public or private activities, which tends to show him
deficient in moral character, honesty, probity or good
demeanor, is sufficient to warrant his suspension or
disbarment (Tiong vs. Atty. Florendo, A.C. No. 4428, Dec. 12,
2011).
Moral turpitude
Moral turpitude imports an act of baseness, vileness
or depravity in the duties which one person owes to
another or to society in general which is contrary to
the usual accepted and customary rule of right and
duty which a person should follow. The question as to
whether an offense involves moral turpitude is for the
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW
 Legal Ethics

Supreme Court to decide. from each other and either one could have a live-in
partner with full consent of the other, is contrary to
Examples of acts involving moral turpitude law and morals. The ratification by a notary public who
is a lawyer of such illegal or immoral contract or
1. Conviction of estafa and/or BP 22. DISBARRED (In document constitutes malpractice or gross
the Matter of Disbarment Proceedings v. Narciso misconduct in office. He should at least refrain from its
N. Jaramillo, A.C. No. 229, Apr. 30, 1957). consummation (In Re: Santiago, A.C. No. 923, June 21,
2. Conviction of bribery/ attempted bribery. 1940; Panganiban v. Borromeo, 58 Phil. 367; In Re:
DISBARRED (In Re: Dalmacio De los Angeles, A.C. Bucana, A.C. No. 1637, July 6, 1976).
No. L-350, Aug. 7,1959; 7 C.J.S., p. 736; 5 Am. Jur.
p. 428). Rule 1.03, Canon 1, CPR
3. Conviction of murder. DISBARRED (In Re: A lawyer shall not, for any corrupt motive or
Disbarment Proceedings Against Atty. Diosdado interest, encourage any suit or proceeding or delay
Q. Gutierrez, A.C. No. L- 363, July 31, 1962). any mans cause.
4. Conviction of homicide. DISBARRED (Soriano v.
Dizon, A.C. No. 6792, Jan. 25, 2006). The rule is aimed against the practice of
5. Conviction of illegal marriage before admission to barratry, stirring up litigation and ambulance
the bar. DISQUALIFIED FROM BEING ADMITTED chasing.
TO THE BAR (Villasanta v. Peralta, 101 Phil.313,
Apr. 30, 1957). Crime of maintenance
6. Conviction of falsification of public document.
REMOVED FROM HIS OFFICE/NAME ERASED A lawyer owes to society and to the court the duty not
FROM ROLL OF ATTORNEYS (Ledesma de Jesus- to stir up litigation.
Paras v. Quinciano Vailoces, A.C. No. 439, Apr. 12,
1961). Barratry v. Ambulance chasing (1993 Bar Question)
7. Conviction of estafa through falsification of public
document. DISBARRED (Villanueva v. Sta. Ana, BARRATRY AMBULANCE CHASING
CBD Case No. 251, July 11, 1995). An offense of frequently An act of chasing victims
8. Conviction of abduction. SUSPENDED FROM exciting and stirring up of accidents for the
OFFICE FOR 1 YEAR (In Re Basa, 41 Phil. 275, Dec. quarrels and suits, either purpose of talking to the
7, 1920). at law or otherwise; said victims (or relatives)
9. Conviction of concubinage. SUSPENDED FROM lawyers act of fomenting and offering his legal
OFFICE FOR 1 YEAR (In re Isada, 60 Phil. 915, Nov. suits among individuals services for the filing of a
16, 1934). and offering his legal case against the person(s)
10. Conviction of smuggling. DISBARRED (In re Rovero, services to one of them. who caused the
A.C. No. 126, Oct. 24, 1952). Barratry is not a crime accident(s). It has
under the Philippine laws. spawned a number of
Rule 1.02, Canon 1 However, it is proscribed recognized evils such as
A lawyer shall not counsel or abet activities aimed at by the rules of legal (FSMD):
defiance of the law or at lessening confidence in the ethics.
legal system. (1994, 1998 Bar Questions) 1. Fomenting of
litigation with
Q: Atty. Asilo, a lawyer and a notary public, notarized resulting burdens on
a document already prepared by spouses Roger and the courts and the
Luisa when they approached him. It is stated in the public;
document that Roger and Luisa formally agreed to 2. Subordination of
live separately from each other and either one can perjury;
have a live-in partner with full consent of the other. 3. Mulcting of innocent
What is the liability of Atty. Asilo, if any? (1998 Bar persons by
Question) judgments, upon
manufactured
A: Atty. Asilo may be held administratively liable for causes of action; and
violating Rule 1.02 of the CPR - a lawyer shall not 4. Defrauding of
counsel or abet activities aimed at defiance of the law injured persons
or at lessening confidence in the legal system. An having proper causes
agreement between two spouses to live separately of action but

UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS

2014 GOLDEN NOTES
18
 DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF A LAWYER
ignorant of legal
rights and court
procedures by
means of contracts
which retain
exorbitant
percentages of
recovery and illegal
charges for court
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).
NOTE: Volunteer advice to bring lawsuit comes within the
prohibition, except where ties of blood, relationship and
trust make it a duty to do so.
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? (2011 Bar
Question)
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 (CPE, Canon 28). 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.
Impropriety of voluntary giving of advice
It is improper to voluntarily give legal advice when the
lawyer, in giving such, is motivated by a desire to
obtain personal benefit, secure personal publicity, or
cause legal action to be taken merely to harass or
injure another.
Rule 1.04, Canon 1
A lawyer shall encourage his clients to avoid, end or
settle a controversy if it will admit of a fair
settlement.
It is the duty of the lawyer to temper his clients
propensity to litigate and resist his clients whims and
caprices for the lawyer also owes duty to the court. A
lawyer should be a mediator for concord and a
conciliator for compromise rather than an initiator of
19
controversy and a predator of conflict.
The rule requires that lawyers encourage settlement
only when the same is fair. It should be noted that the
duty and the right of the lawyer is limited to
encouraging the client to settle. Ultimately, however,
the final decision to settle a claim rests upon the client.
Q: Jon de Ysasi III was employed by his father, in their
farm in Negros Occidental. During the entire period
of Jon de Ysasi III's illnesses, his father took care of his
medical expenses and Jon de Ysasi III continued to
receive compensation. However, later on, without
due notice, his father ceased to pay Jon de Ysasi IIIs
salary. Jon de Ysasi III made oral and written
demands from Atty. Sumbingco (Jon de Ysasi's
auditor and legal adviser) for an explanation for the
sudden withholding of his salary, as well as for the
remittance of his salary. Both demands, however,
were not acted upon. Jon de Ysasi III filed a case in
court. Can the lawyers who have been employed by
the parties be admonished for not trying to reconcile
the parties before the filing of suit?
A: Yes. The conduct of the respective counsel of the
parties, as revealed by the records, sorely disappoints
the Court and invites reproof. Both counsels may well
be reminded that their ethical duty as lawyers to
represent their clients with zeal goes beyond merely
presenting their clients' respective causes in court. It is
just as much their responsibility, if not more
importantly, to exert all reasonable efforts to smooth
over legal conflicts, preferably out of court and
especially in consideration of the direct and immediate
consanguineous ties between their clients. Once again,
the useful function of a lawyer is not only to conduct
litigation but to avoid it whenever possible by advising
settlement or withholding suit. He is often called upon
less for dramatic forensic exploits than for wise
counsel in every phase of life. He should be a mediator
for concord and a conciliator for compromise, rather
than a virtuoso of technicality in the conduct of
litigation (De Ysasi v. NLRC, G.R. No. 104599, Mar. 11,
1994).
EFFICIENT AND CONVENIENT
LEGAL SERVICES
Canon 2
A lawyer shall make his legal services available
in an efficient and convenient manner
compatible with the independence, integrity
and effective-ness of the profession.
The rationale of this is that it is the lawyers prime duty
to see to it that justice is accorded to all without
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW
 Legal Ethics
discrimination.
Rule 2.01, Canon 2
A lawyer shall not reject, except for valid reasons, the
cause of the defenseless or the oppressed.
Definitions
1. Defenseless
Those who are not in a position to defend themselves
due to poverty, weakness, ignorance or other similar
reasons.
2. Oppressed
Those who are the victims of the cruelty, unlawful,
exaction, domination or excessive use of authority.
NOTE: A lawyer so appointed as counsel for an indigent
prisoner, as the Canons of Professional Ethics demands,
should always exert his best efforts in the indigents behalf
(People v. Estebia, G.R. No. L-26868, Feb. 27, 1969).
The inability to pay for legal services is not a valid reason to
refuse acceptance of a case. This is because the profession is
a branch of the administration of justice and not a mere
money-getting trade. (CPR Annotated, PhilJA)
AN ACT PROVIDING A MECHANISM FOR FREE LEGAL
ASSISTANCE AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES
(RA No. 9999)
FEBRUARY 23, 2010
Purpose of RA No. 9999 (Free Legal Assistance Act of
2010)
1. Encourage lawyers and professional partnerships
to provide free legal assistance.
2. Solicit the assistance of lawyers and professional
partnerships in the private practice of law in
providing quality legal assistance to indigent
litigants through a system of tax incentives.
3. Provide relief to the Public Attorneys Office (PAO)
and other associations accredited by the Supreme
Court from the numerous cases it handles.
4. Provide indigent litigants the opportunity to
acquire the services of the distinguished law firms
and legal practitioners of the country for free.
5. Ensure that the right of every individual to
counsel, as mandated in the Constitution, is
protected and observed.
Services available
Public Attorney's Office (PAO), Department of Justice
(DOJ) and other legal aid clinics accredited by the
Supreme Court shall refer pauper litigants to identified
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
2014 GOLDEN NOTES
20
lawyers and professional partnerships. PAO, DOJ or
the accredited legal aid clinic shall issue a certification
that services were rendered by the lawyer or the
professional partnership under this act. The
certification shall include the cost of the actual
services given.
Incentives to lawyers giving free service
A lawyer or professional partnerships rendering actual
free legal services shall be entitled to an allowable
deduction from the gross income, the amount that
could have been collected for the actual free legal
services rendered or up to ten percent (10%) of the
gross income derived from the actual performance of
the legal profession, whichever is lower: Provided,
That the actual free legal services herein contemplated
shall be exclusive of the minimum sixty (60)-hour
mandatory legal aid services rendered to indigent
litigants as required under the Rule on Mandatory
Legal Aid Services for Practicing Lawyers, under BAR
Matter No. 2012, issued by the Supreme Court (RA
9999, Sec. 5).
Salient Features of RA 9999
1. The law will allow indigent litigants to acquire the
services of renowned lawyers and law firms for
free.
2. In exchange for the services rendered by the
lawyer or the law firm, they will be given tax
incentives equivalent to the cost of the services
rendered to the indigent litigant.
3. It will help relieve the Public Attorneys Office
(PAO) of its numerous caseloads involving
indigent litigants who shall be referred to lawyers
or law firms in the private practice.
4. It should entice renowned and distinguished firms
and lawyers in the practice as their services shall
still be compensated commensurately through
the tax incentives.
NOTE: The DOJ, in cooperation with the Philippine
Information Agency (PIA), is hereby mandated to conduct an
annual Information, Education and Communication (IEC)
campaign in order to inform the lawyers of the procedures
and guidelines in availing tax deductions and inform the
general public that a free legal assistance to those who
cannot afford counsel is being provided by the State (Sec. 6,
RA 9999).
Rule 2.02, Canon 2
In such cases, even if the lawyer does not accept a
case, he shall not refuse to render legal advice to the
person concerned if only to the extent
necessary to safeguard the latters rights.
 DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF A LAWYER
Rendering of Legal Advice includes preliminary steps
that should be taken, at least, until the person
concerned has obtained the services of a proper
counsels representation. Even though no attorney-
client relationship is created between the parties, the
lawyer, by providing interim advice, preserves the
dignity of the profession by inspiring public faith in the
profession (CPR Annotated, PhilJA).
Rule 2.03, Canon 2
A lawyer shall not do or permit to be done any act
designated primarily to solicit legal business. (1997
Bar Question)
Rationale behind the rule that legal profession is not
considered as a business (2006 Bar Question)
It is not a business because it is a:
1. Relation, as an officer of the court, to the
administration of justice involving thorough
sincerity, integrity and reliability
2. Duty of public service
3. Relation to clients with the highest degree of
fiduciary
4. Relation, to the colleagues at the bar,
characterized by candor, fairness, and
unwillingness to resort to current business
methods of advertising and encroachment on
their practice, or dealing directly with their
clients.
Q: Atty. David agreed to give of his professional
fees to an intermediary or commission agent and he
also bound himself not to deal directly with the
clients. Can he be subject to disciplinary action?
A: Yes. The agreement is void because it was
tantamount to malpractice which is the practice of
soliciting cases of law for the purpose of gain either
personally or through paid agents or brokers.
Malpractice ordinarily refers to any malfeasance or
dereliction of duty committed by a lawyer. The
meaning of malpractice is in consonance with the
notion that the practice of law is a profession not a
business. The lawyer may not seek or obtain
employment by himself or through others, to do so
would be unprofessional (Tan Tek Beng v. David, A. C.
No. 1261, Dec. 29, 1983).
NOTE: A general professional partnership with a non-lawyer
is VOID. In the formation of partnership for the practice of
law, no person should be admitted or held out as a
practitioner or member who is not a member of the legal
profession duly authorized to practice, and amenable to
professional discipline (CPE, Canon 33).
21
Advertisements
GR: No advertisement by lawyers is allowed. The most
worthy and effective advertisement possible is the
establishment of a well-merited reputation for
professional capacity and fidelity to trust.
XPNs: (LEPO-LABAN-PD)
1. Reputable Law lists, in a manner consistent with
the standards of conduct imposed by the canons,
of brief biographical and informative data, are
allowed.
2. Advertisements or simple announcement of the
Existence of a lawyer or his law firm posted
anywhere it is proper such as his place of business
or residence except courtrooms and government
buildings.
3. Ordinary simple Professional Card. It may contain
only a statement of his name, the name of the law
firm which he is connected with, address,
telephone number and the special branch of law
practiced.
4. A simple announcement of the Opening of a law
firm or of changes in the partnership, associates,
firm name or office address, being for the
convenience of the profession, is not
objectionable.
5. Advertisements or announcement in any Legal
publication, including books, journals, and legal
magazines and in telephone directories (Ulep v.
Legal Clinic, Inc., B.M. No. 553, June 17, 1993).
6. Writing legal Articles
7. Engaging in Business and other occupations
except when such could be deemed improper, be
seen as indirect solicitation or would be the
equivalent of a law practice.
8. Activity of an association for the purpose of legal
representation.
9. Notice to other local lawyers and publishing in a
legal journal of ones availability to act as an
associate for them
10. Seeking a Public office, which can only be held by
a lawyer or, in a dignified manner, a position as a
full time corporate counsel
11. Listing in a phone Directory, but not under a
designation of a special branch of law (Atty. Khan
Jr. v. Atty. Simbillo, A.C. No. 5299, Aug.19, 2003).
Rationale for the prohibition of advertisements
1. The profession is primarily for public service
2. Commercializes the profession
3. Involves self-praise and puffing
4. Damages public confidence
5. May increase lawsuits and result in needless
litigation
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW
 Legal Ethics
Examples of indirect solicitation
1. Writing and selling for publication articles of
general nature on legal subjects
2. Writing unsolicited article on a legal subject
NOTE: If engaged in another profession or occupation
concurrently with the practice of law, the lawyer shall make
clear to his client whether he is acting as a lawyer or in
another capacity.
Q: Atty. Dulcinea writes a regular column in a
newspaper of general circulation and articles on
unforgettable legal stories in a leading magazine. Her
by-line always includes the name of her firm where
she is a name partner. Would you consider this as
improper advertising? Explain your answer.
A: Atty. Dulcineas by-line including the firm name
where she belongs is improper because it is an indirect
way of solicitation or is an advertisement of the law
firm.
Q: A paid advertisement appeared in the July 5, 2000
issue of Philippine Daily Inquirer, which reads:
"ANNULMENT' OF MARRIAGE Specialist 532-
4333/521-2667." Similar advertisements were
published in the August 2 and 6, 2000 issues of the
Manila Bulletin and August 5, 2000 issue of The
Philippine Star.
Does the appearance of the following: "ANNULMENT'
OF MARRIAGE Specialist 532- 4333/521-2667", in a
newspaper, amount to advertising and solicitation of
legal services prohibited by the Code of Professional
Responsibility and the Rules of Court?
A: Yes. It has been repeatedly stressed that the
practice of law is not a business. It is a profession in
which duty to public service, not money, is the primary
consideration. Lawyering is not primarily meant to be
a money-making venture, and law advocacy is not a
capital that necessarily yields profits. The gaining of a
livelihood should be a secondary consideration. The
duty to public service and to the administration of
justice should be the primary consideration of lawyers,
who must subordinate their personal interests or what
they owe to themselves (Atty. Khan Jr. v. Atty. Simbillo,
A.C. No. 5299, Aug. 19, 2003).
NOTE: The rule against solicitation applies to a lawyer who
offers monetary reward to those who can serve as
witness/es in the case, which he is handling (CPR Annotated,
PhilJA).
Q: Facing disciplinary charges for advertising as a
lawyer, Atty. A argues that although the calling card
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
2014 GOLDEN NOTES
22
of his businessman friend indicates his law office and
his legal specialty, the law office is located
in his friends store. Decide (2001 Bar Question)
A: This appears to be a circumvention of the
prohibition on improper advertising. There is no valid
reason why the lawyers businessman friend should be
handing out calling cards which contains the lawyers
law office and legal specialty, even if his office is
located in his friends store. What makes it more
objectionable is the statement of his supposed legal
specialty.
Rule 2.04, Canon 2
A lawyer shall not charge rates lower than those
customarily prescribed unless the circumstances so
warrant (1997, 2005 Bar Questions)
GR: A lawyer shall not charge rates lower than those
customarily prescribed.
XPN: When clients are relatives, co-lawyers, or are
indigents. These are the valid justifications.
NOTE: What the rule prohibits is a competition in the matter
of charging professional fees for the purpose of attracting
clients in favor of the lawyer who offers lower rates. The rule
does not prohibit a lawyer from charging a reduced fee or
none at all to an indigent (Comments of the IBP Committee).
TRUE, HONEST, FAIR, DIGNIFIED AND OBJECTIVE
INFORMATION ON LEGAL SERVICES
Canon 3
A lawyer in making known his legal services shall
use only true, honest, fair, dignified and objective
information or statement of facts
The practice of law is not a trade like the sale of
commodities to the general public where "the usual
exaggerations in trade, when the proper party had the
opportunity to know the facts, are not in
themselves fraudulent (NCC, Art. 1340).
Q: Atty. E has a daily 10-minute radio program billed
as a Court of Common Troubles. The program is
advertised by the radio station as a public service
feature for those who seek but cannot afford to pay
for legal advice. Its sponsors include a food
processing company and a detergent manufacturing
firm which share with the radio station the monthly
remuneration of Atty. E. Is there any impropriety in
Atty. Es role under the above arrangement? (1997
Bar Question)
 DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF A LAWYER
A: Yes. Giving advice on legal matters through the
medium of a newspaper column or radio station or
television broadcast is improper. It would involve
indirect advertising and violation of the confidential
relation between the lawyer and the client (Agpalo,
Legal Ethics).
Rule 3.01, Canon 3
A lawyer shall not use or permit the use of any false,
fraudulent, misleading, deceptive, undignified, self-
laudatory or unfair statement or claim regarding his
qualifications or legal services. (1997 Bar Question)
Any false, exaggerating or untrue claims about his
qualification are clearly unethical. Example of this is
when a lawyer makes representation to a prospective
client that he has never lost a single case in his entire
career. Certainly, this is impossible for the best lawyers
in the country have experienced losing cases
(Antiquiera, 1992).
Examples of advertisements considered as deceptive
1. Misstatements of fact
2. 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
3. Inclusion of information irrelevant on selecting a
lawyer
4. Representations concerning the quality of service,
which cannot be measured or verified (CPR
Annotated, PhilJA).
Rule 3.02, Canon 3
In the choice of a firm name, no false, misleading or
assumed name shall be used. The continued use of
the name of a deceased partner is permissible
provided that the firm indicates in all its
communications that said partner is deceased.
(1994, 1996, 2001 Bar Questions)
Rationale behind the rule that the name of deceased
partner may still be used
All the partners have, by their joint and several efforts
over a period of years contributed to the good will
attached to the firm name. In the case of a firm having
widespread connections, this good will is disturbed by
a change in firm name every time a partner dies, and
that reflects a loss in some degree of the good will to
the building up of which the surviving partners have
contributed their time, skill and labor through a period
of years (CPR Annotated, PhilJA).
NOTE: No name not belonging to any of the partners or
associates may be used in the firm name for any purpose.
23
Continued use of the name of a deceased partner is
permissible provided that the firm indicates in all its
communications that said partner is deceased. The use of a
cross after the name of the deceased partner is sufficient
indication. It is advisable though that the year of the death
be also indicated.
Rule 3.03, Canon 3
Where a partner accepts public office, he shall
withdraw from the firm and his name shall be
dropped from the firm name unless the law allows
him to practice law concurrently.
The rationale of this rule is to prevent the law firm or
partners from making use of the name of the public
official to attract business and to avoid suspicion of
undue influence.
Q: Samonte alleges that when she went to Branch
220, RTC, Quezon City, to inquire about the reason for
the issuance of the temporary restraining order, Atty.
Rolando Gatdula (Clerk of Court) blamed her lawyer
for writing the wrong address in the complaint for
ejectment, and told her that if she wanted the
execution to proceed, she should change her lawyer
and retain the law office of Atty. Gatdula, at the same
time giving his calling card with the name "Baligod,
Gatdula, Tacardon, Dimailig and Celera" with office at
Rm. 220 Mariwasa Bldg., 717 Aurora Blvd., Cubao,
Quezon City, otherwise she will not be able to eject
the defendant Dave Knope. Samonte told Atty.
Gatdula that she could not decide because she was
only representing her sister. To her consternation,
the RTC Branch 220 issued an order granting the
preliminary injunction as threatened by Atty. Gatdula
despite the fact that the MTC, Branch 37 had issued
an Order directing the execution of the Decision in
Civil Case No. 37-14552.
Samonte filed an administrative case for misconduct,
alleging that Atty. Gatdula is engaged in the private
practice of law. Did Atty. Gatdula violate the Code of
Conduct and Ethical Standards for the Public Officials
and Employees?
A: Yes. Samonte by her failure to appear at the
hearings, failed to substantiate her allegation that it
was Atty. Gatdula who gave her calling card "Baligod,
Gatdula, Tacardon, Dimailig and Celera Law Offices"
and that he tried to convince her to change counsels.
However, while Atty. Gatdula vehemently denies
Samonte's allegations, he does not deny that his name
appears on the calling card attached to the complaint,
which admittedly came into the hands of Samonte.
The card clearly gives the impression that he is
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW
 Legal Ethics
connected with the said law firm. The
inclusion/retention of his name in the professional
card constitutes an act of solicitation which violates
Section 7 sub-par. (b) (2) of R.A. 6713, otherwise
known as "Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards for
the Public Officials and Employees" which declares it
unlawful for a public official or employee to, among
others: (2) Engage in the private practice of their
profession unless authorized by the Constitution or
law, provided that such practice will not conflict or
tend to conflict with official functions (Samonte v.
Gatdula, A.M. No. 99-1292, Feb. 26, 1999).
Rule 3.04, Canon 3
A lawyer shall not pay or give anything of value to
representatives of the mass media in anticipation of,
or in return for, publicity to attract legal business.
The reason for this rule is to prevent some lawyers
from gaining an unfair advantage over others through
the use of gimmickry, press agentry or other artificial
means.
Q: Fiscal Salva conducted the investigation of the case
concerning the killing of Monroy, in the session hall
of the Municipal Court of Pasay City to accommodate
the public and members of the press. Also, he told the
press that if you want to ask question, I am allowing
you to do so and the questions will be reproduced as
my own. Is the act of the fiscal in sensationalizing
the case unethical?
A: Yes. Fiscal Salva should be publicly reprehended
and censured for the uncalled and wide publicity and
sensationalism that he had given to and allowed in
connection with his investigation, whatever be his
motive, which is considered and found to be contempt
of court (Cruz v Salva, G.R. No. L-12871, July 25, 1959).
PARTICIPATION IN THE IMPROVEMENT AND
REFORMS IN THE LEGAL SYSTEM
Canon 4
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.
By reason of education and experience, lawyers are
especially qualified to recognize deficiencies in the
legal system and to initiate corrective measures
therein. Thus, they should participate in proposing and
supporting legislation and programs to improve the
system, without regard to the general interests or
desires of clients or former clients (Ethical
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
2014 GOLDEN NOTES
24
Consideration 8-1, 1978, Model Code of Professional
Responsibility, American Bar Association).
E.g.:
1. Presenting position papers or resolutions for the
introduction of pertinent bills in Congress; or
2. Petitions with the SC for the amendment of the
Rules of Court.
Endorsement by a lawyer
A lawyer may, with propriety, endorse a candidate and
seek that endorsement from other lawyers. A lawyer
should not use or attempt to use the power or prestige
of the judicial office to secure such endorsement. On
the other hand, the lawyer whose endorsement is
sought should have the courage and moral stamina to
refuse the request for endorsement if he believes the
candidate lacks the essential qualifications for the
office or believes the opposing candidate is better
qualified (ABA Opinion 189 (1938); (Funa, 2009).
PARTICIPATION IN THE LEGAL
EDUCATION PROGRAM
Canon 5
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 law students and assist in
disseminating information regarding the law and
jurisprudence.
This duty carries with it the obligation to be well
informed of the existing laws, and to keep abreast with
legal developments, recent enactment and
jurisprudence. It is imperative that they be conversant
with the basic legal principles. Unless they faithfully
comply with such duty, they may not be able to
discharge competently and diligently their obligations
as members of the Bar. Worse, they may become
susceptible to committing mistakes (Dulalai Jr. v. Cruz,
A.C. No. 6854, Apr. 27, 2007, citing Santiago v.
Rafanan, A.C. No. 6252, Oct. 5, 2004).
The latest circular of the Supreme Court provides for
the mandatory attendance of all lawyers in the so-
called Mandatory Continuing Legal Education Program
of the IBP. For law practitioners, they have to comply
with the 36 hours of mandatory legal education as a
pre-condition to the non-revocation of license to
practice law (Antiquiera, 1992).
 DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF A LAWYER
Three-fold obligation of a lawyer
1. He owes it to himself to continue improving his
knowledge of the laws.
2. He owes it to his profession to take an active
interest in the maintenance of high standards of
legal education.
3. He owes it to the lay public to make the law a part
of their social consciousness.
LAWYERS IN THE GOVERNMENT AND
DISCHARGE OF OFFICIAL TASKS
Canon 6
These canons shall apply to lawyers in
government service in the discharge of their
official tasks
Lawyers in the employ of the government should be
more sensitive in the performance of their
professional obligations as their conduct is subject to
constant scrutiny of the public.
Rule 6.01, Canon 6
The primary duty of a lawyer engaged in PUBLIC
PROSECUTION is not to convict but to see to it that
justice is done. The suppression of facts or the
concealment of witnesses capable of establishing the
innocence of the accused is highly reprehensible and
is cause for disciplinary action (1992, 1993 Bar
Questions)
Q: From the viewpoint of legal ethics, why should it
be mandatory that the public prosecutor be present
at the trial of a criminal case despite the presence of
a private prosecutor? (2001 Bar Question)
A: The public prosecutor must be present at the trial
of the criminal case despite the presence of a private
prosecutor in order to see to it that the interest of the
State is well-guarded and protected, should the
private prosecutor be found lacking in competence in
prosecuting the case. Moreover, the primary duty of a
public prosecutor is not to convict but to see to it that
justice is done (Rule 6.01, CPR). A private prosecutor
would be naturally interested only in the conviction of
the accused.
Instance where a private prosecutor may appear in
behalf of the State even without the presence or
supervision of a public prosecutor
All criminal actions either commenced by complaint
or by information shall be prosecuted under the
direction and control of a public prosecutor. In case of
heavy work schedule of the public prosecutor or in the
25
event of lack of public prosecutors, the private
prosecutor may be authorized in writing by the Chief
of the Prosecution Office or the Regional State
Prosecutor to prosecute the case subject to the
approval of the court. Once so authorized to prosecute
the criminal action, the private prosecutor shall
continue to prosecute the case up to end of the trial
even in the absence of a public prosecutor, unless the
authority is revoked or otherwise withdrawn (RRC,
Rule 110, Sec. 5, as amended by A.M. No. 02-2-07-SC
effective May 1, 2002).
Rule 6.02, Canon 6
A lawyer in the government service shall not use his
public position to promote or advance his private
interests, nor allow the latter to interfere with his
public duties.
Restriction on lawyers who are also public officials
and employees during their incumbency (PERU)
They must NOT:
1. Engage in the Private practice of their
profession unless authorized by the
Constitution or law, provided that such
practice will not conflict or tend to conflict
with their official functions;
2. Own, control, manage or accept Employment
as officer, employee, consultant, counsel,
broker, agent, trustee or nominee in any
private enterprise regulated, supervised or
licensed by their office unless expressly
allowed by law;
3. Recommend any person to any position in a
private enterprise which has a regular or
pending official transaction with their office;
and
4. Use or divulge confidential or classified
information officially known to them by
reason of their office and not available to the
public.
Rule 6.01 v. Rule 6.02
Unlike Rule 6.01, 6.02 is not limited to public
prosecutors, or public lawyers engaged principally in
criminal prosecution cases. The restriction applies
particularly to lawyers in government service, who are
allowed by law to engage in private law practice, and
those who, though prohibited from engaging in the
practice of law, have friends, former associates and
relatives who are in the active practice of law (CPR
Annotated, PhilJA).
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW
 Legal Ethics

Rule 6.03, Canon 6 the drafting, enforcing or interpreting government or

A lawyer shall not, after leaving government service, agency procedures, regulations or laws, or briefing
accept engagement or employment in connection abstract principles of law are acts which do not fall
with any matter in which he had intervened while in within the scope of the term matter and cannot
said service (1992, 1993, 2001 Bar Questions) disqualify.

The restriction provided under the rule covers
engagement or employment which means that he
cannot accept any work or employment from anyone
that will involve or relate to the matter in which he
intervened as a public official, except on behalf of the
body or authority which he served during his public
employment (CPR Annotated, PhilJA).
Q: Atty. Madrigal worked in the Supreme Court,
under the division which handles the case of Mr.
Roxas. Before the promulgation of the decision of the
case, Atty. Madrigal resigned and started to work in
the law firm which handles the case of Mr. Roxas. Is
Atty. Madrigal allowed to use the information he got
to help in the case handled by the firm?
However, this concern does not cast shadow in the
case at bar. The act of Mendoza in informing the
Central Bank on the procedure on how to liquidate the
GenBank is a different matter from the subject matter
of the civil case which is about the sequestration of the
shares of Tan et al. in Allied Bank. Consequently, the
danger that confidential official information might be
divulged is still nil, if not inexistent. To be sure, there
are no inconsistent sides to be bothered about in this
case. For there is no question that in lawyering for Tan
et al., Mendoza is indirectly defending the validity of
the action of the Central Bank in liquidating GenBank
and selling it later to Allied Bank. Their interests
coincide instead of colliding (PCGG v. Sandiganbayan,
G.R. Nos. 151809-12, Apr. 12, 2005).

A: No, such act is unethical and is violative of Rule 6.03 Adverse-interest conflict v. Congruent-interest
of the CPR. conflict

NOTE: Sec. 7(b) of R.A. 6713 prohibits former public official CONGRUENT-INTEREST
ADVERSE-INTEREST
or employee for a period of 1 year after retirement or REPRESENTATION
separation from office to practice his profession in CONFLICTS
CONFLICTS
connection with any matter before the office he used to be Adverse-interest In congruent-interest
with.
conflicts exist where representation conflict, the
the matter in which the disqualification does not
Q: Former Solicitor General Estelito Mendoza filed a
former government really involve a conflict at
petition with the CFI praying for the assistance and
lawyer represents a all, because it prohibits the
supervision of the court in the GenBanks liquidation.
client in private practice lawyer from representing a
Mendoza gave advice on the procedure to liquidate
is substantially related private practice client even
the GenBank. Subsequently, President Aquino
to the matter that the if the interests of the
established the PCGG to recover the alleged ill-gotten
lawyer dealt with while former government client
wealth of former President Marcos, his families and
employed by the and the new client are
cronies. The PCGG filed with the Sandiganbayan a
government and the entirely parallel.
complaint for reversion, reconveyance, restitution,
interests of the
accounting and damages against Tan, et al. and
government and the
issued several writs of sequestration on properties
interests of the current
they allegedly acquired. Tan, et al. were represented
and former are adverse.
by former SolGen Mendoza, who has then resumed
his private practice of law. The PCGG filed motions to NOTE: congruent-interest representation conflict, unlike
disqualify Mendoza as counsel for Tan, et al. The the adverse-interest conflict, is unique to former
motions alleged that Mendoza, as then SolGen and government lawyers.
counsel to Central Bank, actively intervened in the
liquidation of GenBank, which was subsequently DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF A
acquired by Tan, et al. Is Rule 6.03 of the CPR LAWYER TO THE LEGAL PROFESSION
applicable to Mendoza?
Canon 7
A: No. The advice given by Mendoza on the procedure
A lawyer shall at all times uphold the integrity and
to liquidate the GenBank is not the matter
dignity of the legal profession and support the
contemplated by Rule 6.03 of the CPR.
activities of the integrated bar
ABA Formal Opinion No. 342 is clear in stressing that
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
2014 GOLDEN NOTES
26
 DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF A LAWYER
Integrated Bar of the Philippines
It is an official national body composed of all persons
whose names now appear or may hereafter be
included in the Roll of Attorneys of the Supreme Court
(RRC, Sec. 1, Rule 139-A).
NOTE: Integrated Bar is a state-organized bar, to which every
lawyer must belong. As distinguished from bar associations
organized by individual lawyers themselves, membership in
which is voluntary. It is a national organization of lawyers
created on 16 January 1973 under Rule 139-A, Rules of Court,
and constituted on 4 May 1973 into a body corporate by PD
No. 181.
Integration of the Bar
The Integration of the Philippine Bar means the official
unification of the entire lawyer population, and this
requires membership and financial support of every
attorney as condition sine qua non to the practice of
law and the retention of his name in the Roll of
Attorneys of the Supreme Court (Pineda, 1999).
Fundamental purposes of the IBP
1. To elevate the standards of the legal profession;
2. Improve the administration of justice; and
3. Enable the Bar to discharge its public
responsibility more effectively (RRC, Sec. 2, Rule
139-A).
NOTE: The Philippines is divided into 9 Regions of the
Integrated Bar, with a Chapter organized in every province.
Each Chapter shall have its own local government as
provided for by uniform rules to be prescribed by the Board
of Governors and approved by the SC (Secs. 3 and 4, Rule
139-A, RRC).
Constitutionality of the IBP integration
The practice of law is not a vested right but a privilege
clothed with public interest. Hence, it is fair and just
that the exercise of that privilege be regulated to
assure compliance with the lawyer's public
responsibilities. Given existing bar conditions, the
most efficient means of doing so is by integrating the
Bar through a rule of court that requires all lawyers to
pay annual dues to the Integrated Bar (In the Matter
of the Integration of the Bar of the Philippines, 49 SCRA
22, Jan. 9, 1973).
Structure of the IBP board
Nine Governors shall be elected by the House of
Delegates from the nine Regions on the
representation basis of one Governor from each
Region. Each Governor shall be chosen from a list of
27
nominees submitted by the Delegates from the Region,
provided that not more than one nominee shall come
from any Chapter. The President and the Executive
Vice President, if chosen by the Governors from
outside of themselves as provided in Section 7 of this
Rule, shall ipso facto become members of the Board
(RRC, Sec. 6, Rule 139-A).
Term of members of the IBP Board
Members shall hold office for a term of one year from
the date of their election and until their successors
shall have been duly elected and qualified. No person
may be a Governor for more than two terms (RRC, Sec.
6, Rule 139-A).
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).
NOTE: The principle on rotation shall be strictly
implemented so that all prior elections for governor in the
region shall be reckoned with or considered in determining
who should be the governor to be selected from the
different chapters to represent the region in the Board of
Governors (Bar Matter No. 586 dated May 16, 1991).
Kinds of rotation
1. Rotation by pre-ordained sequence - effected by
the observance of the sequence of the service of
the chapters in the first cycle, which is very
predictable.
2. Rotation by exclusion - effected by the exclusion
of a chapter who had previously served until all
chapters have taken their turns to serve. It is not
predictable as each chapter will have the chance
to vie for the right to serve, but will have no right
to a re-election as it is debarred from serving
again until the full cycle is completed (In The
Matter of the Brewing Controversies in the
Elections of the Integrated Bar of the Philippines,
A.M. No. 09-5-2-SC, December 04, 2012).
NOTE: In one case, the Supreme Court held that rotation by
exclusion shall be adopted since the elections would be more
genuine as the opportunity to serve as Governor at any time
is once again open to all chapters, unless, of course, a
chapter has already served in the new cycle. While
predictability is not altogether avoided, as in the case where
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW
 Legal Ethics
only one chapter remains in the cycle, still, as previously
noted by the Court the rotation rule should be applied in
harmony with, and not in derogation of, the sovereign will of
the electorate as expressed through the ballot. (In The
Matter of the Brewing Controversies in the Elections of the
Integrated Bar of the Philippines, A.M. No. 09-5-2-SC,
December 04, 2012).
Transferring to another IBP Chapter is not a ground
for disqualification to run as IBP Governor
Transferring to another IBP Chapter is not a ground for
disqualification for the post of IBP Governor as the
same is allowed under Section 19 of the IBP By-Laws
with the qualification only that the transfer be made
not less than three months immediately preceding any
chapter election (Velez v. De Vera, A.C. No. 6697, July
25, 2006).
Board meetings
The Board shall meet regularly once every three
months, on such date and at such time and place as it
shall designate. A majority of all the members of the
Board shall constitute a quorum to do business.
Special meetings may be called by the President or by
five members of the Board (RRC, Sec. 6, Rule 139-A).
IBP officers
The Integrated Bar shall have a/an:
1. President
2. Executive Vice President who shall be chosen
by the Governors immediately after the
latters election; either from among
themselves or from other members of the
Integrated Bar, by the vote of at least five
Governors. Each of the regional members of
the Board shall be ex officio Vice President for
the Region which he represents.
3. Secretary
4. Treasurer
5. Such other officers and employees as may be
required by the Board of Governors, to be
appointed by the President with the consent
of the Board, and to hold office at the
pleasure of the Board or for such term as it
may fix. Said officers and employees need not
be members of the Integrated Bar (RRC, Sec.
7, Rule 139-A).
Term of office of officers
The President and the Executive Vice President shall
hold office for a term of one year from the date of their
election and until their successors shall have duly
qualified. The Executive Vice President shall
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
2014 GOLDEN NOTES
28
automatically become the President for the next
succeeding full term. The Presidency shall rotate from
year to year among all the nine Regions in such order
of rotation as the Board of Governors shall prescribe.
No person shall be President or Executive Vice
President of the Integrated Bar for more than one
term (RRC, Sec. 7, Rule 139-A).
Qualifications of a Regional IBP Governor
1. He is a member in good standing of the IBP
2. He is included in the voters list of his chapter or he
is not disqualified by the Integration Rule, by the
By-Laws of the Integrated Bar, or by the By-Laws
of the Chapter to which he belongs.
3. He does not belong to a chapter from which a
regional governor has already been elected,
unless the election is the start of a new season or
cycle.
4. He is not in the government service (In Re: Petition
to disqualify Atty. De Vera, A.C. No. 6052, Dec. 11,
2003).
NOTE: Moral fitness is not an explicit qualification in the IBP
by-laws.
Vacancy occurring in the IBP presidency
1. In the event the President is absent or unable to
act, his duties shall be performed by the Executive
Vice President
2. In the event of the death, resignation, or removal
of the President, the Executive Vice President
shall serve as Acting President during the
remainder of the term of the office thus vacated
3. In the event of the death, resignation, removal or
disability of both the President and the Executive
Vice President, the Board of Governors shall elect
an Acting President to hold office until the next
succeeding election or during the period of
disability. (RRC, Sec. 8, Rule 139-A)
NOTE: Serves only the unexpired term.
IBP must be apolitical
No lawyer holding an elective, judicial, quasi-judicial or
prosecutory office in the Government or any political
subdivision or instrumentality thereof shall be eligible
for election or appointment to any position in the
Integrated Bar or any Chapter thereof. A Delegate,
Governor, officer or employee of the Integrated Bar,
or an officer or employee of any Chapter thereof shall
be considered ipso facto resigned from his position as
of the moment he files his certificate of candidacy for
any elective public office or accepts appointment to
any judicial, quasi-judicial, or prosecutory office in the
 DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF A LAWYER
Government or any political subdivision or
instrumentality thereof (RRC, Sec. 13, Rule 139-A).
Prohibited acts and practices relative to the elections
of IBP officers
1. Distribution, except on election day, of election
campaign materials;
2. Distribution, on election day, of election campaign
materials other than a statement of the bio data
of the candidate on not more than one page of a
legal size sheet of paper; or causing the
distribution of such statement to be done by
persons other than those authorized by the officer
presiding at the elections;
3. Campaigning for or against any candidate, while
holding an elective, judicial, quasi-judicial or
prosecutory office in the Government or any
political subdivision, agency or instrumentality
thereof;
4. Formation of tickets, single slates, or
combinations of candidates as well as the
advertising thereof; and
5. For the purpose of inducing or influencing a
member to withhold his vote, or to vote for or
against a candidate:
a. Payment of the dues or other indebtedness of
any member;
b. Giving of food, drink, entertainment,
transportation or any article of value, or any
similar consideration to any person;
c. Making a promise or causing an expenditure
to be made, offered or promise to any person
(Sec. 4, IBP By-Laws; In the Matter of the
Inquiry into the 1989 Elections of the
Integrated Bar of the Philippines, A.M. No.
491, Oct. 6, 1989).
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 non-political. Also the ethics of the legal
profession imposed on all lawyers has been violated
29
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).
MEMBERSHIP AND DUES
Q: The Integrated Bar of the Philippines adopted a
resolution recommending to the Court the removal of
the name Marcial A. Edillon, a duly licensed practicing
attorney, from its Roll of Attorneys for stubborn
refusal to pay his membership dues to the IBP since
its constitution, notwithstanding due notice. Is
Edillon correct in his objection that the Court is
without power to compel him to become a member
of the IBP, hence, Sec. 1 of Rule 139-A of the Rules of
Court is unconstitutional for it impinges on his
constitutional right of freedom to associate (and not
to associate)?
A: No. To compel a member of the Integrated Bar is
not violative of his constitutional freedom to associate.
Integration does not make a lawyer a member of any
group of which he is not already a member. He became
a member of the Bar when he passed the Bar
Examinations. All that integration actually does is to
provide an official national organization for the well-
defined but unorganized and incohesive group of
which every lawyer is already a member.
Assuming that the questioned provision does in a
sense compel a lawyer to be a member of the
Integrated Bar, such compulsion is justified as an
exercise of the police power of the State (In the Matter
of IBP Membership Dues Delinquency of Atty. Edillon,
A.C. No. 1928, Dec. 19, 1980).
NOTE: A lawyer does not automatically become a member
of the IBP chapter where he resides or works after becoming
a full-fledged member of the Bar. He has the discretion to
choose the IBP Chapter he wants to join (Garcia v. De Vera,
A.C. 6052, Dec. 11, 2003).
Unless he otherwise registers his preference for a particular
Chapter, a lawyer shall be considered a member of the
Chapter of the province, city, political subdivision or area
where his office is or, in the absence thereof, his residence is
located. In no case shall any lawyer be a member of more
than one Chapter (RRC, Sec. 4, Rule 139-A).
Procedure for voluntary termination of membership
A member may terminate his membership by filing a
written notice to that effect with the Secretary of the
Integrated Bar, who shall immediately bring the
matter to the attention of the Supreme Court.
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW
 Legal Ethics
Forthwith he shall cease to be a member and his name
shall be stricken by the Court from the Roll of
Attorneys (RRC, Sec.11, Rule 139-A).
NOTE: Re-instatement may be made by the Court in
accordance with rules and regulations prescribed by the
Board of Governors and approved by the Court (RRC, Sec.11,
Rule 139-A).
Membership dues
Every member of the Integrated Bar shall pay such
annual dues as the Board of Governors shall determine
with the approval of the Supreme Court. A fixed sum
equivalent to ten percent (10%) of the collections from
each Chapter shall be set aside as a Welfare Fund for
disabled members of the Chapter and the compulsory
heirs of deceased members thereof (RRC, Sec. 9, Rule
139-A).
NOTE: Membership dues are not prohibited by the
Constitution. The fee is imposed as a regulatory measure,
designed to raise funds for carrying out the purposes and
objectives of the integration (In the Matter of IBP
Membership dues delinquency of Atty. Marcial Edillon, A.M.
No. 1928, Aug. 3, 1978).
Effect of non-payment of dues
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
(RRC, Sec. 10, Rule 139-A) subject to the requirement
of due process (Funa, 2009).
Q: Atty. Llamas, for a number of years, has not
indicated the proper PTR and IBP OR Nos. and data in
his pleadings. He only indicated IBP Rizal 259060
but he has been using this for at least 3 years already.
Atty. Llamas averred that he is only engaged in a
limited practice of law and under R.A. 7432, as a
senior citizen, he is exempted from payment of
income taxes and included in this exemption, is the
payment of membership dues. Is Atty. Llamas
correct?
A: Rule 139-A requires that every member of the
Integrated Bar shall pay annual dues and default
thereof shall warrant the appropriate penalties. It
does not matter whether or not Atty. Llamas is only
engaged in limited practice of law. Moreover, the
exemption invoked by Atty. Llamas does not include
exemption from payment of membership or
association dues (Santos Jr. v. Atty. Llamas, A.C. No.
4749, Jan. 20, 2000).
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
2014 GOLDEN NOTES
30
NOTE: RA 7432 providing 20% discount to Senior Citizens DO
NOT apply to IBP Dues.
Q: Atty. Arevalo sought exemption from payment of
IBP dues for the alleged unpaid accountability for the
years 1977-2005. He alleged that after being
admitted to the Philippine Bar in 1961, he became
part of the Philippine Civil Service then migrated to,
and worked in, the USA in December 1986 until his
retirement in the year 2003. He maintained that he
cannot be assessed IBP dues for the years that he was
working in the Philippine Civil Service since the Civil
Service law prohibits the practice of ones profession
while in government service, and neither can he be
assessed for the years when he was working in the
USA. Is Atty. Arevalo entitled to exemption from
payment of his dues during the time that he was
inactive in the practice of law?
A: No. The Integration of the Philippine Bar means the
official unification of the entire lawyer population. This
requires membership and financial support of every
attorney as condition sine qua non to the practice of
law and the retention of his name in the Roll of
Attorneys of the Supreme Court.
Payment of dues is a necessary consequence of
membership in the IBP, of which no one is exempt. This
means that the compulsory nature of payment of dues
subsists for as long as ones membership in the IBP
remains regardless of the lack of practice of, or the
type of practice, the member is engaged in. There is
nothing in the law or rules which allow exemption
from payment of membership dues (Letter of Atty.
Arevalo, Jr. Requesting Exemption from Payment of
Dues, B.M. No. 1370, May 9, 2005).
UPHOLDING THE DIGNITY AND INTEGRITY
OF THE PROFESSION
Academic requirements for bar candidates
1. Pre-Law - Pursued and satisfactorily completed in
an authorized and recognized university or
college, requiring for admission thereto the
completion of a four-year high school course, the
course of study prescribed therein for a bachelor's
degree in arts or sciences (RRC, Sec. 6, Rule 138)
2. Law proper - satisfactorily completed the
following courses in a law school or university duly
recognized by the government: civil law,
commercial law, remedial law, criminal law, public
and private international law, political law, labor
and social legislation, medical jurisprudence,
taxation and legal ethics (RRC, Sec. 5, Rule 138).
 DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF A LAWYER
Rule 7.01, Canon 7
A lawyer shall be answerable for knowingly making
a false statement or suppressing a material fact in
connection with his application for admission to the
bar (1995, 1997, 2004, 2005 Bar Questions)
The concealment of an attorney in his application to
take the bar exams of the fact that he had been
charged with or indicted for an alleged crime, is
ground for revocation of his license to practice law.
Honest mistake as excuse in making false statement
An honest mistake in making false statement may be a
valid excuse but the burden of proof lies on the one
who alleges it.
On the other hand, to be liable for suppressing a fact
or information in the application, the suppression
must be:
1. Deliberately or knowingly made; and
2. The fact or information suppressed must be
material (CPR Annotated, PhilJA).
False statements in the application for admission to
the Bar
1. If the false statement or suppression of material
fact is discovered before the candidate could take
the bar examinations, he will be denied
permission to take the examinations.
2. If the false statement or suppression of material
fact was discovered after the candidate had
passed the examinations but before having been
taken his oath, he will not be allowed to take his
oath as a lawyer.
3. If the discovery was made after the candidate had
taken his oath as a lawyer, his name will be
stricken from the Roll of Attorneys.
Effect concealment of a crime which does not involve
moral turpitude
Concealment will be taken against him. It is the fact of
concealment and not the commission of the crime
itself that makes him morally unfit to become a lawyer.
When he made concealment he perpetrated perjury.
Rule 7.02, Canon 7
A lawyer shall not support the application for
admission to the bar of any person known by him to
be unqualified in respect to character, education or
other relevant attribute.
The rationale behind the rule goes beyond the
personal responsibility to be upright and honest. It
31
further extends to the lawyers responsibility to
uphold the integrity and dignity of the profession, by
not blindly issuing certifications in support of
applications for admission to the bar of persons known
to him or her to have questionable character,
inadequate education or other relevant attributes not
consistent with any or all of the requirements for
admission (CPR Annotated, PhilJA).
Rule 7.03, Canon 7
A lawyer shall not engage in a conduct that
adversely reflects on his fitness to practice law, nor
shall he, whether in public or private life, behave in
a scandalous manner to the discredit of the legal
profession (2004 Bar Question)
Q: Atty. Perenia got married in 2005. Then he met
another woman, Helen; they fell in love and started
living together. Atty. Perenia would even bring her
along social functions and introduce her as his second
wife. Is such act unethical?
A: Yes, it violates Rule 7.03 of CPR. The fact that he
shamelessly flaunts his mistress constitutes an act
which embarrasses and discredits the law profession
since it is his duty and obligation to uphold the dignity
and integrity of the profession. The actuation of Atty.
Perenia is contrary to good morals.
While it has been held in disbarment cases that the
mere fact of sexual relations between two unmarried
adults is not sufficient to warrant administrative
sanction for such illicit behavior, it is not so with
respect to betrayals of the marital vow of fidelity. Even
if not all forms of extra-marital relations are
punishable under penal law, sexual relations outside
marriage is considered disgraceful and immoral as it
manifests deliberate disregard of the sanctity of
marriage and the marital vows protected by the
Constitution and affirmed by our laws (Vitug v. Roncal,
A.C. No. 6313, Sept. 7, 2006).
Q: Atty. Kuripot was one of Town Banks valued
clients. In recognition of his loyalty to the bank, he
was issued a gold credit card with a credit limit of
P250,000.00. After two months, Atty. Kuripot
exceeded his credit limit, and refused to pay the
monthly charges as they fell due. Aside from a
collection suit, Town Bank also filed a disbarment
case against Atty. Kuripot. In his comment on the
disbarment case, Atty. Kuripot insisted that he did
not violate the Code of Professional Responsibility,
since his obligation to the bank was personal in
nature and had no relation to his being a lawyer. Is
Atty. Kuripot correct? Explain your answer.
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW
 Legal Ethics
A: Atty. Kuripot is not correct. Section 7.03 of the Code
of Professional Responsibility provides that a lawyer
shall not engage in conduct that adversely affects his
fitness to practice law, nor shall he, whether in public
or private life, behave in a scandalous manner to the
discredit of the legal profession.
Q: Explain whether Atty. Kuripot should be held
administratively liable for his refusal to settle his
credit card bill. (2005 Bar Question)
A: He may not be held administratively liable. The
Supreme Court has held that it does not take original
jurisdiction of complaints for collection of debts. The
creditors course of action is civil, not administrative
in nature and proper reliefs may be obtained from the
regular courts (Litigio v. Dicon, A.M. No. MTJ-93-806,
July 13, 1995). Although lawyers have been held
administratively liable for obstinacy in evading
payment of a debt (Constantino v. Saludares, A.C. No.
2029, Dec. 7, 1993; Lao v. Medel, A.C. No. 5916, July 1,
2003), there is no obstinacy shown in this case.
COURTESY, FAIRNESS AND CANDOR TOWARDS
PROFESSIONAL COLLEAGUES
Canon 8
A lawyer shall conduct himself with courtesy,
fairness and candor towards his professional
colleagues, and shall avoid harassing tactics
against opposing counsel.
Lawyers, though they may represent different clients,
should bear in mind that they are not enemies but
brothers and sisters in their profession (Antiquiera,
1992).
Rule 8.01, Canon 8
A lawyer shall not, in his professional dealings, use
language which is abusive, offensive or otherwise
improper.
Instances of disrespectful language
1. Categorizes the SC decision as false, erroneous
and illegal (Suo v. Cloribel, A.M. No. 01-1-15-RTC,
July 10, 2003).
2. Description of judges attitude as unjust, hostile,
vindictive and dangerous (Cornejo v. Judge Tan,
G.R. No. L-2217, Mar. 23, 1950).
3. Stating that justice is blind and also deaf and
dumb (In Re: Almacen, G.R. No. L- 27654, Feb. 18,
1970).
4. Attributing to the SC acts of dismissing judges
without rhyme and reason and disbarring
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
2014 GOLDEN NOTES
32
lawyers without due process (Zaldivar v.
Gonzales, G.R. Nos. 79690-707, Feb. 1, 1989).
5. Calling an adverse counsel as bobo or using
the word ay que bobo in reference to the
manner of offering evidence. (Castillo v. Padilla Jr.,
A.M. No. 2339, Feb. 1984); and
6. Any other analogous cases.
NOTE: The lawyers arguments, whether written or oral,
should be gracious to both the court and opposing counsel
and be of such words as may be properly addressed by one
gentleman to another (National Security Co. v. Jarvis, 278 U.S.
610).
A lawyers language should be forceful but dignified,
emphatic but respectful as befitting an advocate and in
keeping with the dignity of the legal profession (In Re:
Climaco, A.C. No. 134-J, Jan. 21, 1974).
Q: In the pleadings and motions filed by Tiongco, he
described Atty. Deguma as a love crazed Apache, a
horned spinster, man-hungry virago and female bull
of an Amazon who would stop at nothing to injure
defendant if only to please and attract her client.
Tiongco claims that she, as a lawyer in the Public
Attorneys Office, is using the PAO as a marriage
bureau for her benefit. Is the language employed by
Tiongco improper and unethical?
A: Yes. The Code of Professional Responsibility
provides in Canon 8 that a lawyer shall conduct himself
with courtesy, fairness, and candor toward his
professional colleagues, and shall avoid harassing
tactics against opposing counsel. Rule 8.01 provides
that a lawyer shall not in his professional dealings, use
language which is abusive, offensive or otherwise
improper while Rule 11.03 provides that a lawyer shall
abstain from scandalous, offensive or menacing
language before the courts. Thus, Tiongco is warned
accordingly (Tiongco Yared v. Ilarde, G.R. No. 114732,
Aug. 1, 2000).
NOTE: Lack of want of intention is no excuse for the
disrespectful language employed. Counsel cannot escape
responsibility by claiming that his words did not mean what
any reader must have understood them as meaning (Rheem
of the Philippines v. Ferrer, G.R. No. L-22979, Jan. 27, 1967).
Although the Canon that the Rule implements pertains to a
lawyers dealings with his fellow lawyers, the Rule is
generally worded to apply to anyone in the wider context of
a lawyers professional dealings, including his or her clients
and witnesses (CPR Annotated, PhilJA).
 DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF A LAWYER
Rule 8.02, Canon 8
A lawyer shall not, directly or indirectly, encroach
upon the professional employment of another
lawyer; however, it is the right of any lawyer,
without fear or favor, to give proper advice and
assistance to those seeking relief against
unfaithful or neglectful counsel (1995, 1997, 2001,
2005, 2006 Bar Questions)
A person without a retained lawyer is a legitimate
prospective client for any lawyer whom he approaches
for legal services. But, as soon as he had retained one
and had not dismissed the retained counsel, efforts on
the part of another lawyer to take him as client
constitutes an act of encroaching upon the
employment of another lawyer.
A lawyer should not in any way communicate upon the
subject of controversy with a party represented by
counsel much less should he undertake to negotiate or
compromise the matter with him, but should deal with
his counsel.
Any act which is aimed to ease out a previous lawyer
with the intention to grab the case is highly unethical
and should be avoided (Antiquiera, 1992).
Exceptions
1. A lawyer may properly interview any witness or
prospective witness or prospective witness for the
opposing side in any civil or criminal action
without the consent of opposing counsel or party.
2. Any person who seeks relief against an unfaithful
or neglectful lawyer may approach another
lawyer for proper advice and assistance. Any
advice or assistance extended after proper
verification is not encroaching upon the business
of another lawyer for such act is justified under
the circumstances.
Q: Myrna, in a case for custody of children against her
husband, sought advice from Atty. Mendoza whom
she met at a party. She informed Atty. Mendoza that
her lawyer, Atty. Khan, has been charging her
exorbitant appearance fees when all he does is move
for postponements which have unduly delayed the
proceedings; and that recently, she learned that Atty.
Khan approached her husband asking for a huge
amount in exchange for the withdrawal of her
Motion for Issuance of Hold Departure Order so that
he and his children can leave for abroad. Is it ethical
for Atty. Mendoza to advise Myrna to terminate the
services of Atty. Khan and hire him instead for a
reasonable attorneys fees?
33
A: Such advice would be unethical. A lawyer shall
conduct himself with courtesy, fairness and candor
towards his professional colleagues (CPR, Canon 8).
Specifically, he should not directly or indirectly
encroach upon the professional employment of
another lawyer (CPR, Canon 8).
Q: What should Atty. Mendoza do about the
information relayed to him by Myrna that Atty. Khan
approached her husband with an indecent proposal?
(2006 Bar Question)
A: He can advise her to terminate the services of Atty.
Khan and/or file an administrative case against Atty.
Khan. It is the right of any lawyer, without fear or favor,
to give proper advice and assistance to those seeking
relief against unfaithful or neglectful counsel (CPR,
Rule 8.02).
Q: You are the counsel of K in his action for specific
performance against DEV, Inc., a subdivision
developer which is represented by Atty. L. Your client
believes that the president of DEV Inc., would be
willing to consider an amicable settlement and your
client urges you to discuss the matter with DEV Inc.,
without the presence of Atty. L whom he consider to
be an impediment to an early compromise. Would it
be alright for you to negotiate the terms of the
compromise as so suggested above by your client?
(1997 Bar Question)
A: No. Rule 8.02, Canon 8 of the Code of Professional
Responsibility provides that a lawyer shall not,
directly or indirectly, encroach upon the professional
employment of another lawyer. Canon 9 of the Code
of Professional Ethics is more particular. A lawyer
should not in any way communicate upon the subject
of the controversy with a party represented by counsel,
much less should he undertake to negotiate or
compromise the matter with him but should deal only
with his counsel. In the case of Likong v. Lim, A.C. No.
3149, August 17, 1994, a lawyer was suspended for
negotiating a compromise agreement directly with the
adverse party without the presence and participation
of her counsels.
NO ASSISTANCE IN UNAUTHORIZED
PRACTICE OF LAW
Canon 9
A lawyer shall not, directly or indirectly, assist in
the unauthorized practice of law.
The rationale of this canon is to protect the public, the
court, the client and the bar from the incompetence or
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW
 Legal Ethics
dishonesty of those unlicensed to practice law and not
subject to the disciplinary control of the court.
There is no violation of this canon if a lawyer employs
a paralegal graduate to assist him in the practice of law
since the job of a paralegal is limited to drafting of
documents, case management, etc. (Antiquiera, 1992).
Q: Sanchez alleged that the complaint against him
and the supporting affidavits were subscribed and
sworn to before Tupas, the Clerk of Court, who is not
a member of the IBP and therefore engaged in
unauthorized practice of law. Is Tupas as Clerk of
Court authorized to administer oath?
A: The term "clerk of courts" in Section 41 of the
Administrative Code as amended is used as a general
term. The intention of the law is to authorize all clerks
of court regardless of whether they are clerks of the
MTCs, to administer oaths on matter involving official
business. As Clerk of Court of MCTC, Tupas has the
authority to administer oath of affidavits of parties and
witnesses which are to be filed in court (Sanchez v.
Tupas, A.M. OCA IPI No. 03- 1687-P, Mar. 1, 2004).
Rule 9.01, Canon 9
A lawyer shall not delegate to any unqualified
person the performance of any task which by law
may only be performed by a member of the bar in
good standing.
The qualifications to be a lawyer is personal and the
Bar is an exclusive group of professionals who possess
the requisite qualifications and for whom defined
functions are reserved. To delegate the functions
would violate the rationale behind reserving defined
functions exclusively for those who are admitted to
the bar.
Although the authority of a lawyer to represent a client
cannot be delegated to an unqualified person, it does
not follow however that the retained lawyer is
automatically authorized to make such delegation to a
qualified person because a client-lawyer relationship is
personal (CPR Annotated, PhilJA).
Q: Lorenzo is a lawyer but is suspended in the practice
of law due to some unethical acts. He worked for a
law firm owned by one of his friends. Since he has so
many cases to handle, Atty. Berenguer assigned a
case to Lorenzo, believing he can handle such easy
case. Did Atty. Berenguer violate any rule?
A: Yes, because he delegates handling of a case to a
person suspended from the practice of law. Under
Rule 9.01 of CPR A lawyer shall not delegate to any
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
2014 GOLDEN NOTES
34
unqualified person the performance of any task which
by law may only be performed by a member of the bar
in good standing.
Rule 9.02, Canon 9
A lawyer shall not divide or stipulate to divide a
fee for legal services with persons not licensed to
practice law.
The interest promoted by the prohibition is that the
independence of the professional judgment of a
lawyer, which the client is paying for, could be at risk
if a non-lawyer has direct rights to share in the legal
fees resulting from the exercise of such professional
judgment (CPR Annotated, PhilJA).
Exceptions to Rule 9.02
1. Where there is a pre-existing agreement with a
partner or associate that, upon the latters death,
money shall be paid over a reasonable period of
time to his estate to persons specified in the
agreement; (CPR, Rule 9.02, second par., Canon 9)
or
NOTE: This exception is in the nature of a bequest. It is
still in substance, payment to the deceased lawyer. His
estate and/or assignee could not claim entitlement to
the money in their own right but only by
representation (CPR Annotated, PhilJA).
2. Where a lawyer undertakes to complete
unfinished legal business of a deceased lawyer;
(CPR, Rule 9.02, third par., Canon 9) or
NOTE: The estate or the heir cannot be made a
member of the partnership with the surviving partners.
The legal fees in this case, no longer represent
compensation for past
3. Where a lawyer or law firm includes a non-lawyer
employees in a retirement plan, even if the plan is
based in whole or in part, on a profit sharing
agreement (CPR, Rule 9.02, fourth par., Canon 9).
NOTE: This is not a division of legal fees but a pension
representing deferred wages for the employees
past services.
This exception is an implicit recognition of the
incontestable fact that lawyers need to, and in fact,
depend on non-lawyers for the administrative support
functions necessary to allow lawyers to discharge their
legal functions more efficiently (CPR Annotated,
PhilJA).
 DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF A LAWYER
Q: You had just taken your oath as lawyer. The
secretary to the president of a big university offered
to get you as the official notary public of the school.
She explained that a lot of students lose their
identification cards and are required to secure an
affidavit of loss before they can be issued a new one.
She claimed that this would be very lucrative for you,
as more than 30 students lose their identification
cards every month. However, the secretary wants
you to give her one-half of your earning therefrom.
Will you agree to the arrangement? Explain. (2005
Bar Question)
A: No, I will not agree. Rule 9.02 of the Code of
Professional Responsibility provides that a lawyer
shall not divide or stipulate to divide a fee for legal
service with persons not licensed to practice law. The
secretary is not licensed to practice law and is not
entitled to a share of the fees for notarizing affidavits,
which is a legal service.
DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF A
LAWYER TO THE COURTS
Canon 10
A lawyer owes candor, fairness and good faith to
the court
The burden cast on the judiciary would be intolerable
if it could not take at face value what is asserted by
counsel.
As officers of the court, lawyers have the primary
obligation towards the administration of justice. To
mislead the court is contumacious and clearly a ground
for disciplinary action (Antiquiera, CPR, p. 39).
Q: Atty. Florido demanded that the custody of their
children be surrendered to him by showing his spouse
Hueysuwan-Florido a photocopy of an alleged
Resolution issued by the CA which supposedly
granted his motion for temporary child custody. His
spouse refused to surrender the custody. Hence, Atty.
Florido filed a verified petition for the issuance of a
writ of habeas corpus asserting his right to custody of
the children on the basis of the alleged CAs
resolution. Hueysuwan obtained a certification from
the CA stating that no such resolution had been
issued. Hence, complainant filed the instant
complaint. May Atty. Florido be held administratively
liable for his reliance on and attempt to enforce a
spurious Resolution of the CA?
A: Yes. Atty. Floridos actions erode the public
perception of the legal profession. Candor and fairness
are demanded of every lawyer. The burden cast on the
35
judiciary would be intolerable if it could not take at
face value what is asserted by counsel. The time that
will have to be devoted just to the task of verification
of allegations submitted could easily be imagined
(Hueysuwan- Florido v. Atty. Florido, A.C. No. 5624, Jan.
20, 2004).
Requirements of candor
1. A lawyer shall not suppress material and vital facts
which bear on the merit or lack of merit of
complaint or petition.
2. A lawyer shall volunteer to the court any
development of the case which has rendered the
issue raised moot and academic.
3. Disclosure to the court of any decision adverse to
his position of which opposing counsel is
apparently ignorant and which court should
consider in deciding a case.
4. He shall not represent himself as a lawyer for a
client, appear in court and present pleadings in
the latters behalf only to claim later that he was
not authorized to do so.
Rule 10.01, Canon 10
A lawyer shall not do any falsehood, nor consent
to the doing of any in court; nor shall he mislead,
or allow the court to be misled by any artifice.
A lawyer must be a disciple of truth. He should bear in
mind that as an officer of the court his high vocation is
to correctly inform the court upon the law and the
facts of the case and to aid it in doing justice and
arriving at correct conclusion.
The courts on the other hand are entitled to expect
only complete honesty from lawyers appearing and
pleading before them. While a lawyer has the
solemn duty to defend his clients cause, his conduct
must never be at the expense of truth (Young v.
Batuegas, A.C. No. 5379, May 9, 2003).
NOTE: A lawyer owes fidelity to the cause of his client but
not at the expense of truth and the administration of justice
(Garcia v. Francisco, Adm. Case no. 3923, Mar. 30,1993).
Q: Dr. Maligaya, a doctor and retired colonel of the
Air Force filed an action for damages against several
military officers for whom Atty. Doronilla stood as a
counsel. During the hearing of the case, Atty.
Doronilla says that he and Dr. Maligaya had an
agreement that if the opposing party withdraws the
case against him, Dr. Maligaya will also withdraw all
the cases. However, Dr. Maligaya swore that he never
entered into any agreement to withdraw his lawsuits.
Atty. Doronillo admitted that there was, in fact, no
such agreement. He pointed out that his main
concern was to settle the case amicably. Dr. Maligaya
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW
 Legal Ethics
filed a case against Atty. Doronilla charging him of
unethical conduct for having uttered falsehood in
court. Is Atty. Doronilla guilty as charged?
A: Yes. Atty. Doronilla violated Canon 10 and Rule
10.01 of the CPR. Not only that, he also violated the
lawyers oath to do no falsehood, nor consent to the
doing of any in court, of which Canon 10 and Rule
10.01 are but restatements. His act infringed on every
lawyers duty to never seek to mislead the judge or
any officer by an artifice or false statement of fact or
law (Maligaya v. Doronilla, A.C. No. 6198, Sept. 15,
2006).
Presenting false evidence is not justifiable
It is a clear violation of Canon 10 and Rule 10.01 of the
CPR.
NOTE: Aside from violations of the CPR, the lawyer is also
guilty of a crime under Art. 184, Revised Penal Code,
which states, "Any person who shall knowingly offer in
evidence a false witness or testimony in any judicial or
official proceeding, shall be punished as guilty of false
testimony and shall suffer the respective penalties provided
in this section.
Examples of falsehood
1. Lawyers falsely stating in a deed of sale that
property is free from all liens and encumbrances
when it is not so (Sevilla v. Zoleta, A.C. No. 31,
Mar. 28, 1955).
2. Lawyers making it appear that a person, long
dead, executed a deed of sale, in his favor
(Monterey v. Arayata, Per. Rec. Nos 3527, 3408,
Aug. 23, 1935).
3. Lawyer, encashing a check payable to a deceased
cousin by signing the latters name on the check
(In re: Samaniego, A.C. No. 74, Nov. 20, 1959).
4. Lawyer falsifying a power of attorney and used it
in collecting the money due to the principal and
appropriating the money for his own benefit (In
re: Rusina, A.C. No. 270, May 29, 1959).
5. Lawyer alleging in one pleading that his clients
were merely lessees of the property involved, and
alleged in a later pleading that the same clients
were the owners of the same property where
there are false allegations in the pleadings
(Chavez v. Viola, GR No. 2152, Apr. 19, 1991).
6. Lawyer uttering falsehood in a Motion to Dismiss
(Martin v. Moreno, A.C. No. 1432, May 21, 1984).
7. Lawyer denying having received the notice to file
brief which is belied by the return card (Ragasajo
v. IAC, G.R. No. L-69129, Aug. 31, 1987).
8. Lawyer presenting falsified documents in court
which he knows to be false (Berenguer v.
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
2014 GOLDEN NOTES
36
Carranza, A.C. No. 716, Jan. 30, 1969).
9. Lawyer filing false charges or groundless suits
(Retuya v. Gorduiz, A.C. No. 1388, Mar. 28, 1980).
10. Making untruthful and false statements before
the court (Molina v. Magat, A.C. No. 1900, June
13, 2012).
Rule 10.02, Canon 10
A lawyer shall not knowingly misquote or
misrepresent the contents of the paper, the
language or the argument of opposing counsel, or
the text of a decision or authority, or knowingly
cite as law a provision already rendered
inoperative by repeal or amendment, or assert as
a fact that which has not been proved.
If not faithfully and exactly quoted, the decisions and
rulings of the court may lose their proper and correct
meaning, to the detriment of other courts, lawyers and
the public who may thereby be misled.
Rule 10.03, Canon 10, CPR
A lawyer shall observe the rules of procedure and
shall not misuse them to defeat the ends of
justice.
Filing multiple actions constitutes an abuse of the
Courts processes. Those who filed multiple or
repetitive actions subject themselves to disciplinary
action for incompetence or willful violation of their
duties as attorneys to act with all good fidelity to the
courts, and to maintain only such actions that appear
to be just and consistent with truth and honor (Pablo
R. Olivares etc. v. Atty. Arsenio Villalon Jr., A.C. No.
6323, Apr. 13, 2007).
Instances when lawyers can be disciplined based on
the pleadings he filed
When a counsel deliberately:
1. Files an unsigned pleading in violation of the
rules;
2. Alleges scandalous matters therein;
3. Fails to promptly report to the court a change
of his address (RRC, Sec. 3, Rule 7).
NOTE: A lawyer should not abuse his right of recourse to the
courts for the purpose of arguing a cause that had been
repeatedly rebuffed. Neither should he use his knowledge of
law as an instrument to harass a party nor to misuse judicial
processes, as the same constitutes serious transgression of
the Code of Professional Responsibility. For while he owes
fidelity to the cause of his client, it should not be at the
expense of truth and the administration of justice (Garcia v.
Francisco, A.C. No. 3923, Mar. 30, 1993).
 DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF A LAWYER
Rule 10.04, Canon 10
A lawyer shall, when filing a pleading, furnish the
opposing party with a copy thereof, together with
all the documents annexed thereto. Unless a
motion is ex parte, he should set it for hearing,
with sufficient notice to the other party.
RESPECT FOR COURTS AND JUDICIAL OFFICERS
Canon 11
A lawyer shall observe and maintain the respect
due to the courts and to judicial officers and
should insist on similar conduct by other
Disrespect toward the court would necessarily
undermine the confidence of the people in the
honesty and integrity of the members of the court, and
consequently to lower or degrade the administration
of justice by the court.
All lawyers are expected to recognize the authority of
the Supreme Court and obey its lawful processes and
orders. Despite errors which one may impute on the
orders of the Court, these must be respected,
especially by the bar or the lawyers who are
themselves officers of the courts (Yap-Paras v. Atty.
Paras, A.C. No. 4947, June 7, 2007).
In case of conflict between his duty to the court and
his duty to the society and his client, the other must
yield since it is his duty to the court that should take
precedence.
Q: Atty. Z criticized the court in a tactful manner, not
in any way causing disrespect. Is that allowed?
A: Yes. The fact that a person is a lawyer does not
deprive him of the right, as enjoyed by every citizen, to
comment on and criticize the actuations of a judge but
it is the cardinal condition of all criticisms that it shall
be bona fide, and shall not spill over the walls of
decency and propriety (Zaldivar v. Gonzales, G.R. Nos.
79690-707, Feb. 1, 1989).
NOTE: What a lawyer can ordinarily say against a concluded
litigation and the manner the judge handed down the
decision therein may not generally be said to a pending
action. The court, in a pending litigation, must be shielded
from embarrassment and influence in performing the
important duty of deciding it. On the other hand, once
litigation is concluded, the judge who decided on it is subject
to the same criticism as any other public official because
then his ruling becomes public property and is thrown open
to public consumption.
Q: Attorney Paguia, asserts that the inhibition of the
members of the Supreme Court from hearing the
37
petition is called for under the Code of Judicial
Conduct prohibiting justices or judges from
participating in any partisan political activity.
According to him, the justices have violated the said
rule by attending the 'EDSA 2 Rally' and by
authorizing the assumption of Vice- President
Macapagal-Arroyo to the Presidency. The subsequent
decision of the Court in Estrada v. Arroyo (G.R. Nos.
146710-15, Mar. 2, 2001 and G.R. Nos. 146710-15,
Apr. 3, 2001) is a patent mockery of justice and due
process. He went on to state that the act of the
public officer, if lawful, is the act of the public office.
But the act of the public officer, if unlawful, is not the
act of the public office. Consequently, the act of the
justices, if lawful, is the act of the Supreme Court. But
the act of the justices, if unlawful, is not the act of the
Supreme Court. It is submitted that the decision in
Estrada v. Arroyo being patently unlawful in view of
the Code of Judicial Conduct, is not the act of the
Supreme Court but is merely the wrong of those
individual Justices who falsely spoke and acted in the
name of the Supreme Court (Urbano v. Chavez, G.R.
No. 87977, Mar. 19, 1990). Are Atty. Paguias
comments within the bounds of fair and well-
founded criticisms regarding decisions of the SC?
A: No. Criticism or comment made in good faith on the
correctness or wrongness, soundness or unsoundness,
of a decision of the Court would be welcome for, if
well-founded, and such reaction can enlighten the
court and contribute to the correction of an error if
committed (In re: Sotto, 82 Phil. 595). The ruling in
Estrada v. Arroyo, being a final judgment, has long put
to end any question pertaining to the legality of the
ascension of Arroyo into the presidency. By reviving
the issue on the validity of the assumption of Gloria
Macapagal-Arroyo to the presidency, Attorney Paguia
is vainly seeking to breathe life into the carcass of a
long dead issue. Attorney Paguia has not limited his
discussions to the merits of his client's case within the
judicial forum; indeed, he has repeated his assault on
the Court in both broadcast and print media.
The Supreme Court does not claim infallibility; it will
not denounce criticism made by anyone against the
Court for, if well-founded, can truly have constructive
effects in the task of the Court, but it will not
countenance any wrongdoing nor allow the erosion of
our peoples faith in the judicial system, let alone, by
those who have been privileged by it to practice law in
the Philippines. Canon 11 of the Code of Professional
Responsibility mandates that the lawyer should
observe and maintain the respect due to the courts and
judicial officers and, indeed, should insist on similar
conduct by others. In liberally imputing sinister and
devious motives and questioning the impartiality,
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW
 Legal Ethics
integrity, and authority of the members of the Court,
Atty. Paguia has only succeeded in seeking to impede,
obstruct and pervert the dispensation of justice
(Estrada v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. Nos. 159486-88, Nov.
25, 2003).
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 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. Many types of
criticism leveled at the judiciary cross the line to
become harmful and irresponsible attacks. These
potentially devastating attacks and unjust criticism can
threaten the independence of the judiciary. 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
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
2014 GOLDEN NOTES
38
Misrepresentation in the Supreme Court, A.M. No. 10-
10-4-SC, Oct. 19, 2010).
Q: The Court En Banc issued a Resolution directing
respondent Atty. De Vera to explain why he should
not be cited for indirect contempt of court for
uttering some allegedly contemptuous statements in
relation to the case involving the constitutionality of
the Plunder Law which was then pending. Atty. De
Vera admitted the report in the November 6, 2002
issue of the Philippine Daily Inquirer that he
suggested that the Court must take steps to dispel
once and for all these ugly rumors and reports that
the Court would vote in favor of or against the
validity of the Plunder Law to protect the credibility
of the Court. Is the statement of Atty. De Vera
disrespectful to the courts?
A: Yes. Indeed, freedom of speech includes the right to
know and discuss judicial proceedings, but such right
does not cover statements aimed at undermining the
Courts integrity and authority, and interfering with
the administration of justice. Freedom of speech is not
absolute, and must occasionally be balanced with the
requirements of equally important public interests,
such as the maintenance of the integrity of the courts
and orderly functioning of the administration of justice.
Thus, the making of contemptuous statements
directed against the Court is not an exercise of free
speech; rather, it is an abuse of such right.
Unwarranted attacks on the dignity of the courts
cannot be disguised as free speech, for the exercise of
said right cannot be used to impair the independence
and efficiency of courts or public respect therefore and
confidence therein (In Re: Published Alleged Threats by
Atty. Leonard de Vera, A.M. No. 01-12-03-SC, July 29,
2002).
Rule 11.01, Canon 11
A lawyer shall appear in court properly attired.
As an officer of the court and in order to maintain the
dignity and respectability of the legal profession, a
lawyer who appears in court must be properly attired.
Consequently, the court can hold a lawyer in contempt
of court if he does not appear in proper attire. Any
deviation from the commonly accepted norm of
dressing in court (barong or tie, not both) is enough to
warrant a citing for contempt.
The traditional attires for male lawyers in the
Philippines are the long-sleeve Barong Tagalog or coat
and tie. Female lawyers appear in semi-formal attires.
Judges also appear in the same attire in addition to
black robes.
 DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF A LAWYER
Rule 11.02, Canon 11
A lawyer shall punctually appear at court
hearings.
Punctuality is demanded by the respect which a lawyer
owes to the court, the opposing counsel and to all the
parties to the case (Funa, 2009).
Rule 11.03, Canon 11
A lawyer shall abstain from scandalous,
offensive, or menacing language or behavior
before the Courts.
Q: After the parties had filed their respective briefs
with the Court of Appeals and before the latter's
resolution submitting the case for decision was
released, respondent lawyers, Atty. Depasucat, and
others filed a pleading "Manifestation of Usurpation
of Authority of the Hon. Court of Appeals from a Self-
Confessed Briber of Judges", which stated that
plaintiff-appellant Uy had, in fact, confessed to
bribing judges. Consequently, Uy filed a verified
complaint against respondent lawyers for gross
misconduct. Should the respondents be disciplined
for having authored and filed the Manifestation of
Usurpation of Authority of the Hon. Court of Appeals
from a Self-Confessed Briber of Judges?
A: Yes. Respondents went overboard by stating in the
Manifestation that complainant "had in fact confessed
to bribery and telling one of the judges, after the
judges allegedly refused to give in to their demands,
by using illegally taped conversations-both actual
and/or by telephone". It belied their good intention
and exceeded the bounds of propriety, hence, not
arguably protected; it is the surfacing of a feeling of
contempt towards a litigant; it offends the court
before which it is made. A lawyer shall abstain from
scandalous, offensive or menacing language or
behavior before the courts. It must be remembered
that the language vehicle does not run short of
expressions which are emphatic but respectful,
convincing but not derogatory, illuminating but not
offensive. It has been said that a lawyer's language
should be dignified in keeping with the dignity of the
legal profession. It is the duty of Atty. Depasucat et al.
as members of the Bar to abstain from all offensive
personality and to advance no fact prejudicial to the
honor or reputation of a party or witness, unless
required by the justice of the cause with which he is
charged (Uy v. Depasucat, A.C. No. 5332, July 29, 2003).
NOTE: The language of a lawyer, both oral and written, must
be respectful and restrained in keeping with the dignity of
the legal profession and with his behavioral attitude toward
39
his brethren in the profession. The use of abusive language
by counsel against the opposing counsel constitutes at the
same time disrespect to the dignity of the court justice.
Moreover, the use of impassioned language in pleadings,
more often than not, creates more heat than light
(Buenaseda v. Flavier, G.R. No. 106719, Sept. 21, 1993).
The duty to observe and maintain respect is not a one-way
duty from a lawyer to a judge. A judge should also be
courteous to counsel, especially those who are young and
inexperienced and to all those appearing or concerned in the
administration of justice.
Q: An administrative case and disbarment proceeding
was filed against MDS, a Lady Senator for uttering in
her privilege speech delivered in the Senate floor
where she was quoted as saying that
she wanted to spit on the face of Chief Justice and
his cohorts in the Supreme Court, and calling the
Court a Supreme Court of idiots. She alleged that it
was considered as part of her Parliamentary
immunity as such was done during the session. Is she
correct?
A: Yes, because her statements, being part of her
privilege speech as a member of Congress, were
covered by the constitutional provision on
parliamentary immunity. Indeed, her privilege speech
is not actionable criminally or in a disciplinary
proceeding under the Rules of Court. However, as a
member of the Bar, the Court wishes to express its
deep concern about the language Senator MDS used
in her speech and its effect on the administration of
justice. To the Court, the lady senator has undoubtedly
crossed the limits of decency and good professional
conduct. It is at once apparent that her statements in
question were intemperate and highly improper in
substance. MDS should have taken to heart in the first
place the ensuing passage in In Re: Vicente Sotto
that x x x [I]f the people lose their confidence in the
honesty and integrity of this Court and believe that
they cannot expect justice therefrom, they might be
driven to take the law into their own hands, and
disorder and perhaps chaos would be the result.
No lawyer who has taken an oath to maintain the
respect due to the courts should be allowed to erode
the peoples faith in the judiciary. In this case, the lady
senator clearly violated Canon 8, Rule 8.01 and Canon
11 of the Code of Professional Responsibility (Pobre v.
Senator Santiago, A.C. No. 7399, Aug. 25, 2009).
NOTE: The lawyers duty to render respectful subordination
to the courts is essential to the orderly administration of
justice. Hence, in the assertion of the clients rights,
lawyers even those gifted with superior intellect, are
enjoined to rein up their tempers (Zaldivar v. Gonzalez, G.R.
Nos. 79690-707, Oct. 7, 1988).
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW
 Legal Ethics
Rule 11.04, Canon 11
A lawyer shall not attribute to a Judge motives not
supported by the record or have no materiality to
the case.
Every citizen has the right to comment upon and
criticize the actuations of public officers. This right is
not dismissed by the fact that the criticism is aimed at
a judicial authority, or that it is articulated by a lawyer.
Such right is especially recognized where the criticism
concerns a concluded litigation, because the Courts
actuations are thrown open to public consumption.
Courts thus treat with forbearance and restraint a
lawyer who vigorously assails their actuations for
courageous and fearless advocates are the strands
that weave durability into the tapestry of justice.
Post litigation utterances or publications made by
lawyers, critical of the courts and their judicial
actuations, whether amounting to a crime or not,
which transcend the permissible bounds of fair
comment and legitimate criticism and thereby tend to
bring them into dispute or to subvert public confidence
in their integrity and in the orderly administration of
justice, constitute grave professional misconduct
which may be visited with disbarment or other lesser
appropriate disciplinary sanctions by the SC in the
exercise of the prerogatives inherent in it as the duly
constituted guardian of the morals and ethics of the
legal fraternity (In Re: Almacen, G.R. No. L-27654, Feb.
18, 1970).
Q: Atty. Romeo Roxas was charged for contempt
when he, in a letter addressed to Associate Justice
Chico-Nazario, stated that Justice Nazario decided
the cases in favor of Zuzuarregui, ordering Attys.
Roxas and Pastor to pay the former P17,073,224.84
on considerations other than the pure merits of the
case and called the SC a dispenser of injustice." He
ended his letter by mocking her when he said sleep
well if you still can and that her earthly life will
be judged by the Supreme Dispenser of Justice where
only the merits of your Honors life will be relevant
and material and where technicalities can shield no
one from his or her wrongdoings." In the written
explanation of Atty. Roxas, he extended apologies to
Justice Nazario. He said he was merely exercising his
rights to express a legitimate grievance or articulate
fair criticisms of the courts ruling. Moreover,
according to him, instead of resorting to public
criticisms, he chose to ventilate his criticisms in a very
discreet and private manner by writing a personal
letter. Should Atty. Roxas be punished for the
contents of his letter?
A: Yes. Atty. Roxas letter contains defamatory
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
2014 GOLDEN NOTES
40
statements that impaired public confidence in the
integrity of the Judiciary. The making of contemptuous
statements directed against the court is not an
exercise of free speech; rather, it is an abuse of such
right.
A letter furnished to all the members of the SC, even if
a copy was not disseminated to the media, does not
enjoy the mantle of right to privacy. Letters addressed
to the individual justices in connection with the
performance of their judicial functions become part of
the judicial record and are matter of concern for the
entire court.
Atty. Roxas is guilty of indirect contempt of court for
an improper conduct tending, directly and indirectly,
to impede, obstruct or degrade the administration of
justice; and with his contemptuous and defamatory
statements, Atty. Roxas likewise violated Canon 11 of
the CPR particularly Rules 11.03 and 11.04 (Roxas v.
Zuzuarregui, et al., G.R. No. 152072, July 12, 2007).
Q: When is public comment and criticism of a court
decision permissible and when would it be improper?
(1997 Bar Question)
A: A lawyer, like every citizen, enjoys the right to
comment on and criticize the decision of a court. As an
officer of the court, a lawyer is expected not only to
exercise that right but also to consider it his duty to
expose the shortcomings and indiscretions of courts
and judges. But such right is subject to the limitations
that it shall be bona fide. It is proper to criticize the
courts and judges, but it is improper to subject them
to abuse and slander, degrade them or destroy public
confidence in them. Moreover, a lawyer shall not
attribute to a judge motives not supported by the
record or have no materiality in the case (CPR, Rule
11.04).
NOTE: A lawyer should be reminded of his primary duty to
assist the court in the administration of justice. The relations
between counsel and judge should be based on mutual
respect and on a deep appreciation by one of the duties of
the other. It is upon their cordial relationship and mutual
cooperation that the hope of our people for speedy and
efficient justice rests (Abiera v. Maceda, A.C. No. RTJ-91-660,
June 30, 1994).
If the court official or employee or a lawyer is to be
disciplined, the evidence against him should be substantial,
competent and derived from direct knowledge, not on mere
allegations, conjectures, suppositions or on the basis of
hearsay (Cervantes v. Atty. Sabio, A.C. No. 7828, Aug. 11,
2008).
 DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF A LAWYER

Rule 11.05, Canon 11 given by the trial court, Atty. Villar Jr. failed to file his
A lawyer shall submit grievances against a Judge formal offer of exhibits. The dismissal of the
to the proper authorities only. collection case prompted Jardin to file a verified
affidavit-complaint for the disbarment of Atty. Villar
Proper venue/forum for the filing of the following Jr. with the Court, wherein he alleged that after the
cases dismissal of the collection case, he terminated the
services of Atty. Villar Jr. as his counsel; that Atty.
NATURE OF THE CASE WHERE TO FILE Villar Jr. failed to return the originals of the
If administrative in It shall be filed with the documentary exhibits entrusted to him; and that Atty.
nature Office of the Court Villar Jr. finally handed over the documents only as
Administrator of the an aftermath of a heated argument he had with the
Supreme Court. Jardin's wife. Was Atty. Villar Jr. remiss in his duties
If criminal and not It shall be filed with the as counsel when he failed to file his formal offer of
purely administrative Office of the exhibit?
Ombudsman, also with
the OCP. A: Yes. The record clearly shows that Atty. Villar Jr. has
If it involves a Justice of It must be coursed been languid in the performance of his duties as
counsel for the complainant. He was given by the Trial
the Supreme Court through the House of
Court several extensions of time. Therefore, Atty. Villar
based on impeachable Representative and the
offenses Senate in accordance Jr. had three (3) months and nine (9) days within which
with the rules on to file the formal offer of exhibits. Atty. Villar Jr. did not
bother to give an explanation even in mitigation or
impeachment.
extenuation of his inaction.
Source: (CPR Annotated, PhilJA)

NOTE: An administrative complaint is not an appropriate

remedy where judicial recourse is still available, such as a
motion for reconsideration, an appeal, or a petition for
certiorari, unless the assailed order or decision is tainted
with fraud, malice, or dishonesty (Santiago III v. Justice
Enriquez, Jr., A.M. No. CA-09-47-J, Feb. 13, 2009).
ASSISTANCE IN THE SPEEDY AND EFFICIENT
ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE
Canon 12
A lawyer shall exert every effort and consider it
his duty to assist in the speedy and efficient
administration of justice
A lawyer must exert every effort and consider it his
duty to assist in the speedy and efficient
administration of justice.
A lawyer is bound by his oath to serve his client with
utmost zeal and dedication and shall conduct himself
according to the best of his knowledge and discretion
(Antiquiera, CPR, p. 50).
The filing of another action concerning the same
subject matter, in violation of the doctrine of res
judicata, runs contrary to this Canon (Lim v. Montano,
A.C. No. 5653, Feb. 27, 2006).
Q: Jardin engaged the services of Atty. Villar Jr. to
represent him in a collection case. The case went its
course, but later despite several extensions of time
41
Evidently, Atty. Villar Jr. has fallen short of the
competence and diligence required of every member
of the Bar. It is indeed dismaying to note Atty. Villar
Jr.s patent violation of his duty as a lawyer. He
committed a serious transgression when he failed to
exert his utmost learning and ability and to give entire
devotion to his client's cause. His client had relied on
him to file the formal offer of exhibits among other
things. But he failed him. Resulting as it did in the
dismissal of the case, his failure constitutes
inexcusable default (Jardin v. Atty. Villar, Jr., A.C. No.
5474, Aug. 28, 2003).
Q: Judgment was rendered against Eternal Gardens
ordering it to reconvey the cemetery to the rightful
owners. Despite the final decision of the SC, Eternal
Gardens was able to prevent the execution for 17
years, rendering the judgment ineffectual. They filed
several petitions and motions for reconsideration
with the trial court and the CA despite the fact that it
would never prosper as the trial courts decision had
long become final before the said petitions were filed.
Did the lawyers violate Canon 12 of the CPR?
A: While lawyers owe their entire devotion to the
interest of the client and zeal in the defense of their
clients right, they are also officers of the court, bound
to exert every effort to assist in the speedy and efficient
administration of justice. They should not misuse the
rules of procedure to defeat the ends of justice or
unduly delay a case, impede the execution of a
judgment or misuse court processes. The facts and the
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW
 Legal Ethics
law should advise them that a case such as this should
not be permitted to be filed to merely clutter the
already congested judicial dockets. They do not
advance the cause of law or their clients by
commencing litigations that for sheer lack of merit do
not deserve the attention of the courts (Eternal
Gardens Memorial Park Corporation v. CA, G.R. No.
123698, Aug. 5, 1998).
Rule 12.01, Canon 12
A lawyer shall not appear for trial unless he has
adequately prepared himself on the law and the
facts of his case, the evidence he will adduce and
the order of its profference. He should also be
ready with the original documents for comparison
with the copies.
A newly hired counsel who appears in a case in the
midstream is presumed and obliged to acquaint
himself with all the antecedent processes and
proceedings that have transpired in the record prior to
his takeover (Villasis v. CA, G.R. Nos. L- 36874-76, Sept.
30, 1974).
Rule 12.02, Canon 12
A lawyer shall not file multiple actions arising
from the same cause. (1991, 1997, 1998, 2002 Bar
Questions)
The mere filing of several cases based on the same
incident does not necessarily constitute forum
shopping. The question is whether the several actions
filed involve the same transactions, essential facts and
circumstances. If they involve essentially different
facts, circumstances and causes of action, there is no
forum shopping (Paredes v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No.
108251, January 31, 1996).
The essence of forum shopping is the filing of multiple
suits involving the same parties for the same cause of
action, either simultaneously or successively, for the
purpose of obtaining a favorable judgment (Foronda v.
Atty. Guerrero, A.C. No. 5469, Aug. 10, 2004).
NOTE: If same evidence supports both actions, there is also
forum shopping.
Q: The trial court declared Paxton Development
Corporation (PDC) the lawful owner of the subject
lots. CA affirmed. Top Rate, as the losing party,
sought to have the said resolution set aside and
thereafter filed with the Supreme Court a motion for
extension of time to file a petition for review from
the adverse CA decision and resolution. The motion
contained a "verification/ certification" under oath
as to non-forum shopping, without mentioning the
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
2014 GOLDEN NOTES
42
pending manifestation and motion with the CA,
which was notarized by Atty. Manlangit. Both Atty.
Manlangit and Atty. Gana knew the relevant case
status after having invariably acted as counsel of Top
Rate before the trial court, the Court of Appeals and
the Supreme Court.
Top Rate then filed a series of motions with the SC,
all of which failed to state that Top Rate still has a
pending manifestation and motion with the CA. It
was only when it withdrew its Petition for Review on
Certiorari that Top Rate bared before the SC the
existence of the said manifestation and motion
pending with the CA. Should Top Rate and its counsel
be found guilty of forum shopping?
A: Yes. Although Top Rate as principal party executed
the several certifications of non-forum shopping, Atty.
Gana and Atty. Manlangit cannot deny responsibility
therefore since Atty. Manlangit notarized the
certifications and both of them definitely knew the
relevant case status after having invariably acted as
counsel of Top Rate before the trial court, the Court of
Appeals and the Supreme Court. Attys. Gana and
Manlangit of the Gana and Manlangit Law Office,
counsel of record of Top Rate, are administratively
liable for grotesque violations of the Code of
Professional Responsibility.
It is an act of malpractice for it trifles with the courts,
abuses their processes, degrades the administration of
justice and adds to the already congested court
dockets. What is critical is the vexation brought upon
the courts and the litigants by a party who asks
different courts to rule on the same or related causes
and grant the same or substantially the same relief and
in the process creates the possibility of conflicting
decisions being rendered by different forums upon the
same issues, regardless of whether the court, in which
one of the suits was brought, has no jurisdiction over
the action (Top Rate Construction and General Services
v. Paxton Devt. Corp., G.R. No. 151081, Sept. 11, 2003).
Possible consequences of forum shopping
1. Summary dismissal without prejudice unless there
is a willful or deliberate forum-shopping (RRC, Sec.
5, Rule 7).
2. Penalty for direct contempt of court on the party
and his lawyer in case of willful and deliberate
forum-shopping (RRC, Sec. 5, Rule 7).
3. Criminal action for a false certification of non-
forum shopping and indirect contempt
4. Disciplinary proceedings for the lawyer concerned
(RRC, Sec. 5, Rule 7).
 DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF A LAWYER
Rule 12.03, Canon 12
A lawyer shall not, after obtaining extensions of
time to file pleadings, memoranda or briefs, let
the period lapse without submitting the same or
offering an explanation for his failure to do so.
(2003 Bar Question)
The court censures the practice of counsels who
secure repeated extensions of time to file their
pleadings and thereafter simply let the period lapse
without submitting the pleading or even an
explanation or manifestation of their failure to do so
(Achacoso v. CA, G.R. No. L-35867, June 28, 1973).
Asking for extension of time must be in good faith.
Otherwise, it is an obstruction of justice and the lawyer
is subject to discipline (CPR Annotated, PhilJA).
The same rule applies more forcefully to motion for
continuance. Postponement is not a matter of right
but of sound judicial discretion (Edrial v. Quilat- Quilat,
G.R. No. 133625, Sept. 6, 2000).
Rule 12.04, Canon 12
A lawyer shall not unduly delay a case, impede the
execution of a judgment or misuse court processes.
It is understandable for a party to make full use of
every conceivable legal defense the law allows it.
However, of such attempts to evade liability to which
a party should respond, it must ever be kept in mind
that procedural rules are intended as an aid to justice,
not as means for its frustration.
Once a judgment becomes final and executory, the
prevailing party should not be denied the fruits of his
victory by some subterfuge devised by the losing party.
Unjustified delay in the enforcement of a judgment
sets at naught the role of the courts in disposing
justiciable controversies with finality (Aguilar v.
Manila Banking Corporation, GR No. 157911,
September 19, 2006).
Lawyers should not resort to nor abet the resort of
their clients, to a series of actions and petitions for the
purpose of thwarting the execution of a judgment that
has long become final and executory (Cobb-Perez v.
Lantin, No. L-22320, May 22, 1968).
The writs of amparo and habeas data are
extraordinary remedies which cannot be used as tools
to stall the execution of a final and executory decision
in a property dispute (Castillo v. Cruz, G.R. No. 182165,
November 25, 2009).
43
Rule 12.05, Canon 12
A lawyer shall refrain from talking to his witness
during a break or recess in the trial, while the
witness is still under examination.
The rule is designed to uphold and maintain fair play
with the other party and to prevent the examining
lawyer from being tempted to coach his own witness
to suit his purpose.
Guidelines in interviewing witnesses (2001, 2005 Bar
Questions)
1. A lawyer may interview a witness in advance of
the trial to guide him in the management of the
litigation;
2. A lawyer may also interview a prospective
witness for the opposing side in any civil and
criminal action without the consent of opposing
counsel or party;
3. A lawyer must properly obtain statements from
witnesses whose names were furnished by the
opposing counsel or interview the employees of
the opposing party even though they are under
subpoena to appear as witnesses for the opposite
side;
4. If after trial resulting in defendants conviction, his
counsel has been advised that a prosecution
witness has committed perjury, it is not only
proper but it is the lawyers duty to endeavor
honorable means to obtain such witness
reaction, even without advising the public
prosecutor of his purpose and even though the
case is pending appeal; and
5. An adverse party, though he may be used as a
witness, is not however a witness within the
meaning of the rule permitting a lawyer to
interview the witness of the opposing counsel.
NOTE: Although the law does not forbid an attorney to be a
witness and at the same time an attorney in a cause, the
courts prefer that counsel should not testify as a witness
unless it is necessary and that they should withdraw from the
active management of the case (PNB v. Uy Teng Piao, G.R.
No. L- 35252, Oct. 21, 1932).
Rule 12.06, Canon 12
A lawyer shall not knowingly assist a witness to
misrepresent himself or to impersonate another.
Sanctions to a lawyer who instructs a witness to
perpetuate misrepresentation
Art. 184, Revised Penal Code provides: The lawyer who
presented a witness knowing him to be a false witness
is criminally liable for Offering False Testimony
in Evidence.
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW
 Legal Ethics
NOTE: The lawyer who is guilty of the above is both
criminally and administratively liable.
Criminal liability of witness who commits
misrepresentation
The witness who commits the misrepresentation is
criminally liable for False Testimony either under Art.
181, 182 or 183, Revised Penal Code, depending upon
the nature of the case.
Rule 12.07, Canon 12
A lawyer shall not abuse, browbeat or harass a
witness nor needlessly inconvenience him.
Q: Nolito Boras was convicted of statutory rape. The
victim, a minor, testified and the manner of
examination was excessive. The lawyer of Boras was
asking questions like, Did you have any opportunity
at the time you were raped to hold the penis of Nolito
Boras?, At the time, when you were raped by Nolito
Boras, is his penis hard or soft?, and Did you see
your uncle Cerilo after the accused stop pushing and
pulling his penis to your vagina or while he was still
in the process of pushing and pulling his penis to
your vagina? Did the lawyer of Nolito Boras violate
Rule 12.07?
A: Yes. It must be stressed that in dealing with rape
cases of children, especially those below 12 years of
age, due care must be observed by the trial court in
handling the victim. In fact, more often than not, the
grueling experience in the trial court in the course of
direct examination and cross-examination is more
traumatic than the fact of the rape itself. On such
occasions, mishandling of victims lead to psychological
imbalances which, if not properly treated by medical
experts, will lead to an abnormal behavioral response
against the idea of sex itself and disturbed interaction
with the opposite or same sex.
By subjecting her into explaining whether she was
forced or intimidated is excessive. It is because proof
of force and intimidation is unnecessary in statutory
rape. Considering that there is a medical report
substantiating the allegations made by the victim, the
manner of examination of the victim must be
tempered. Especially in this case since the child is only
six years old who remains uncorrupted (People v.
Boras, G.R. No. 127495, Dec. 22, 2000).
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
2014 GOLDEN NOTES
44
Rule 12.08, Canon 12
A lawyer shall avoid testifying in behalf of his
client, except:
a. On formal matters, such as the mailing,
authentication or custody of an instrument, and
the like; or
b. On substantial matters, in cases where his
testimony is essential to the ends of justice, in
which event he must, during his testimony,
entrust the trial of the case to another counsel.
The function of a witness is to tell the facts as he recalls
them in answer to questions. The function of an
advocate is that of a partisan. It is difficult to
distinguish between the zeal of an advocate and the
fairness and impartiality of a disinterested witness.
Matters to which a lawyer CANNOT testify on
(TARCC)
1. When, as an attorney, he is to Testify on the
theory of the case;
2. When such would Adversely affect any lawful
interest of the client with respect to which
confidence has been reposed on him;
3. Having accepted a Retainer, he cannot be a
witness against his client;
4. He cannot serve Conflicting interests; and
5. When he is to violate the Confidence of his client.
Matters to which a lawyer CAN testify on (FETAD)
1. On Formal matters, such as the mailing,
authentication or custody of instrument and the
like;
2. Acting as an Expert on his fee;
3. On substantial matters in cases where his
Testimony is essential to the ends of justice, in
which event he must, during his testimony,
entrust the trial of the case to another counsel;
4. Acting as an Arbitrator; and
5. Deposition.
RELIANCE ON MERITS OF CASE AND AVOIDANCE
FROM ANY IMPROPRIETY WHICH TENDS TO
INFLUENCE OR GIVES THE APPEARANCE OF
INFLUENCE UPON THE COURTS
Canon 13
A lawyer shall rely upon the merits of his cause
and refrain from any impropriety which tends to
influence, or gives the appearance of influencing
the court
It is unethical for a lawyer to give an appearance as if
he is capable of influencing judges and court personnel.
 DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF A LAWYER
Giving of gifts to the judges are discouraged as it tend
to give an appearance of influencing the conduct of
judicial function or breeding familiarity with judges
(Antiquiera, 1992).
It is reprehensible for a lawyer to wrongfully use the
name of the law office for the purpose of giving more
weight and credit to the pleading. Motions and
pleadings filed in courts are acted upon in accordance
with their merits or lack of it, and not on the
reputation of the law firm or the lawyer filing the same
(Rodica v. Atty. Lazaro, et al. A.C. No. 9259, August 23,
2012).
Rule 13.01, Canon 13
A lawyer shall not extend extraordinary attention
or hospitality to, nor seek opportunity for
cultivating familiarity with judges.
The rule is designed to protect the good name and
reputation of the judge and the lawyer.
Lawyers should not seek for opportunity to cultivate
familiarity with judges. A lawyer who resorts to such
practices of seeking familiarity with judges dishonors
his profession and a judge who consents to them is
unworthy of his high office.
It is improper for a litigant or counsel to see a judge in
chambers and talk to him about a matter related to the
case pending in the court of said judge (Austria v.
Masaquel, G.R. No. 22536, Aug. 31, 1967).
Q: Atty. J requested Judge K to be a principal sponsor
at the wedding of his son. Atty. J met Judge K a month
before during the IBP-sponsored reception to
welcome Judge K into the community, and having
learned that Judge K takes his breakfast at a coffee
shop near his (Judge K's) boarding house, Atty. J
made it a point to be at the coffee shop at about the
time that Judge K takes his breakfast. Comment on
Atty. J's acts. Do they violate the Code of Professional
Responsibility? (2000 Bar Question)
A: Yes, his actions violate the Code of Professional
Responsibility. Canon 13 of the said Code provides that
a lawyer shall rely upon the merits of his cause and
refrain from any impropriety which tends to influence,
or gives the appearance of influencing the court. Rule
13.01 of the same Code provides that a lawyer shall
not extend extraordinary attention or hospitality to,
nor seek opportunity for, cultivating familiarity with
judges. Atty. J obviously sought opportunity for
cultivating familiarity with Judge K by being at the
coffee shop where the latter takes his breakfast, and is
extending extraordinary attention to the judge by
45
inviting him to be a principal sponsor at the wedding
of his son.
Rule 13.02, Canon 13
A lawyer shall not make public statements in the
media regarding a pending case tending to arouse
public opinion for or against a party.
Prejudicial Publicity
There must be an allegation and proof that the judges
have been unduly influenced, not simply that they
might be, by barrage of publicity (CPR Annotated,
PhilJA).
NOTE: The restriction does not prohibit issuances of
statements by public officials charged with the duty of
prosecuting or defending actions in court.
NOTE: In a concluded litigation, a lawyer enjoys a wider
latitude of comment on or criticize the decision of a judge of
his actuation. Thus, it has been held that a newspaper
publication tending to impede, obstruct, embarrass or
influence the courts in administering justice in a pending
case constitutes criminal contempt, but the rule is otherwise
after the litigation is ended (In re: Loazano, 54 Phil. 801, July
24, 1930).
Q: Dumbledore, a noted professor of commercial law,
wrote an article on the subject of letters of credit,
which was published in the IBP Journal. Assume that
he devoted a significant portion of the article to a
commentary on how the Supreme Court should
decide a pending case involving the application of the
law on letters of credit. May he be sanctioned by the
Supreme Court? Explain.
A: Yes, Professor Dumbledore may be sanctioned by
the Supreme Court. Rule 13.02 of the CPR provides
that a lawyer shall not make public statements in the
media regarding a pending case tending to arouse
public opinion for or against a party. The Court in a
pending litigation must be shielded from
embarrassment or influence in its duty of deciding the
case.
Q: Assume Dumbledore did not include any
commentary on the case. Assume further after the
Supreme Court decision on the case had attained
finality, he wrote another IBP Journal article,
dissecting the decision and explaining why the
Supreme Court erred in all its conclusions. May he be
sanctioned by the Supreme Court? Explain. (2008 Bar
Question)
A: He may not be sanctioned by the Supreme Court.
Once a case is concluded, the judge who decided it is
subject to the same criticism as any other public
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW
 Legal Ethics
official because his decision becomes public property
and is thrown open to public consumption. The lawyer
enjoys a wide latitude in commenting or criticizing the
judges decision, provided that such comment or
criticism shall be bona fide and not spill over the
bounds of decency and propriety.
Rule 13.03, Canon 13
A lawyer shall not brook or invite interference by
another branch or agency of the government in
the normal course of judicial proceedings.
The reason for this rule is that such action will be
contrary to the principle of separation of powers.
All lawyers must uphold, respect and support the
independence of the judiciary. This independence
from interference is made to apply against all branches
and agencies of the government (Funa, 2009).
The Supreme Court accordingly administered a
reprimand to Bumanlag for gross ignorance of law and
of the Constitution in having asked the President to set
aside by decree the Courts decision which suspended
him for two years from the practice of law (De
Bumanlag v. Bumanlag, A.M. No. 188, Nov. 29, 1976).
DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF A
LAWYER TO THE CLIENTS
Characteristics of attorney-client relationship
1. Strictly personal Prohibits the delegation of work
without the clients consent
2. Highly confidential
a. Communication made in the course of
lawyers professional employment; and
b. Communication intended to be confidential
3. Fiduciary
a. Hold in trust all moneys and properties of his
client that may come into his possession;
b. When a lawyer enforces a charging lien
against his client, the relationship is
terminated; and
c. An attorney cannot represent adverse
interest unless the parties consent to the
representation after full disclosure of facts
Necessity of a contract between lawyer and client
The absence of a written contract will not preclude a
finding that there is a professional relationship.
Documentary formalism is not an essential element in
the employment of an attorney; the contract may be
express or implied.
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
2014 GOLDEN NOTES
46
It is sufficient to establish the professional relation,
that the advice and assistance of an attorney is sought
and received in any matter pertinent to his profession.
An acceptance of the relation is implied on the part of
the attorney from his acting on behalf of his client in
pursuance of a request from the latter.
NOTE: If a person, in respect to his business affairs or any
troubles of any kind, consults with his attorney in his
professional capacity with the view to obtaining professional
advice or assistance and the attorney voluntarily permits or
acquiesce in such consultation, as when he listens to his
clients preliminary statement of his case or gives advice
thereon, then the professional employment is regarded as
established just as effective as when he draws his clients
pleading or advocates his clients cause in court (Dee v. CA,
G.R. No. 77439, Aug. 24, 1989).
Formation of the lawyer-client relationship
The lawyer-client relationship is formed through the
following:
1. Oral When the counsel is employed without a
written agreement, but the conditions and
amount of attorneys fees are agreed upon.
2. Express When the terms and conditions
including the amount of fees are explicitly stated
in a written document, which may be a private or
public document. Written contract of attorneys
fees is the law between the lawyer and the client.
3. Implied When there is no agreement, whether
oral or written, but the client allowed the lawyer
to render legal services not intended to be
gratuitous without objection and client is
benefited by reason thereof.
Rules protecting the attorney-client relationship
1. Best effort must be exerted by the attorney to
protect his clients interest;
2. The attorney must promptly account for any fund
or property entrusted by or received for his client;
3. An attorney cannot purchase his clients property
or interest in litigation;
4. The privacy of communications shall at all times
upheld;
5. An attorney cannot represent a party whose
interest is adverse to that of his client even after
the termination of the relation.
Three principal types of professional activity of a
lawyer (LAP)
1. Legal advice and instructions to clients to inform
them of their rights and obligations;
2. Appearance for clients before public tribunals
which possess power and authority to determine
 DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF A LAWYER
rights of life, liberty, and property according to
law, in order to assist in proper interpretation and
enforcement of law; and
3. Preparation for clients of documents requiring
knowledge of legal principles not possessed by
ordinary layman (CPR Annotated, PhilJA).
Q: Uy engaged the services of Atty. Gonzales to
prepare and file a petition for the issuance of a new
certificate of title. Uy confided with him the
circumstances surrounding the lost title and
discussing the fees and costs. When the petition was
about to be filed, Atty. Gonzales went to Uys office
and demanded a certain amount from him other than
what they had previously agreed upon. Uy found out
later that instead of filing the petition for the
issuance of a new certificate of title, Atty. Gonzales
filed a letter- complaint against him with the Office of
the Provincial Prosecutor for falsification of public
documents. The letter-complaint contained facts
and circumstances pertaining to the transfer
certificate of title that was the subject matter of the
petition which Atty. Gonzales was supposed to have
filed. Should Atty. Gonzales be suspended for
violating the lawyer-client relationship when he filed
a complaint for falsification of public documents
against his client using facts connected with the
latters petition?
A: No. As a rule, an attorney-client relationship is said
to exist when a lawyer voluntarily permits or
acquiesces with the consultation of a person, who in
respect to a business or trouble of any kind, consults a
lawyer with a view of obtaining professional advice or
assistance. It is not essential that the client should
have employed the attorney on any previous occasion
or that any retainer should have been paid, promised
or charged for, neither is it material that the attorney
consulted did not afterward undertake the case about
which the consultation was had, for as long as the
advice and assistance of the attorney is sought and
received, in matters pertinent to his profession.
Evidently, the facts alleged in the complaint for estafa
through falsification of public documents filed by Atty.
Gonzales against Uy were obtained by Atty. Gonzales
due to his personal dealings with Uy. Whatever facts
alleged by Atty. Gonzales against Uy were not
obtained by Atty. Gonzales in his professional capacity
but as a redemptioner of a property originally owned
by his deceased son and therefore, when Atty.
Gonzales filed the complaint for estafa against Uy,
which necessarily involved alleging facts that would
constitute estafa, Atty. Gonzales was not, in any way,
violating Canon 21. Clearly, there was no attorney-
client relationship between Atty. Gonzales and Uy. The
47
preparation and the proposed filing of the petition was
only incidental to their personal transaction (Uy v. Atty.
Gonzales, A.C. No. 5280, Mar. 30, 2004).
AVAILABILITY OF SERVICE WITHOUT
DISCRIMINATION
Canon 14
A lawyer shall not refuse his services to the
needy
The poor and indigent should not be further
disadvantaged by lack of access to the Philippine legal
system.
Lawyers right to decline employment (1990, 1993,
2000, 2002, 2006 Bar Questions)
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 to decline employment.
XPNs:
1. A lawyer shall not refuse his services to the needy
(Canon 14).
2. 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);
3. 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 clien. (Rule
14.03).
Legal aid cases
Legal aid cases are those actions, disputes and
controversies that are criminal, civil and
administrative in nature in whatever stage, wherein an
indigent and pauper litigants need legal
representation.
Rationale for establishing legal aid services
Legal aid is not a matter of charity. It is a means for the
correction of social imbalances that may and often do
lead to injustice, for which reason it is a public
responsibility of the Bar. The spirit of public service
should, therefore, underlie all legal aid offices. The
same should be so administered as to give maximum
possible assistance to the indigent and deserving
members of the community in all cases, matters and
situations in which legal aid may be necessary to
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW
 Legal Ethics
forestall an injustice (Public Service. Sec. 1 Art. 1 IBP
Guidelines on Legal Aid).
Q: Are there instances where a lawyer has the duty to
decline employment? (1993 Bar Question)
A: A lawyer should decline no matter how attractive
the fee offered may be if its acceptance will involve:
(RACCAA)
1. A violation of any of the Rules of the legal
profession;
2. Advocacy in any manner in which he had
intervened while in the government service;
3. Nullification of a Contract which he prepared;
4. Employment with a Collection agency which
solicits business to collect claims;
5. Employment, the nature of which might easily
be used as a means of Advertising his
professional services of his skill; or
6. Any matter in which he knows or has reason to
believe that he or his partner will be an
essential witness for the prospective client.
Reasons why a lawyer may not accept a losing case
1. The attorneys signature in every pleading
constitutes a certificate by him that there is good
cause to support it and that it is not interposed for
delay, and willful violation of such rule shall
subject him to disciplinary action;
2. It is the attorneys duty to counsel or maintain
such actions or proceedings only as appears to
him to be just and only such defenses as he
believes to be honestly debatable under the law;
3. A lawyer is not to encourage either the
commencement or the continuance of an action
or proceeding, or delay any mans cause, for any
corrupt motive or interest; and
4. A lawyer must decline to conduct a civil cause or
to make a defense when convinced that it is
intended merely to harass or injure the opposite
party or to work oppression or wrong.
Q: Is there an instance when a lawyer may accept
losing case? (1996, 2001, 2002, 2005 Bar Questions)
a. In criminal case?
b. In civil case?
A:
a) A lawyer may accept a losing criminal case since
an accused is presumed to be innocent until his guilt is
proven beyond reasonable doubt. Furthermore, CPR
provides that a lawyer shall not decline to represent a
person because of his opinion regarding the guilt of
said person. Otherwise innocent persons might be
denied proper defense (CPR, Rule 14.01).
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
2014 GOLDEN NOTES
48
b) A lawyer may also accept a losing civil case, provided
that, in so doing, he must not engage in dilatory tactics
and must advise his client about the prospects and
advantage of settling the case through a compromise
to the extent of representing indigents, defenseless
and the oppressed.
SERVICES REGARDLESS OF PERSONS STATUS
Rule 14.01, Canon 14
A lawyer shall not decline to represent a person
solely on account of the latters race, sex, creed or
status of life, or because of his own opinion
regarding the guilt of said person.
Q: Atty. DDs services were engaged by Mr. BB as
defense counsel in a lawsuit. In the course of the
proceedings, Atty. DD discovered that Mr. BB was an
agnostic and a homosexual. By reason thereof, Atty.
DD filed a motion to withdraw as counsel without Mr.
BBs express consent. Is Atty. DDs motion legally
tenable? Reason briefly. (2004 Bar Question)
A: No. Atty. DDs motion is not legally tenable. He has
no valid cause to terminate his services. His client, Mr.
BB, being an agnostic and homosexual, should not be
deprived of his counsels representation solely for that
reason.
SERVICES AS COUNSEL DE OFFICIO
Rule 14.02, Canon 14
A lawyer shall not decline, except for serious and
sufficient cause, an appointment as counsel de
officio or as amicus curiae, or a request from the
Integrated Bar of the Philippines or any of its
chapters for rendition of free legal aid (1991,
1993, 1994, 1996, 1998, 2001, 2002, 2004, 2006
Bar Questions)
A court may assign an attorney to render professional
aid free of charge to any party in case, if upon
investigation it appears that the party is destitute and
unable to employ an attorney and that the services of
counsel are necessary to secure the ends of justice and
to protect the rights of the party. It shall be the duty of
the attorney so assigned to render the required service,
unless he is excused therefrom by the court for
sufficient cause shown (RRC, Sec. 31, Rule 138).
Counsel de oficio
1. Members of the bar in good standing;
2. Any person, resident of the province and of good
repute for probity and ability, in localities without
lawyers
 DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF A LAWYER
Considerations in appointing a counsel de oficio
1. Gravity of offense
2. Difficulty of questions that may arise; and
3. Experience and ability of appointee
Q: A criminal complaint was filed against Bermas for
the crime of rape. The Prosecutor issued a
certification that the accused has waived his right to
preliminary investigation. On arraignment, the
accused was brought before the trial court without
counsel. The court assigned a PAO attorney to be the
counsel de officio who, during trial also made a
request that she be relieved from the case. Another
counsel was thereafter assigned as the new counsel
de officio. When said new counsel for the accused
failed to appear before the court for their
presentation of evidence, the Court appointed
another counsel de officio but, again, said counsel
asked to be relieved from the case. The newly
appointed counsel also failed to appear before the
court.
Despite the said events, the lower court convicted
the accused of death penalty for the violation of the
crime of rape. The defense counsel claimed that the
accused was deprived of due process, is he correct?
A: Yes. The right to counsel must be more than just the
presence of a lawyer in the courtroom or the mere
propounding of standard questions and objections.
The right to counsel means that the accused is amply
accorded legal assistance extended by a counsel who
commits himself to the cause for the defense and acts
accordingly. The right assumes an active involvement
by the lawyer in the proceedings, particularly at the
trial of the case, his bearing constantly in mind of the
basic rights of the accused, his being well-versed on
the case, and his knowing the fundamental procedures,
essential laws and existing jurisprudence.
It is never enough that accused be simply informed of
his right to counsel; he should also be asked whether
he wants to avail himself of one and should be told
that he can hire a counsel of his own choice if he so
desires or that one can be provided to him at his
request.
A counsel de officio is expected to act with utmost
diligence. A mere pro-forma appointment of de officio
counsel who fails to genuinely protect the interests of
the accused merits disapprobation. The exacting
demands expected of a lawyer should be no less than
stringent when one is a counsel de officio. He must
take the case not as a burden but as an opportunity to
assist in the proper dispensation of justice. No lawyer
is to be excused from this responsibility except only for
49
the most compelling and cogent reasons.
Obviously, in the instant case, the aforenamed
defense lawyers did not protect, much less uphold, the
fundamental rights of the accused. Instead, they
haphazardly performed their function as counsel de
officio to the detriment and prejudice of the accused
Sevilleno, however guilty he might have been found to
be after trial (People v. Bermas, G.R. No. 120420, Apr.
21, 1999).
VALID GROUNDS FOR REFUSAL
Rule 14.03, Canon 14
A lawyer may not refuse to accept representation
of an indigent client unless:
a. He is in no position to carry out the work
effectively or competently;
b. He labors under a conflict of interest between
him and the prospective client or between a
present client and a prospective client.
Grounds of refusal of appointment to be a Counsel de
Oficio
1. Too many de officio cases assigned to the lawyer;
(People v. Daeng, G.R. No. L- 34091, Jan. 30, 1973)
2. Conflict of interest; (CPR, Rule 14.03)
3. Lawyer is not in a position to carry out the work
effectively or competently; (supra)
4. Lawyer is prohibited from practicing law by reason
of his public office which prohibits appearances in
court; and
5. Lawyer is preoccupied with too many cases which
will spell prejudice to the new clients.
6. Health reasons
7. Extensive travel abroad
NOTE: A lawyer may refuse to handle cases due to these
valid reasons. However, Rule 2.02 requires him to give advice
on preliminary steps if he is asked until the client secures the
services of counsel. He shall refrain from giving this
preliminary advice if there is conflict of interest between a
present client and a prospective one for extending such legal
advice will create and establish an attorney-client
relationship between them and may involve a violation of the
rule prohibiting a lawyer from representing conflicting
interest.
Q: Assailed in a certiorari proceeding is an order of
respondent Judge Climaco denying a motion filed by
petitioner Ledesma to be allowed to withdraw as
counsel de officio. One of the grounds for such a
motion was his allegation that with his appointment
as Election Registrar by the COMELEC, he was not in
a position to devote full time to the defense of the
two accused. The denial by respondent Judge of such
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW
 Legal Ethics
a plea, notwithstanding the conformity of the
defendants, was due to its principal effect of
delaying the case." Is the denial of Judge Climaco
correct?
A: Yes. The reluctance of Ledesma to comply with his
responsibilities as counsel de officio is not an adequate
ground for the motion of withdrawal. Membership in
the bar is a privilege burdened with a condition. For
some lawyers especially the neophytes in the
profession being appointed as a lawyer is an irksome
chore. Law is a profession dedicated to the ideal of
service and not a mere trade. Thus is made manifest
the indispensable role of a member of the Bar in the
defense of an accused. Such a consideration could
have sufficed for Ledesma not being allowed to
withdraw as counsel de oficio. For he did betray by his
moves his lack of enthusiasm for the task entrusted to
him, to put matters mildly. He did point though to his
responsibility as an election registrar. Assuming his
good faith, no such excuse could be availed now. There
is not likely at present, and in the immediate future, an
exorbitant demand on his time (Ledesma v. Climaco,
G.R. No. L-23815, June 28, 1974).
Q: Ferrer was accused of having raped his 11-year-old
stepdaughter. Ferrers counsel of record was PAO's
Atty. Macabanding. During the pre-trial, both of them
failed to appear. Ferrer was considered by the court
as having jumped bail. Trial in absentia followed
where Ferrer was assisted by another PAO lawyer,
Atty. Alonto. Atty. Macabanding did not appear in all
the subsequent hearings of the case. He did not
inform the court of his whereabouts. Ferrer was
found guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime
charged and imposed upon him the death penalty.
Did Atty. Macabanding live up to the demands
expected from a counsel de officio?
A: No. Ferrer was not properly and effectively
accorded the right to counsel. Canon 18 of the CPR
requires every lawyer to serve his client with utmost
dedication, competence and diligence. He must not
neglect a legal matter entrusted to him. For all intents,
purposes and appearances, Atty. Macabanding
abandoned his client, an accused who stands to face
the death penalty.
While he faced the daunting task of defending an
accused that had jumped bail, this unfortunate
development is not a justification to excuse him from
giving his heart and soul to the latter's defense. The
exercise of their duties as counsel de officio meant
rendering full meaning and reality to the constitutional
precepts protecting the rights of the accused (People
v. Ferrer, G.R. No. 148821, July 18, 2003).
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
2014 GOLDEN NOTES
50
Q: May a lawyer decline a request for free legal aid to
an indigent accused made by a chapter of the IBP?
Explain. (2002 Bar Question)
A: No. Rule 14.02 of the CPR provides that a lawyer
shall not decline, except for serious and sufficient
cause, an appointment as counsel de officio or as
amicus curiae or a request from the IBP or any of
its chapter for rendition of free legal aid. He
may, decline such appointment only for
serious and sufficient cause.
Q: Will your answer be different if the legal aid is
requested in a civil case? (2002 Bar Question)
A: The answer will not be exactly the same, because in
a civil case, the lawyer can also decline if he believes
the action or defense to be unmeritorious. He is
ethically bound to maintain only actions and
proceedings which appear to him to be just and only
such defenses which he believes to be honestly
debatable under the law.
Rule 14.04, Canon 14
A lawyer who accepts the cause of a person
unable to pay his professional fees shall observe
the same standard of conduct governing his
relations with paying clients. (2008 Bar Question)
Q: Atty. Mariano Dajoyag, Jr. is Ernesto Ramos
counsel. He failed to perfect their appeal before the
SC. He filed the petition for certiorari within the 20-
day period of extension that he sought in his 2nd
motion for extension. He learned that the period of
extension granted in his 1st motion for extension was
inextendible only after the expiration of the 2 periods
of extension that he prayed for. A complaint for
negligence and malpractice was filed against him, to
which he pleaded good faith and excusable neglect of
duty. Is Atty. Dajoyag Jr. guilty of neglect of duty?
A: Yes. Motions for extension are not granted as a
matter of right but in the sound discretion of the court,
and lawyers should never presume that their motions
for extension or postponement will be granted or that
they will be granted the length of time they prayed for.
Further, regardless of the agreement Atty. Dajoyag, Jr.
had with Ramos with respect to the payment of his fees,
Atty. Dajoyag, Jr. owed it to Ramos to do his utmost to
ensure that every remedy allowed by law is availed of.
Rule 14.04 of the Code of Professional Responsibility
enjoins every lawyer to devote his full attention,
diligence, skills, and competence to every case that he
accepts. Pressure and large volume of legal work do
not excuse Atty. Dajoyag, Jr. for filing the petition for
 DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF A LAWYER
certiorari out of time.
Nevertheless, Atty. Dajoyag Jr. exerted efforts to
protect the rights and interests of Ernesto Ramos,
including trying to secure a reconsideration of the
denial of the petition. Thus, he is guilty of simple
neglect of duty (Ramos v. Dajoyag, Jr., A.C. No. 5174,
Feb. 28, 2002).
NOTE: The fact that his services are rendered without
remuneration should not occasion a diminution in his zeal
(Ledesma v. Climaco, G.R. No. L-23815, June 28, 1974).
CANDOR, FAIRNESS AND LOYALTY TO CLIENTS
Canon 15
A lawyer shall observe candor, fairness and loyalty
in all his dealings and transactions with his clients
A lawyer owes absolute fidelity to the cause of his
client. He owes his client full devotion to his interest,
warm zeal in the maintenance and defense of his rights.
It demands of an attorney an undivided allegiance, a
conspicuous and high degree of good faith,
disinterestedness, candor, fairness, loyalty, fidelity
and absolute integrity in all his dealings and
transactions with his clients and an utter renunciation
of every personal advantage conflicting in any way,
directly or indirectly, with the interest of his client
(Oparel Sr. v. Abaria, A.C. No. 959, July 30, 1971).
If they find that their clients cause is defenseless, then
it is their bounden duty to advise the latter to
acquiesce and submit rather than to traverse the
incontrovertible (Rollon v. Atty. Naraval, A.C. No. 6424,
Mar. 4, 2005).
CONFIDENTIALITY RULE
Confidentiality
It means the relation between lawyer and client or
guardian and ward, or between spouses, with regard
to the trust that is placed in the one by the other
(Blacks Law Dictionary 7th Edition 1990, 2004).
A lawyer shall preserve the confidences and secrets of
his client even after the attorney-client relation is
terminated (CPR, Canon 21).
It is one of the duties of a lawyer, as provided for in the
Rules of Court, to maintain inviolate the confidence,
and at every peril to himself, to preserve the secrets of
his client (RRC, Sec. 20 (e), Rule 138).
51
PRIVILEGED COMMUNICATIONS
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 of which, in 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.
Rule 15.02, Canon 15
A lawyer shall be bound by the rule on privilege
communication in respect of matters disclosed to
him by a prospective client. (2008 Bar Question)
Disclosure of a prospective client
The foregoing disqualification rule applies to
prospective clients of a lawyer. Matters disclosed by a
prospective client to a lawyer are protected by the rule
on privileged communication even if the prospective
client does not thereafter retain the lawyer or the
latter declines the employment. It covers crimes and
offenses already committed by the client.
The reason for this is to make the prospective client
free to discuss whatever he wishes with the lawyer
without fear that what he tells the lawyer will be
divulged or used against him, and for the lawyer to be
equally free to obtain information from the
prospective client (CPR Annotated, PhilJA).
Requisites of privileged communication
1. There is attorney-client relationship or a kind of
consultancy requirement with a prospective
client;
2. The communication was made by the client to the
lawyer in the course of the lawyers professional
employment; and
3. The communication must be intended to be
confidential.
NOTE: The party who avers that the communication is
privileged has the burden of proof to establish the existence
of the privilege unless from the face of the document itself,
it clearly appears that it is privileged. The mere allegation
that the matter is privileged is not sufficient (People v.
Sleeper, G.R. No. 22783, Dec. 3, 1924; Lapena Jr., 2009).
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW
 Legal Ethics
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).
Q: Rosa Mercados husband filed an annulment
against her. Atty. Julito Vitriolo represented her.
Thereafter, a criminal action against her was filed by
the latter for falsification of public document.
According to Atty. Vitriolo, she indicated in the
Certificates of Live Birth of her children that she is
married to a certain Ferdinand Fernandez, and that
their marriage was solemnized on April 11, 1979,
when in truth, she is legally married to Ruben
Mercado and their marriage took place on April 11,
1978. Mercado claims that the criminal complaint
disclosed confidential facts and information relating
to the civil case for annulment handled by Vitriolo as
her counsel. Did Atty. Julito Vitriolo violate the rule
on privileged communication between attorney and
client?
A: The evidence on record fails to substantiate
Mercados allegations. She did not even specify the
alleged communication in confidence disclosed by Atty.
Vitriolo. All of Mercados claims were couched in
general terms and lacked specificity. Without any
testimony from Mercado as to the specific confidential
information allegedly divulged by Atty. Vitriolo
without her consent, it is difficult, if not impossible to
determine if there was any violation of the rule on
privileged communication. It is not enough to merely
assert the attorney-client privilege. The burden of
proving that the privilege applies is placed upon the
party asserting the privilege (Mercado v. Vitrilio, A.C.
No. 5108, May 26, 2005).
Characteristics of privileged communication
1. Attorney-client privilege where legal advice is
professionally sought from an attorney.
2. The client must intend the above communication
to be confidential.
3. Attorney-client privilege embraces all forms of
communication and action.
4. As general rule, attorney-client privilege also
extends to the attorneys secretary, stenographer,
clerk or agent with reference to any fact acquired
in such capacity.
5. The above duty is perpetual and communication
is absolutely privileged from disclosure.
6. Persons entitled to claim privileges
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
2014 GOLDEN NOTES
52
Coverage of the attorney-client privilege
1. Lawyer;
2. Client; and
3. Third persons who by reason of their work have
acquired information about the case being
handled such as:
a. Attorneys secretary, stenographer and
clerk;
b. Interpreter, messengers and agents
transmitting communication; and
c. An accountant, scientist, physician, engineer
who has been hired for effective consultation.
(RRC, Sec. 24(b), Rule 130)
Duration of privileged communication
The privilege continues to exist even after the
termination of the attorney-client relationship.
NOTE: The privilege character of the communication ceases
only when waived by the client himself or after his death, by
his heir or legal representative (Lapena, Jr. 2009).
Instances when communication is not privileged
A communication made by a client to a lawyer is not
privileged in the following instances:
1. After pleading has been filed because such
becomes part of public records.
2. When communication was intended by the
client to be sent to a third person through his
counsel.
3. When the communication sought by client is
intended to aid future crime or perpetration of
fraud.
4. When communication between attorney and
client is heard by a third party.
5. When there is consent or waiver of the client.
6. When the law requires disclosure.
7. When disclosure is made to protect the
lawyers rights .
NOTE: Even if the communication is unprivileged, the rule of
ethics prohibits lawyers from voluntarily revealing or using
to his benefit or to that of a third person, to the disadvantage
of the client, the said communication unless the client
consents thereto (RRC, Sec. 3, Rule 138-A).
 DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF A LAWYER
CONFLICT OF INTEREST
(1991, 1992, 1993, 1994, 1997, 1999, 2000, 2001,
2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2008 Bar Questions)
Rule 15.01, Canon 15
A lawyer, in conferring with a prospective client,
shall ascertain as soon as practicable whether the
matter would involve a conflict with another
client or his own interest, and if so, shall forthwith
inform the prospective client.
Purpose of conflict search
By conducting a conflict search, the lawyer will be able
to determine, in the first instance, if he is barred from
accepting the representation through conflicts with his
present clients or the lawyers own interest (CPR
Annotated, PhilJA).
Three tests to determine existence of conflict of
interest
1. Conflicting Duties - When, on behalf of one
client, it is the attorneys duty to contest for that
which his duty to another client requires him to
oppose or when possibility of such situation will
develop.
2. Invitation of Suspicion - Whether the acceptance
of the new relation will prevent a lawyer from the
full discharge of his duty of undivided fidelity and
loyalty to his client or will invite suspicion of
unfaithfulness or double-dealing in the
performance thereof.
3. Use of Prior Knowledge Obtained - Whether a
lawyer will be called upon in his new relation to
use against the first client any knowledge
acquired in the previous employment.
Types of conflict of interest
1. Concurrent or multiple representations
Generally occurs when a lawyer represents clients
whose objectives are adverse to each other, no
matter how slight or remote such adverse interest
may be.
The tests for concurrent or multiple representations
are:
a. Whether a lawyer is duty-bound to fight for an
issue or claim in behalf of one client and, at the
same time, to oppose that claim for the other
client;
b. Whether the acceptance of a new relation
would prevent the full discharge of the
lawyers duty of undivided fidelity or loyalty to
the client;
c. Whether the acceptance of new relation would
53
invite suspicion of unfaithfulness or double-
dealing in the performance of the lawyers duty
of undivided fidelity and loyalty; and
d. Whether, in the acceptance of a new relation,
the lawyer would be called upon to use against
a client confidential information acquired
through their connection.
2. Sequential or successive representation Involves
representation by a law firm of a present client
who may have an interest adverse to a prior or
former client of the firm. (CPR Annotated, PhilJA)
NOTE: What is material in determining whether there is a
conflict of interest in the representation is probability, not
certainty of conflict. (see discussion on disqualification or
limitation of public officials in practicing law, congruent-
interest representation conflict and adverse-interest
conflict).
Illustration: Existence of conflict of Interest
1. A v. B
A and B are present clients.
2. C v. D; E v. D
C is the present client and D is not a present
client in the same case but is a present client
in another case.
3. F v. G; H v. G
F is the present client and G was a former
client and the cases are related.
1. I v. J; K v. J
I is the present client and J was a former client
in a case that is unrelated.
2. L, M, N v. O, P, Q
L, M, N are present clients but L and
M joins O, P, Q (People v. Davis).
Other instances of conflict of interest
1. A corporate lawyer cannot join a labor union of
employees in that corporation;
2. A lawyer of an insurance corporation who
investigated an accident cannot represent the
complainant/injured person;
3. As a receiver of a corporation, he cannot represent
the creditor;
4. As a representative of the obligor, he cannot
represent the obligee; and
5. As a lawyer representing a party in a compromise
agreement, he cannot, subsequently, be a lawyer
representing another client who seeks to nullify the
agreement.
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW
 Legal Ethics
Being a counsel-of-record of the other party is not a
requisite to be guilty of representing conflicting
interests
To be guilty of representing conflicting interests, a
counsel-of-record of one party need not also be
counsel-of-record of the adverse party. He does not
have to publicly hold himself as the counsel of the
adverse party, nor make his efforts to advance the
adverse party's conflicting interests of record ---
although these circumstances are the most obvious
and satisfactory proof of the charge. It is enough that
the counsel of one party had a hand in the preparation
of the pleading of the other party, claiming adverse
and conflicting interests with that of his original client.
To require that he also be counsel-of-record of the
adverse party would punish only the most obvious
form of deceit and reward, with impunity, the highest
form of disloyalty (Artueza v. Atty. Maderazo, A.C. No.
4354, Apr. 22, 2002).
Q: Mr. X and his father went to the residence of Atty.
Y to seek his advice regarding the problem of the
alleged indebtedness of Mr. X's brother to Caesar's
Palace, a well-known gambling casino at Las Vegas.
Atty. Y assured Mr. X and his father that he would
inquire into the matter, after which his services were
reportedly contracted for P100,000. 00. Several long
distance telephone calls and two trips to Las Vegas by
him elicited the information that indeed Mr. X's
brother has an outstanding account to Caesars but
further investigations revealed that said account had
actually been incurred by Ramon Sy, with Mr. X's
brother merely signing for the chits. Atty. Y
personally talked with the president of Caesar's
Palace and convinced the latters president to go
after Sy instead to which the latter agreed with the
condition that Atty. Y should first convince Sy to pay
the indebtedness to which Atty. Y succeeded. He was
able to free Mr. X's brother from his indebtedness.
Having thus settled the account of Mr. X's brother,
Atty. Y sent several demand letters to Mr. X
demanding the balance of P50,000.00 as attorney's
fees. Mr. X, however, ignored these, thus, Atty. Y filed
a complaint against Mr. X for the collection of
attorney's fees and refund of transport fare and other
expenses. Mr. X claimed, that at the time Atty. Y was
rendering services to Mr. X, he was actually working
"in the interest" and "to the advantage" of Caesar's
Palace of which he was an agent and a consultant.
This being the case, Atty. Y is not justified in claiming
that he rendered legal services to Mr. X in view of the
conflicting interests involved. Did the Atty. Y violate
the conflict of interest rule?
A: No. Generally, an attorney is prohibited from
representing parties with contending positions.
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
2014 GOLDEN NOTES
54
However, at a certain stage of the controversy before
it reaches the court, a lawyer may represent
conflicting interests with the consent of the parties. A
common representation may work to the advantage of
said parties since a mutual lawyer, with honest
motivations and impartially cognizant of the parties'
disparate positions, may well be better situated to
work out an acceptable settlement of their differences,
being free of partisan inclinations and acting with the
cooperation and confidence of said parties. A lawyer is
entitled to have and receive the just and reasonable
compensation for services rendered at the special
instance and request of his client and as long as he is
honestly and in good faith trying to serve and
represent the interests of his client, the latter is bound
to pay his just fees (Dee v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No.
77439, Aug. 24, 1989).
Rule when the lawyer of the corporation and the
board of directors of such corporation is the same
The interest of the corporate client is paramount and
should not be influenced by any interest of the
individual corporate officials. A lawyer engaged as
counsel for a corporation cannot represent members
of the same corporation's Board of Directors in a
derivative suit brought against them. To do so would
be tantamount to representing conflicting interests
which is prohibited by the Code of Professional
Responsibility (Hornilla v. Atty. Salunat, A.C. No. 5804,
July 1, 2003).
Q: Six months ago, Atty. Z was consulted by A, about
a four-door apartment in Manila left by her deceased
parents. A complained that her two siblings, B and C,
who were occupying two units of the apartment,
were collecting the rentals from the other two units
and refusing to give her any part thereof. Atty. Z
advised A to first seek the intervention of her
relatives and told her that if this failed, he would take
legal action as A asked him to do. B asks Atty. Z to
defend him in a suit brought by A against him (B) and
C through another counsel. Should Atty. Z accept the
case?
A: No. When A consulted him about her complaint
against B and C, a lawyer-client relationship was
created between A and Atty. Z. Atty. Z cannot
subsequently represent B against A in a matter he was
consulted about. This constitutes conflict of interest. It
does not matter if Atty. Z is not handling the case for
A.
Q: Should Atty. Z tell B that A consulted him earlier
about the same case? Why? (2002 Bar Question)
 DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF A LAWYER
A: Yes. Rule 21.07 of the CPR provides that "a lawyer
shall not reveal that he has been consulted about a
particular case except to avoid possible conflict of
interest. In this case, he has to reveal to B that he had
been consulted by A on the case that B if offering to
retain his services, in order to avoid a possible conflict
of interest.
Rule 15.03, Canon 15
A lawyer shall not represent conflicting interests
except by written consent of all concerned given
after a full disclosure of the facts.
GR: An attorney cannot represent diverse interests. It
is highly improper to represent both sides of an issue.
The proscription against representation of conflicting
interest finds application where the conflicting
interest arise with respect to the same general matter
and is applicable however slight such adverse interest
may be. It applies although the attorneys intention
and motives were honest and he acted in good faith.
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).
NOTE: A lawyer may at a certain stage of the controversy and
before it reaches the court represent conflicting interests
with the express written consent of all parties concerned
given after disclosure of the facts. The disclosure should
include an explanation of the effects of the dual
representation, such as the possible revelation or use of
confidential information.
An attorney owes loyalty to his client not only in the case in
which he has represented him but also after relation of
attorney and client has terminated.
Instances when lawyers cannot represent conflicting
interest even if the consent of both clients were
secured
Where the conflict is:
1. Between the attorneys interest and that of a
client; or
2. Between a private clients interests and that
of the government or any of its
instrumentalities.
Effects of representing adverse interests (DJ-FAC)
1. Disqualification as counsel of new client on
petition of former client;
2. Where such is unknown to, and becomes
prejudicial to the interests of the new client, a
Judgment against such may, on that ground, be
55
set aside;
3. The attorneys right to Fees may be defeated if
found to be related to such conflict and such was
objected to by the former client, or if there was a
concealment and prejudice by reason of the
attorneys previous professional relationship with
the opposite party;
4. A lawyer can be held Administratively liable
through disciplinary action and may be held
Criminally liable for betrayal of trust.
Q: Huey Company and Dewey Corporation are both
retainer clients of Atty. Anama. He is the corporate
secretary of Huey Company. He represents Dewey
Corporation in three pending litigation cases. Dewey
Corporation wants to file a civil case against Huey
Company and has requested Atty. Anama to handle
the case. What are the options available to Atty.
Anama? Explain your answer.
A:
1. To decline the case because to do so will constitute
representing conflicting interests. It is unethical for a
lawyer to represent a client in a case against another
client in the same case.
2. To accept to file the case against Huey Company,
after full disclosure to both retained clients and upon
their express and written consent. The written consent
may free him from the charge of representing
conflicting interests, because written consent
amounts to a release by the clients of the lawyers
obligation not to represent conflicting interests.
Q: If you were Atty. Anama, which option would you
take? Explain.
A: If I were Atty. Anama, I will choose the first option
and inhibit myself in the case as both entities are my
clients. The conflict of interests between the
contending clients may reach such a point that,
notwithstanding their consent to the common
representation, the lawyer may be suspected of
disloyalty by one client. His continuing to act in a
double capacity strikes deeply in the foundation of the
attorney-client relationship.
Rule 15.04, Canon 15
A lawyer may, with the written consent of all
concerned, act as mediator, conciliator or
arbitrator in setting the disputes.
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW
 Legal Ethics
CANDID AND HONEST ADVICE TO CLIENTS
Rule 15.05, Canon 15
A lawyer when advising his client, shall give a
candid and honest opinion on the merits and
probable results of the clients case, neither
overstating nor understating the prospects of the
case.
Q: Consorcia Rollon went to the office of Atty. Camilo
Naraval to seek his assistance in a case filed against
her by Rosita Julaton for Collection of Sum of Money
with Prayer for Attachment. After going over the
documents she brought with her, Atty. Naraval
agreed to be her lawyer and she was required to pay
P8,000.00 for the filing and partial service fee. Atty.
Naraval did not inform her that the said civil suit has
been decided against her and which judgment has
long become final and executory.
Atty. Naraval was not able to act on the case. Because
of this, Rollon wanted to withdraw the amount she
has paid and to retrieve the documents pertaining to
said case. Unfortunately, despite several follow-ups,
Atty. Naraval always said that he cannot return the
documents because they were in their house, and
that he could not give her back the P8,000.00 because
he has no money. Did Atty. Naraval fail to fulfill his
undertakings?
A: Yes. Despite his full knowledge of the finality based
on the documents furnished to him, Atty. Naraval
withheld such vital information and did not properly
appraise Rollon. He should have given her a candid and
honest opinion on the merits and the status of the case
but he withheld such vital information. He did not
inform her about the finality of the adverse judgment.
Instead, he demanded P8,000 as filing and service
fee and thereby gave her hope that her case would
be acted upon.
Rule 15.05 of the Code of Professional Responsibility
requires that lawyers give their candid and best
opinion to their clients on the merit or lack of merit of
the case, neither overstating nor understating their
evaluation thereof. Knowing whether a case would
have some prospect of success is not only a function,
but also an obligation on the part of lawyers. If they
find that their client's cause is defenseless, then it is
their bounden duty to advise the latter to acquiesce
and submit, rather than to traverse the
incontrovertible (Rollon v. Naraval, A.C. No. 6424, Mar.
4, 2005).
Rule 15.06, Canon 15
A lawyer shall not state or imply that he is able to
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
2014 GOLDEN NOTES
56
influence any public official, tribunal or legislative
body.
This rule is known as INFLUENCE-PEDDLING. It is
improper for a lawyer to show in any way that he has
connections and can influence any tribunal or public
official, judges, prosecutors, congressmen and others,
especially so if the purpose is to enhance his legal
standing and to entrench the confidence of the client
that his case or cases are assured of victory.
Q: In a case for inhibition filed against Judge Paas, it
was found that her husband, Atty. Renerio Paas, was
using his wife's office as his office address in his law
practice. Judge Paas admitted that Atty. Paas did use
her office as his return address for notices and orders
in 2 criminal cases, lodged at the Pasay City RTC, but
only to ensure and facilitate delivery of those notices,
but after the cases were terminated, all notices were
sent to his office address in Escolta. Was Atty. Paas
act of using his wifes office as his office address
unprofessional and dishonorable?
A: Yes. By allowing Atty. Paas to use the address of her
court in pleadings before other courts, Judge Paas had
indeed allowed her husband to ride on her prestige for
the purpose of advancing his private interest.
Atty. Paas is guilty of simple misconduct because of
using a fraudulent, misleading, and deceptive address
that had no purpose other than to try to impress either
the court in which his cases are lodged, or his client,
that he has close ties to a member of the judiciary, in
violation of the Code of Professional Responsibility.
The need for relying on the merits of a lawyer's case,
instead of banking on his relationship with a member
of the bench which tends to influence or gives the
appearance of influencing the court, cannot be
overemphasized. It is unprofessional and dishonorable,
to say the least, to misuse a public office to enhance a
lawyer's prestige. Public confidence in law and lawyers
may be eroded by such reprehensible and improper
conduct (Paas v. Almarvez, A.M. No. P-03-1690, Apr. 4,
2003).
COMPLIANCE WITH LAWS
Rule 15.07, Canon 15
A lawyer shall impress upon his client compliance
with the laws and the principle of fairness.
Q: Maria Cielo Suzuki entered into contracts of sale
and real estate mortgage with several persons. The
sale and mortgage transactions were facilitated by
Atty. Erwin Tiamson, counsel of the sellers. Suzuki
paid P80,000 as her share in the expenses for
 DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF A LAWYER
registration. He retained in his possession the subject
deeds of absolute sale and mortgage as well as the
owner's copy of the title. However, he never
registered the said documents and did not cause the
transfer of the title over the subject property in the
name of Suzuki. Atty. Tiamson said that he did not
register the deed of sale to protect the interest of his
client and even if the same has been registered, he
cannot give him the owner's duplicate copy until
purchase price for the subject property has been fully
paid and the real estate mortgage cancelled. Is Atty.
Tiamson justified in not registering the transaction?
A: No. Rule 15.07 obliges lawyers to impress upon
their clients compliance with the laws and the
principle of fairness. To permit lawyers to resort to
unscrupulous practices for the protection of the
supposed rights of their clients is to defeat one of the
purposes of the State, the administration of justice.
While lawyers owe their entire devotion to the interest
of their clients and zeal in the defense of their client's
right, they should not forget that they are, first and
foremost, officers of the court, bound to exert every
effort to assist in the speedy and efficient
administration of justice. The client's interest is amply
protected by the real estate mortgage executed by
complainant. Thus, Atty. Tiamson failed to live up to
this expectation (Suzuki v. Tiamson, A.C. No. 6542,
Sept. 30, 2005).
CONCURRENT PRACTICE OF ANOTHER PROFESSION
Rule 15.08, Canon 15
A lawyer who is engaged in another profession or
occupation concurrently with the practice of law
shall make clear to his client whether he is acting
as a lawyer or in another capacity.
This rule is intended to avoid confusion; it is for the
benefit of both the client and the lawyer (Funa, 2009).
NOTE: The lawyer should inform the client when he is acting
as a lawyer and when he is not, because certain ethical
considerations governing the client-lawyer relationship may
be operative in one case and not in the other (Report of the
IBP Committee, p.84).
A partys engagement of his counsel in another capacity
concurrent with the practice of law is not prohibited, so long
as the roles being assumed by such counsel is made clear to
the client (New Sampaguita Builder Construction, Inc. v.
Philippine National Bank, G.R. No. 148753, July 30, 2004).
57
CLIENTS MONEYS AND PROPERTIES
Canon 16
A lawyer shall hold in trust all moneys and properties of
his client that may come into his possession
Money collected by the lawyer on a judgment
favorable to his client constitute trust funds and
should be immediately paid over to the client. While
Section 37, Rule 138 of the Rules of Court grants the
lawyer a lien upon the funds, documents and papers
of his client, which have lawfully come into his
possession, such that he may retain the same until his
lawful fees and disbursements have been paid, and
apply such funds to the satisfaction thereof, the lawyer
still has the responsibility to promptly account to his
client for such moneys received. Failure to do so
constitutes professional misconduct.
The lawyers failure to turn over such funds, moneys,
or properties to the client despite the latters demands
give rise to the presumption that the lawyer had
converted the money for his personal use and benefit.
This failure also renders the lawyer vulnerable to
judicial contempt under Section 25, Rule 138 of the
Rules of Court (CPR Annotated, PhilJA).
Q: Luis de Guzman as defendant in a civil case,
obtained an adverse judgment. His counsel was Atty.
Emmanuel Basa. He wants to challenge the decision
through a petition for certiorari. It was agreed that
Luis will pay P15,000 for said legal service. Atty. Basa
collected a down payment of P5,000. However, no
such petition was filed. He did not seasonably file
with the CA the required appellants brief resulting in
the dismissal of the appeal. Despite several
extensions to file the appellants brief, Atty. Basa
failed to do so. Instead, he filed two more motions for
extension. When he filed the appellants brief, it was
late, being beyond the last extension granted by the
appellate court. Was Atty. Emmanuel Basa negligent
in the performance of his professional duty to Luis de
Guzman?
A: Yes, he is guilty of gross misconduct. Where a client
gives money to his lawyer for a specific purpose, such
as to file an action or appeal an adverse judgment, the
lawyer should, upon failure to take such step and
spend the money for it, immediately return the money
to his client. His unjustified withholding of Luis money
is a gross violation of the general morality and
professional ethics (De Guzman v. Atty. Emmanuel
Basa, A.C. No. 5554, June 29, 2004).
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW
 Legal Ethics
Prohibition of a Lawyer acquiring client property
Pursuant to Canon 16 of the Code of Professional
Responsibility.
Furthermore, Article 1491 of the Civil Code states that:
The following persons cannot acquire
or purchase, even at public or judicial
auction, either in person or through the
mediation of another:
xxx
(5) lawyers, with respect to the property
and rights which may be the object of any
litigation in which they take part by virtue
of their profession. (see NCC)
NOTE: This prohibition is entirely independent of fraud and
such need not be alleged or proven. Art. 1491 (5) of the NCC
applies only if the sale or assignment of the property takes
place during the pendency of the litigation involving the
clients property (Ramos v. Ngaseo, A.C. No. 6210, Dec. 9,
2004).
FIDUCIARY RELATIONSHIP
Rule 16.01, Canon 1
A lawyer shall account for all money or property
collected or received for or from the client.
A lawyer must be scrupulously careful in handling
money entrusted to him in his professional capacity,
because of the high degree of fidelity and good faith
expected on his part (Medina v. Bautista, A.C. No. 190,
Sept. 26, 1964).
Lawyers inexcusable act of withholding the property
of client and imposing unwarranted fees in exchange
for release of documents deserve the imposition of
disciplinary action (Miranda v. Carpio, A.C. No. 6281,
September 26, 2011).
Q: X sought assistance to the President of the IBP to
enable him to talk to Atty. U who had allegedly been
avoiding him for more than a year. Atty. U failed to
turnover to his client the amount given to him by X
as settlement for a civil case. Is Atty. U guilty for
violating Canon 16 of the Code of Professional
Responsibility?
A: Yes. The Code of Professional Responsibility
mandates every lawyer to hold in trust all money and
properties of his client that may come into his
possession. A lawyers failure to return upon demand
the funds or property held by him on behalf of his
client gives rise to the presumption that he has
appropriated the same for his own use to the prejudice
of, and in violation of the trust reposed in him by, his
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
2014 GOLDEN NOTES
58
client. The relation between attorney and client is
highly fiduciary in nature. Being such, it requires
utmost good faith, loyalty, fidelity and
disinterestedness on the part of the attorney. Its
fiduciary nature is intended for the protection of the
client (Espiritu vs. Ulep, A.C. No. 5808, May 4, 2005).
Fiduciary duty
The principle that an attorney derives no undue
advantage that may operate to the prejudice or cause
an occasion for loss of a client. The relationship
between the lawyer and client is one of mutual trust
and confidence of the highest degree.
Instances when civil liability arises
1. Client is prejudiced by lawyer's negligence or
misconduct;
2. Breach of fiduciary obligation;
3. Civil liability to third persons;
4. Libelous words in pleadings;
5. violation of communication privilege;
6. Liability for costs of suit (Treble Costs) when
lawyer is made liable for insisting on client's
patently unmeritorious case or interposing appeal
merely to delay litigation
Remedy of the client
Recover property from lawyer, together with its fruits,
subject to clients returning to his lawyer the purchase
price thereof and the legal interests thereon.
Exemption from liability
A lawyer is exempted from liability for slander, libel or
for words otherwise defamatory, published in the
course of judicial proceedings, provided the
statements are connected with, relevant, pertinent
and material to the cause in hand or subject of inquiry.
NOTE: Test of relevancy The matter to which the privilege
does not extend must be palpably wanting in relation to the
subject of controversy, that no reasonable man can doubt its
relevancy or propriety.
Criminal liability of lawyers
A lawyer may be held criminally liable if he commits
any of the following:
1. Causing prejudice to the client thru malicious
breach of professional duty or thru inexcusable
negligence or ignorance;
2. Revealing clients secrets learned in lawyers
professional capacity thru malicious breach of
professional duty or inexcusable negligence or
 DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF A LAWYER
ignorance;
3. A lawyer who has undertaken the defense of a
client or has received confidential information from
said client in a case may be criminally liable for
undertaking defense of opposing party in same
cause without consent of first client; (RPC, Art. 209)
4. A lawyer who shall knowingly introduce in
evidence in any judicial proceeding or to the
damage of another or who, with intent to cause
such damage, shall use any false document may be
held criminally liable therefor; (RPC, Art. 172) and
5. A lawyer who is appropriates his clients funds
may be held liable for estafa.
NOTE: When a lawyer collects or receives money from his
client for a particular purpose, he should promptly
account to the client how the money was spent. His
failure either to render an accounting or to return the
money (if the intended purpose of the money does not
materialize) constitutes a blatant disregard of Rule 16.01
of the CPR (Belleza v. Malaca, A.C. No. 7815, July 23,
2009).
Costs of Suit
GR: Losing client and not the lawyer is liable for costs
of suit in favor of prevailing party, the lawyer not being
a party-litigant.
XPN: Where the lawyer insisted on clients patently
unmeritorious case or interposed an appeal to delay
litigation or thwart prompt satisfaction of prevailing
partys just and valid claim, the court may adjudge
lawyer to pay treble costs of suit.
CO-MINGLING OF FUNDS
Rule 16.02, Canon 16
A lawyer shall keep the funds of each client
separate and apart from his own and those of
others kept by him.
Failure of the lawyer to account all the funds and
property of his client which may come into his
possession would amount to misappropriation which
may subject him to disbarment on the ground of grave
misconduct or a criminal prosecution for estafa under
Art. 315, par. 1(b) of the RPC.
Q: BPI filed two complaints for replevin and damages
against Esphar Medical Center Inc. and its President
Cesar Espiritu. Espiritu engaged the services of Atty.
Juan Cabredo IV. While these cases were pending in
court, the latter advised Esphar to remit money and
update payments to the bank through the trial court.
59
Accordingly, Esphar's representative delivered a total
of P51,161 to Atty. Cabredo's office. However, the
management of Esphar found out that he did not
deliver said money to the court or to the bank. Did
Atty. Caredo commit a breach of trust?
A: Yes. His act amounted to deceit in violation of his
oath. The relationship between a lawyer and a client is
highly fiduciary; it requires a high degree of fidelity and
good faith. Hence, in dealing with trust property, a
lawyer should be very scrupulous. Money or other
trust property of the client coming into the possession
of the lawyer should be reported by the latter and
account any circumstances, and should not be
commingled with his own or be used by him (Espiritu
v. Cabredo, A.C. No. 5831, Jan. 13, 2003).
DELIVERY OF FUNDS
Rule 16.03, Canon 16
A lawyer shall deliver the funds and property of
his client when due or 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. He shall also
have a lien to the same extent on all judgments
and executions he has secured for his client as
provided for in the Rules of Court.
Counsel cannot unilaterally retain clients property
for his attorneys lien
A counsel has no right to retain or appropriate
unilaterally as lawyers lien any amount belonging to
his client which may come into his possession (Cabigao
v. Rodrigo, Aug. 9, 1932).
NOTE: While this rule provides that the lawyer has the right
to retain the funds of his client as may be necessary to satisfy
his lawful fees and disbursements known as attorneys lien
and his lien to the same extent on all judgments and
executions he has secured for his client called charging lien,
he is still duty bound to render an accounting of his
clients funds and property which may come into his
possession in the course of his professional employment In
the application of attorneys lien, a lawyer shall give notice
to his client otherwise, the same might be construed as
misappropriation which may subject him to disciplinary
action (Antiquiera, 2007).
Q: Fernandez engaged the services of Atty. Cabrera II
to handle the cases of her associates in Baguio City.
After taking hold of the records of the cases that
Fernandez entrusted to him and after getting initially
paid for the services he would render, Atty. Cabrera
II suddenly disappeared and could no longer be
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW
 Legal Ethics
located in his given address or in the addresses that
Fernandez gathered. Did Atty. Cabrera II violate the
Code of Professional Responsibility when he
accepted the records and money of the complainant
and thereafter failed to render his services?
A: Yes. Acceptance of money from a client establishes
an attorney-client relationship and gives rise to the
duty of fidelity to the client's cause. The Canons of
Professional Responsibility require that once an
attorney agrees to handle a case, he should undertake
the task with zeal, care, and utmost devotion.
Atty. Cabrera's action projects his appalling
indifference to his client's cause and a brazen
disregard of his duties as a lawyer. Not only did he fail
to render service of any kind, he also absconded with
the records of the cases with which he was entrusted.
Then to top it all, he kept the money complainant paid
to him. Such conduct is unbecoming of a member of
the bar, for a lawyer's professional and personal
conduct must at all times be kept beyond reproach and
above suspicion. The duty of a lawyer is to uphold the
integrity and dignity of the legal profession at all times.
This can only be done by faithfully performing the
lawyer's duties to society, to the bar, to the courts and
to his clients (Fernandez v. Atty. Cabrera II, A.C. No.
5623, Dec. 11, 2003).
BORROWING OR LENDING
Rule 16.04, Canon 16
A lawyer shall not borrow money from his client
unless the client's interest are fully protected by
the nature of the case or by independent advice.
Neither shall a lawyer lend money to a client
except, when in the interest of justice, he has to
advance necessary expenses in a legal matter he
is handling for the client.
A lawyer who takes advantage of his clients financial
plight to acquire the latters properties for his own
benefit is of the confidence of the public in the fidelity,
honesty and integrity of the legal profession
(Hernandez, Jr. v. Go A.C. No. 1526, January 2005).
Prohibition from borrowing money from client
GR: A lawyer is not allowed to borrow money from his
client.
XPN: The clients interests are fully protected by the
nature of the case or by independent advice.
Prohibition of lending money to client
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
2014 GOLDEN NOTES
60
GR: A lawyer is not allowed to lend money to his client.
XPN: When in the interest of justice, he has to advance
necessary expenses in a legal matter he is handling for
the client (CPR, Rule 16.04).
NOTE: Prohibition from lending is intended to assure the
lawyers independent professional judgment, for if the
lawyer acquires a financial interest in the outcome of the
case the free exercise of his judgment may be adversely
affected
Q: Atty. Lozada was the retained counsel and legal
adviser of Frias to which all documents and titles of
properties of the latter were entrusted to. Atty.
Lozada persuaded Frias to sell her house, the former
acting as broker since she was in need of money. Dra.
San Diego, the prospective buyer then handed 2
million in cash and 1 million in check and out of the 2
million, Atty. Lozada took 1 million as her commission
without Frias consent. When Dra. San Diego backed
out from the sale, Frias tried to recover from Atty.
Lozada the title to the property and other documents
but Atty. Lozada started avoiding her. Dra. San Diego
filed a case against Frias to return the 3 million she
paid plus interest. Frias claimed that her failure to
return the money was because of Atty. Lozadas
refusal to give back the 1 million she took as
commission. A case was filed by Frias against Atty.
Lozada but despite the favourable decision,
respondent refused to return the money.
Atty. Lozada claimed that since she did not have
enough money, Frias requested her to sell or
mortgage the property and offered her a loan,
commission and attorneys fees on the basis of the
selling price. He denied that Frias previously
demanded the return of 1 million until the civil case
against her was instituted in which she expressed her
willingness to pay the 900,000 plus agreed interest.
Did Atty. Lozada commit a violation of the Code of
Professional Responsibility in asking for a loan from
her client?
A: Yes. Her act of borrowing money from a client was
a violation of Canon 16.04 of the Code of Professional
Responsibility.
A lawyers act of asking a client for a loan, as what
respondent did, is very unethical. It comes within
those acts considered as abuse of clients confidence.
The canon presumes that the client is disadvantaged
by the lawyers ability to use all the legal maneuverings
to renege on her obligation (Frias v. Lozada, A.C. NO.
6656, Dec. 13, 2005).
NOTE: The principle behind Rule 16.04 is to prevent the
lawyer from taking advantage of his influence over the client
 DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF A LAWYER
or to avoid acquiring a financial interest in the outcome of
the case.
FIDELITY TO CLIENTS CAUSE
Canon 17
A lawyer owes fidelity to the cause of his client and
he shall be mindful of the trust and confidence
reposed in him.
Q: Matias Lagramada residing with his uncle,
Apolonio Lagramada, was invited by the latter to
accompany him to the police station, supposedly to
pick up a refrigerator they were to repair. Upon their
arrival there, Matias was immediately taken in and
locked behind bars. Two information were filed
against him only 10 months after the first day of his
incarceration. With the assistance of counsel, Matias
pleaded not guilty when arraigned, without raising
the invalidity of the arrest. Was the case properly
handled?
A: No. Lawyers owe fidelity to the cause of their clients
and must be mindful of the trust and confidence
reposed in them. Matias counsel, in the spirit of
safeguarding his clients rights, should have taken the
necessary steps to correct the situation. However, he
allowed his client to enter a plea during the latters
arraignment without raising the invalidity of arrest.
Thus, the former effectively waived his clients right to
question its validity. Defense counsels are expected to
spare no effort to save the accused from unrighteous
incarcerations.
Matias counsel should have not only perfunctorily
represented his client during the pendency of the case,
but should have kept in mind his duty to render
effective legal assistance and true service by
protecting the latters rights at all times (People v.
Lagramada, G.R. Nos. 146357 & 148170, Aug. 29,
2002).
COMPETENCE AND DILIGENCE
Canon 18
A lawyer shall serve his client with competence
and diligence.
Diligence is the attention and care required of a person in a
given situation and is the opposite of negligence. It is
axiomatic in the practice of law that the price of success is
eternal diligence to the cause of the client (Edquibal v. Ferrer,
A.C. No. 5687, Feb. 3, 2005).
Degree of diligence required in the profession
The legal profession demands of a lawyer that degree
61
of vigilance and attention of a good father of a family
(Lapena, 2009) or ordinary pater familias (Pineda,
2009). He is not required to exercise extraordinary
diligence (Edquibal v. Ferrer, Jr., A.C. No. 5687, Feb. 3,
2005).
Q: In a criminal case for rape with homicide, the
accused pleaded guilty. However, the three PAO
lawyers assigned as counsel de officio did not advise
their client of the consequences of pleading guilty;
one PAO lawyer left the courtroom during trial and
thus was not able to cross-examine the prosecution
witnesses. The other postponed the presentation of
evidence for the defense, and when he appeared, he
said he would rely solely on the plea of guilty, in the
belief that it would lower the penalty to reclusion
perpetua. Should the three PAO lawyers be
disciplined?
A: Yes. All three (3) of them displayed manifest
disinterest on the plight of their client. They lacked
vigor and dedication to their work. Canon 18 of the
Code of Professional Responsibility requires every
lawyer to serve his client with utmost dedication,
competence and diligence. He must not neglect a legal
matter entrusted to him, and his negligence in this
regard renders him administratively liable. Obviously,
in the instant case, the defense lawyers did not protect,
much less uphold, the fundamental rights of the
accused. Instead, they haphazardly performed their
function as counsel de officio to the detriment and
prejudice of the accused Sevilleno, however guilty he
might have been found to be after trial (People v.
Sevilleno, G.R. No. 129058, Mar. 29, 1999).
ADEQUATE PREPARATION
Rule 18.02, Canon 18
A lawyer shall not handle any legal matter
without adequate preparation.
A lawyer should prepare his pleadings with great care
and circumspection. He should refrain from using
abrasive and offensive language, for it merely weakens
rather than strengthens the force of legal reasoning
and detracts from its persuasiveness. In preparing a
complaint for damages, counsel for plaintiff should
allege and state the specific amounts claimed not only
in the body of the complaint but also in the prayer, so
that the proper docket fees can be assessed and paid
(Fernandez v. Atty. Novero, A.C. No. 5394, Dec. 2,
2002).
The counsel must constantly keep in mind that his
actions or omissions, even malfeasance and
nonfeasance would be binding to his client. Verily, a
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW
 Legal Ethics
lawyer owes to the client the exercise of utmost
prudence and responsibility in representation
(Fernandez v. Atty. Novero, A.C. No. 5394, Dec. 2,
2002).
NEGLIGENCE
Rule 18.03, Canon 18
A lawyer shall not neglect a legal matter
entrusted to him and his negligence in connection
therewith shall render him liable. (1998, 2002 Bar
Questions)
A lawyer is enjoined not to neglect a legal matter
entrusted to him, and his negligence in connection
therewith shall render him liable. It is the duty of the
lawyer to serve his client with competence and
diligence and he should exert his best efforts to
protect within the bounds of the law, the interest of
his client (Vda. De Enriquez v. San Jose, 516 SCRA 486,
2007).
Negligence of a lawyer
What amounts to carelessness or negligence in a
lawyers discharge of his duty to client is incapable of
exact formulation. It will depend upon the
circumstances of the case. Also, when he failed to
comply with the clear provisions of the law and the
rules.
Instances of negligence by attorneys
Failure to appeal to CA despite instructions by the
client to do so constitutes inexcusable negligence on
the part of the counsel (Abiero v. Juanino, A.C. No.
5302, Feb.18, 2005).
Even if a lawyer was "honestly and sincerely"
protecting the interests of his client, the former still
had no right to waive the appeal without the latter's
knowledge and consent (Abay v. Atty. Montesino, A.C.
No. 5718, Dec. 4, 2003).
Q: As an incident in the main case, Velasquez
appointed his counsel as attorney-in-fact to
represent him at the pre-trial. Counsel failed to
appear, hence Velasquez was declared in default. The
order of default was received by counsel but no steps
were taken to have it lifted or set aside. Decide.
A: It is binding on Velasquez who is himself guilty of
negligence when, after executing the special power of
attorney in favor of his lawyer, he left for abroad and
apparently paid no further attention to his case until
he received the decision. There is therefore no fraud,
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
2014 GOLDEN NOTES
62
accident, mistake or excusable negligence which will
warrant a lifting of the order of default. As a general
rule, a client is bound by the mistakes of his counsel;
more so by the result of his own negligence
Q: Are the mistakes or negligence of a lawyer binding
upon the client? (1998, 2000, 2002 Bar Questions)
GR: Client is bound by attorneys conduct, negligence
and mistake in handling a case or in the management
of litigation and in procedural technique, and he
cannot complain that the result might have been
different had his lawyer proceeded differently.
XPNs: (LIPIG)
1. Lack of acquaintance with technical aspect of
procedure;
2. When adherence thereto results in
outright deprivation of clients liberty or property
or where Interest of justice so requires;
3. Where error by counsel is Purely technical which
does not substantially affect clients cause;
4. Ignorance, incompetence, or inexperience of
lawyer is so great and error so serious that client,
who has a good cause, is prejudiced and denied a
day in court;
5. Gross negligence of lawyer.
NOTE: If by reason of the lawyers negligence, actual loss has
been caused to his client, the latter has a cause of action
against him for damages. However, for the lawyer to be held
liable, his failure to exercise reasonable care, skill and
diligence must be proximate cause of the loss.
COLLABORATING COUNSEL
Rule 18.01, Canon 18
A lawyer shall not undertake a legal service which
he knows or should know that he is not qualified
to render. However, he may render such service if,
with the consent of his client, he can obtain as
collaborating counsel a lawyer who is competent
on the matter.
The lawyers acceptance, whether for a fee or not, is
an implied representation that he possesses the
requisite degree of academic learning, skill and ability
to handle the case.
He is therefore directed not to take legal services,
which he knows or should know he is not qualified or
competent to render except if his client consents, the
lawyer can take as collaborating counsel another
lawyer who is competent on the matter.
 DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF A LAWYER
Collaborating Counsel
One who is subsequently engaged to assist a lawyer
already handling a particular case for a client (Pineda,
2009).
NOTE: The handling lawyer cannot just take another counsel
without the consent of the client. The new lawyer on the
other hand cannot just enter his appearance as collaborating
counsel without the conformity of the first counsel.
DUTY TO APPRISE CLIENT
Rule 18.04, Canon 18
A lawyer shall keep the client informed of the
status of his case and shall respond within a
reasonable time to the clients request for
information.
A lawyer should notify his client of the adverse
decision while within the period to appeal to enable
the client to decide whether to seek an appellate
review. He should communicate with him concerning
the withdrawal of appeal with all its adverse
consequences. The client is entitled to the fullest
disclosure of the mode or manner by which his interest
is defended or why certain steps are taken or omitted.
Q: Spouses Garcia engaged the services of Atty.
Rolando Bala to appeal to the CA the adverse
Decision of the Department of Agrarian Relations
Adjudication Board (DARAB). Instead, he erroneously
filed a Notice of Appeal. During one instance when
the spouses had called on him to ask for a copy of the
supposed appeal, Atty. Bala uttered unsavory words
against them. Because of his error, the prescribed
period for filing the petition lapsed, to the prejudice
of his clients. Did Atty. Bala violate any ethical rules?
A: Yes. Rule 18.04 states that a "lawyer shall keep the
client informed of the status of his case and shall
respond within a reasonable time to the client's
request for information." Accordingly, the spouses had
the right to be updated on the developments and
status of the case for which they had engaged the
services of Atty. Bala. But he apparently denied them
that right. Having become aware of the wrong remedy
he had erroneously taken, he purposely evaded his
clients, refused to update them on the appeal, and
misled them as to his whereabouts. Moreover, he
uttered invectives at them when they visited him for
an update on the case (Spouses Garcia v. Bala, A.C. No.
5039, Nov. 25, 2005).
NOTE: The lawyer is obliged to respond within a reasonable
time to a client's request for information. A client is entitled
to the fullest disclosure of the mode or manner by which that
client's interest is defended or why certain steps are taken
63
or omitted. A lawyer who repeatedly fails to answer the
inquiries or communications of a client violates the rules of
professional courtesy and neglects the client's interests
(Villariasa-Reisenbeck v. Abarrientos, A.C. No. 6238, Nov. 4,
2004).
Doctrine of imputed knowledge
The knowledge acquired by an attorney during the
time that he is acting within the scope of his authority
is imputed to the client. It is based on the assumption
that an attorney, who has notice of matter affecting
his client, has communicated the same to his principal
in the course of professional dealings.
NOTE: The doctrine applies regardless of whether or not the
lawyer actually communicated to the client what he learned
in his professional capacity, the attorney and his client being
one judicial person.
Notice to counsel is notice to client, but not vice versa
if the latter appeared by attorney
GR: The law requires that service of any notice upon a
party who has appeared by attorney shall be made
upon his attorney. Notice sent to a party who has
appeared by counsel is not notice in law, it being
immaterial that the client actually received the notice
or volunteered to get a copy thereof.
XPNs:
1. Strict application might foster dangerous collusion
to the detriment of justice;
2. Service of notice upon party instead of upon his
attorney is ordered by the court;
3. Notice of pre-trial is required to be served upon
parties and their respective lawyers;
4. In appeal from the lower court to the RTC, upon
docketing of appeal.
REPRESENTATION WITH ZEAL
WITHIN LEGAL BOUNDS
Canon 19
A lawyer shall represent his client with zeal
within the bounds of the law
When a lawyer accepts a case, whether for a fee or not,
his acceptance is an implied representation that he:
(CASE)
1. will exercise reasonable and ordinary Care and
diligence in the pursuit or defense of the case;
2. will possess the requisite degree of Academic
learning, skill and ability in the practice of his
profession;
3. will take steps as will adequately Safeguard his
clients interests; and
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW
 Legal Ethics
4. will Exert his best judgment in the prosecution
or defense of the litigation entrusted to him.
(Islas v. Platon, G.R. No. L-23183, Dec. 29,
1924).
Authority to appear in court is presumed
GR: A lawyer is presumed to be properly authorized to
represent any cause in which he appears.
XPN: On motion of either party and on reasonable
grounds, the presiding judge may require an attorney
to prove the authority under which he appears (RRC,
Rule 138, Sec. 21).
Voluntary appearance of lawyer without authority
An attorney may not appear for a person until he is in
fact employed by, or retained for such person. An
attorney willfully appearing in court for a person
without being employed, unless by leave of court, may
be punished for contempt as an officer of the court,
who has misbehaved in his official transactions (Rule
138, Sec. 26).
Effects of unauthorized appearance
1. The party represented is not bound by attorneys
appearance in the case neither by the judgment
rendered therein;
2. Court does not acquire jurisdiction over the
person of the party represented;
3. The adverse party who has been forced to litigate
as a defendant by the unauthorized action on the
part of the attorney for the plaintiff may, on that
ground, move for the dismissal of the complaint;
and
4. If unauthorized appearance is willful, attorney
may be cited for contempt as an officer of the
court who has misbehaved in his official
transactions, and he may be disciplined for
professional misconduct.
Ratification of unauthorized appearance
1. Express Categorized assertion by client that he
has authorized a lawyer or that he confirms his
authorization to represent him in the case.
2. Implied Where party with knowledge of fact that
a lawyer has been representing him in a case,
accepts benefits of representation or fails to
promptly repudiate the assumed authority.
Requisites of implied ratification by silence
1. The party represented by the attorney is of age or
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
2014 GOLDEN NOTES
64
competent or if he suffers from any disability, he
has a duly appointed guardian or legal
representative;
2. The party or his guardian, as the case may be, is
aware of the attorneys representation; and
3. He fails to promptly repudiate assumed authority.
Extent of lawyers authority in litigation
A lawyer has authority to bind the client in all matters
of ordinary judicial procedure. The cause of action, the
claim or demand sued upon and the subject matter of
the litigation are within the exclusive control of the
client. A client may waive, surrender, dismiss, or
compromise any of his rights involved in litigation in
favor of the other party even without or against the
consent of his attorney.
USE OF FAIR AND HONEST MEANS
Rule 19.01, Canon 9
A lawyer shall employ only fair and honest means
to attain the lawful objectives of his client and
shall not present, participate in presenting or
threaten to present, participate in presenting or
threaten to present unfounded criminal charges
to obtain an improper advantage in any case or
proceeding (1997 Bar Question)
Rule 19.01 of the CPR obligates a lawyer, in defending
his client, to employ only such means as are consistent
with truth and honor. He should not prosecute
patently frivolous and meritless appeals or institute
clearly groundless actions. The act of a lawyer in
preventing the execution of the judgment against his
clients shows that he actually committed what the
above rule expressly prohibits (Que v. Revilla, A.C. No.
7054, Dec. 4, 2009).
Under this rule, a lawyer should not file or threaten to
file any unfounded or baseless criminal case or cases
against the adversaries of his client designed to secure
a leverage to compel the adversaries to yield or
withdraw their own cases against the lawyers client
CLIENTS FRAUD
Rule 19.02, Canon 19
A lawyer who has received information that his
client has, in the course of the representation,
perpetrated a fraud upon a person or tribunal,
shall promptly call upon the client to rectify the
same, and failing which he shall terminate the
relationship with such client in accordance with
the Rules of Court (2001 Bar Question)
 DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF A LAWYER
The lawyers duty to his client does not mean freedom
to set up false or fraudulent claims especially with
respect to provisions of law or administrative rules and
that while lawyers are bound to exert utmost legal skill
in prosecuting their clients cause or defending it, their
duty, first and foremost, is to the administration of
justice (CPR Annotated, PhilJA).
NOTE: It is an unethical tactic for a lawyer to offer monetary
rewards to anyone who could give him information against a
party so that he could have leverage against all actions
involving such party (CPR Annotated, PhilJA).
PROCEDURE IN HANDLING THE CASE
Rule 19.03, Canon 19
A lawyer shall not allow his client to dictate the
procedure in handling the case.
Who has control over the case
1. As to matters of procedure - it is the client who yields
to the lawyer and not the lawyer yielding to the client
(Lapena 2009).
NOTE: The basis of this rule is that the lawyer is better
trained and skilled in law.
2. As to subject matter - the client is in control.
NOTE: Cause of action, claim or demand, and subject of
litigation are within clients control. Proceedings to
enforce the remedy are within the exclusive control of
the attorney.
Authority of counsel to compromise
GR: The attorney has no authority to compromise his
clients case. This is so because the client, even if
represented by counsel, retains exclusive control over
the subject matter of the litigation. The client can, of
course, authorize his lawyer to compromise his case,
and the settlement made by the lawyer will bind his
client.
XPNs:
1. When the lawyer is confronted with an
emergency where prompt and urgent action is
necessary to protect the interest of his client and
there is no opportunity for consultation with the
latter.
2. Settlement of Monetary Obligation to client is full
payment in cash.
NOTE: Compromise is a contract whereby the parties, by
making reciprocal concessions, avoid litigation or put an end
to one already commenced (NCC, Art. 2028).
65
Duty of the lawyer in gathering information regarding
the case
The lawyer cannot entirely depend on the information
his client gave or the time his client wished to give. The
lawyer should take more control over handling the
case. Where the client is based overseas, the lawyer
should with more reason, have moved to secure all the
legal means available to him either to continue
representing his client effectively or to make the
necessary manifestation in court, with the clients
conformity, that he was withdrawing as counsel of
record (CPR Annotated, PhilJA).
Appearance
It is the coming into court as a party either as a plaintiff
or as a defendant and asking relief therefrom.
Kinds of appearance
1. General appearance When a party comes to
court either as plaintiff or defendant and seeks
general reliefs from the court for satisfaction of
his claims or counterclaims respectively.
2. Special appearance When a defendant appears
in court solely for the purpose of objecting to the
jurisdiction of the court over his person.
NOTE: By virtue of Sec. 20, Rule 14 of the 1997 Rules of Civil
Procedure, there is no more distinction between general
appearance and special appearance, in the sense that a
defendant may file a motion to dismiss not only on the
ground of lack of jurisdiction over his person but also on
some other grounds without waiving the jurisdiction of the
court over his person.
Entry of appearance v. Appearance of counsel
Entry of appearance is the written manifestation
submitted by the counsel of record to inform the court
that he will act as the counsel of a party made before
the date of the hearing while appearance is the verbal
manifestation of the counsel in order for the court to
recognize his presence during the hearing of the case.
(Sec.21, Rule 138, Rules of Court).
ATTORNEYS FEES
(1990, 1991, 1992, 1994, 1995, 1997, 1998, 2005,
2006, 2007 Bar Questions)
Canon 20
A lawyer shall charge only fair and reasonable
fees
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW
 Legal Ethics
GR: Only lawyers are entitled to attorneys fees. The
same cannot be shared with a non-lawyer. It is
unethical.
XPNs: A lawyer may divide a fee for legal services with
persons not licensed to practice law: (CPR)
1. A lawyer undertakes to Complete the
unfinished legal business of a deceased
lawyer;
2. There is a Pre-existing agreement with a
partner or associate that, upon the latters
death, money shall be paid over a
reasonable period of time to his estate or
to persons specified in the agreement;
3. A lawyer or law firm includes non-lawyer
employees in Retirement plan, even if the
plan is based, in whole or in part, on a
profit-sharing agreement. (CPR, Rule 9.02)
NOTE: Entitlement to lawyers fees is presumed (Funa, 2009).
Unless otherwise expressly stipulated, rendition of
professional services by a lawyer is for a fee or compensation
and is not gratuitous (Research and Services Realty, Inc. v. CA,
G.R. No. 124074, Jan. 27,1997).
Rule 20.01, Canon 20
A lawyer shall be guided by the following factors
in determining his fees:
a. The time spent and the extent of the
service rendered or required;
b. The novelty and difficulty of the questions
involved;
c. The importance of the subject matter;
d. The skill demanded;
e. The probability of losing other
employment as a result of acceptance of the
proffered case;
f. The customary charges for similar services
and the schedule of fees of the IBP chapter to
which he belongs;
g. The amount involved in the controversy
and the benefits resulting to the client from the
service;
h. The contingency or certainty of
compensation;
i. The character of the employment, whether
occasional or established; and
j. The professional standing of the lawyer.
NOTE: Generally, the amount of attorneys fees due is that
stipulated in the retainer agreement which is conclusive as
to the amount of lawyers compensation (Funa, 2009) unless
the stipulated amount in the written contract is found by the
court to be unconscionable or unreasonable (Sec. 24, Rule
138, RRC). In the absence thereof, the amount of attorneys
fees is fixed on the basis of quantum meruit (Sesbreno v.
Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 117438, June 8,1995; Funa, 2009).
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
2014 GOLDEN NOTES
66
Kinds of payment
1. Fixed or absolute fee that which is payable
regardless of the result of the case.
a. A fixed fee payable per appearance
b. A fixed fee computed upon the number of
hours spent
c. A fixed fee based on piece work
d. Combination of any of the above
2. Contingent fee a fee that is conditioned on the
securing of a favorable judgment and recovery of
money or property and the amount of which may be
on a percentage basis.
Requisites for the accrual of attorneys fees
1. Existence of attorney-client relationship; and
2. Rendition by the lawyer of services to the client.
NOTE: A pauper, while exempted from payment of legal fees
is not exempted from payment of attorneys fees (Cristobal
v. Employees Compensation Commission, G.R. No. L-49280,
Feb. 26, 1981).
Factors in determining the attorneys fees (1994 Bar
Question)
In determining what is fair and reasonable, a lawyer
shall be guided by the following factors: (STIP-
SNACCC)
1. Skill demanded;
2. Time spent and the extent of the services
rendered or required;
3. Importance of the subject matter;
4. Probability of losing other employment as a
result of acceptance of the proffered case;
5. Professional Standing of the lawyer;
6. Novelty and difficulty of the questions involved;
7. Amount involved in the controversy and the
benefits resulting to the client from the services;
8. Customary Charges for similar services and the
schedule of fees of the IBP chapter to which he
belongs;
9. Contingency or certainty of compensation; and
10. Character of the employment, whether
occasional or established. (Rule 20.01)
NOTE: Imposition of interest in the payment of
attorneys fees is not justified (Funa, 2009).
Contracts for attorneys services in this jurisdiction stands
upon an entirely different footing from other contract for the
payment of compensation for any other services (Mambulao
Lumber Co. v. Philippine National Bank, 130 Phil. 366).
NOTE: No court shall be bound by the opinion of attorneys
as expert witnesses as to the proper compensation, and may
 DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF A LAWYER
disregard such testimony and base its conclusion on its Thereafter, Atty. Funk represented Concept
professional knowledge. A written contract for services shall Placement in the case filed against it for illegal
control the amount to be paid therefor, unless found by the dismissal. While the labor case was still pending,
court to be unconscionable or unreasonable (RRC, Sec. 24,
Concept Placement terminated the services of Atty.
Rule 138).
Funk. Nevertheless, Atty. Funk continued handling
the case. Atty. Funk then advised Concept Placement
Factors to consider in determining the amount of
of the POEAs favorable decision and requested the
attorneys fees in the absence of any fee
payment of his attorneys fees. Concept Placement
arrangement (TINS)
refused. Is Atty. Funk entitled to attorneys fees for
assisting Concept Placement as counsel in the labor
1. Time spent and the services rendered or required
case even if the services of Atty. Funk were already
A lawyer is justified in fixing higher fees when the
terminated?
case is so complicated and requires more time and
effort in fixing it.
A: Yes. The expiration of the retainer contract
2. Importance of subject matter The more important
between the parties during the pendency of the labor
the subject matter or the bigger the value of the
case does not extinguish the respondents right for
interest of the property in litigation, the higher is
attorneys fees. The Court found that while the
the attorneys fees.
petitioner and the respondent did not execute a
3. Novelty and difficulty of questions involved When
written agreement on the fees in the labor case aside
the questions in a case are novel and difficult,
from the Retainer Agreement, the petitioner did
greater effort, deeper study and research are
categorically and unequivocally admit in its
bound to burn the lawyers time and stamina
Compulsory Counterclaim that it has engaged the
considering that there are no local precedents to
services of the respondent as its counsel for a fee of
rely upon.
P60, 000, etc. (Concept Placement Resources Inc. v.
4. Skill demanded of a lawyer The totality of the
Atty. Funk, G.R. No. 137680, Feb. 6, 2004).
lawyers experience provides him skill and
competence admired in lawyers.
Kinds of Retainer Agreements on Attorneys Fees
Different types of fee arrangements
1. General retainer or retaining fee It is the fee paid
to a lawyer to secure his future services as general
1. Retainers fee where the lawyer is paid for services
counsel for any ordinary legal problem that may
for an agreed amount for the case.
arise in the ordinary business of the client and
2. The lawyer agrees to be paid per court appearance.
referred to him for legal action. The client pays fixed
3. Contingent fee where the lawyer is paid for his
retainer fees, which could be monthly or otherwise.
services depending on the success of the case. This
The fees are paid whether or not there are cases
applies usually in civil suits for money or property
referred to the lawyer;
where the lawyers fee is taken from the award
2. Special retainer It is a fee for a specific or
granted by the court.
particular case or service rendered by the lawyer
4. Attorney de officio. The attorney is appointed by
for a client.
the court to defend the indigent litigant in a
criminal case. The client is not bound to pay the
Q: Atty. Franciscos retainer agreement with RXU said
attorney for his services although he may be paid a
that his attorney's fees in its case against CRP shall
nominal fee taken from a public fund appropriated
be 15% of the amounts collected. Atty. Francisco
for the purpose.
asked the trial court to issue a temporary restraining
5. Legal aid. The attorney renders legal services for
order against CRP but this was denied, prompting him
those who could not afford to engage the services
to file a petition for certiorari with the Court of
of paid counsel.
Appeals to question the order of denial. At this point,
6. Quantum meruit basis. If there is no specific
RXU terminated Atty. Franciscos services. When the
contract between the lawyer and the client, the
parties later settled their dispute amicably, CRP paid
lawyer is paid on quantum meruit basis, that is,
RXU P100 million. Because of this, Atty. Francisco
what the lawyer deserves for his services.
came around and claimed a 15% share in the amount.
What should be his attorneys fees? (2011 Bar
Q: Concept Placement retained the services of Atty.
Question)
Funk. Under their retainer contract, Atty. Funk is to
render various legal services except litigation, quasi-
A: A reasonable amount that the court shall fix upon
judicial and administrative proceedings and similar
proof of quantum meruit which means as much as he
actions for which there will be separate billings.
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
67 FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW
 Legal Ethics
deserves.
Instances when the measure of quantum meruit may
be resorted to (2007 Bar Question)
1. There is no express contract for payment of
attorneys fees agreed upon between the lawyer
and the client;
2. Although there is a formal contract for attorneys
fees, the stipulated fees are found unconscionable
or unreasonable by the court;
3. The contract for attorneys fees is void due to purely
formal matters or defects of execution;
4. The counsel, for justifiable cause, was not able to
finish the case to its conclusion;
5. Lawyer and client disregard the contract for
attorneys fees; and
6. The client dismissed his counsel before the
termination of the case.
Q: A client refuses to pay Atty. A his contracted
attorney's fees on the ground that counsel did not
wish to intervene in the process of effecting a fair
settlement of the case. Decide. (2001 Bar Question)
A: Rule 1.04 of the Code of Professional Responsibility
provides that "a lawyer shall encourage his clients to
avoid, end or settle a controversy if it will admit of a
fair settlement". If a lawyer should refuse to intervene
in a settlement proceeding, his entitlement to his
attorney's fees may be affected. However, if he has
already rendered some valuable services to the client,
he must be paid his attorney's fees on the basis of
quantum meruit, even if it is assumed that he is
dismissed.
Instances when counsel cannot recover the full
amount despite written contract for attorneys fees
(2006 Bar Question)
1. When the services called for were not performed as
when the lawyer withdrew before the case was
finished, he will be allowed only reasonable fees
2. When there is a justified dismissal of the attorney,
the contract will be nullified and payment will be on
the basis of quantum meruit only. A contrary
stipulation will be invalid
3. When the stipulated attorneys fees are
unconscionable, when it is disproportionate as
compared to the value of services rendered and is
revolting to human conscience;
4. When the stipulated attorneys fees are in excess of
what is expressly provided by law;
5. When the lawyer is guilty of fraud or bad faith
toward his client in the matter of his employment;
6. When the counsels services are worthless because
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
2014 GOLDEN NOTES
68
of his negligence;
7. When contract is contrary to law, morals or public
policy; and
8. Serving adverse interest unless the lawyer proves
that it was with the consent of both parties.
Rationale behind the rule that the court may reduce
unconscionable attorneys fees
1. Indubitably intertwined with the lawyers duty to
charge only reasonable fees is the power of the
court to reduce the amount of attorneys fees if the
same is excessive and unconscionable (Roxas v. De
Zuzuarregui, Jr., G. R. No. 152072, Jan. 31, 2006).;
2. A lawyer is primarily an officer of the court hence
fees should be subject to judicial control;
3. Sound public policy demands that courts disregard
stipulations for attorneys fees when they appear to
be a source of speculative profit at the expense of
the debtor or mortgagor (Borcena v. IAC, et. al., G.R.
No. 70099, Jan. 7, 1987).
NOTE: A trial judge may not order the reduction of the
attorneys fees on the ground that the attorney is below
average standard of a lawyer. The opinion of the judge as
to the capacity of a lawyer is not a basis of the right to a
lawyers fees (Fernandez v. Hon. Bello, No. L-14277, Apr. 30,
1960).
ACCEPTANCE FEES
Q: Rose engaged the services of Atty. Jack as counsel
for five cases. In the Retainer Agreement, Rose
agreed to pay Atty. Jack the amount of 200,000 as
Acceptance Fee for the five cases plus an additional
1,500 Appearance Fee per hearing and in the event
that damages are recovered, she would pay Atty. Jack
10% as success fee. Rose issued two checks
amounting to 51,716.54 in favor of Atty. Jack
however despite receipt of said amounts he failed to
file a case in one of the five cases referred to him; one
case was dismissed due to untimely appeal; and
another case was dismissed but he failed to inform
Rose about it before she left for abroad. Dissatisfied
with the outcome of her cases she demanded from
Atty. Jack the return of all the records she had
entrusted to him however he returned only two of
the five cases. She filed a complaint charging him
with violation of Canon 16 and 16.03 of the Code of
Professional Responsibility. Was there a violation of
the said Canon by the respondent?
A: None. From the records of the case, it was found
that four of the cases referred by Rose were filed but
were dismissed or terminated for causes not
attributable to Atty. Jack; and that there was no
probable cause to maintain the suit. No fault or
 DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF A LAWYER
negligence can be attributed to the Atty. Jack. Rose still
owes payment of acceptance fee because she only
paid 51, 716.54.
An acceptance fee is not a contingent fee, but is an
absolute fee arrangement which entitles a lawyer to
get paid for his efforts regardless of the outcome of
the litigation. Dissatisfaction from the outcome of the
cases would not render void the retainer agreement
for Atty. Jack appears to have represented the interest
of Rose (Yu v Bondal, A.C. No. 5534, Jan. 17, 2005).
NOTE: The expiration of the retainer contract between the
parties during the pendency of the labor case does not
extinguish the respondents right to attorneys fees (Uy v.
Gonzales, A.C. No. 5280, Mar. 30, 2004).
CONTINGENCY FEE ARRANGEMENTS
Contingency fee contract
One which stipulates that the lawyer will be paid for
his legal services only if the suit or litigation ends
favorably to the client (Taganas vs. NLRC, G.R. No.
118746, September 7, 1995). It is like a contract
subject to a suspensive condition wherein the
obligation to pay the counsel is based upon the
outcome of the case.
Contingent fees are sanctioned by the CPE and by the
CPR subject to certain limitations (Licudan vs. CA, G.R.
No. 91958, January 24, 1991).
NOTE: If a lawyer employed on contingent basis dies or
becomes disabled before the final adjudication or
settlement of the case has been obtained, he or his estate
will be allowed to recover the reasonable value of the
services rendered. The recovery will be allowed only after
the successful termination of the litigation in the clients
favor (Morton v. Forsee, Ann. Cas. 1914 D. 197; Lapena,
2009, Pineda, 2009).
Rationale for contingent fee contracts
Contracts of this nature (contingent fee contract) are
permitted because they redound to the benefit of the
poor client and the lawyer especially in cases where
the client has meritorious cause of action, but no
means with which to pay for the legal services unless
he can, with the sanction of law, make a contract for a
contingent fee to be paid out of the proceeds of the
litigation (Francisco, 1949)
Limitation of the stipulation regarding contingent fee
contract
It must be reasonable based on the circumstance of
the case. Contingent fee contracts are under the
69
supervision and close scrutiny of the court in order
that clients may be protected from just charges. Its
validity depends on the measure of reasonableness of
the stipulated fees under the circumstances of the
case. Stipulated attorneys fees must not be
unconscionable wherein the amount is by far so
disproportionate compared to the value of the
services rendered as to amount to fraud perpetrated
to the client (Sesbreno vs. CA, G.R. No. 117438, June 8,
1995).
Q: The stipulation between the lawyer and counsel is
as follows, the attorneys fees of the Atty. X will be
of whatever the client might recover from his share
in the property subject of the litigation. Is the
stipulation valid?
A: Yes. The stipulation made is one of a contingent fee
which is allowed by the CPE and the CPR. It does not
violate the prohibition of acquisition of property
subject of the litigation by the lawyer provided for in
the Civil Code since the prohibition applies only to a
sale or assignment to the lawyer by his client during
the pendency of the litigation. The transfer actually
takes effect after the finality of the judgment and not
during the pendency of the case. As such it is valid
stipulation between the lawyer and client.
Acceptance of an initial fee before or during the
progress of the litigation detract from the contingent
nature of the fees
The acceptance of an initial fee before or during the
progress of the litigation does not detract from the
contingent nature of the fees, as long as the bulk
thereof is made dependent upon the successful
outcome of the action (Francisco vs. Matias, January
31, 1964, G.R. No. L-16349).
Q: Chester asked Laarni to handle his claim to a
sizeable parcel of land in Quezon City against a well-
known property developer on a contingent fee basis.
Laarni asked for 15% of the land that may be
recovered or 15% of whatever monetary settlement
that may be received from the property developer as
her only fee contingent upon securing a favorable
final judgment or compromise settlement. Chester
signed the contingent fee agreement. Assume the
property developer settled the case after the case
was decided by the Regional Trial Court in favor of
Chester for P1 Billion. Chester refused to pay Laarni
P150 Million on the ground that it is excessive. Is the
refusal justified? Explain.
A: The refusal of Chester to pay is unjustified. A
contingent fee is impliedly sanctioned by Rule 20.01(f)
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW
 Legal Ethics
of the CPR. A much higher compensation is allowed as
contingent fees is consideration of the risk that the
lawyer will get nothing if the suit fails. In several cases,
the Court has indicated that a contingent fee of 30% of
the money or property that may be recovered is
reasonable. Moreover, although the developer settled
the case, it was after the case was decided by the RTC
in favor of Chester, which shows that Atty. Laarni has
already rendered service to the client.
Q: Assume there was no settlement and the case
eventually reached the Supreme Court which
promulgated a decision in favor of Chester. This time
Chester refused to convey to Laarni 15% of the
litigated land as stipulated on the ground that the
agreement violates Article 1491 of the Civil Code,
which prohibits lawyers from acquiring by purchase
properties and rights, which are the object of
litigation in which they take part by reason of their
profession. Is the refusal justified? Explain. (2008 Bar
Question)
A: Chesters refusal is not justified. A contingent fee
arrangement is not covered by Art.1491 of the Civil
Code, because the transfer or assignment of the
property in litigation takes effect only upon finality of
a favorable judgment. (Director of Lands v. Ababa, No.
L-26096, Feb. 27, 1979); (Macariola v. Asuncion, A.C.
No. 133-J, May 31, 1982).
Q: Evangelina Masmuds husband, the late Alexander,
filed a complaint against his employer for non-
payment of permanent disability benefits, medical
expenses, sickness allowance, moral and exemplary
damages, and attorneys fees. He engaged the
services of Atty. Go, as his counsel and agreed to pay
attorneys fees on a contingent basis, as follows: 20%
of total monetary claims as settled or paid and an
additional 10% in case of appeal. The Labor Arbiter
granted the monetary claims of Alexander.
Eventually, after several appeals, the decision being
favorable to Evangelina (substituted her deceased
husband), the decision became final and executory.
Upon motion of Atty. Go, the surety company
delivered to the NLRC Cashier, the check amounting
to P3,454,079.20. Thereafter, Atty. Go moved for the
release of the said amount to Evangelina. Out of the
said amount, Evangelina paid Atty. Go the sum of
P680,000.00. Dissatisfied, Atty. Go filed a motion to
record and enforce the attorneys lien alleging that
Evangelina reneged on their contingent fee
agreement. Evangelina manifested that Atty. Gos
claim for attorneys fees of 40% of the total monetary
award was null and void based on Article 111 of the
Labor Code. Is her contention correct?
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
2014 GOLDEN NOTES
70
A: No. Art. 111. Attorney's fees. (a) In cases of unlawful
withholding of wages, the culpable party may be
assessed attorney's fees equivalent to ten percent of
the amount of the wages recovered. Contrary to
Evangelinas proposition, Article 111 of the Labor Code
deals with the extraordinary concept of attorneys fees.
It regulates the amount recoverable as attorney's fees
in the nature of damages sustained by and awarded to
the prevailing party. It may not be used as the standard
in fixing the amount payable to the lawyer by his client
for the legal services he rendered.
In this regard, Section 24, Rule 138 of the Rules of
Court should be observed in determining Atty. Gos
compensation. The said Rule provides:
Sec. 24. Compensation of attorneys; agreement as to
fees. An attorney shall be entitled to have and recover
from his client no more than a reasonable
compensation for his services, with a view to the
importance of the subject matter of the controversy,
the extent of the services rendered, and the
professional standing of the attorney. No court shall be
bound by the opinion of attorneys as expert witnesses
as to the proper compensation, but may disregard such
testimony and base its conclusion on its own
professional knowledge. A written contract for services
shall control the amount to be paid therefor unless
found by the court to be unconscionable or
unreasonable.
The retainer contract between Atty. Go and
Evangelina provides for a contingent fee. The contract
shall control in the determination of the amount to be
paid, unless found by the court to be unconscionable
or unreasonable. The criteria found in the Code of
Professional Responsibility are also to be considered in
assessing the proper amount of compensation that a
lawyer should receive (CPR, Canon 20, Rule 20.01;
Evangelina Masmud v. NLRC, et. al., G.R. No. 183385,
Feb. 13, 2009).
Champertous contract
Is one where the lawyer stipulates with his client in the
prosecution of the case that he will bear all the
expenses for the recovery of things or property being
claimed by the client, and the latter agrees to pay the
former a portion of the thing or property recovered as
compensation. It is void for being against public policy
(like gambling).
NOTE: A champertous contract is considered void due to
public policy, because it would make him acquire a stake in
the outcome of the litigation which might lead him to place
his own interest above that of the client (Bautista v. Gonzales,
A.M. No. 1625, Feb. 12, 1990).
 DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF A LAWYER

Contingent v. Champertous contract 3. Unsatisfied claim for attorneys fees or

disbursements.
CONTINGENT CHAMPERTOUS
CONTRACT CONTRACT Attorneys charging lien
Payable in cash Payable in kind - a
dependent on the portion of the thing or A charging lien is the right of a lawyer to the same
success of the property recovered as extent upon all judgments for the payment of money,
litigation compensation and executions issued in pursuance of such judgments
Lawyers do not Lawyers undertake to which he has secured in a litigation of his client, from
undertake to pay all pay all expenses of and after the time when he shall have caused a
expenses of litigation litigation statement of his claim of such lien to be entered upon
Valid Void the records of the court rendering such judgment, or
issuing such execution, and shall have caused written
Q: The contract of attorney's fees entered into by notice thereof to be delivered to his client and to the
Atty. Quintos and his client, Susan, stipulates that if a adverse party; and he shall have the same right and
judgment is rendered in favor of the latter, Atty. power over such judgments and executions as his
Quintos gets 60% of the property recovered as client would have to enforce his lien and secure the
contingent fee. In turn, he will assume payment of all payment of his fees and disbursements (RRC, Sec. 37,
expenses of the litigation. May Atty. Quintos and Rule 138).
Susan increase the amount of the contingent fee to
80%? (2006 Bar Question) Requisites in order for an attorney to be able to
exercise his charging lien
A: No. Atty. Quintos and Susan cannot agree to
increase the amount of the contingent fee to 80% 1. Existence of attorney-client relationship;
because the agreement is champertous. Even if there 2. The attorney has rendered services;
is no champertous provision present, the contingent 3. Favorable money judgment secured by the
fee of 80% of the PROPERTY recovered could still be counsel for his client;
considered as unconscionable, because it is so 4. The attorney has a claim for attorneys fees or
disproportionate as to indicate that an unjust advances; and
advantage had been taken of the client, and is 5. A statement of the claim has been duly recorded
revolting to human conscience. Contracts for in the case with notice thereof served upon the
attorney's fees are always subject to control by the client and the adverse party.
courts.
NOTE: A charging lien, to be enforceable as a security for the
payment of attorneys fees, requires as a condition sine qua
ATTORNEYS LIENS
non a judgment for money and execution in pursuance of
such judgment secured in the main action by the attorney in
Attorneys retaining lien favor of his client.

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 Retaining lien v. Charging lien
same until his lawful fees and disbursements have
been paid, and may apply such funds to the RETAINING CHARGING LIEN
satisfaction thereof. LIEN
As to Nature Passive lien. It Active lien. It
NOTE: A lawyer is not entitled to unilaterally appropriate his cannot be can be enforced
clients money for himself by the mere fact alone that the
actively by execution. It
client owes him attorneys fees (Rayos v. Hernandez, GR No.
169079, Feb. 12, 2007). enforced. It is a is a special lien.
general lien.
Requisites in order for an attorney to be able to As to Basis Lawful Securing of a
exercise his retaining lien (ALU) possession of favorable
papers, money
1. Attorney-client relationship; documents, judgment for
2. Lawful possession by the lawyer of the clients property client.
funds, documents and papers in his professional belonging to
capacity; and the client.
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
71 FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW
 Legal Ethics

As to Coverage Covers papers, Covers all executions issued in pursuance of such judgments,
documents, and judgments for which he has secured in a litigation of his client, from
properties in the payment of and after the time when the records of the court
the lawful money and rendering such judgment or issuing such execution.
possession of execution
the attorney by issued in FEES AND CONTROVERSIES WITH CLIENTS
reason of his pursuance of
professional such judgment. Rule 20.02, Canon 20
employment. A lawyer shall, in cases of referral, with the
As to Effect As soon as the As soon as the consent of the client, be entitled to a division of
attorney gets claim for fees in proportion to the work performed and
possession of attorneys fees responsibility assumed.
papers, had been
documents, or entered into This is not in the nature of a brokers commission.
property. the records of
the case. Lawyer-referral system
As to May be Generally,
Applicability exercised exercised only Under this system, if another counsel is referred to the
before when the client, and the latter agrees to take him as
judgment or attorney had collaborating counsel, and there is no express
execution or already secured agreement on the payment of attorneys fees, the said
regardless a favorable counsel will receive attorneys fees in proportion to
thereof. judgment for the work performed and responsibility assumed. The
his client. lawyers and the client may agree upon the proportion
As to When When client but in case of disagreement, the court may fix the
Extinguishment possession loses action as proportional division of fees (Lapena, 2009).
lawfully ends as lien may only
when lawyer be enforced Rule 20.03
voluntarily against A lawyer shall not, without the full knowledge and
parts with judgment consent of the client, accept any fee, reward,
funds, awarded in costs, commission, interest, rebate or forwarding
documents, and favor of client, allowance or other compensation whatsoever
papers of client proceeds related to his professional employment from
or offers them thereof/execut anyone other than the client. (1997, 2003 Bar
as evidence. ed thereon. Questions)

Q: Upon being replaced by Justice C, Atty. B, the It is intended to secure the fidelity of the lawyer to
former counsel of the parents of the victims of the his clients cause and to prevent a situation in which
OZONE Disco tragedy, was directed to forward all the the receipt by him of a rebate or commission from
documents in his possession to Justice C. Atty. B another with the clients business may interfere with
refused, demanding full compensation pursuant to the full discharge of his duty to his client. (Report of
their written contract. Sensing that a favorable the IBP Committee)
judgment was forthcoming, Atty. B filed a motion in
court relative to his attorneys fees, furnishing his GR: Fees shall be received from the client only.
former clients with copies thereof. Is Atty. B legally
and ethically correct in refusing to turn over the XPN: A lawyer may receive compensation from a
documents and in filing the motion? Explain. (1996 person other than his client when the latter has full
Bar Question) knowledge and approval thereof (Sec. 20 (e), Rule 138).
A: Yes. He is entitled to a retaining lien which gives him
the right to retain the funds, documents and papers of
Rule 20.04, Canon 20
his client which have lawfully come to his possession
A lawyer shall avoid controversies with clients
until his lawful fees and disbursement have been paid concerning his compensation and shall resort to
(RRC, Sec. 37, Rule 138; CPR, Rule 16.03). He is also judicial action only to prevent imposition, injustice
legally and ethically correct in filing a motion in court
or fraud. (1998 Bar Question)
relative to his fees. He is entitled to a charging lien
upon all judgments for the paying of money, and
GR: A lawyer should avoid the filing of any case against
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
2014 GOLDEN NOTES
72
 DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF A LAWYER
a client for the enforcement of attorneys fees.
NOTE: The legal profession is not a money-making trade but
a form of public service. Lawyers should avoid giving the
impression that they are mercenary (Perez v. Scottish Union
and National Insurance Co., C.A. No. 8977, Mar. 22, 1946). It
might even turn out to be unproductive for him for potential
clients are likely to avoid a lawyer with a reputation of suing
his clients.
XPNs:
1. To prevent imposition
2. To prevent injustice
3. To prevent fraud (CPR, Rule 20.04)
NOTE: A client may enter into a compromise agreement
without the intervention of the lawyer, but the terms of the
agreement should not deprive the counsel of his
compensation for the professional services he had rendered.
If so, the compromise shall be subjected to said fees. If the
client and the adverse party who assented to the
compromise are found to have intentionally deprived the
lawyer of his fees, the terms of the compromise, insofar as
they prejudice the lawyer, will be set aside, making both
parties accountable to pay the lawyers fees. But in all cases,
it is the client who is bound to pay his lawyer for his legal
representation (Atty. Gubat v. NPC, G.R. No. 167415, Feb. 26,
2010),
Ways on how lawyers claim attorney's fees
1. In the same case It may be asserted either in the
very action in which the services of a lawyer had
been rendered or in a separate action.
2. In a separate civil action A petition for attorney's
fees may be filed before the judgment in favor of
the client is satisfied or the proceeds thereof
delivered to the client.
The determination as to the propriety of the fees or as
to the amount thereof will have to be held in abeyance
until the main case from which the lawyer's claim for
attorney's fees may arise has become final. Otherwise,
the determination of the courts will be premature.
Instances when an independent civil action to
recover attorneys fees is necessary
1. Main action is dismissed or nothing is awarded;
2. Court has decided that it has no jurisdiction over
the action or has already lost it;
3. Person liable for attorneys fees is not a party to the
main action;
4. Court reserved to the lawyer the right to file a
separate civil suit for recovery of attorneys fees;
5. Services for which the lawyer seeks payment are
not connected with the subject litigation; and
6. Judgment debtor has fully paid all of the judgment
73
proceeds to the judgment creditor and the lawyer
has not taken any legal step to have his fees paid
directly to him from the judgment proceeds.
7. Failure to exercise Charging Lien
Effects of the nullity of contract on the right to
attorneys fees
If the nullification is due to:
1. The illegality of its object - the lawyer is
precluded from recovering; and
2. Formal defect or because the court has found
the amount to be unconscionable - the lawyer may
recover for any services rendered based on
quantum meruit.
Kinds of lawyer according to services rendered and
the compensation they are entitled to
1. Counsel de parte He is entitled to the reasonable
attorneys fees agreed upon, or in the absence
thereof, on quantum meruit basis.
2. Counsel de officio The counsel may not demand
from the accused attorneys fees even if he wins the
case. He may, however, collect from the
government funds, if available based on the
amount fixed by the court.
3. Amicus Curiae not entitled to attorneys fees.
CONCEPTS OF ATTORNEYS FEES
Two concepts of attorneys fees
1. Ordinary attorney's fee The reasonable
compensation paid to a lawyer by his client for the
legal services he has rendered to the latter (Pineda,
2009).
NOTE: The basis for this compensation is the fact of his
employment by and his agreement with the client.
2. Extraordinary attorney's fee An indemnity for
damages ordered by the court to be paid by the
losing party in litigation.
NOTE: The basis for this is any of the cases provided for
by law where such award can be made, such as those
authorized in Article 2208 of the Civil Code, and is payable
to the client, NOT to the lawyer unless they have agreed
that the award shall pertain to the lawyer as additional
compensation or as part thereof.
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW
 Legal Ethics
ORDINARY CONCEPT OF ATTORNEYS FEES
Q: Aurora Pineda filed an action for declaration of
nullity of marriage against Vinson Pineda, who was
represented by Attys. Clodualdo de Jesus, Carlos
Ambrosio and Emmanuel Mariano. The parties'
proposal for settlement regarding Vinson's visitation
rights over their minor child and the separation of
their properties was approved by the court. The
marriage was subsequently declared null and void.
Throughout the proceedings counsels and their
relatives and friends, availed of free products and
treatments from Vinsons dermatology clinic. This
notwithstanding, they billed him additional legal fees
amounting to P16.5 million which he, however,
refused to pay. Instead, he issued them several
checks totaling P1.12 million as full payment for
settlement. Still not satisfied, the three lawyers filed
in the same court a motion for payment of lawyers'
fees for P50 million, which is equivalent to 10% of the
value of the properties awarded to Pineda in the case.
Are their claim justified?
A: No. Clearly, what they were demanding was
additional payment for legal services rendered in the
same case. Demanding P50 million on top of the
generous sums and perks already given to them was
an act of unconscionable greed. They could not charge
Pineda a fee based on percentage, absent an express
agreement to that effect. The payments to them in
cash, checks, free products and services from Pinedas
business more than sufficed for the work they did. The
full payment for settlement should have discharged
Vinson's obligation to them.
As lawyers, they should be reminded that they are
members of an honorable profession, the primary
vision of which is justice. It is the lawyers despicable
behavior in the case at bar which gives lawyering a bad
name in the minds of some people. The vernacular has
a word for it: nagsasamantala. The practice of law is a
decent profession and not a money-making trade.
Compensation should be but a mere incident (Pineda
v. de Jesus, G.R. No. 155224, Aug. 23, 2006).
Q: DOY Mercantile Inc. refused to satisfy Atty. Gabriel,
Jr.s attorneys fees, prompting the latter to file with
the RTC a Motion to Allow Commensurate Fees and
to Annotate Attorneys Lien on certain TCTs. The RTC
fixed Atty. Gabriel, Jr.s fees and ordered that a lien
be annotated on the TCTs. A Writ of Execution was
later issued by the trial court in Atty. Gabriel, Jr.s
favor. Upon Atty. Gabriel Jr.s motion for
reconsideration, the RTC increased his fees. It then
issued another Writ of Execution to enforce the new
award but denied the Motion to Annotate the Award
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
2014 GOLDEN NOTES
74
at the back of the TCTs. DOY, for its part, filed several
petitions to set aside the RTC Orders involving the
award of attorneys fees. Eventually, CA rendered a
decision, fixing Atty. Gabriel, Jr.s fees at P200,000.00
and affirming the subsequent order of the RTC not to
annotate such award on the TCTs. Should the court
rely on the importance of the subject matter in
controversy and the professional standing of counsel
in awarding attorneys fee?
A: No. DOYs contention that the appellate court
should also have taken into account the importance of
the subject matter in controversy and the professional
standing of counsel in determining the latters fees is
untenable. Although Rule 138 of the Rules of Court
and Rule 20.01, Canon 20 of the Code of Professional
Responsibility lists several other factors in setting such
fees, these are mere guides in ascertaining the real
value of the lawyers service. Courts are not bound to
consider all these factors in fixing attorneys fees.
While a lawyer should charge only fair and reasonable
fees, no hard and fast rule maybe set in the
determination of what a reasonable fee is, or what is
not. That must be established from the facts in each
case (DOY Mercantile, Inc. v. AMA Computer College,
G.R. No. 155311, Mar. 31, 2004).
EXTRAORDINARY CONCEPT OF ATTORNEYS FEES
Rules on extraordinary concept of attorneys fees
GR: Attorneys fees as damages are not recoverable.
An adverse decision does not ipso facto justify their
award in favor of the winning party.
XPNs: Attorneys fees in the concept of damages may
be awarded in any of the following circumstances:
1. When there is an agreement;
2. When exemplary damages are awarded;
3. When defendants action or omission
compelled plaintiff to litigate;
4. In criminal cases of malicious prosecution
a. Plaintiff was acquitted; and
b. The person who charged him knowingly
made the false statement of facts or that
the filing was prompted by sinister
design to vex him;
5. When the action is clearly unfounded;
6. When defendant acted in gross and evident
bad faith;
7. In actions for support;
8. In cases of recovery of wages;
9. In actions for indemnity under workmens
compensation and employees liability laws;
10. In a separate civil action arising from a crime;
11. When at least double costs are awarded
 DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF A LAWYER
(costs of suit does not include attorneys
fees);
12. When the court deems it just and equitable;
and
13. When a special law so authorizes (NCC, Art.
2208).
Rationale behind the rule that the Court shall state
the reason for attorneys fees in in its decision
The award of attorneys fees being an exception rather
than the general rule, it is necessary for the court to
make findings of facts and law that would bring the
case within the exception and justify the grant of such
award (Agustin vs. CA, G.R. No. 84751, June 6, 1990).
NOTE: Attorneys fees must be specifically prayed for and
proven and justified in the decision itself (Trans-Asia
Shipping Lines, Inc. vs. CA, G.R. No. 118126, Mar. 4, 1996).
PRESERVATION OF CLIENTS CONFIDENCES
Canon 21
A lawyer shall preserve the confidence and
secrets of his client even after the attorney-client
relation is terminated.
The protection given to the client is perpetual and
does not cease with the termination of the litigation
nor is affected by the party ceasing to employ the
attorney and employ another or any other change of
relation between them. It even survives the death of
the client.
PROHIBITED DISCLOSURES AND USE
Rule 21.01, Canon 21
A lawyer shall not reveal the confidences or secrets of
his client except;
a. When authorized by the client after acquainting
him of the consequences of the disclosure;
b. When required by law;
c. When necessary to collect his fees or to defend
himself, his employees or associates or by judicial
action.
GR: A lawyer shall not reveal the confidences and
secrets of his client.
NOTE: An attorney cannot, without the consent of his client,
be examined as to any communication made by the client to
him, or his advice given thereon in the course of, or with a
view to, professional employment, nor can an attorneys
secretary, stenographer, or clerk be examined, without the
consent of the client and his employer, concerning any fact
the knowledge of which has been acquired in such capacity
(RRC, Sec. 24(b), Rule 130).
75
XPNs:
1. When authorized by his client after acquainting
him of the consequences of the disclosure;
NOTE: The only instance where the waiver of the client alone
is insufficient is when the person to be examined with
reference to any privileged communication is the attorneys
secretary, stenographer or clerk, in respect to which, the
consent of the attorney is likewise necessary.
2. When required by law;
3. When necessary to collect his fees or to defend
himself, his employees or associates by judicial
action.
NOTE: Payment of retainer fee is not essential before an
attorney can be required to safeguard a prospective clients
secret acquired by the attorney during the course of the
consultation with the prospective client, even if the attorney
did not accept the employment.
Instances when a lawyer may testify as a witness in a
case which he is handling for a client
1. On formal matters, such as the mailing,
authentication or custody of an instrument and the
like;
2. Acting as an expert on his free;
3. Acting as an arbitrator;
4. Depositions; and
5. On substantial matters in cases where his
testimony is essential to the ends of justice, in
which event he must, during his testimony, entrust
the trial of the case to another counsel.
Rule 21.02, Canon 21
A lawyer shall not, to the disadvantage of his
client, use information acquired in the course of
employment, nor shall he use the same to his own
advantage or that of a third person, unless the
client with full knowledge of the circumstances
consents thereto.
Rule 21.05, Canon 21
A lawyer shall adopt such measures as may be
required to prevent those whose services are
utilized by him, from disclosing or using confidences
or secrets of the client.
Rule 21.06, Canon 21
A lawyer shall avoid indiscreet conversation about
a clients affairs even with members of his family.
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW
 Legal Ethics
Rule 21.07, Canon 21
A lawyer shall not reveal that he has been
consulted about a particular case except to avoid
possible conflict of interest.
Q: Bun Siong Yao is a majority stockholder of Solar
Farms & Livelihood Corporation and Solar Textile
Finishing Corporation. Atty. Leonardo Aurelio is also
a stockholder and the retained counsel of both the
corporation and Bun Siong Yao. The latter purchased
several parcels of land using his personal funds but
were registered in the name of the corporations upon
the advice of Atty. Aurelio. After a disagreement
between Atty. Aurelio and
Bun Siong Yaos wife, the former demanded the
return of his investment in the corporations but when
Yao refused to pay, he filed 8 charges for estafa and
falsification of commercial documents against Yao
and his wife and the other officers of the corporation.
Yao alleged that the series of suits is a form of
harassment and constitutes an abuse of the
confidential information which Atty. Aurelio
obtained by virtue of his employment as counsel.
Atty. Aurelio however said that he only handled
isolated labor cases for the said corporations. Did
Atty. Aurelio abuse the confidential information he
obtained by virtue of his employment as counsel?
A: Yes. The long-established rule is that an attorney is
not permitted to disclose communications made to
him in his professional character by a client, unless the
latter consents. Atty. Aurelio took advantage of his
being a lawyer in order to get back at Yao. In doing so,
he has inevitably utilized information he has obtained
from his dealings with Yao and Yao's companies for his
own end.
Lawyers cannot be allowed to exploit their profession
for the purpose of exacting vengeance or as a tool for
instigating hostility against any person most especially
against a client or former client (Bun Siong Yao v.
Aurelio, A.C. No. 7023, Mar. 30, 2006).
Acts punished under Art. 209 of the Revised Penal
Code (betrayal of trust by attorney)
1. By causing damage to his client, either 1) by any
malicious breach of professional duty, 2) by
inexcusable negligence or ignorance
2. By revealing any of the secrets of his clients learned
by him in his professional capacity.
3. By undertaking the defense of the opposing party
in the same case, without the consent of his first
client, after having undertaken the defense of said
first client or after having received confidential
information from said client.
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
2014 GOLDEN NOTES
76
Rule 21.03, Canon 21
A lawyer shall not, without the written consent of
his client, give information from his files to an
outside agency seeking such information for
auditing, statistical, bookkeeping, accounting,
data processing, or any other similar purposes.
Q: Certain government officers, armed with search
warrant duly issued, seized among other things, a
filing cabinet belonging to Atty. X. In seeking the
return of the cabinet, Atty. X claimed that the cabinet
contained documents and articles belonging to his
clients but the government refused to return the
cabinet. Atty. X petitioned the court which issued the
warrant, praying that the agents be prohibited from
opening the cabinet. Should Atty. Xs petition be
given due course?
A: Yes. The lower court cannot order the opening of
said cabinet. To do so is in violation of his rights as an
attorney. It would be tantamount to compelling him to
disclose his clients secrets (Lapena, 2009).
NOTE: Confidential information obtains even against
government agencies and instrumentalities (Funa, 2009).
DISCLOSURE, WHEN ALLOWED
Rule 21.04, Canon 21
A lawyer may disclose the affairs of a client of
the firm to partners or associates thereof unless
prohibited by the client.
Professional employment of a law firm is equivalent to
retainer of members thereof. In a law firm, partners or
associates usually consult one another involving their
cases and some work as a team. Consequently, it
cannot be avoided that some information about the
case received from the client may be disclosed to the
partners or associates.
Q: In need of legal services, Niko secured an
appointment to meet with W Atty. Henry of Henry &
Meyer Law Offices. During the meeting, Niko
divulged highly private information to Atty. Henry,
believing that the lawyer would keep the
confidentiality of the information. Subsequently,
Niko was shocked when he learned that Atty. Henry
had shared the confidential information with his law
partner, Atty. Meyer, and their common friend,
private practitioner Atty. Canonigo. When
confronted, Atty. Henry replied that Niko never
signed any confidentiality agreement, and that he
shared the information with the two lawyers to
secure affirmance of his legal opinion on
 DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF A LAWYER
Nikos problem. Did Atty. Henry violate any rule of
ethics? Explain fully. (2008 Bar Question)
A: Atty. Henry violated Canon No. 21 of the CPR by
sharing information obtained from his client Niko with
Atty. Canonigo. Canon No. 20 provides that a lawyer
shall preserve the confidences or secrets of his client
even after the attorney-client relationship is
terminated. The fact that Atty. Canonigo is a friend
from whom he intended to secure legal opinion on
Nikos problem, does not justify such disclosure. He
cannot obtain a collaborating counsel without the
consent of the client (CPR, Rule 18.01).
On the other hand, Atty. Henry did not violate Canon
21 in sharing information with his partner Atty. Meyer.
Rule 21.04 of the CPR specifically provides that
a lawyer may disclose the affairs of a client of the firm
to partners or associates thereof unless prohibited by
the client. Atty. Henry was not prohibited from
disclosing the affairs of Niko with the members of his
law firm. The employment of a member of a firm is
generally considered as employment of the firm itself
(Hilado v. David, G.R. No. L-961, Sept. 21, 1949).
Privileged communication rule with regard to the
identity of his client
GR: A lawyer may not invoke privileged
communication to refuse revealing a clients identity.
XPNs:
1. When there is a strong possibility that revealing
the clients name would implicate the client in the very
activity for which he sought the lawyers advice;
2. When disclosure would open the client to civil
liability;
3. When governments lawyers have no case against
an attorneys client and revealing the clients name
would furnish the only link that would come from the
chain of testimony necessary to convict him.
Reasons why a lawyer may not invoke privileged
communication to refuse revealing a clients identity
1. Due process considerations require that the
opposing party should know the adversary;
2. The privilege pertain to the subject matter of the
relationship;
3. The privilege begins to exist only after attorney-
client relationship has been established hence it does
not attach until there is a client; and
4. The court has a right to know that the client
whose privileged information is sought to be
protected is flesh and blood.
77
Q: Atty. X was charged of violating Code of
Responsibility for representing conflicting interests
by accepting the responsibility of representing Mr. A
in the cases similar to those in which he had
undertaken to represent Mr. D and his group,
notwithstanding that Mr. A was the very same person
whom Mr. D and his group had accused with Atty. Xs
legal assistance. He had drafted the demand letters
and the complaint-affidavit that became the bases
for the filing of the estafa charges against Mr. A.
Atty. X contends that his lawyer-client relationship
with Mr. D ended when he and his group entered into
the compromise settlement. Is his contention
correct?
A: No. Atty. Xs contention is not correct. The lawyer-
client relationship did not terminate as of the date of
compromise agreement, for the fact remained that he
still needed to oversee the implementation of the
settlement as well as to proceed with the criminal
cases until they were dismissed or otherwise
concluded by the trial court. It is also relevant to
indicate that the execution of a compromise
settlement in the criminal cases did not ipso
facto cause the termination of the cases not only
because the approval of the compromise by the trial
court was still required, but also because the
compromise would have applied only to the civil
aspect, and excluded the criminal aspect pursuant to
Article 2034 of the Civil Code (Samson vs. Era, A.C. No.
6664, July 16, 2013).
WITHDRAWAL OF SERVICES
Canon 22
A lawyer shall withdraw his services only for
good cause and upon notice appropriate in the
cirtumstances.
Right to withdraw
GR: A lawyer lacks the unqualified right to withdraw
once he has taken a case. By his acceptance, he has
impliedly stipulated that he will prosecute the case to
conclusion. This is especially true when such
withdrawal will work injustice to a client or frustrate
the ends of justice.
XPNs: The right of a lawyer to retire from the case
before its final adjudication, which arises only from:
1. The clients written consent; or
2. By permission of the court after due notice and
hearing.
Instances when a lawyer may withdraw his services
without the consent of his client (FIC MOVIE)
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW
 Legal Ethics
1. When the client deliberately Fails to pay the fees for
the services or fails to comply with the retainer
agreement;
2. When the client pursues an Illegal or immoral
course of conduct in connection with the matter he
is handling;
3. When the lawyer finds out that he might be
appearing for a Conflicting interest;
4. When the Mental or physical condition of the
lawyer renders it difficult for him to carry out the
employment effectively;
5. Other similar cases;
6. When the client insists that the lawyer pursue
conduct in Violation of these canons and rules;
7. When his Inability to work with co-counsel will not
promote the best interest of the client; and
8. When the lawyer is Elected or appointed to a public
office (CPR, Rule 22.01).
Procedure to follow when withdrawal is without
clients consent
1. File a petition for withdrawal in court.
2. Serve a copy of this petition upon his client and the
adverse party at least 3 days before the date set for
hearing.
NOTE: He should present his petition well in advance of the
trial of the action to enable the client to secure the services
of another lawyer.
If the application is filed under circumstances that do not
afford a substitute counsel sufficient time to prepare
for trial or that work prejudice to the clients cause, the
court may deny his application and require him to conduct
the trial.
A lawyer should not presume that the court will grant his
petition for withdrawal. Until his withdrawal shall have been
proved, the lawyer remains counsel of record who is
expected by his client as well as by the court to do what the
interests of his client require.
Q: Can a client discharge the services of his lawyer
without a cause? (1994, 1997, 1998 Bar Question)
A: Yes. A client has the right to discharge his attorney
at any time with or without a cause or even against his
consent.
1. With just cause lawyer is not necessarily
deprived of his right to be paid for his services. He
may only be deprived of such right if the cause for
his dismissal constitutes in itself a sufficient legal
obstacle to recovery.
2. Without just cause
a. No express written agreement as to fees -
reasonable value of his services up to the date
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
2014 GOLDEN NOTES
78
of his dismissal (quantum meruit).
b. There is written agreement and the fee
stipulated is absolute and reasonable full
payment of compensation.
c. The fee stipulated is contingent.
d. If dismissed before the conclusion of the
action - reasonable value of his services
(quantum meruit)
e. If contingency occurs or client prevents its
occurrence full amount.
NOTE: A lawyer should question his discharge otherwise he
will only be allowed to recover on quantum meruit basis.
Limitations on clients right to discharge the services
of his lawyer
1. When made with justifiable cause, it shall
negate the attorneys right to full payment of
compensation.
2. The attorney may, in the discretion of the court,
intervene in the case to protect his right to fees.
3. A client may not be permitted to abuse his right to
discharge his counsel as an excuse to secure
repeated extensions of time to file a pleading or
to indefinitely avoid a trial.
Conditions for substitution of counsel
1. Written application
2. Written consent of the client
3. Written consent of the attorney to be substituted,
or in the absence thereof, proof of service of
notice of said motion to the attorney to be
substituted in the manner prescribed by the rules.
Heavy workload as excuse for withdrawal as counsel
Standing alone, heavy workload is not sufficient
reason for the withdrawal of a counsel. When a lawyer
accepts to handle a case, whether for a fee or gratis et
amore, he undertakes to give his utmost attention,
skill and competence to it regardless of its significance.
Failure to fulfill his duties will subject him to grave
administrative liability as a member of the Bar (Ceniza
v. Atty. Rubia, A.C. No. 6166, October 2, 2009).
Rule 22.01, Canon 22
A lawyer may withdraw his services in any of the
following case:
a. When the client pursues an illegal or immoral
course of conduct in connection with the matter
he is handling;
b. When the client insists that the lawyer pursue
conduct violative of these canons and rules;
c. When the inability to work with co- counsel will
not promote the best interest of the client;
 DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF A LAWYER
d. When the mental or physical condition of the
lawyer renders it difficult for him to carry out the
employment effectively;
e. When the client deliberately fails to pay the fees
for the services or fails to comply with the retainer
agreement
f. When the lawyer is elected or appointed to
public office; and
g. Other similar cases.
NOTE: In cases a-e (above), the lawyer must file a written
motion with an express consent of his client and the court
shall determine whether he ought to be allowed to retire.
He may also retire at any time from an action or special
proceeding without the consent of his client, should the
court, on notice to the client and attorney, and on hearing,
determine that he ought to be allowed to retire (RRC, Sec.
26, Rule 138).
Hot Potato Rule
GR: A lawyer may not unreasonably withdraw from
representing a client.
XPN: Withdrawal may be allowed if there is a conflict
of interest arising from circumstances beyond the
control of the lawyer or the law firm (Blacks Law
Dictionary,9th edition).
Q: On the eve of the initial hearing for the reception
of evidence for the defense, the defendant and his
counsel had a conference where the client directed
the lawyer to present as principal defense witnesses
2 persons whose testimonies were personally known
to the lawyer to have been perjured. The lawyer
informed his client that he refused to go along with
the unwarranted course of action proposed by the
defendant. But the client insisted on the directive, or
else he would not pay the agreed attorneys fees.
When the case was called for hearing the next
morning the lawyer forthwith moved in open court
that he be relieved as counsel for the defendant. Both
the defendant and the plaintiffs counsel objected to
the motion. Under the given facts, is the defense
lawyer legally justified in seeking withdrawal from
the case? Why or why not? Reason briefly.
A: Yes, he is justified. Under rule 22.01 of the CPR, a
lawyer may withdraw his services if the client insists
that the lawyer pursue conduct violative of these
canon and rules. The insistence of the client that the
lawyer present witnesses whom he personally knows
to have been perjured, will expose him to criminal and
civil liability and violate his duty of candor, fairness and
good faith to the court.
79
Q: Was the motion for relief as counsel made by the
defense lawyer in full accord with the
procedural requirements for a lawyers withdr
awal from a court case? Explain briefly. (2004 Bar
Question)
A: No, his actuation is not in accord with the
procedural requirements for the lawyers withdrawal
from a court case. Whether or not a lawyer has a valid
cause to withdraw from a case, he cannot just do so
and leave the client in the cold unprotected. He must
serve a copy of his petition upon the client and the
adverse party. He should, moreover, present his
petition well in advance of the trial of the action to
enable the client to secure the services of another
lawyer.
Q: Atty. X filed a notice of withdrawal of appearance
as counsel for the accused Y after the prosecution
rested its case. The reason for the withdrawal of Atty.
X was the failure of accused Y to affix his conformity
to the demand of Atty. X for increase in attorney's
fees. Is the ground for withdrawal justified? Explain.
(2000 Bar Question)
A: The ground for the withdrawal is not justified. Rule
22.01 (e) of the Code of Professional Responsibility
provides that a lawyer may withdraw his services
when the client deliberately fails to pay the fees for his
services or fails to comply with the retainer agreement.
In this case, the client has not failed to pay the lawyer's
fees or to comply with the retainer agreement. He has
only refused to agree with the lawyer's demand for an
increase in his fees. It is his right to refuse as that is
part of his freedom of contract.
Rule 22.02, Canon 22
A lawyer who withdraws or is discharged shall,
subject to a retaining lien, immediately turn over
all papers and property to which the client is
entitled, and shall cooperate with his successor in
the orderly transfer of the matter, including all
information necessary for the proper handling of
the matter.
Duties of a discharged lawyer or one who withdraws
1. Immediately turn-over all papers and property to
which the client is entitled; and
2. To cooperate with his successor in the orderly
transfer of the case.
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW
 Legal Ethics

SUSPENSION, DISBARMENT AND Other sanctions and remedies

DISCIPLINE OF LAWYERS
RULE 139-B, RULES OF COURT
NATURE AND CHARACTERISTICS OF DISCIPLINARY
ACTION AGAINST LAWYERS
Rationale of disciplining errant lawyers
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.
NOTE: A lawyer may be disciplined or suspended for any
misconduct professionally or privately (Cruz v. Atty. Jacinto,
Adm. Case No. 5235, March 22, 2000).
Nature of the power to discipline
The power to discipline a lawyer is JUDICIAL in nature
and can be exercised only by the courts. It cannot be
defeated by the legislative or executive departments.
NOTE: The power to disbar and to reinstate is an inherently
judicial function (Andres v. Cabrera, SBC- 585, Feb. 29, 1984).
Powers of the Supreme Court in disciplining lawyers
(WARD-SIP)
1. Warn;
2. Admonish;
3. Reprimand;
4. Disbar;
5. Suspend a lawyer; [Sec. 27, Rule 138, Revised Rules
of Court (RRC)]
6. Interim suspension; and
7. Probation (IBP Guidelines)
Powers of the Court of Appeals and the Regional Trial
Courts
They are also empowered to: (WARSP)
1. Warn;
2. Admonish;
3. Reprimand;
4. Suspend an attorney from practice for any of the
causes named in Sec 27, Rule 138 until further
action of the Supreme Court in the case; (Sec. 16,
Rule 139-B) and
5. Probation (IBP Guidelines)
NOTE: The CA and RTC cannot disbar a lawyer.
1. Restitution;
2. Assessment of costs;
3. Limitation upon practice;
4. Appointment of a receiver;
5. Requirement that a lawyer take the bar
examination or professional responsibility
examination;
6. Requirement that a lawyer attend continuing
education courses; and
7. Other requirements that the highest court or
disciplinary board deems consistent with the
purposes of the sanctions.
Forms of disciplinary measures (WARCS-DIP)
1. Warning an act of putting one on his guard
against an impending danger, evil, consequence
or penalty;
2. Admonition a gentle or friendly reproof, mild
rebuke, warning, reminder, or counseling on a
fault, error or oversight; an expression of
authoritative advice;
3. Reprimand a public and formal censure or
severe reproof, administered to a person at fault
by his superior officer or the body to which he
belongs;
4. Censure official reprimand;
5. Suspension temporary withholding of a lawyers
right to practice his profession as a lawyer for a
certain period or for an indefinite period of time:
a. Definite;
b. Indefinite qualified disbarment; lawyer
determines for himself how long or how
short his suspension shall last by proving
to court that he is once again fit to
resume practice of law.
NOTE: Indefinite suspension is not cruel. Indefinite
suspension put in his hands the key for the
restoration of his rights and privileges as a lawyer
(Dumadag v. Atty. Lumaya, A.C. No. 2614, June 29,
2000).
6. Disbarment it is the act of the Supreme Court of
withdrawing from an attorney the right to
practice law. The name of the lawyer is stricken
out from the Roll of Attorneys;
NOTE: A disbarred lawyer cannot be disbarred again
(Yuhico v. Atty. Gutierrez, A.C. No. 8391, November 23,
2010).

7. Interim Suspension it is the temporary

suspension of a lawyer from the practice of law
pending imposition of final discipline;
Includes:
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
2014 GOLDEN NOTES
80
 SUSPENSION, DISBARMENT AND DISCIPLINE OF LAWYERS
a. Suspension upon conviction of a serious
crime;
b. Suspension when the lawyers
continuing conduct is or is likely to cause
immediate and serious injury to a client
or public
8. Probation it is a sanction that allows a lawyer to
practice law under specified conditions.
SUI GENERIS
Sui generis in nature
Administrative cases against lawyers belong to a class
of their own (sui generis). They are distinct from and
may proceed independently of civil and criminal cases
(In re Almacen, G.R. No. L-27654, Feb. 18, 1970; Funa,
2009).
Main objectives of disbarment and suspension
1. Compel the attorney to deal fairly and honestly
with his clients;
2. Remove from the profession a person whose
misconduct has proved him unfit to be entrusted
with the duties and responsibilities belonging to
the office of an attorney;
3. Punish the lawyer;
4. Set an example or a warning for the other
members of the bar;
5. Safeguard the administration of justice from
incompetent and dishonest lawyers;
6. Protect the public.
NOTE: The purpose and the nature of disbarment
proceedings make the number of defenses available in civil
and criminal actions inapplicable in disciplinary proceedings.
PRESCRIPTION
There is no prescriptive period for the filing of a
complaint against an erring lawyer
Rule VII, Section 1 of the Rules of Procedure of the
CBD-IBP, which provides for a prescriptive period for
the filing of administrative complaints against lawyers,
should be struck down as void and of no legal effect
for being ultra vires (Heirs of Falame v. Atty. Baguio,
A.C. No. 6876, Mar. 7, 2008).
Q: Atty. Gutierrez phoned Yuhico and asked for a cash
loan claiming that he needed money to pay for the
medical expenses of his mother who was seriously ill,
and promised to pay the loan very soon.
Consequently, he asked Yuhico again for a
loan to pay for his wifes hospitalization and
81
again promised to pay within a short time
but failed to do so. Later, he again attempted to
borrow money for his daughters licensure exa
mination in the US Medical Board and assured Yuhico
that he will pay his debts on or before a certain date
but Yuhico refused to lend him the money, instead,
he demanded payment of his debts. Atty. Gutierrez
failed to pay which led to the filing of a complaint
before the IBP- CBD for non-payment of just debts. It
turned out that Atty. Gutierrez was previously
disbarred in the case of Huyssen v Atty. Gutierrez for
gross misconduct in view of his failure to pay his
debts and his issuance of worthless checks. May Atty.
Gutierrez be disbarred for the second time?
A: No. The SC held that while the IBP recommended to
disbar Atty. Gutierrez for the second time, we do not
have double or multiple disbarment in our laws or
jurisprudence and neither do we have a law mandating
a minimum 5-year requirement for readmission, as
cited by the IBP. Thus, while Gutierrezs infraction calls
for the penalty of disbarment, they cannot disbar him
anew (Yuhico v Atty. Gutierrez, A.C. No. 8391, Nov. 23,
2010).
GROUNDS
Specific grounds for suspension or disbarment of a
lawyer
1. Deceit;
2. Malpractice;
3. Grossly immoral conduct;
4. Conviction of a crime involving moral turpitude;
5. Violation of oath of office;
6. Willful disobedience of any lawful order of a
superior court;
7. Corrupt or willful appearance as an attorney for a
party to a case without authority to do so (RRC,
Sec. 27, Rule 138);
8. 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.
Lawyers misconduct committed prior and after
admission to the bar and its effects
1. Prior to admission to the bar - acts of misconduct
prior to admission include those that indicate that
at the time the lawyer took his oath, he did not
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW
 Legal Ethics
possess the required qualifications for
membership in the bar. Consequently, the
cancellation of his license is justified.
2. After admission to the bar - those which cause loss
of moral character on his part or involve violation
of his duties to the court, his client, to the legal
profession and to the public.
NOTE: Disbarment and suspension of a lawyer, being the
most severe forms of disciplinary sanction, should be
imposed with great caution and only in those cases where
the misconduct of the lawyer as an officer of the court and a
member of the bar is established by clear, convincing and
satisfactory proof (Vitug v. Rongcal, A.C. No. 6313, Sept. 7,
2006).
Disbarment is merited when the action is not the lawyers
first ethical infraction of the same nature (Que v. Revilla, A.C.
No. 7054, Dec. 4, 2009).
Lending money by a justice of Supreme Court, not a ground
for disbarment and helping a person apply for sale
application on a lot is not an offense and not also a ground
for disbarment (Olazo v. Justice Tinga (Ret.), A.M. No. 10-5-
7-SC, December 7, 2010).
Malpractice
It refers to any malfeasance or dereliction of duty
committed by a lawyer (Tan TekBeng v. David, Adm.
Case No. 1261, Dec. 29 1983; Lapena,Jr., 2009).
Legal malpractice
It consists of failure of an attorney to use such skill,
prudence and diligence as a lawyer of ordinary skill and
capacity commonly possess and exercise in the
performance of tasks which they undertake, and when
such failure proximately causes damage, it gives rise to
an action in tort (Tan TekBeng v. David, A.C. No. 1261,
Dec. 29, 1983).
Gross misconduct
It is any inexcusable, shameful or flagrant unlawful
conduct on the part of the person concerned in the
administration of justice which is prejudicial to the
rights of the parties or to the right determination of a
cause, a conduct that is generally motivated by a
predetermined, obstinate or intentional purpose
(Yumol Jr. v. Ferrer, Sr., A.C. No. 6585, Apr. 21, 2005).
Grossly immoral conduct
It is one that is so corrupt and false as to constitute a
criminal act or so unprincipled or disgraceful as to be
reprehensible to a high degree (Vitug v. Rongcal, A.C.
No. 6313, Sept. 7, 2006);
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
2014 GOLDEN NOTES
82
NOTE: Mere intimacy between a lawyer and a woman with
no impediment to marry each other, and who voluntarily
cohabited and had two children, is neither so corrupt to
constitute a criminal act nor so unprincipled as to warrant
disbarment or disciplinary action against the man as a
member of the bar (Arciga v. Maniwang, A.C. No. 1608, Aug.
14, 1981).
Moral turpitude
It has been defined as everything that is done
contrary to justice, honesty, modesty, or good morals,
an act of baseness, vileness, or depravity in the private
duties which a man owes his fellowmen, or to society
in general, contrary to the accepted and customary
rule of right and duty between man and woman, or
conduct contrary to justice, honesty modesty, or good
morals (Soriano v. Dizon, A. C. No. 6792, Jan. 25, 2006).
Other statutory grounds for suspension and
disbarment of members of the bar
Other statutory grounds include:
1. Acquisition of interest in the subject matter of the
litigation, either through purchase or assignment
(NCC, Art. 1491);
2. Breach of professional duty, inexcusable
negligence, or ignorance, or for the revelation of
the clients secrets (RPC, Art. 208);
3. Representing conflicting interests (RPC, Art. 209).
Other grounds for discipline
1. Non-professional misconduct
GR: A lawyer may not be suspended or disbarred for
misconduct in his non-professional or private
capacity.
XPN: Where such is so gross as to show him
to be morally unfit for office or unworthy of
privilege, the court may be justified in
suspending or removing him from the Roll of
Attorneys. (2005 Bar Question)
NOTE: The issuance of worthless checks constitutes gross
misconduct as its effect transcends the private interests
of the parties directly involved in the transaction and
touches the interests of the community at large.
2. Gross immorality An act of personal immorality
on the part of a lawyer in his private relation with
opposite sex may put his character in doubt. But
to justify suspension or disbarment, the act must
not only be immoral, it must be grossly immoral
(Abaigar v. Paz, A.M. No. 997, Sept. 10, 1979).
NOTE: Cohabitation per se is not grossly immoral. It
 SUSPENSION, DISBARMENT AND DISCIPLINE OF LAWYERS
depends on circumstances and is not necessary that
there be prior conviction for an offense before lawyer
may be disciplined for gross immorality. If the evidence
is not sufficient to hold a lawyer liable for gross
immorality, he may still be reprimanded where
evidence shows failure on his part to comply with
rigorous standards of conduct required from lawyers.
3. Conviction of a crime involving moral turpitude
All crimes of which fraud or deceit is an element
or those inherently contrary to rules of right
conduct, honesty or morality in civilized
community.
4. Promoting to violate or violating penal laws
5. Misconduct in discharge of official duties A
lawyer who holds a government office may not be
disciplined as a member of the bar for misconduct
in the discharge of his duties as government
official.
However, if the misconduct is in violation of the
CPR or of his oath as a lawyer or is of such a
character as to affect his qualifications as a lawyer,
he may be subject to disciplinary action such as
disbarment (Collantes v. Renomeron, A.C. No.
3056, Aug. 16, 1991).
NOTE: This rule does not apply to impeachable officials
like SC justices, members of constitutional commissions
and Ombudsman because they can be removed only by
impeachment.
6. Commission of fraud or falsehood; and
7. Misconduct as notary public
NOTE: By applying for having himself commissioned as
notary public, a lawyer assumes duties in a dual
capacity, the non-performance of which may be a
ground for discipline as a member of the bar.
PROCEEDINGS
Characteristics of disbarment proceedings
1. Sui Generis
a. Neither purely civil nor purely criminal, they
are investigations by the Court into the
conduct of one of its officers.
b. Not a civil action because there is neither
plaintiff nor respondent, and involves no
private interest. The complainant is not a
party and has no interest in the outcome
except as all citizens have in the proper
administration of justice. There is no redress
for private grievance.
c. Not a criminal prosecution because it is not
meant as a punishment depriving him of
83
source of livelihood but rather to ensure that
those who exercise the function should be
competent, honorable and reliable so that
the public may repose confidence in them.
NOTE: A disbarment proceeding may proceed
regardless of interest or lack of interest of the
complainant (Rayos-Ombac v. Rayos, A.C. No. 2884, Jan.
28, 1998). However, if the complainant refuses to
testify and the charges cannot then be substantiated,
the court will have no alternative but to dismiss the case.
(2000 Bar Question)
2. The defense of double jeopardy cannot be
availed of in a disbarment proceeding;
3. It can be initiated motu proprio by the SC or IBP. It
can be initiated without a complaint;
4. It is imprescriptible;
5. Conducted confidentially;
6. It can proceed regardless of the interest or the
lack thereof on the part of the complainant; and
7. It in itself constitutes due process of law.
8. Whatever has been decided in a disbarment case
cannot be a source of right that may be enforced
in another action;
9. In pari delicto rule not applicable;
10. No prejudicial question in disbarment
proceedings;
11. Penalty in a disbarment case cannot be in the
alternative; and
12. Monetary claims cannot be granted except
restitution and return of monies and properties of
the client given in the course of the lawyer-client
relationship.
Three-fold purpose of confidentiality of disbarment
proceedings
1. To enable the court to make its investigation free
from extraneous influence or interference;
2. To protect the personal and professional reputation
of attorneys from baseless charges of disgruntled,
vindictive and irresponsible persons or clients by
prohibiting publication of such charges pending
their final resolution (Albano v. Coloma, A.C. No.
528, Oct. 11, 1967);
3. To deter the press from publishing charges or
proceedings based thereon for even a verbatim
reproduction of the complaint against an attorney
in the newspaper may be actionable.
NOTE: The confidentiality of the proceedings is a privilege
which may be waived by the lawyer in whom and for the
protection of whose personal and professional reputation it
is vested, as by presenting the testimony in a disbarment
case or using it as impeaching evidence in a civil suit (Villalon
v. IAC, G.R. No. L-73751, Sept. 24, 1986).
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW
 Legal Ethics
Offices authorized to investigate disbarment
proceedings
1. Supreme Court (RRC, Sec. 13, Rule 139-B)
2. IBP through its Commission on Bar Discipline or
authorized investigator (RRC, Sec. 2, Rule 139-B)
3. Office of the Solicitor General (RRC, Sec. 13, Rule
139-B)
Purposes of disbarment
1. To protect the public
2. To protect and preserve the legal profession
3. To compel the lawyer to comply with his duties and
obligations under the CPR.
The burden of proof is upon the complainant and the
SC will exercise its disciplinary power only if the
complainant establishes his case by the required
quantum of proof which is clear, convincing and
satisfactory evidence (Aquino v. Mangaoang, A.C. No.
4934, Mar. 17, 2004).
PROCEDURE FOR DISBARMENT
BAR MATTER NO. 1960 (MAY 1, 2000)
AMANEDMENT OF SEC. 1, RULE 139-B OF THE ROC
Proceedings for disbarment, suspension or discipline
of attorneys may be taken by the:
1. Supreme Court motu proprio; or
2. Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP) upon
the verified complaint of any person. The
complaint shall state clearly and concisely the facts
complained of and shall be supported by affidavits
of persons having personal knowledge of the facts
therein alleged and/or by such documents as may
substantiate said facts.
DISBARMENT PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE IBP
The IBP Board of Governors may motu proprio, or upon
referral by the Supreme Court, or by a Chapter Board
of Officers, or at the instance of any person, initiate
and prosecute proper charges against erring attorneys
including those in the government service; Provided,
however, that all charges against Justices of the Court
of Tax Appeals and the Sandiganbayan, and Judges of
the Court of Tax Appeals and lower courts, even if
lawyers are jointly charged with them, shall be filed
with the Supreme Court; Provided, further, that
charges filed against Justices and Judges before the IBP,
including those filed prior to their appointment in the
Judiciary, shall immediately be forwarded to the
Supreme Court for disposition and adjudication.
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
2014 GOLDEN NOTES
84
PROCEDURAL STEPS FOR
DISBARMENT IN THE IBP
1. The Board of Governors shall appoint from among
the IBP members an investigator or when special
circumstances so warrant, a panel of 3
investigators to investigate the complaint;
2. If the complaint is meritorious, the respondent
shall be served with a copy requiring him to
answer within 15 days from service.
3. The respondent shall file a verified answer
containing 6 copies; after receipt of the answer or
lapse of the period to do so, the Supreme Court,
may, motu proprio or at the instance of the IBP
Board of Governors, upon recommendation by
the investigator, suspend an attorney from
practice, for any of the causes under Rule 138,
Sec. 27, during the pendency of the investigation
4. After joinder of the issues or failure to answer, the
respondent shall be given full opportunity to
defend himself. But if the respondent fails to
appear to defend himself in spite of notice, the
investigator may proceed ex parte. The
investigation shall be terminated within 3 months
from commencement which period may be
extended.
5. The investigator shall make a report to the Board
of Governors within 30 days from termination of
the investigation which report shall contain his
findings and recommendations together with the
evidence.
6. The Board of Governors shall have the power to
review the decision of the investigator. Its
decision shall be promulgated within a period not
exceeding 30 days from the next meeting of the
Board following the submission of the report of
the investigator.
7. If the decision is a finding of guilt of the charges,
the IBP Board of Governors shall issue a resolution
setting forth its findings and recommendations
which shall be transmitted to the Supreme Court
for final action together with the record.
If the decision is for exoneration, or if the sanction
is less than suspension or dismissal, the Board
shall issue a decision exonerating the respondent
of imposing a lesser sanction. The resolution
exonerating the respondent shall be considered
as terminating the case unless upon petition of
the complainant or other interested party filed
with the Supreme Court within 15 days from
notice of the Boards decision.
 SUSPENSION, DISBARMENT AND DISCIPLINE OF LAWYERS
RESOLUTION OF THE COURT EN BANC
DATED JUNE 17, 2008 B.M. NO. 1755
(RE: RULES OF PROCEDURE OF THE COMMISSION
ON BAR DISCIPLINE)
Propriety of a motion for reconsideration
1. A party can no longer file a motion for
reconsideration of any order or resolution of the
Investigating Commissioner, such motion being a
prohibited pleading.
2. Regarding the issue of whether a motion for
reconsideration of a decision or resolution of the
Board of Governors (BOG) can be entertained, an
aggrieved party can file said motion with the BOG
within fifteen (15) days from notice of receipt
thereof by said party.
3. In case a decision is rendered by the BOG that
exonerates the respondent or imposes a sanction
less than suspension or disbarment, the aggrieved
party can file a motion for reconsideration within
the 15-day period from notice. If the motion is
denied, said party can file a petition for a review
under Rule 45 of the Rules of Court with the
Supreme Court within fifteen (15) days from
notice of the resolution resolving the motion. If no
motion for reconsideration is filed, the decision
shall become final and executory and a copy of
said decision shall be furnished the Supreme
Court.
4. If the imposable penalty is suspension from the
practice of law or disbarment, the BOG shall issue
a resolution setting forth its findings and
recommendations. The aggrieved party can file a
motion for reconsideration of said resolution with
the BOG within fifteen (15) days from notice. The
BOG shall first resolve the incident and shall
thereafter elevate the assailed resolution with the
entire case records to the Supreme Court for final
action. If the 15-day period lapses without any
motion for reconsideration having been filed,
then the BOG shall likewise transmit to this Court
the resolution with the entire case records for
appropriate action.
NOTE: Lawyers must update their records with the IBP by
informing the IBP National Office or their respective chapters
of any change in office or residential address and other
contact details. In case such change is not duly updated,
service of notice on the office or residential address
appearing in the records of the IBP National Office shall
constitute sufficient notice to a lawyer for purposes of
administrative proceedings against him (KeldStemmerik v.
Atty. Leonuel Mas, A.C. No. 8010, June 16, 2009).
85
DISBARMENT PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE
SUPREME COURT
1. In proceedings initiated motu proprio by the
Supreme Court or in other proceeding when the
interest of justice so requires, the Supreme Court
may refer the case for investigation to the
Solicitor General or to any officer of the Supreme
Court or judge of a lower court, in which case the
investigation shall proceed in the same manner
provided in Sections 6 to 11 of Rule 139-B, RRC,
save that the review of the report of investigation
shall be conducted directly by the Supreme Court
(RRC, Sec. 13, Rule 139-B)
NOTE: Reference of the Court to the IBP of complaints
against lawyers is not mandatory (Zaldivar v.
Sandiganbayan, G.R. Nos. 79590-707; Zaldivar v.
Gonzales, G.R. No. 80578, Oct. 7,1988).
NOTE: Reference of complaints to the IBP is not an
exclusive procedure under Rule 139-B, RRC. The Court
may conduct disciplinary proceedings without the
intervention of the IBP by referring cases for
investigation to the Solicitor General or to any officer of
the Supreme Court or judge of a lower court. In such
case, the report or recommendation of the investigating
official shall be reviewed directly by the Supreme Court
(Bautista v. Gonzales, A.M. No. 1626, February 12,1990;
Funa, 2009).
2. Based upon the evidence adduced at the
investigation, the Solicitor General or other
Investigator designated by the Supreme Court a
report containing his findings of fact and
recommendations together with the record and
all the evidence presented in the investigation for
the final action of the Supreme Court (RRC, Sec.
14, Rule 139-B).
Q: Atty. Narags spouse filed a petition for
disbarment because her husband courted one of his
students, maintained the said student as a mistress
and had children with her. On the other hand, Atty.
Narag claimed that his wife was a possessive, jealous
woman who abused him and filed the complaint
against him out of spite. Atty. Narag, however, failed
to refute the testimony given against him. His actions
were of public knowledge. Is Atty. Narags
disbarment appropriate?
A: Yes, Atty. Narag failed to prove his innocence
because he failed to refute the testimony given against
him and it was proved that his actions were of public
knowledge and brought disrepute and suffering to his
wife and children. Good moral character is a
continuing qualification required of every member of
the bar. Thus, when a lawyer fails to meet the exacting
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW
 Legal Ethics

standard of moral integrity, the Supreme Court may

withdraw his or her privilege to practice law. When a
lawyer is found guilty of gross immoral conduct, he
may be suspended or disbarred. As a lawyer, one must
not only refrain from adulterous relationships but
must not behave in a way that scandalizes the public
by creating a belief that he is flouting those moral
standards (Narag v. Atty. Narag, A.C. No. 3405, June
29, 1998).

Effect of lawyers death in an administrative

proceeding against him

1. Renders the action moot and academic, but

2. The Court may still resolve the case on its merit in
order to clear publicly the name of the lawyer

PROCEDURE FOR DISBARMENT OR DISCIPLINE OF ATTONEYS BY THE

SUPREME COURT MOTU PROPRIO (Rule 139-B, RRC)
Supreme Court shall refer the case to an investigator, who
may either be:
1. Solicitor General,
2. Any officer of the SC, or
3. Any judge of a lower court
e

Notify Respondent

RESPONDENTS VERIFIED ANSWER (Must be filed withi

n 15 days from service)

INVESTIGATION
(TERMINATE WITHIN 3 MONTHS)

REPORT TO SUPREME COURT (to be submitted not later

than 30 days from investigations termination)

REPORT MUST CONTAIN THE INVESTIGATORS:

SUPREME COURT
1. Findings of fact
FOR REVIEW or
2. Recommendations
JUDGMENT

UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS

2014 GOLDEN NOTES
86
 SUSPENSION, DISBARMENT AND DISCIPLINE OF LAWYERS

PROCEDURE FOR DISBARMENT OR DISCIPLINE OF ATTORNEYS BY THE IBP (Rule 139-B, RRC)

VERIFIED COMPLAINT TO THE IBP BY ANY PERSON

IBP MotuProprio (Committee on Bar Complaint must be:
Discipline through National Grievance 1. In writing;
Investigator) 2. State facts complained of; and
3. Supported by affidavits / documents

Shall appoint an investigator / panel of 3

investigators and notify respondent

RECOMMEND DISMISSAL IF NOT IF MERITORIOUS,

MERITORIOUS RESPONDENTS VERIFIED ANSWER
(Must be filed within 15 days from
service)

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

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

BOARD OF GOVERNORS FOR REVIEW REPORT TO BOARD OF GOVERNORS

(issues a Resolution Should be (Submitted not later than 30 days from
promulgated within a period not termination of investigation) containing:
exceeding 30 days from the next meeting Findings of facts
of the board following the submittal of Recommendations
the Investigators Report.)

SUPREME COURT FOR

JUDGMENT

ISSUE DECISION IF: The case shall be deemed terminated unless

Exonerated upon petition of the complainant or other
Sanction is less than suspension / interested party filed with the Supreme Court
disbarment (admonition, within fifteen (15) days from notice of the
reprimand, or fine) Board's resolution, the Supreme Court orders
otherwise

UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS

87 FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW
 Legal Ethics
Effect of the desistance or withdrawal of complaint
or non-appearance of complainant in disbarment
proceedings
The desistance or the withdrawal of the complainant
of the charges against a judge/lawyer does not deprive
the court of the authority to proceed to determine the
matter. Nor does it necessarily result in the dismissal
of the complaint except when, as a consequence of the
withdrawal or desistance no evidence is adduced to
prove the charges.
The doctrine of res ipsa loquitur is applicable in cases
of dismissal of judges or disbarment of lawyers (1996,
2003 Bar Questions)
This principle or doctrine applies to both judges and
lawyers. Judges had been dismissed from the service
without need of a formal investigation because based
on the records, the gross misconduct or inefficiency of
judges clearly appears (Uy v. Mercado, A.M. No. R-368-
MTJ, Sept. 30, 1987).
The same principle applies to lawyers. Thus, where on
the basis of the lawyers comment or answer to show
a show-cause order of SC, it appears that the lawyer
has so conducted himself in a manner which exhibits
his blatant disrespect to the court, or his want of good
moral character or his violation of the attorneys oath,
the lawyer may be suspended or disbarred without
need of trial-type proceeding. What counts is that the
lawyer has been given the opportunity to air his side
(Prudential Bank v. Castro, A.M. No. 2756, June 5,
1986).
Mitigating circumstances in disbarment
1. Good faith in the acquisition of a property of the
client subject of litigation (In Re: Ruste, A.M. No.
632, June 27, 1940);
2. Inexperience of the lawyer (Munoz v. People, G.R.
No. L-33672, Sept. 28, 1973);
3. Age (Santos v. Tan, A.C. No. 2697, Apr. 19, 1991);
4. Apology (Munoz v. People, G.R. No. L- 33672, Sept.
28, 1973);
5. Lack of Intention to slight or offend the Court
(Rheem of the Philippines, Inc. v. Ferrer, G.R. No.
L-22979, Jan. 27, 1967);
6. Absence of prior disciplinary record;
7. Absence of dishonest or selfish motive;
8. Personal or emotional problems;
9. Timely good faith effort to make restitution or to
rectify consequences of misconduct;
10. Full and free disclosure to disciplinary board or
cooperative attitude toward the proceedings;
11. Character or reputation;
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
2014 GOLDEN NOTES
88
12. Physical or mental disability or impairment;
13. Delay in disciplinary proceedings;
14. Interim rehabilitation;
15. Imposition of other penalties or sanctions;
16. Remorse;
17. Remoteness of prior offenses (IBP Guidelines
9.32).
NOTE: Disbarment should not be decreed where any
punishment less severe such as reprimand, suspension or
fine would accomplish the end desired (Amaya v. Tecson, A.C.
No. 5996, Feb. 7, 2005).
Aggravating circumstances in disbarment
1. Prior disciplinary offenses;
2. Dishonest or selfish motives;
3. A pattern of misconduct;
4. Multiple offenses;
5. Bad faith obstruction of the disciplinary
proceeding by intentionally failing to comply with
rules or orders of the disciplinary agency;
6. Submission of false evidence, false statements, or
other deceptive practices during the disciplinary
process;
7. Refusal to acknowledge wrongful nature of
conduct;
8. Vulnerability of victim;
9. Substantial experience in the practice of law; and
10. Indifference to making restitution. (IBP Guidelines
9.22)
Guidelines to be observed in the lifting of an order
suspending a lawyer from the practice of law
1. Upon the expiration of the period of suspension,
respondent shall file a Sworn Statement with the
Court, through the Office of the Bar Confidant,
stating therein that he or she has desisted from the
practice of law and has not appeared in any court
during the period of his or her suspension;
2. Copies of the Sworn Statement shall be furnished to
the Local Chapter of the IBP and to the Executive
Judge of the courts where respondent has pending
cases handled by him or her, and/or where he or
she has appeared as counsel; and
3. The Sworn Statement shall be considered as proof
of respondents compliance with the order of
suspension;
DISCIPLINE OF FILIPINO LAWYERS
PRACTICING ABROAD
If the Filipino lawyer is disbarred or suspended from
the practice of law by a competent court or disciplinary
agency in a foreign jurisdiction where he has been
 SUSPENSION, DISBARMENT AND DISCIPLINE OF LAWYERS

admitted as an attorney, and a ground therefor

includes any of the acts enumerated in Section 27,
Rule 138 of the RRC, such disbarment or suspension is
a ground for his disbarment or suspension in the
Philippines (Lapena, 2009).

NOTE: The judgment, resolution or order of the foreign court

or disciplinary agency shall be prima facie evidence of the
ground for disbarment or suspension (SC Resolution date 21
February 1992 amending Sec. 27, Rule 138, RRC).

Judgment of suspension of a Filipino lawyer in a

foreign court

The judgment of suspension against a Filipino lawyer

in a foreign jurisdiction does not automatically result
in his suspension or disbarment in the Philippines as
the acts giving rise to his suspension are not grounds
for disbarment and suspension in this jurisdiction.
Judgment of suspension against a Filipino lawyer may
transmute into a similar judgment of suspension in the
Philippines only if the basis of the foreign court's
action includes any of the grounds for disbarment or
suspension in this jurisdiction. Such judgment merely
constitutes prima facie evidence of unethical acts as
lawyer (Velez v. De Vera, A.C. No. 6697, July 25, 2006).

Q: Atty. LA is a member of the Philippine Bar and the

California Bar in the United States. For willful
disobedience of a lawful order of a Superior Court in
Los Angeles, Atty. LA was suspended from the
practice of law in California for one (1) year. May his
suspension abroad be considered a ground for
disciplinary action against Atty. LA in the Philippines?
Why? (2002 Bar Question)

A: The suspension of Atty. LA from the practice of law

abroad may be considered as a ground for disciplinary
action here if such suspension was based on one of the
grounds for disbarment in the Philippines or shows a
loss of his good moral character, a qualification he has
to maintain in order to remain a member of the
Philippine Bar.

UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS

89 FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW
 Legal Ethics
READMISSION TO THE BAR
Reinstatement and its requirements
Reinstatement is the restoration of the privilege to
practice law after a lawyer has been disbarred. The
applicant must, satisfy the Court that he is a person of
good moral character a fit and proper person to
practice law.
NOTE: The power of the Supreme Court to reinstate is based
on its constitutional prerogative to promulgate rules on the
admission of applicants to the practice of law (1987
Constitution, Sec. 5[5], Art. VIII).
READMISSION TO THE BAR OF LAWYERS
WHO HAVE BEEN SUSPENDED
Q: Raul Gonzales was found guilty of both contempt
of court in facie curiae and gross misconduct as an
officer of court and member of the bar. For this, he
was suspended indefinitely. After more than 4 years
from his suspension, Gonzales filed an ex-parte
motion to lift his suspension from the practice of law,
alleging that he gave free legal aid services by paying
lawyers to do the same as he could not personally
represent said clients; pursued civic work for the
poor; brought honor to the country by delivering a
paper in Switzerland; that he has a long record in the
service of human rights and the rule of law; his
suspension of 51 months has been the longest so far;
states his profound regrets for the inconvenience
which he has caused to the Court; sincerely reiterates
his respect to the institution as he reiterates his oath
to conduct himself as a lawyer. May his suspension
be lifted?
A: Yes. Gonzales contrition, so noticeably absent in his
earlier pleadings, has washed clean the offense of his
disrespect. His remorse has soften his arrogance and
made up for his misconduct. Gonzales suspension has
given him ample time and opportunity to amend his
erring ways, rehabilitate himself, and thus, prove
himself worthy once again to enjoy the privileges of
membership of the Bar. His motion was granted
(Zaldivar v. Gonzales, G.R. Nos. 79690- 707, April 7,
1993).
Lifting of suspension is not automatic upon the end
of the period stated in the Courts decision
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
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
2014 GOLDEN NOTES
90
Enterprises, Inc. et al. v. Atty. de Vera, et al. and Atty.
de Vera v. Atty. Encanto, et al.).
Thus, according to the OBC, a suspended lawyer must
first present proof(s) of his compliance by submitting
certifications from the Integrated Bar of the
Philippines and from the Executive Judge that he has
indeed desisted from the practice of law during the
period of suspension. Thereafter, the Court, after
evaluation, and upon a favorable recommendation
from the OBC, will issue a resolution lifting the order
of suspension and thus allow him to resume the
practice of law (Maniago v. Atty. De Dios, A.C. No. 7472,
March 30, 2010).
Guidelines to be observed in case of lifting an order
which suspended a lawyer from the practice of law
The following guidelines were issued by the Supreme
Court, the same to be observed in the matter of the
lifting of an order suspending a lawyer from the
practice of law:
1. After a finding that respondent lawyer must be
suspended from the practice of law, the Court
shall render a decision imposing the penalty;
2. Unless the Court explicitly states that the decision
is immediately executory upon receipt thereof,
respondent has 15 days within which to file a
motion for reconsideration thereof. The denial of
said motion shall render the decision final and
executory;
3. Upon the expiration of the period of suspension,
respondent shall file a Sworn Statement with the
Court, through the Office of the Bar Confidant,
stating therein that he or she has desisted from
the practice of law and has not appeared in any
court during the period of his or her suspension;
4. Copies of the Sworn Statement shall be furnished
to the Local Chapter of the IBP and to the
Executive Judge of the courts where respondent
has pending cases handled by him or her, and/or
where he or she has appeared as counsel;
5. The Sworn Statement shall be considered
as proof of respondents compliance with the
order of suspension;
6. Any finding or report contrary to the statements
made by the lawyer under oath shall be a ground
for the imposition of a more severe punishment,
or disbarment, as may be warranted.
 READMISSION TO THE BAR
READMISSION TO THE BAR OF LAWYERS
WHO HAVE BEEN DISBARRED
Requirements for judicial clemency for disbarred
lawyers and judges
1. There must be proof of remorse and reformation.
2. Sufficient time must have elapsed from the
imposition of the penalty to ensure a period of
reform.
3. The age of the person asking for clemency must
show that he still has productive years ahead of him
that can be put to good use by giving him a chance
to redeem himself.
4. There must be a showing of promise (such as
intellectual aptitude, learning or legal acumen or
contribution to the legal scholarship and the
development of the legal system), as well as
potential for public service.
5. There must be other relevant factors and
circumstances that may justify clemency.
Supreme Courts guidelines in reinstatement
1. The applicants character and standing prior
to the disbarment;
2. The nature and character of the charge for which
he was disbarred;
3. His conduct subsequent to the disbarment, and
the time that has elapsed between the
disbarment and the application for reinstatement
(Prudential Bank v. Benjamin Grecia, A.C. No.
2756, Dec. 18, 1990);
4. His efficient government service (In re: Adriatico,
G.R. No. L-2532, Nov. 17, 1910);
5. Applicants appreciation of the significance of
his dereliction and his assurance that he now
possesses the requisite probity and integrity; and
6. Favorable endorsement of the IBP and pleas of his
loved ones (Yap Tan v. Sabandal, B.M. No. 144,
Feb. 24, 1989).
NOTE: Whether or not the applicant shall be reinstated rests
on the discretion of the court (Prudential Bank v. Benjamin
Grecia, A.C. No. 2756, Dec. 18, 1990).
The court may require applicant for reinstatement to enroll
in and pass the required fourth year review classes in a
recognized law school (Cui v. Cui, In Re: Resian, A.C. No. 270,
Mar. 20, 1974).
Effects of reinstatement
1. Reinstatement to the roll of attorneys wipes out
the restrictions and disabilities resulting from a
91
previous disbarment (Cui v. Cui, G.R. No. L-18727,
Aug. 31, 1964);
2. Recognition of moral rehabilitation and mental
fitness to practice law;
3. Lawyer shall be subject to same law, rules and
regulations as those applicable to any other
lawyer; and
4. Lawyer must comply with the conditions imposed
on his readmission.
Effect of the executive pardon granted by the
President
If during the pendency of a disbarment proceeding the
respondent was granted executive pardon, the
dismissal of the case on that sole basis will depend on
whether the executive pardon is absolute or
conditional.
1. Absolute or unconditional pardon - the
disbarment case will be dismissed.
2. Conditional pardon - the disbarment case will not
be dismissed on the basis thereof.
NOTE: To be reinstated, there is still a need for the filing of
an appropriate petition with the Supreme Court (In re:
Rovero, A.M. No. 126, Dec. 29, 1980).
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).
NOTE: In the light of recent court pronouncements that a
lawyer may be disciplined even for non-professional
misconduct, one may argue that a lawyer convicted of a
crime involving moral turpitude, and subsequently receives
absolute pardon, may still be proceeded against under the
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW
 Legal Ethics
Code of Professional Responsibility even if the acts of which
he was found guilty did not involve professional misconduct
(A modification of In Re Lontok, supra). The ground for the
petition for disciplinary action under the Code must,
however, not be founded alone on the conviction but must
be based on the acts committed by the lawyer which
rendered him morally unfit to be a member of the bar
(Aguirre, Legal and Judicial Ethics. A Pre-week Reviewer,
2006 Edition).
Q: X, a member of the Bar, was charged with and
found guilty of estafa, for which he was sentenced to
suffer imprisonment and to indemnify the offended
party for the amount Involved. Not having taken an
appeal from the judgment of conviction, upon finality
thereof he was taken into custody to serve sentence.
A month after he was incarcerated, he was granted
pardon by the Chief Executive on condition that he
would not commit another offense during the
unserved portion of his prison sentence. Soon after
Xs release from custody after being pardoned, the
offended party in the criminal case filed a Complaint
for Disbarment against X in the Supreme Court. X set
up the defense that having been pardoned thus he
may not be disbarred from the practice of law
anymore. Is Xs contention tenable? (1999 Bar
Question)
A: Xs contention is not tenable. He was granted only a
conditional pardon. Such conditional pardon merely
relieved him of the penal consequences of his act but
did not operate as a bar to his disbarment. Such
pardon does not reach the offense itself. Hence, it
does not constitute a bar to his disbarment. (In Re
GutierrezbA.C. No. L-363, July 31, 1962; In re Avancena,
A.C. No. 407, Aug. 15, 1967). Furthermore, the acts of
X leading to his conviction may be used to show that
he does not possess the necessary requirement of
good moral character for continued membership in
the Bar (In re Valloces, A.C. No. 439, Sept. 30, 1982).
READMISSION TO THE BAR OF LAWYERS
WHO HAVE BEEN REPATRIATED
Q: Dacanay practiced law until he migrated to Canada
to seek medical attention to his ailments. He
subsequently applied for Canadian citizenship to
avail of Canadas free medical aid program. His
application was approved and he became a Canadian
citizen. Dacanay later on reacquired his Philippine
citizenship by virtue of R.A. 9225. Did Dacanay lose
his membership in the Philippine bar when he gave
up his Philippine citizenship? Can he automatically
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
2014 GOLDEN NOTES
92
practice law upon reacquiring Filipino citizenship?
A: The Constitution provides that the practice of all
professions in the Philippines shall be limited to
Filipino citizens save in cases prescribed by law. Since
Filipino citizenship is a requirement for admission to
the bar, loss thereof terminates membership in the
Philippine bar and, consequently, the privilege to
engage in the practice of law. In other words, the loss
of Filipino citizenship ipso jure terminates the privilege
to practice law in the Philippines. The practice of law is
a privilege denied to foreigners.
The exception is when Filipino citizenship is lost by
reason of naturalization as a citizen of another country
but subsequently reacquired pursuant to R.A.
9225. This is because all Philippine citizens who
become citizens of another country shall be deemed
not to have lost their Philippine citizenship under the
conditions of R.A. 9225. Therefore, a Filipino lawyer
who becomes a citizen of another country is deemed
never to have lost his Philippine citizenship if he
reacquires it in accordance with R.A. 9225. Although
he is also deemed never to have terminated his
membership in the Philippine bar, no automatic right
to resume law practice accrues.
Before a lawyer who reacquires Filipino citizenship
pursuant to R.A. 9225 can resume his law practice, he
must first secure from the SC the authority to do so,
conditioned on:
1. The updating and payment in full of the annual
membership dues in the IBP;
2. The payment of professional tax;
3. The completion of at least 36 credit hours of
mandatory continuing legal education, this is
especially significant to refresh the
applicant/petitioners knowledge of Philippine
laws and update him of legal developments; and
4. The retaking of the lawyers oath which will not only
remind him of his duties and responsibilities as a
lawyer and as an officer of the Court, but also
renew his pledge to maintain allegiance to the
Republic of the Philippines (Petition for Leave to
Resume Practice of Law of Benjamin Dacanay, B.M.
No. 1678, Dec. 17, 2007).
 MANDATORY CONTINUING LEGAL EDUCATION
MANDATORY CONTINUING LEGAL EDUCATION
(MCLE)
Purpose of MCLE
MCLE ensures that members of the IBP are kept
abreast with law and jurisprudence throughout their
career, maintain the ethics of the profession and
enhance the standards of the practice of law.
Committee on Mandatory Continuing Legal
Education
1. Composition:
a. Retired Justice of the SC to act as Chairman,
who is nominated by the SC
b. IBP National President acts as the Vice-
Chairman
c. 3 other members nominated by the
Philippine Judicial Academy, UP Law Center
and Association of Law Professors,
respectively
2. Members are of proven probity and integrity
3. Compensation as may be determined by the SC
4. The initial terms of each of the 3 members shall be
5, 4, and 3 years respectively
REQUIREMENTS
Requirements of completion of MCLE
Members of the IBP, unless exempted under Rule 7,
shall complete every 3 years at least 36 hours of
continuing legal education activities. The 36 hours
shall be divided as follows:
1. 6 hours legal ethics
2. 4 hours trial and pretrial skills
3. 5 hours alternative dispute resolution
4. 9 hours updates on substantive and procedural
laws and jurisprudence
5. 4 hours legal writing and oral advocacy
6. 2 hours international law and international
conventions
7. Remaining 6 hours such other subjects as may
be prescribed by the Committee on MCLE
MCLE for a newly admitted member of the bar
Starts on the first day of the month of his admission.
(Bar Matter No. 850, Sec. 5, last par.)
Classes of credits
1. Participatory credit Attending approved
education activities like seminars, conventions,
symposia, and the like; speaking or lecturing, or
93
assigned as panelist, reactor, or commentator,
etc. in approved education activities; teaching in
law school or lecturing in bar review classes.
2. Non-participatory Preparing, as author or co-
author, written materials (article, book or book
review) which contribute to the legal education of
the author member, which were not prepared in
the ordinary course of his practice or
employment; editing a law book, law journal or
legal newsletter.
COMPLIANCE
Non-compliance of the MCLE
1. Failure to complete education requirement within
the compliance period;
2. Failure to provide attestation of compliance or
exemption;
3. Failure to provide satisfactory evidence of
compliance (including evidence of exempt status)
within the prescribed period;
4. Failure to satisfy the education requirement and
furnish evidence of such compliance within 60 days
from receipt of non-compliance notice;
5. Failure to pay non-compliance fee within the
prescribed period; or
6. Any other act or omission analogous to any of the
foregoing or intended to circumvent or evade
compliance with the MCLE requirements.
NOTE: Members failing to comply will receive a Non-
Compliance Notice stating the specific deficiency and will be
given 60 days from date of notification to file a response.
EXEMPTIONS
Persons exempted from the MCLE
1. The President, Vice-President and the Secretaries
and Undersecretaries of Executive Departments;
2. Senators and Members of the House of
Representatives;
3. The Chief Justice and Associate Justices of the
Supreme Court, incumbent and retired members
of the judiciary, incumbent members of Judicial
Bar Council, incumbent members of the MCLE
Committee, incumbent court lawyers who have
availed of the Philippine Judicial Academy
programs of continuing judicial education
(Amendment to Bar Matter 850, Resolution\ of the
Court En Banc, July 13, 2004);
4. The Chief State Counsel, Chief State Prosecutor
and Assistant Secretaries of the Dept. of Justice;
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW
 Legal Ethics
5. The Solicitor General and the Assistant Solicitor
General;
6. The Government Corporate Counsel, Deputy and
Assistant Government Corporate Counsel;
7. The Chairman and Members of the Constitutional
Commissions;
8. The Ombudsman, the Overall Deputy
Ombudsman, the Deputy Ombudsmen and the
Special Prosecutor of the Office of the
Ombudsman;
9. Heads of government agencies exercising quasi-
judicial functions;
10. Incumbent deans, bar reviewers and professors of
law who have teaching experience for at least 10
years in accredited law schools;
11. The Chancellor, Vice-Chancellor and members of
the Corps of Professional and Professorial
Lecturers of the Philippine Judicial Academy; and
12. Governors and Mayors because they are
prohibited from practicing their profession
Other parties exempted:
1. Those who are not in law practice, private or
public;
2. Those who have retired from law practice with the
approval of the IBP Board of Governors.
Request for exemption under special circumstance
If there is a good cause for exemption from or
modification of requirement, member may file a
verified request setting forth good cause for
exemption (such as physical disability, illness, post-
graduate study abroad, proven expertise in law, etc.)
from compliance with or modification of any of the
requirements, including an extension of time for
compliance, in accordance with procedure to be
established by the Committee on MCLE.
NOTE: Applications for exemption from or modification of
the MCLE requirement shall be under oath and supported by
documents.
Q: Atty. Mike started teaching Agrarian Reform and
Taxation in June 2001 at the Arts and Sciences
Department of the Far Eastern University. In 2005, he
moved to San Sebastian Institute of Law where he
taught Political Law. Is Atty. Mike exempt from
complying with the MCLE for the 4th compliance
period in April 2013? (2011 Bar Question)
A: No, since he has yet to complete the required
teaching experience to be exempt.
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
2014 GOLDEN NOTES
94
SANCTIONS
Consequences of non-compliance
A member who fails to comply with the requirements
after the 60-day period shall be listed as delinquent
member by the IBP Board of Governors upon
recommendation of the Committee on MCLE.
NOTE: The listing as a delinquent member is an
administrative in nature but it shall be made with notice and
hearing by the Committee on MCLE. B.M. No. 1922, which
took effect on January 1, 2009, requires practicing members
of the bar to indicate in all pleadings filed before the courts
or quasi-judicial bodies, the number and date of issue of
their MCLE Certificate of Compliance or Certificate of
Exemption, as may be applicable, for the immediately
preceding compliance period. Failure to disclose the
required information would cause the dismissal of the case
and the expunction of the pleadings from the records.
BAR MATTER 2012, RULE ON MANDATORY LEGAL
AID SERVICE
The mandatory Legal Aid Service mandates every
practicing lawyer to render a minimum of 60 hours of
free legal aid services to indigent litigants yearly.
Purpose
The rule seeks to enhance the duty of lawyers to the
society as agents of social change and to the courts as
officers thereof by helping improve access to justice by
the less privileged members of society and expedite
the resolution of cases involving them. Mandatory free
legal service by members of the bar and their active
support thereof will aid the efficient and effective
administration of justice especially in cases involving
indigent and pauper litigants (Sec. 2, B.M. No. 2012).
Scope
It shall govern the mandatory requirement for
practicing lawyers to render free legal aid services in
all cases (whether, civil, criminal or administrative)
involving indigent and pauper litigants where the
assistance of a lawyer is needed. It shall also govern
the duty of other members of the legal profession to
support the legal aid program of the Integrated Bar of
the Philippines (B.M. No. 2012, Sec 3).
Practicing lawyers are members of the Philippine Bar
who appear for and in behalf of parties in courts of law
and quasi-judicial agencies.
The term practicing lawyers shall EXCLUDE:
1. Government employees and incumbent elective
officials not allowed by law to practice;
 MANDATORY CONTINUING LEGAL EDUCATION
2. Lawyers who by law are not allowed to appear in
court;
3. Supervising lawyers of students enrolled in law
student practice in duly accredited legal clinics of
law schools and lawyers of non-governmental
organizations (NGOs) and peoples organizations
(POs) like the Free Legal Assistance Group who by
the nature of their work already render free legal
aid to indigent and pauper litigants; and
4. Lawyers not covered under subparagraphs 1 to 3
including those who are employed in the private
sector but do not appear for and in behalf of
parties in courts of law and quasi-judicial
agencies.(B.M. 1. 2012, Sec. 4[a])
Legal aid cases
It includes actions, disputes, and controversies that
are criminal, civil and administrative in nature in
whatever stage wherein indigent and pauper litigants
need legal representation (B. M.2012, Sec. 4[c]).
Requirements for mandatory legal aid service
Under the Rule, a practicing lawyer, among others,
shall coordinate with the Clerk of Court or the Legal
Aid Chairperson of ones Integrated Bar of the
Philippines (IBP) Chapter for cases where the lawyer
may render free legal aid service:
1. Every practicing lawyer is required to render a
minimum of 60 hours of free legal aid services to
indigent litigants in a year. Said 60 hours shall be
spread within the period of 12 months, with a
minimum of 5 hours of free legal aid services each
month. However, where it is necessary for the
practicing lawyer to render legal aid service for
more than 5 hours in one month, the excess hours
may be credited to the said lawyer for the
succeeding periods (B.M. 2012, Sec. 5[a] first
par.).
2. The practicing lawyer shall report compliance with
the requirement within 10 days of the last month
of each quarter of the year. (B.M. 2012, Sec. 5[a]
third par.)
3. A practicing lawyer shall be required to secure and
obtain a certificate from the Clerk of Court
attesting to the number of hours spent rendering
free legal aid services in a case. (B.M. 2012, Sec.
5[b])
4. Said compliance report shall be submitted to the
Legal Aid Chairperson of the IBP Chapter within
the Courts jurisdiction. (B.M. 2012, Sec. 5[c])
5. The IBP chapter shall, after verification, issue a
compliance certificate to the concerned lawyer.
The IBP Chapter shall also submit compliance
95
reports to the IBPs National Committee on Legal
Aid (NCLA) for recording and documentation. The
submission shall be made within forty-five (45)
days after the mandatory submission of
compliance reports by the practicing lawyers.
(B.M. 2012, Sec. 5[d])
6. Practicing lawyers shall indicate in all pleadings
filed before the courts or quasi-judicial bodies the
number and date of issue of their certificate of
compliance for the immediately preceding
compliance period. (B.M. 2012, Sec 5[e])
Contents of a certificate from the Clerk of Court
attesting the number of hours spent in rendering free
legal services
1. The case or cases where the legal aid service was
rendered, the party or parties in the said case(s),
the docket number of the said case(s) and the
date(s) the service was rendered
2. The number of hours actually spent
3. The number of hours actually spent attending
mediation, conciliation or any other mode of ADR
on a particular case
4. A motion (except a motion for extension of time to
file a pleading or for postponement of hearing or
conference) or pleading filed on a particular case
shall be considered as one (1) hour of service (B.M.
2012, Sec 5[b]).
NOTE: The Clerk of Court shall issue the certificate in
triplicate, one (1) copy to be retained by the practicing
lawyer, one (1) copy to be retained by the Clerk of Court and
one (1) copy to be attached to the lawyer's compliance
report (B.M. 2012, Sec 5[b][iv] second par.)
Credits to lawyers who render free legal aid
A lawyer who renders mandatory legal aid service for
the required number of hours in a year for the three
year-period covered by a compliance period under the
Rules on MCLE shall be credited the following:
1. Two (2) credit units for legal ethics
2. Two (2) credit units for trial and pretrial skills
3. Two (2) credit units for alternative dispute
resolution
4. Four (4) credit units for legal writing and oral
advocacy
5. Four (4) credit units for substantive and
procedural laws and jurisprudence
6. Six (6) credit units for such subjects as may be
prescribed by the MCLE Committee under
Section 2(g), Rule 2 of the Rules on MCLE
A lawyer who renders mandatory legal aid service for
the required number of hours in a year for at least two
consecutive years within the three year- period
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW
 Legal Ethics

covered by a compliance period under the Rules on officer of an NGO (non-governmental organizations) or PO
MCLE shall be credited the following: (peoples organizations) shall be a ground for an
1. One (1) credit unit for legal ethics administrative case against the said Clerk of Court or
Chairperson. This is without prejudice to the filing of the
2. One (1) credit unit for trial and pretrial skills
criminal and administrative charges against the malfeasor
3. One (1) credit unit for alternative dispute
(B.M. 2012, Sec. 7[e]).
resolution
4. Two (2) credit units for legal writing and oral
advocacy
5. Two (2) credit units for substantive and
procedural laws and jurisprudence
6. Three (3) credit units for such subjects as may be
prescribed by the MCLE Committee under
Section 2(g), Rule 2 of the Rules on MCLE. (Sec.
8, B.M. 2012)

Sanctions in case of non-compliance with the rule on

mandatory legal aid service

1. At the end of every calendar year, any practicing

lawyer who fails to meet the minimum prescribed
60 hours of legal aid service each year shall be
required by the IBP, through the National
Committee on Legal Aid (NCLA), to explain why he
was unable to render the minimum prescribed
number of hours.
2. If no explanation has been given or if the NCLA
finds the explanation unsatisfactory, the NCLA
shall make a report and recommendation to the
IBP Board of Governors that the erring lawyer be
declared a member of the IBP who is not in good
standing.
3. Upon approval of the NCLAs recommendation,
the IBP Board of Governors shall declare the
erring lawyer as a member not in good standing.
4. The notice to the lawyer shall include a directive
to pay P4,000.00 penalty which shall accrue to the
special fund for the legal aid program of the IBP.
5. The not in good standing declaration shall be
effective for a period of 3 months from the receipt
of the erring lawyer of the notice from the IBP
Board of Governors.
6. During the said period, the lawyer cannot appear
in court or any quasi-judicial body as counsel.
7. Provided, however, that the not in good
standing status shall subsist even after the lapse
of the 3-month period until and unless the penalty
shall have been paid.
8. Any lawyer who fails to comply with his duties
under this Rule for at least 3 consecutive years
shall be the subject of disciplinary proceedings to
be instituted motu proprio by the Committee on
Bar Discipline. (B.M. 2012, Sec. 7)
NOTE: The falsification of a certificate or any contents
thereof by any Clerk of Court or by any Chairperson of the
Legal Aid Committee of the IBP local chapter where the case
is pending or by the Director of a legal clinic or responsible

UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS

2014 GOLDEN NOTES
96
 NOTARIAL PRACTICE
NOTARIAL PRACTICE
(1996, 2005, 2007 Bar Questions)
Purpose of the Notarial Law
1. To promote, serve, and protect public interest;
2. To simplify, clarify, and modernize the rules
governing notaries public; and
3. To foster ethical conduct among notaries public
(Sec. 2, Rule I, A.M. No. 02-8-13-SC)
Effect of notarized document
A document acknowledged before a notary public is a
public document (RRC, Sec. 19, Rule 132) and may be
presented in evidence without further proof, the
certificate of acknowledgment being prima facie
evidence of the execution of the instrument or
document involved (RRC, Sec. 30, Rule 132).
QUALIFICATIONS OF NOTARY PUBLIC
Notary public
A person appointed by the court whose duty is to
attest to the genuineness of any deed or writing in
order to render them available as evidence of facts
stated therein and who is authorized by the statute to
administer various oaths.
NOTE: Notary Public" and "Notary" refer to any person
commissioned to perform official acts under the rules on
Notarial Practice (Sec. 9, Rule II, A.M. No. 02-8-13-SC).
Qualifications of a notary public
To be eligible for commissioning as notary public, the
petitioner must be:
1. A citizen of the Philippines;
2. Over 21 years of age;
3. A resident in the Philippines for at least 1 year and
maintains a regular place of work or business in the
city or province where the commission is to be
issued;
4. A member of the Philippine Bar in good standing
with clearances from the Office of the Bar
Confidant of the Supreme Court and the Integrated
Bar of the Philippines; and
5. Has not been convicted in the first instance of any
crime involving moral turpitude (second par., Sec.
1, Rule III,2004 Rules on Notarial Practice, A.M.).
Commission
It refers to the grant of authority to perform notarial
acts and to the written evidence of the authority (Sec.
3, Rule II, A.M. 02-8-13-SC).
97
Issuance of notarial commission
A notarial commission may be issued by an Executive
Judge to any qualified person who submits a petition
in accordance with the Rules on Notarial Practice (A.M.
No. 02-8-13-SC, first par., Sec. 1, Rule III).
Form of the petition and supporting documents for a
notarial commission
Every petition for a notarial commission shall be in
writing, verified, and shall include the following:
1. A statement containing the petitioner's personal
qualifications, including the petitioner's date of
birth, residence, telephone number, professional
tax receipt, roll of attorney's number and IBP
membership number;
2. Certification of good moral character of the
petitioner by at least 2 executive officers of the
local chapter of the Integrated Bar of the
Philippines where he is applying for commission;
3. Proof of payment for the filing of the petition as
required by the Rules on Notarial Practice; and
4. Three passport-size color photographs with light
background taken within 30 days of the
application. The photograph should not be
retouched. The petitioner shall sign his name at
the bottom part of the photographs (A.M. No. 02-
8-13-SC, Sec. 2,Rule III).
NOTE: Every petitioner for a notarial commission shall pay
the application fee as prescribed in the Rules of Court (A.M.
No. 02-8-13-SC, Sec. 3, Rule III).
Requirements before the executive judge conducts a
summary hearing on the petition
1. The petition is sufficient in form and substance;
2. The petitioner proves the allegations contained in
the petition; and
3. The petitioner establishes to the satisfaction of
the Executive Judge that he has read and fully
understood the Rules on Notarial Practice.
NOTE: The Executive Judge shall forthwith issue a
commission and a Certificate of Authorization to Purchase a
Notarial Seal in favor of the petitioner (A.M. No. 02-8-13-SC,
Sec. 4, Rule III)
Two kinds of duties
1. Execution of formalities required by law; and
2. Verification of the capacity and identity of the
parties as well as the legality of the act executed
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW
 Legal Ethics
Duties of a notary public
1. To keep a notarial register
2. To make the proper entry or entries in his notarial
register touching his notarial acts in the manner
required by the law
3. To send the copy of the entries to the proper clerk
of court within the first 10 days of the month next
following
4. To affix to acknowledgments the date of
expiration of his commission, as required by law
5. To forward his notarial register, when filled, to the
proper clerk of court
6. To make report, within reasonable time to the
proper judge concerning the performance of his
duties, as may be required by such judge
7. To make the proper notation regarding residence
certificates (Sec. 240, Rev. Adm. Code).
Lawyers as notary public
GR: Only those admitted to the practice of law are
qualified to be notaries public.
XPNs: When there are no persons with the necessary
qualifications or where there are qualified persons but
they refuse appointment. In which case, the following
persons may be appointed as notaries:
1. Those who passed the studies of law in a
reputable university; or
2. A clerk or deputy clerk of court for a period of
not less than two years.
Prohibition against the RTC judges to notarize
Section 35, Rule 138, of the Revised Rules of Court as
well as Canon 5, Rule 5.07 of the Code of Judicial
Conduct provides that no judge or other official or
employee of the superior courts shall engage in private
practice as a member of the bar or give professional
advice to clients. Notarization of documents is
considered a practice of law.
The rights, duties, privileges and functions of the office
of an attorney-at-law are so inherently incompatible
with the official functions, duties, powers, discretions
and privileges of a judge of the Regional Trial Court.
Authority of MTC judges to notarize and its limitation
MTC and MCTC judges may act as notaries public ex-
officio in the notarization of documents connected
only with the exercise of their official functions and
duties. They may not, as notaries public ex-officio,
undertake the preparation and acknowledgment of
private documents, contracts and other acts of
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
2014 GOLDEN NOTES
98
conveyances which bear no direct relation to the
performance of their functions as judges.
However, MTC and MCTC judges assigned to
municipalities or circuits with no lawyers or notaries
public may, in the capacity as notaries public ex-officio,
perform any act within the competence of a regular
notary public, provided that:
1. All notarial fees charged be for the account of
the Government and turned over to the
municipal treasurer
2. Certification be made in the notarized
documents attesting to the lack of any lawyer
or notary public in such municipality or
circuit.
Their authority to notarize is limited to their sala.
Hence, they cannot notarize documents filed in
another town because it will be considered as practice
of law.
Q: Vicente Batic charged Judge Victorio Galapon Jr.
with engaging in unauthorized notarial practice for
having notarized a Deed of Absolute Sale between
Antonio Caamic and Lualhati Ellert. Under the deed
of sale, Lualhati Ellert, was described as single. At the
time of Galapons notarization of the Deed of Sale,
there was a notary public in Dulag, Leyte. Judge
Galapon claims that he did not prepare the document
and that his participation was limited to its
acknowledgment, for which the corresponding fee
was collected by and paid to the clerk of court. Are
MTC judges like Judge Galapon absolutely prohibited
from acting as notaries public?
A: No. While Judge Galapon explains that he sincerely
believed that when no notary public is available, the
MTC may act as ex-officio notary public, provided the
fees shall be for the government, such is not enough
to exonerate him from liability. His acts do not fall
under the exception because at the time of his
notarization of the Deed of Sale, there was a notary
public in Dulag, Leyte (Vicente Batic v. Judge Victorio
Galapon Jr., A.M. No. MTJ-99-1239, July 29, 2005).
Clerk of court as notary
Clerk of court may at as notary public, provided he is
commissioned and has been permitted by his superior.
Such consent is necessary because the act of
notarizing a document is a practice of law.
Rules with regard to fees that a notary public may
charge
1. For performing a notarial act, a notary public may
charge the maximum fee as prescribed by the
 NOTARIAL PRACTICE
Supreme Court unless he waives the fee in whole
or in part (A. M. 02-8-13-SC, Sec. 1, Rule V);
2. A notary public may charge travel fees and
expenses separate from the notarial fees when
traveling to perform a notarial act if the notary
public and the person requesting the notarial act
agree prior to the travel (A. M. 02-813-SC, Sec. 2,
Rule);
3. No fee or compensation of any kind, except those
expressly prescribed and allowed herein, shall be
collected or received for any notarial service (A.
M. 02-813-SC, Sec. 3, Rule V);
4. A notary public shall not require payment of any
fees specified prior to the performance of a
notarial act unless otherwise agreed upon (A. M.
02-813-SC, first par., Sec. 4, Rule V);
5. Any travel fees and expenses paid to a notary
public prior to the performance of a notarial act
are not subject to refund if the notary public
already traveled but failed to complete in whole
or in part the notarial act for reasons beyond his
control and without negligence on his part (A. M.
02-813-SC, second par., Sec. 4, Rule V).
NOTE: A notary public who charges fee for notarial services
shall issue a receipt registered with the Bureau of Internal
revenue and keep a journal of notarial fees. He shall enter in
the journal all fees charges for services rendered. A notary
public shall post in a conspicuous place in his office a
complete schedule of chargeable notarial fees (A. M. 02-813-
SC, Sec. 5, Rule V).
TERM OF OFFICE OF A NOTARY PUBLIC
Term of office of a notary public (1995 Bar Question)
A notary public may perform notarial acts for a period
of 2 years commencing the 1st day of January of the
year in which the commissioning is made until the last
day of December of the succeeding year regardless of
the actual date when the application was renewed,
unless earlier revoked or the notary public has
resigned under the Rules on Notarial Practice and the
Rules of Court (A.M. No. 02-8-13-SC, Section 11, Rule
III).
NOTE: The period of 2 years of a notarial commission will
commence at January first regardless of when it was really
granted and will end at exactly 2 years from said date of
commencement up to December of the 2nd year. Ex. Atty.
Antonio applied for and was given notarial commission on 12
November 2010, such term will expire on 31 December 2011
(2011 Bar Question).
Q: Juan dela Cruz was commissioned as a notary
public in 2001. His friend asked him to notarize a deed
of absolute sale sometime in 2004, to which he
agreed free of charge. A complaint for malpractice
99
was filed against him. Is Juan dela Cruz guilty of
malpractice?
A: Yes. Absent any showing that his notarial
commission has been renewed, his act constitutes
malpractice because at the time he notarized the
document, his notarial commission has already
expired. It is not a defense that no payment has been
received. The requirement for the issuance of the
commission as notary public must not be treated as a
mere casual formality. In fact, Juans act also
constitutes falsification of public document.
Expired Commission
A notary public may file a written application with the
Executive Judge for the renewal of his commission
within 45 days before the expiration thereof. A mark,
image or impression of the seal of the notary public
shall be attached in the application (A.M. No. 02-8-13-
SC, first par., Sec. 13, Rule III).
NOTE: If a person is applying for a commission for the first
time, what he files is a petition and not an application.
Failure of the notary public to file an application for
the renewal of his commission
Failure to file said application will result in the deletion
of the name of the notary public in the register of
notaries public and may only be reinstated therein
after he is issued a new commission (A.M. No. 02-8-13-
SC, second and third pars., Sec. 13, Rule III).
NOTE: The Executive Judge shall, upon payment of the
application fee, act on an application for renewal of a
commission within thirty (30) days from receipt thereof. If
the application is denied, the Executive Judge shall state the
reasons therefor (A.M. No. 02-8-13-SC, Sec. 14, Rule III).
POWERS AND LIMITATIONS OF A NOTARY PUBLIC
Powers of a notary public
A notary public is empowered to perform the following
notarial acts: (JAO-CAS)
1. Acknowledgements;
2. Oaths and affirmations;
3. Jurats;
4. Signature witnessings;
5. Copy certifications; and
6. Any other act authorized by these rules (A.M.
No. 02-8-13-SC, Section 1(a), Rule IV)
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW
 Legal Ethics
Notarization of a private document
Notarization converts a private document to a public
instrument, making it admissible in evidence without
the necessity of preliminary proof of its authenticity
and due execution. A notarized document is by law
entitled to full credit upon its face and it is for this
reason that notaries public must observe the basic
requirements in notarizing documents (Dolores dela
cruz, ET AL V. Atty. Jose Dimaano, Jr., September 12,
2008, A.C. No. 7781).
Absence of notarization in a deed of sale
The absence of notarization of the Deed of Sale would
not necessarily invalidate the transaction evidenced
therein. Article 1358 of the Civil Code requires that the
form of a contract that transmits or extinguishes real
rights over immovable property should be in a public
document, yet it is also an accepted rule that the
failure to observe the proper form does not render the
transaction invalid. Thus, it has been uniformly held
that the form required in Article 1358 is not essential
to the validity or enforceability of the transaction, but
required merely for convenience (Leonor Camcam v.
CA; Tigno v. Aquino).
Acknowledgment
Refers to an act in which an individual on a single
occasion:
1. Appears in person before the notary public and
presents an integrally complete instrument or
document;
NOTE: A notary public cannot perform a notarial act over
a document that has missing pages, or that contains
blanks that should be filled-in prior to the notarial act.
2. Is attested to be personally known to the notary
public or identified by the notary public through
competent evidence of identity as defined by the
Rules on Notarial Practice; and
3. Represents to the notary public that the signature
on the instrument or document was voluntarily
affixed by him for the purposes stated in the
instrument or document, declares that he has
executed the instrument or document as his free
and voluntary act and deed, and, if he acts in a
particular representative capacity, that he has the
authority to sign in that capacity (Sec. 1, Rule II, A.M.
02-8-13-SC).
Q: Cabanilla filed a complaint against Atty. Cristal-
Tenorio with the IBP, alleging that he never appeared
before her when she notarized the deed of sale of his
house, and that the signatures appearing opposite
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
2014 GOLDEN NOTES
100
their respective names were forgeries. Did Atty.
Cristal-Tenorio fail to comply with the mandates of
the law when she notarized the deed of sale without
the complainant and his children? Does such failure
warrant the revocation of her notarial commission?
A: Yes. Under Section 1(a) of Act 2103, a notary public
taking the acknowledgment in a document or
instrument is mandated to certify that the person
acknowledging the instrument or document is known
to him and that he is the same person who executed it
and acknowledged that the same is his free act and
deed. To "acknowledge before" means to avow; to
own as genuine, to assert, to admit; and "before"
means in front or preceding in space or ahead of. A
party acknowledging must appear before the notary
public. A notary public should not notarize a document
unless the persons who signed the same are the very
same persons who executed and personally appeared
before the said notary public to attest to the contents
and truth of what are stated therein. The presence of
the parties to the deed making the acknowledgment
will enable the notary public to verify the genuineness
of the signature of the affiant. A notary public is
enjoined from notarizing a fictitious or spurious
document. The function of a notary public is, among
others, to guard against any illegal deed (Cabanilla v.
Cristal-Tenorio, A.C. No. 6139, Nov. 11, 2003).
Q: Before me personally appeared this 30th of
August 2010 Milagros A. Ramirez, who proved her
identity to me through witnesses: 1. Rosauro S.
Balana, Passport UU123456; 1-5-2010/Baguio City;
and 2. Elvira N. Buela, Passport VV200345; 1-17-
2009/Manila. Both witnesses, of legal ages, under
oath declare that: Milagros A. Ramirez is personally
known to them; she is the same seller in the
foregoing deed of sale; she does not have any current
identification document nor can she obtain one
within a reasonable time; and they are not privy to or
are interested in the deed he signed. What is the
status of such a notarial acknowledgement? (2011
Bar Question)
A: Valid, since it is a manner of establishing the
identity of the person executing the document.
Jurat
Refers to an act in which an individual on a single
occasion:
1. Appears in person before the notary public and
presents an instrument or document;
2. Is personally known to the notary public or
identified by the notary public through competent
evidence of identity as defined by the Rules on
Notarial Practice;
 NOTARIAL PRACTICE

3. Signs the instrument or document in the presence public official

of the notary; and
4. Takes an oath or affirmation before the notary
public as to such instrument or document (A.M.
02-8-13-SC, Sec. 6, Rule II).
NOTE: A jurat is not a part of a pleading but merely evidences
the fact that the affidavit was properly made. The claim or
belief of Atty. Dela Rea that the presence of petitioner
Gamido was not necessary for the jurat because it is not an
acknowledgment is patently baseless. If this had been his
belief since he was first commissioned as a notary public,
then he has been making a mockery of the legal solemnity of
an oath in a jurat. Notaries public and others authorized by
law to administer oaths or to take acknowledgments should
not take for granted the solemn duties appertaining to their
offices. Such duties are dictated by public policy and are
impressed with public interest (Gamido v. Bilibid Prisons
Officials, G.R. No. 114829, Mar. 1, 1995).
Acknowledgment v. Jurat
authorized for the
purpose.
NOTE: In notarial wills, acknowledgement is required, not
merely a jurat.
Signature witnessing
Refers to a notarial act in which an individual on a
single occasion:
1. Appears in person before the notary public and
presents an instrument or document;
2. Is personally known to the notary public or
identified by the notary public through competent
evidence of identity as defined by the Rules on
Notarial Practice; and
3. Signs the instrument or document in the presence
of the notary public (A. M. No. 02-8-13-SC, Sec. 14,
Rule II).

ACKNOWLEDGMENT JURAT Q: Is a notary public authorized to certify the affixing

Act of one who has
executed a deed, in going to
some competent officer or
court and declaring It to be
his act or deed
The notary public or officer
taking the
acknowledgement shall
certify that the person
acknowledging the
instrument or document is
known to him and he is the
same person who executed
it and acknowledged that
the same is his free act and
deed.
Two-fold purpose: To
authorize the deed to be
given in evidence without
further proof of its
execution, and, to entitle it
to be recorded.
Where used:
1. To authenticate an
agreement between two or
more persons; or
2. Where the document
contains a disposition of
property.
E.g. The acknowledgement
in a deed of lease of land.
That part of an
affidavit in which the
notary public or
officer certifies that
the instrument was
sworn to before him.
It is not part of a
pleading but merely
evidences the fact
that the affidavit was
properly made.
Purpose: Gives the
document a legal
character.
Where used:
1. Affidavits;
2. Certifications;
3. Whenever the
person executing
makes a statement of
facts or attests to the
truth of an event,
under oath.
E.g. An affidavit
subscribed before a
notary public or
101
of a signature by thumb or other mark on an
instrument or document presented for notarization?
(1995 Bar Question)
A: Yes. It is also within the powers of a notary public,
provided:
1. The thumb or other mark is affixed in the presence
of the notary public and of two (2) disinterested
and unaffected witnesses to the instrument or
document;
2. Both witnesses sign their own names in addition
to the thumb or other mark;
3. The notary public writes below the thumb or
other mark: thumb or other mark affixed by
(name of signatory by mark) in the presence of
(names and addresses of witnesses) and
undersigned notary public; and
4. The notary public notarizes the signature by
thumb or other mark through an
acknowledgment, jurat or signature witnessing.
(Sec. 1(b), Rule IV, A.M. No. 02-8-13-SC)
Q: Is a notary public authorized to sign on behalf of a
person who is physically unable to sign or make a
mark on an instrument or document? (1995 Bar
Question)
A: Yes. It likewise falls within the powers of a notary
public, provided:
1. The notary public is directed by the person unable
to sign or make a mark to sign on his behalf;
2. The signature of the notary public is affixed in the
presence of 2 disinterested and unaffected
witnesses to the instrument or document;
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW
 Legal Ethics
3. Both witnesses sign their own names;
4. The notary public writes below his signature:
Signature affixed by notary in the presence of
(names and addresses of person and 2
witnesses); and
5. The notary public notarizes his signature by
acknowledgment or jurat (A.M. 02-8-13-SC, Sec.
1(c), Rule IV).
Copy certification
Refers to a notarial act in which a notary public:
1. Is presented with an instrument or document that
is neither a vital record, a public record, nor
publicly recordable;
2. Copies or supervises the copying of the
instrument or document;
3. Compares the instrument or document with the
copy; and
4. Determines that the copy is accurate and
complete (A.M. 02-8-13-SC, Sec. 4, Rule II).
NOTE: The document copied must be an original document.
It cannot be a copy itself.
Notarial certificate
Refers to the part of, or attachment to a notarized
instrument or document that is completed by the
notary public which bears the notary's signature and
seal, and states the facts attested to by the notary
public in a particular notarization as provided for by
the Rules on Notarial Practice (A. M. No. 02-8-13, Sec.
8, Rule II).
NOTE: Loose notarial certificate refers to a notarial
certificate that is attached to a notarized instrument or
document.
Limitations to the performance of a notarial act
A person shall not perform a notarial act if the person
involved as signatory to the instrument or document
is:
a. Not in the notary's presence personally at the
time of the notarization; and (A.M. No. 02-8-13-
SC, Sec. 2(b)(1), RuleIV).
b. Not personally known to the notary public or
otherwise identified by the notary public through
competent evidence of identity as defined by the
Rules on Notarial Practice (A.M. No. 02-8-13-SC,
Sec.2(b)(2), Rule IV)
c. The document is blank or incomplete; (A.M. 02-8-
13-SC, Sec.6 (a) Rule IV)
d. An instrument or document is without
appropriate notarial certification (A.M. 02-8-13-
SC, Sec. 6, Rule IV).
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
2014 GOLDEN NOTES
102
Q: Engineer Cynthia de la Cruz Catalya filed an
application for building permit in connection with the
renovation of a building situated on a lot owned by
her brother Rolando de la Cruz. One of the
documents required in the processing of the
application was an affidavit to be executed by the lot
owner. Since Rolando de la Cruz was a resident
abroad, an affidavit was prepared wherein it was
made to appear that he was a resident of Leyte. Atty.
Francisco Villamor notarized the purported affidavit.
According to him, a Chinese mestizo appeared in his
law office one time, requesting that his affidavit be
notarized. Said person declared that he was Rolando
de la Cruz. Atty. Villamor then asked for the
production of his residence certificate, but he said, he
did not bother to bring the same along with him
anymore as, he has already indicated his serial
number, in the jurat portion together with the date
of issue and place of issue. Did Atty. Francisco
Villamor commit a violation of notarial law?
A: Yes. It is the duty of the notarial officer to demand
that the document presented to him for notarization
should be signed in his presence. By his admission, the
affidavit was already signed by the purported affiant
at the time it was presented to him for notarization.
Atty. Villamor thus failed to heed his duty as a notary
public to demand that the document for notarization
be signed in his presence (Traya Jr. v. Villamor, A.C. No.
4595,Feb. 6, 2004).
Q: During their lifetime, the Spouses Villanueva
acquired several parcels of land. They were survived
by their 5 children: Simeona, Susana, Maria, Alfonso,
and Florencia. Alfonso executed an Affidavit of
Adjudication stating that as the only surviving son
and sole heir of the spouses, he was adjudicating
himself a parcel of land. Thereafter, he executed a
Deed of Absolute Sale, conveying the property to
Adriano Villanueva. Atty. Salud Beradio appeared as
notary public on both the affidavit of adjudication
and the deed of sale. Atty. Beradio knew of the falsity
of Alfonsos statement. Florencia and descendants of
the other children of the spouses were still alive at
the time of execution of both documents. Was there
a failure to discharge properly the duties of a notary
public?
A: Yes. Atty. Beradios conduct breached the Code of
Professional Responsibility, which requires lawyers to
obey the laws of the land and promote respect for the
law and legal processes as well as Rule 1.01 of the
Code which proscribes lawyers from engaging in
unlawful, dishonest, immoral, or deceitful conduct.
She herself admitted that she knew of the falsity of
Alfonsos statement that he was the sole heir of the
spouses. She therefore notarized a document while
 NOTARIAL PRACTICE

fully aware that it contained a material falsehood. on Notarial Practice.

The affidavit of adjudication is premised on this very
assertion. By this instrument, Alfonso claimed a NOTE: Improper instrument/document is a blank or
portion of his parents estate all to himself, to the incomplete instrument or an instrument or document
exclusion of his co-heirs. Shortly afterwards, Atty. without appropriate notarial certification (A.M. No. 02-8-13-
SC, Sec. 6, Rule V).
Beradio notarized the deed of sale, knowing that the
deed took basis from the unlawful affidavit of
adjudication (Heirs of the Late Spouses Lucas v .Atty. Affirmation or oath
Beradio, A.C. No. 6270, Jan. 22, 2007).
Refers to an act in which an individual on a single
NOTE: If the notary public admited that he has personal occasion:
knowledge of a false statement contained in the instrument 1. Appears in person before the notary public;
to be notarized yet proceeded to affix his or her notarial seal 2. Is personally known to the notary public or
on it, the court must not hesitate to discipline the notary identified by the notary public through competent
public accordingly as the circumstances of the case may
evidence of identity as defined by the Rules on
dictate. Otherwise, the integrity and sanctity of the
notarization process may be undermined and public
Notarial Practice; and
confidence on notarial documents diminished (Ibid). 3. Avows under penalty of law to the whole truth of
the contents of the instrument or document (Sec.
Disqualification of a notary public to perform a 2,Rule II, A.M. No. 02-8-13-SC).
notarial act
REPUBLIC ACT NO. 9406
A notary public is disqualified to perform notarial act MARCH 23, 2007
when he:
1. Is a party to the instrument or document that is to AN ACT REORGANIZING AND STRENGTHENING THE
be notarized; PUBLIC ATTORNEY'S OFFICE, AMENDING FOR THE
2. Will receive, as a direct or indirect result, any PURPOSE PERTINENT PROVISIONS OF EXECUTIVE
commission, fee, advantage, right, title, interest, ORDER NO. 292, OTHERWISE KNOWN AS THE
cash, property, or other consideration, except as "ADMINISTRATIVE CODE OF 1987", AS AMENDED,
provided by the Rules on Notarial Practice and by GRANTING SPECIAL ALLOWANCE TO PAO OFFICIALS
law; or AND LAWYERS, AND PROVIDING FUNDS THEREFOR
3. Is a spouse, common-law partner, ancestor,
descendant, or relative by affinity or Officers allowed to administer oaths
consanguinity of the principal within the fourth
civil degree (A.M. No. 02-8-13-SC, Sec. 3, Rule IV). 1. President;
2. Vice-President;
NOTE: The function would be defeated if the notary public is 3. Members and Secretaries of both Houses of the
one of the signatories to the instrument. For then, he would Congress;
be interested in sustaining the validity thereof as it directly
4. Members of the Judiciary;
involves himself and the validity of his own act. It would
place him in an inconsistent position, and the very purpose
5. Secretaries of Departments;
of the acknowledgment, which is to minimize fraud, would 6. Provincial governors and lieutenant-governors;
be thwarted (Villarin v. Sabate, A.C. No. 3224,Feb. 9, 2000). 7. City mayors;
8. Municipal mayors;
Instances when notary public may refuse to notarize 9. Bureau directors;
10. Regional directors;
1. The notary knows or has good reason to believe 11. Clerk of courts;
that the notarial act or transaction is unlawful or 12. Registrars of deeds;
immoral; 13. Other civilian officers in the public service of the
2. The signatory shows a demeanor which government of the Philippines whose
engenders in the mind of the notary public appointments are vested in the President and are
reasonable doubt as to the former's knowledge of subject to confirmation by the Commission on
the consequences of the transaction requiring a Appointments;
notarial act; 14. All other constitutional officers;
3. In the notary's judgment, the signatory is not 15. PAO lawyers in connection with the performance
acting of his or her own free will; (A.M. No. 02-8- of duty; and
13-SC, Sec.4, Rule V) or 16. Notaries public (Sec. 41)
4. If the document or instrument to be notarized is
considered as an improper document by the Rules
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
103 FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW
 Legal Ethics
Duty to administer oaths
Officers authorized to administer oaths, with the
exception of notaries public, municipal judges and
clerks of court, are not obliged to administer oaths or
execute certificates save in matters of official business
or in relation to their functions as such; and with the
exception of notaries public, the officer performing
the service in those matters shall charge no fee, unless
specifically authorized by law (Section 42).
NOTE: P.A.O. Lawyers now have the authority to administer
oaths, provided it is in connection with the performance of
their duties.
The fiscal or the state prosecutor has the authority to
administer oaths (RA No. 5180, as amended by P.D. 911).
NOTARIAL REGISTER
A notary public shall keep, maintain, protect and
provide for lawful inspection as provided in these
Rules, a chronological official notarial register of
notarial acts consisting of a permanently bound book
with numbered pages.
The register shall be kept in books to be furnished by
the Solicitor General to any notary public upon request
and upon payment of the cost thereof. The register
shall be duly paged, and on the first page, the Solicitor
General shall certify the number of pages of which the
book consists (A.M. No. 02-8-13-SC, Sec. 1(a), RuleVI).
NOTE: Failure of the notary to make the proper entry or
entries in his notarial register touching his notarial acts in
the manner required by law is a ground for revocation of
his commission. (Father Ranhilio C. Aquino Et. Al., s.
Complainants, Vs. Atty. Edwin Pascua, Respondent. A.C. No.
5095, November 28, 2007, En Banc)
Signing or affixing a thumbmark in the notarial
register
At the time of notarization, the notary's notarial
register shall be signed or a thumb or other mark
affixed by each:
1. Principal;
2. Credible witness swearing or affirming to the
identity of a principal; and
3. Witness to a signature by thumb or other mark, or
to a signing by the notary public on behalf of a
person physically unable to sign (A.M. No. 02-8-
13-SC, Sec. 3,Rule VI).
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
2014 GOLDEN NOTES
104
Inspection of a notarial register by private persons
1. The inspection is made in the notarys presence;
2. During regular business hours;
3. The person's identity is personally known to the
notary public or proven through competent
evidence of identity as defined in these Rules;
4. The person affixes a signature and thumb or other
mark or other recognized identifier, in the notarial
register in a separate, dated entry;
5. The person specifies the month, year, type of
instrument or document, and name of the
principal in the notarial act or acts sought; and
6. The person is shown only the entry or entries
specified by him (Sec.4 (a), Rule VI,A.M. No. 02-8-
13-SC).
Examination of notarial register by law enforcement
officer
The notarial register may be examined by a law
enforcement officer in the course of an official
investigation or by virtue of a court order (A. M. No.
02-8-13-SC, Sec. 4(b), Rule VI).
Rules in case of loss, destruction or damage of
notarial register
1. In case the notarial register is stolen, lost,
destroyed, damaged, or otherwise rendered
unusable or illegible as a record of notarial acts,
the notary public shall, within ten (10) days after
informing the appropriate law enforcement
agency in the case of theft or vandalism, notify the
Executive Judge by any means providing a proper
receipt or acknowledgment, including registered
mail and also provide a copy or number of any
pertinent police report.
2. Upon revocation or expiration of a notarial
commission, or death of the notary public, the
notarial register and notarial records shall
immediately be delivered to the office of the
Executive Judge (Sec. 5, Rule VI, A. M. No. 02-8-13-
SC, Sec. 5, Rule VI).
The notary public may refuse the request of
inspection for register of deeds
If the notary public has a reasonable ground to believe
that a person has a criminal intent or wrongful motive
in requesting information from the notarial register,
the notary shall deny access to any entry or entries
therein (A. M. No. 02-8-13-SC, Sec. 4(c), Rule VI).
 NOTARIAL PRACTICE

JURISDICTION OF NOTARY PUBLIC AND public should maintain a regular place of work or business
PLACE OF NOTARIZATION within the city or province where he is commissioned. The
SC evidently wants to eradicate the practice of fly by night
notaries public who notarized documents in improvised
Jurisdiction of notary public
offices.

A notary public may perform notarial acts in any place

REVOCATION OF COMMISSION
within the territorial jurisdiction of the commissioning
court.
Who may revoke the notarial commission
Under the Notarial Law, the jurisdiction of a notary
1. The Executive Judge of the RTC who issued the
public is co-extensive with the province for which he
commission on any ground on which an
was commissioned; and for the notary public in the
application for commission may be denied (A.M.
city of Manila, the jurisdiction is co-extensive with said
No. 02-8-13-SC,Sec. 1, Rule XI); or
city. Circular 8 of 1985, however, clarified further that
2. By the Supreme Court itself in the exercise of its
the notary public may be commissioned for the same
general supervisory powers over lawyer.
term only by one court within the Metro Manila
region.
Grounds for Revocation
Regular place of work or business of a notary
The executive Judge shall revoke a notarial
public meaning
commission for any ground on which an application for
a commission may be denied. In addition, the
The regular place of work or business refers to a
Executive Judge may revoke the commission of, or
stationary office in the city or province wherein the
impose appropriate administrative sanctions upon,
notary public renders legal and notarial services (Sec.
any notary public who:
11, Rule II, 2004 Rules on Notarial Practice).
1. Fails to keep a notarial register;
2. Fails to make the proper entry or entries in his
Rules with regard to jurisdiction of notary public
notarial register concerning his notarial acts;
3. Fails to send the copy of the entries to the
GR: A notary public shall not perform a notarial act
Executive Judge within the first ten (10) days of the
outside his jurisdiction and his regular place of work or
month following;
business.
4. Fails to affix to acknowledgments the date of
NOTE: Outside the place of his commission, a notary public expiration of his commission;
is bereft of power to perform any notarial act (Guerrero v. 5. Fails to submit his notarial register, when filled,
Bihis, 2007). to the Executive Judge;
6. Fails to make his report, within a reasonable
XPNs: A notarial act may be performed at the request time, to the Executive Judge concerning the
of the parties in the following sites, other than his performance of his duties, as may be required by
regular place of work or business, located within his the judge;
territorial jurisdiction: 7. Fails to require the presence of a principal at the
1. Public offices, convention halls, and similar time of the notarial act;
places where oaths of office may be
administered; NOTE: "Principal" refers to a person appearing before the
2. Public function areas in hotels and similar notary public whose act is the subject of notarization.
places for the signing of instruments or
documents requiring notarization; 8. Fails to identify a principal on the basis of
3. Hospitals and other medical institutions where personal knowledge or competent evidence;
a party to an instrument or document is 9. Executes a false or incomplete certificate under
confined for treatment Section 5, Rule IV;
4. Any place where a party to an instrument or 10. Knowingly performs or fails to perform any
document requiring notarization is under other act prohibited or mandated by these Rules;
detention (A. M. No. 02-8-13-SC, Sec. 2, Rule IV). and
5. Such other places as may be dictated because 11. Commits any other dereliction or act which in
of emergency. the judgment of the Executive Judge constitutes
good cause for revocation of commission or
NOTE: It is improper for a notary public to notarize imposition of administrative sanction (Sec. 1, Rule
documents in sidewalk since it is now required that a notary XI,Rule on Notarial Practice).

UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS

105 FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW
 Legal Ethics

the old Notarial Law. As much could be said of his

NOTE: Functions of notary public violations: suspension as
notary not for the practice of law (Villarin v. Sabate, A.C. No.
3224,Feb. 9, 2000).
COMPETENT EVIDENCE OF IDENTITY
failure to demand the exhibition of the residence
certificates of notarial witnesses. Defects in the
observance of the solemnities prescribed by law
render the entire will invalid (Manuel Lee v. Atty.
Regino Tamabago, A.C. No. 5281, Feb. 12, 2008).

Competent evidence of identity SANCTIONS

Competent evidence of identity refers to the
identification of an individual based on the following:
1. 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.
2. 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).
Punishable acts under the 2004 Rules on Notarial
Practice
The Executive Judge shall cause the prosecution of any
person who knowingly:
1. Acts or otherwise impersonates a notary public;
2. Obtains, conceals, defaces, or destroys the seal,
notarial register, or official records of a notary
public; and
3. Solicits, coerces, or in any way influences a notary
public to commit official misconduct.(Rule on
Notarial Practice, Sec. 1, Rule XII).
NOTE: Notarizing documents without the requisite
commission therefore constitutes malpractice, if not the
crime of falsification of public documents (St. Louis
Laboratory High School Faculty And Staff V. Dela Cruz , A.C.
No. 6010. August 28, 2006).

NOTE: Competent evidence of identity is not required in

cases where the affiant is personally known to the Notary
Public (Amora, Jr. v. Comelec, G.R. No.192280, Jan. 25, 2011).

Q: Atty. Regino Tamabago notarized a last will and

testament under which, the decedent supposedly
bequeathed his entire estate to his wife, save for a
parcel of land which he devised to Vicente Lee, Jr. and
Elena Lee, half siblings of Manuel Lee, the
complainant. The will was purportedly executed and
acknowledged before respondent on June 30, 1965.
However, the residence certificate of the testator
noted in the acknowledgment of the will was dated
January 5, 1962. There is also absence of notation of
the residence certificates of the purported witnesses.
Did Atty. Regino Tamabago violate any of the duties
of a notary public?

A: Atty. Tamabago, as notary public, evidently failed in

the performance of the elementary duties of his office.
There is absence of a notation of the residence
certificates of the notarial witnesses in the will in the
acknowledgment. Further, the notation of the
testators old residence certificate in the same
acknowledgment was a clear breach of the law. The
Notarial Law then in force required the exhibition of
the residence certificate upon notarization of a
document or instrument. By having allowed decedent
to exhibit an expired residence certificate, Atty.
Tamabago failed to comply with the requirements of
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
2014 GOLDEN NOTES
106
 CANONS OF PROFESSIONAL ETHICS

CANONS OF PROFESSIONAL ETHICS A: Yes. In doing so, however, he should scrupulously

The Canons of Professional Ethics (CPE) was 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. Only those topics not considered
incorporated are included to prevent redundancy.
Duty of the bar in the selection of judges
It is the duty of the bar to endeavor to prevent political
considerations from outweighing judicial fitness in the
selection of judges. It should strive to have elevated
thereto only those willing to forego other
employments whether of a business, political or other
character, which may embarrass their free and fair
consideration of questions before them for decision
(Canon 2, CPE).
avoid any suggestion calculated to induce the witness
to suppress or deviate from the truth, or in any degree
to affect his free and untrammeled conduct when
appearing at the trial or on the witness stand (Canon
39, CPE).
Q: Mr. A disclosed to his lawyer that he had been
bribing one of the court officials to destroy the
evidence of the other party to tilt the disposition of
the case in his favor. If you are Mr. As lawyer, what
will you do?
A: When a lawyer discovers that some fraud or
deception has been practiced, upon the court or party,
he should endeavor to rectify it; at first by advising his
client, and should endeavor to rectify it and if his client
refuses to forego the advantage thus unjustly gained,
he should promptly inform the injured person or his
counsel, so that they may take appropriate steps.
(Canon 41, CPE). Furthermore, if the client failed or
refuses to rectify the same, he shall terminate the
relationship with such client in accordance with the
Rules of Court (Canon 19.02, CPR)

Q: Can a lawyer stipulate with the client that a

portion of the latters interest in the property subject
of the litigation be conveyed to the former as
payment for his services?

A: No. The same is prohibited both by the CPE and the

Civil Code. The CPE provides that a lawyer should not
purchase any interest in the subject matter of the
litigation which he is conducting. Likewise, the Civil
Code provides that prosecuting attorneys connected
with the administration of justice cannot acquire by
purchase properties in litigation to which they exercise
their respective functions (Canon 10 CPE; Art. 1491,
NCC).

Q: Is it proper for a lawyer to write articles in a

newspaper and the like for publication?

A: A lawyer may with propriety write articles for

publications in which he gives information upon the
law; but he could not accept employment from such
publication to advice inquiries in respect to their
individual rights (Canon 40, CPE).

Q: May a lawyer interview any witness or prospective

witness for the opposing side in any civil or criminal
action without the consent of opposing counsel or
party?
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
107 FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW
 JUDICIAL ETHICS

JUDICIAL ETHICS arguments except to clarify his minds as to

their positions, must not be tempted to an
Judicial ethics unnecessary display of learning or premature
judgment, may criticize and correct
The branch of moral science which treats of the right unprofessional conduct of a lawyer but not in
and proper conduct to be observed by all judges in an insulting manner.
trying and deciding controversies brought before them 2. Attitude toward litigants and witnesses He
for adjudication which conduct must be demonstrative must be considerate, courteous and civil, must
of impartiality, integrity, competence, independence not utter intemperate language during the
and freedom from improprieties. This freedom from hearing of a case.
improprieties must be observed in both the public and
private life of a judge being the visible representation Proper judicial conduct
of the law.
Judges and justices must conduct themselves as to
A judge is a public officer who, by virtue of his office, be beyond reproach and suspicion and be free from
is clothed with judicial authority; A public officer appearance of impropriety in their personal
lawfully appointed to decide litigated questions in behavior not only in the discharge of official duties
accordance with law (People v. Manantan, G.R. No. L- but also in their everyday lives.
14129, Aug. 30, 1962).
Q: In several policy addresses extensively covered by
NOTE: This refers to persons only. There may be a judge media since his appointment on December 21, 2005,
without a court. Chief Justice Artemio V. Panganiban vowed to leave
a judiciary characterized by "four Ins" and to focus in
De jure judge v. De facto judge solving the "four ACID" problems that corrode the
administration of justice in our country. Explain this
De Jure judge De Facto judge "four Ins" and "four ACID" problems (2006 Bar
One who exercises the An officer who is not fully Question).
office of a judge as a vested with all the
matter of right, fully powers and duties A: Chief Justice Panganiban vowed to lead a judiciary
vested with all the conceded to judges but, characterized by four Ins: Independence, Integrity,
powers and functions one who exercises the Industry and Intelligence; one that is morally
conceded to him under office of judge under courageous to stand its ground against the onslaughts
the law (Luna v. some color of right. He of influence, interference, indifference and insolence;
Rodriguez, G.R. No. L- has the reputation of the and that is impervious to the plague of ships - kinship,
13744, Nov. 29, 1918). officer he assumes to be, relationship, friendship and fellowship.
yet he has some defect in
his right to exercise He identified four ACID problems that corrode justice
judicial functions at the in our country; namely, (1) limited Access to justice by
particular time (Luna v. the poor; (2) Corruption; (3) Incompetence; and (4)
Rodriguez, G.R. No. L- Delay in the delivery of quality judgments.
13744, Nov. 29, 1918).
NOTE: Then Chief Justice Panganiban also asked for the
employees of the Judiciary for three things encapsulated by
NOTE: There cannot be a de facto judge when there is a de the Code DHL: Dedication to duty, Honesty in every way, and
jure judge in the actual performance of the duties of the full loyalty to the judiciary and to the Supreme Court
office. Moreover, one cannot be actually acting under any
color of right when he has ceased to be a judge and has Q: The Chief Justice also said that the judiciary must
actually vacated the office by the acceptance of another "safeguard the liberty" and "nurture the prosperity"
office and by actually entering upon the duties of the other of our people. Explain this philosophy. Cite Decisions
office (Luna v. Rodriguez and De Los Angeles, G.R. No. L- of the Supreme Court implementing each of these
13744, Nov. 29, 1918). twin beacons of the Chief Justice (2006 Bar Question)

Proper judicial deportment A: The twin beacons of LIBERTY and PROSPERITY

constitute the core judicial philosophy of Chief Justice
1. Attitude toward counsel He must be Panganiban. He advances the view that liberty must
courteous especially to the young and include the freedoms that prosperity allows. In the
inexperienced, should not interrupt in their same manner, prosperity must include liberty,

UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS

2014 GOLDEN NOTES
108
 SOURCES

especially the liberty to strive for the good life THE NEW CODE OF JUDICIAL CONDUCT
according to a persons conception. He further said FOR THE PHILIPPINE JUDICIARY
that the Judiciary can contribute to the advancement (BANGALORE DRAFT)
of liberty and prosperity by adopting two standards of (A.M. NO. 03-05-01)
judicial review: that in litigations involving civil
liberties, the scales should weigh heavily against the The New Code of Judicial Conduct (NCJC) for the
government and in favor of the people. However, in Philippine Judiciary which took effect on June 1, 2004
conflicts affecting prosperity, development and the supersedes the Canons of Judicial Ethics and the Code
economy, deference must be accorded to the political of Judicial Conduct. Provided, however, that in case of
branches of the government. deficiency or absence of specific provisions in this New
Code, the Canons of Judicial Ethics and Code of Judicial
In the case of Lumanlaw v. Peralta, GR No. 164953, Conduct shall be applicable in a suppletory character
February 13, 2006, a decision penned by the Chief (2007, 2009 Bar Questions).
Justice himself, the Court ordered the release of a
detainee who had been imprisoned at the Manila City This was adopted from the universal declaration of
Jail for almost two years but had not yet been standards for ethical conduct embodied in the
arraigned. Bangalore Draft as revised at the Round Table
Conference of Chief Justices at the Hague.
In the case of Republic, et al. v. Judge Gingoyon and
Philippine International Air Terminals Co., Inc., GR No. The purpose of the New Code of Judicial Conduct for
166429, February 1, 2006, the Court upheld PIATCOs the Philippine Judiciary is to update and correlate the
right to be paid Php300 billion before the Government code of judicial conduct and canons of judicial ethics
can take over the Ninoy Aquino International Airport adopted for the Philippines, and also to stress the
Passenger Terminal III facilities. Philippines solidarity with the universal clamor for a
universal code of judicial ethics (See aforementioned
SOURCES "four Ins" and "four ACID" problems by Chief Justice
Artemio V. Panganiban).
The two sources of judicial ethics
NOTE: The New Code contains 6 Canons and 44 Rules.
a. New Code of Judicial Conduct for the Philippine
Judiciary (Bangalore Draft); Q: One of the foundations of the Bangalore Draft of
b. Code of Judicial Conduct the Code of Judicial Conduct is the importance in a
modern democratic society of what? (2011 Bar
New Code of Judicial Conduct for the Philippine Question)
Judiciary v. Code of Judicial Conduct
A: Public confidence in its judicial system and in the
NEW CODE OF JUDICIAL moral authority and integrity of its judiciary.
CODE OF JUDICIAL
CONDUCT FOR THE
CONDUCT The six (6) canons under the New Code of Judicial
PHILIPPINE JUDICIARY
Focuses on the Concerned primarily Conduct for the Philippine Judiciary
institutional and with the institutional
personal independence independence of the 1. Independence
of judicial officers judiciary. 2. Integrity
3. Impartiality
Contains eight norms of Contained three
4. Propriety
conduct that judges guidelines explaining
5. Equality
shall follow what judges should do
6. Competence and Diligence
* Canon 1 of the 1989
Code created a weaker Duties of a magistrate that will bolster the publics
mandate. confidence to our judicial system

1. Duty to be above reproach and to appear above

reproach (NCJC, Sec.1, Canon 2)
2. Duty to be impartial (NCJC, Canon 3)
3. Duty to avoid improprieties and appearance of
improprieties (NCJC, Sec. 1, Canon 4)

UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS

109 FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW
 JUDICIAL ETHICS
4. Duty of Financial Transparency and duty to avoid
financial conflicts of interest (NCJC, Sec. 7, Canon 4)
5. Duty to be efficient, fair and prompt (NCJC, Sec. 5,
Canon 6)
6. Duty to be free from favor, bias, or prejudice (NCJC,
Sec. 1, Canon 3).
CODE OF JUDICIAL CONDUCT (1989)
Applicability
This code applies suppletorily.
CANON 1
A JUDGE SHOULD UPHOLD THE INTEGRITY AND
INDEPENDENCE OF THE JUDICIARY.
Rule 1.01, Canon 1
A judge should be the embodiment of
competence, integrity and independence.
Q: A complaint was filed against Judge Grageda for
the delay in the resolution of motions relative to Civil
Case No. 54-2001, entitled Pio Angelia v. Arnold
Oghayan. Plaintiff Angelia averred that the case was
filed way back on August 8, 2001. After numerous
postponements, pre-trial was finally set on
December 6, 2007. On December 20, 2007, counsel
for complainant received an order dated December 6,
2007 dismissing the case for failure to prosecute. On
December 28, 2007, Angelia filed a motion for
reconsideration reasoning out that the failure to
prosecute could not be attributed to him. On July 28,
2008, he filed his Urgent Motion for the Early
Resolution of said December 2007 Motion for
Reconsideration. He claimed that despite the lapse of
a considerably long period of time, no action was
taken by Judge Grageda. Is respondent Judge Gragela
GUILTY of undue delay in resolving a motion in
violation of Rule 1.02, Canon 1 and Rule 3.05, Canon
3 of the Code of Judicial Conduct?
A: Yes. Failure to decide cases and other matters
within the reglementary period constitutes gross
inefficiency and warrants the imposition of
administrative sanction against the erring magistrate.
Delay in resolving motions and incidents pending
before a judge within the reglementary period of
ninety (90) days fixed by the Constitution and the law
is not excusable and constitutes gross inefficiency. As
a trial judge, Judge Grageda was a frontline official of
the judiciary and should have at all times acted with
efficiency and with probity.
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
2014 GOLDEN NOTES
110
Judges must decide cases and resolve matters with
dispatch because any delay in the administration of
justice deprives litigants of their right to a speedy
disposition of their case and undermines the peoples
faith in the judiciary. Indeed, justice delayed is justice
denied (Angeliav. Grageda, A.M. No. RTJ-10-2220, Feb.
7, 2011).
Rule 1.02, Canon 1
A judge should administer justice impartially
and without delay.
Rule 1.02, Canon 1
A judge should administer justice impartially
and without delay.
Rule 1.03, Canon 1
A judge should be vigilant against any
attempt to subvert the independence of the
judiciary and should forthwith resist any
pressure from whatever source intended to
influence the performance of official
functions.
CANON 2
A JUDGE SHOULD AVOID IMPROPRIETY AND
THE APPEARANCE OF IMPROPRIETY IN ALL
ACTIVITES.
Rule 2.01, Canon 2
A judge should so behave at all times as to
promote public confidence in the integrity and
impartiality of the judiciary.
Q: Judge Canoy was charged with several counts of
gross ignorance of the law and/or procedures, grave
abuse of authority, and appearance of impropriety
(CJC, Canon 2) for granting bail to Melgazo, the
accused in a criminal case, without any application or
petition for the grant of bail filed before his court or
any court. He verbally ordered the branch clerk of
court to accept the cash deposit as bail, to earmark
an official receipt for the cash deposit, and to date it
the following day. He did not require Melgazo to sign
a written undertaking containing the conditions of
the bail under Sec. 2, Rule 114 to be complied with by
Melgazo. Thus, Judge Canoy ordered the police
escorts to release Melgazo without any written order
of release. Should respondent Judge Canoy be held
administratively liable for violating of Supreme Court
rules, directives and circulars under Sec. 9, Rule 140,
RRC (as amended by A.M. No. 01-8-10-SC)?
 SOURCES
A: Yes. Granting of bail without any application or
petition to grant bail is a clear deviation from the
procedure laid down in Sec. 17 of Rule 114. As regards
the insistence of Judge Canoy that such may be
considered as constructive bail, there is no such
species of bail under the Rules. Despite the noblest of
reasons, the Rules of Court may not be ignored at will
and at random to the prejudice of the rights of another.
Rules of procedure are intended to ensure the orderly
administration of justice and the protection of
substantive rights in judicial and extrajudicial
proceedings. In this case, the reason of Judge Canoy is
hardly persuasive enough to disregard the Rules
(Pantilo III v. Canoy, A.M. No. RTJ-11-2262, Feb. 9,
2011)
Rule 2.02, Canon 2
A judge should not seek publicity for personal
vainglory.
Rule 2.03, Canon 2
A judge shall not allow family, social, or other
relationships to influence judicial conduct or
judgment.
Rule 2.04, Canon 2
A judge should refrain from influencing in any
manner the outcome of litigation or dispute
pending before another court or
administrative agency.
The prestige of judicial office shall not be used or
lent to advance the private interests of others, nor
convey the impression that they are in a special
position to influence the judge.
Q: Judge Belen was charged with grave abuse of
authority and conduct unbecoming a judge. He filed
a complaint for Estafa against complainants father.
However such was dismissed by the city prosecutor
for lack of probable cause. After the dismissal of the
complaint, Judge Belen started harassing and
threatening the complainant with filing of several
cases against the latter. He also wrote using his
personal stationary, several letters addressed to
certain local government authorities and employees,
requesting information on complainants piggery and
poultry business and advising them of the alleged
violations by the complainant of the National
Building Code and certain environmental laws. An
administrative complaint was filed against the judge
for violation of the New Code of Judicial Conduct on
111
the ground that by using the letter head indicating his
position as the Presiding Judge he was trying to use
the prestige of his judicial office for his own personal
interest. Is the judge liable?
A: Yes. While the use of the title is an official
designation as well as an honor that an incumbent has
earned, a line still has to be drawn based on the
circumstances of the use of the appellation. While the
title can be used for social and other identification
purposes, it cannot be used with the intent to use the
prestige of his judicial office to gainfully advance his
personal, family or other pecuniary interests. Nor can
the prestige of a judicial office be used or lent to
advance the private interests of others, or to convey
or permit others to convey the impression that they
are in a special position to influence the judge (CJC,
Canon 2, Rule 2.03). To do any of these is to cross into
the prohibited field of impropriety (Belen v. Belen,A.M.
No. RTJ-08-2139, Aug. 9, 2010).
CANON 3
A JUDGE SHOULD PERFOM OFFICIAL DUTIES
HONESTLY, AND WITH IMPARTIALITY AND
DILIGENCE.
Rule 3.01, Canon 3
A judge shall be faithful to the law and
maintain professional competence.
Q: Plaintiff Conquilla was charged for direct assault
after respondent Judge B conducted a preliminary
investigation and found probable cause to hold the
complainant for trial for the said crime. Complainant
then filed an administrative complaint, alleging that
under A.M. No. 05-08-[2]6-SC, first level court judges
no longer have the authority to conduct preliminary
investigations. Is the respondent judge guilty of gross
ignorance of the law?
A: Yes. When a law or a rule is basic, judges owe it to
their office to simply apply the law. Anything less is
gross ignorance of the law. Judges should exhibit more
than just a cursory acquaintance with the statutes and
procedural rules, and should be diligent in keeping
abreast with developments in law and jurisprudence.
It was therefore incumbent upon respondent judge to
forward the records of the case to the Office of the
Provincial Prosecutor for preliminary investigation,
instead of conducting the preliminary investigation
himself upon amendment of the law stripping the
power of first level court judges to conduct preliminary
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW
 JUDICIAL ETHICS
investigation (Conquilla v. Bernando, A.M. No.MTJ-09-
1737, Feb. 9, 2011).
Rule 3.02, Canon 3
In every case, a judge shall endeavor
diligently to ascertain the facts and the
applicable law unswayed by partisan
interests, public opinion or fear of criticism.
A judge is expected to decide cases only on the basis
of the applicable law on the matter, not on any other
extraneous factors, such as public opinion, personal
convictions and partisan interests (Lapena, 2009).
Rule 3.03, Canon 3
A judge shall maintain order and proper
decorum in the court.
Rule 3.04, Canon 3
A judge should be patient, attentive, and
courteous to lawyers, especially the
inexperienced, to litigants, witnesses, and
others appearing before the court.
A judge should avoid unconsciously falling
into the attitude of mind that the litigants are
made for the courts, instead of the courts for
the litigants.
Q: How would you characterize the relationship
between the judge and a lawyer? Explain (1996 Bar
Question)
A: The Code of Professional Responsibility requires
lawyers to observe and maintain respect for judicial
officers (CPR, Canon 11). On the other hand, the Code
of Judicial Conduct requires judges to be patient,
attentive and courteous to lawyers (CJC, Rule 3.03). In
a word, lawyers and judges owe each other mutual
respect and courtesy.
Rule 3.05, Canon 3
A judge shall dispose of the courts business
promptly and decide cases within the
required periods.
Article VIII, Section 15(1) of the 1987Constitution
mandates lower court judges to decide a case within
the reglementary period of 90 days. The Code of
Judicial Conduct under Rule 3.05 of Canon 3 likewise
enunciates that judges should administer justice
without delay and directs every judge to dispose of the
courts business promptly within the period prescribed
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
2014 GOLDEN NOTES
112
by law. Rules prescribing the time within which certain
acts must be done are indispensable to prevent
needless delays in the orderly and speedy disposition
of cases. Thus, the 90-day period is mandatory (Re:
Cases Submitted for Decision Before Hon. Teresito A.
Andoy, A.M. No. 09-9-163-MTC, May 6, 2010).
NOTE: The Court has repeatedly emphasized the need for
judges to resolve their cases with dispatch. Delay does not
only constitute a serious violation of the parties
constitutional right to speedy disposition of cases, it also
erodes the faith and confidence of the people in the judiciary,
lowers its standards, and brings it into disrepute (Office of
the Court Administrator v. Quilatan, A.M. No. MTJ-09-1745,
Sept. 27, 2010).
Rule 3.06, Canon 3
While a judge may, to promote justice,
prevent waste of time or clear up some
obscurity, properly intervene in the
presentation of evidence during the trial, it
should always be borne in mind that undue
interference may prevent the proper
presentation of the cause or the
ascertainment of truth.
Rule 3.07, Canon 3
A judge should abstain from making public
comments on any pending or impending
case and should require similar restraint on
the part of court personnel.
ADMINISTRATIVE RESPONSIBILITIES
Rule 3.08, Canon 3
A judge should diligently discharge
administrative responsibilities, maintain
professional competence in court
management, and facilitate the
performance of the administrative functions
or other judges and court personnel.
Rule 3.09, Canon 3
A judge should organize and supervise the
court personnel to ensure the prompt and
efficient dispatch of business, and require at
all times the observance of high standards of
public service and fidelity.
 SOURCES

judges impartiality might reasonably be questioned.

Among the instances for the disqualification of a judge
Rule 3.10, Canon 3
is that he is related to a party litigant within the sixth
A judge should take or initiate appropriate
degree or to counsel within the fourth degree of
disciplinary measures against lawyers or
consanguinity or affinity. But this refers to counsel of
court personnel for unprofessional conduct
the parties. As amicus, he represents no party to the
of which the judge may have become aware.
case. There is, therefore, no ground to fear the loss of
the judges impartiality in this case if his son is
appointed amicus curiae.
DISQUALIFICATION
REMITTAL OF DISQUALIFICATION
Rule 3.12, Canon 3
A judge should take no part in a proceeding Rule 3.13, Canon 3
where the judges impartiality might A judge disqualified by the terms of Rule
reasonably be questioned. 3.12 may, instead of withdrawing from the
These cases include among others, proceeding, disclose on the record the basis
proceedings where: of disqualification.
a. The judge has personal knowledge of
disputed evidentiary facts concerning the If, based on such disclosure the parties and
proceeding; lawyers independently of the judges
b. The judge served as executor, participation, all agree in writing that the
administrator, guardian, trustee or reason for the inhibition is immaterial or
lawyer in the case or matter in insubstantial, the judge may then
controversy, or a former associate of the participate in the proceeding.
judge served as counsel during their
association, or the judge or lawyer was a The agreement signed by the parties, shall
material witness therein; be incorporated in the record of the
c. The judges ruling in a lower court is the proceeding.
subject of review;
d. The judge is related by consanguinity or
affinity to a party litigant within the sixth CANON 4
degree or to counsel within the fourth A JUDGE MAY, WITH DUE REGARD TO
degree; OFFICIAL DUTIES, ENGAGE IN ACTIVITIES TO
e. The judge knows the judges spouse or IMPROVE THE LAW, THE LEGAL SYSTEM
child has a financial interest, as heir, AND THE ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE.
legatee, creditor, fiduciary, or otherwise,
in the subject matter in controversy or in
a party to the proceeding, Rule 4.01, Canon 4
f. Any other interest that could be A judge may, to the extent that the
substantially affected by the outcome of following activities do not impair the
the proceeding. performance of judicial duties or cast doubt
on the judges impartiality:
In every instance, the judge shall indicate the a. Speak, write, lecture, teach of participate
legal reason for inhibition. in activities concerning the law, the legal
system and the administration of justice;
b. Appear at a public hearing before a
Q: In a hearing before the Court of Tax Appeals, Atty. legislative or executive body on matters
G was invited to appear as amicus curiae. One of the concerning the law, the legal system or the
Judges hearing the tax case is the father of Atty. G. administration of justice and otherwise
The counsel for the respondent moved for the consult with them on matters concerning
inhibition of the judge in view of the father-son the administration of justice;
relationship. Is there merit to the motion? Decide. c. Serve on any organization devoted to the
(1996 Bar Question) improvement of the law, the legal system or
the administration of justice.
A: There is no merit to the motion. Rule 3.12 of the CJC
provides that a judge should take no part where the

UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS

113 FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW
 JUDICIAL ETHICS

CANON 5,
A JUDGE SHOULD REGULATE EXTRAJUDICIAL
ACTIVITIES TO MINIMIZE THE RISK OF
CONFLICT WITH JUDICIAL DUTIES.
(1995, 1997, 1999, 2000, 2002 Bar Questions)
A judge should so manage investments and other
A judge should regulate his extra-judicial activities so financial interests as to minimize the number of cases
as to minimize the risk of conflict with judicial duties. giving grounds for disqualification. (Rule 5.02)

ADVOCATIONAL, CIVIL AND CHARITABLE ACTIVITIES Rule 5.03, Canon 5

Rule 5.01, Canon 5
A judge may engage in the following activities
provided that they do not interfere with the
performance of judicial duties or detract from
dignity of the court:
1. Write, teach and speak on non-legal subjects;
2. Engage in the arts, sports, and other special
recreational activities;
3. Participate in civic and charitable activities;
4. Serve as an officer, director, trustee, or non-
legal advisor of non-profit or non-political,
educational, religious, charitable, fraternal, or
civic organization.
FINANCIAL ACTIVITIES
Rule 5.02, Canon 5
A judge shall refrain from financial and
business dealing that tend to reflect
adversely on the courts impartiality,
interfere with the proper performance of
judicial activities or increase involvement
with lawyers or persons likely to come
before the court.
Subject to the provisions of the proceeding
rule, a judge may hold and manage
investments but should not serve as officer,
director, manager or advisor, or employee
of any business except as director of a
family business of the judge.
Rule on judges having investments
GR: A judge may hold and manage investments but
should not serve as:
1. An officer
2. Director
3. Manager
4. Advisor
5. Employee of any business
XPN: As director of a family business of the judge.
(Rule 5.03)
Rule 5.04, Canon 5
A judge or any immediate member of the
family shall not accept a gift, bequest,
factor or loan from anyone except as may be
allowed by law.

A judge should so manage investments and Rule 5.05, Canon 5

other financial interests as to minimize the
number of cases giving grounds for
disqualifications.
Rule regarding financial activities
No information acquired in judicial capacity
shall be sued of disclosed by a judge in any
financial dealing or for any other purpose
not related to judicial activities.

A judge shall refrain from financial and business

dealings that tend to:
1. Reflect adversely on the courts impartiality;
2. Interfere with the proper performance of judicial
activities; or
3. Increase involvement with lawyers or persons
likely to come before the court.

UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS

2014 GOLDEN NOTES
114
 QUALITIES
QUALITIES
(NEW CODE OF JUDICIAL CONDUCT)
INDEPENDENCE
CANON 1
JUDICIAL INDEPENDENCE IS A PRE-REQUISITE
TO THE RULE OF LAW AND A FUNDAMENTAL
GUARANTEE OF A FAIR TRIAL.
A JUDGE SHALL, THEREFORE, UPHOLD AND
EXEMPLIFY JUDICIAL INDEPENDENCE IN BOTH
ITS INDIVIDUAL AND INSTITUTIONAL ASPECTS.
Judicial Independence
An independent Judiciary is one free from
inappropriate outside influence.
Judicial independence is a pre-requisite to the rule of
law and a fundamental guarantee of a fair trial. A
judge shall, therefore, uphold and exemplify judicial
independence in both its individual and institutional
aspects (NCJC, Canon 1).
Individual Judicial Independence focuses on each
particular case and seeks to insure his or her ability to
decide cases with autonomy within the constraints of
the law while Institutional Judicial Independence
focuses on the independence of the judiciary as a
branch of government and protects judges as a class
(In the Matter of the Allegations Contained in the
Columns of Mr. Amado P. Macasaet Published in
Malaya dated Sept. 18, 19, 20 and 21, 2007).
NOTE: The treatment of independence as a single Canon is
the primary difference between the new Canon 1 and the
Canon 1 of the 1989 Code.
Section 1, Canon 1, NCJC
Judges shall exercise the judicial function
independently on the basis of their assessment
of the facts and in accordance with a
conscientious understanding of the law, free of
any extraneous influence, inducement,
pressure, threat or interference, direct or
indirect, from any quarter or for any reason.
Judges should inspire public confidence in the judiciary
which can be attained only if judges are perceived by
the public to be fair, honest, competent, principled,
dignified and honorable. Accordingly, the first duty of
judges is to conduct themselves at all times in a
manner that is beyond reproach.
115
Judges must reject pressure by maintaining
independence from, but not limited to the following:
1. Independence from public officials the public laid
their confidence on the fact that the official is
mentally and morally fit to pass upon the merits
of their varied intentions.
2. Independence from government as a whole
avoid inappropriate connections, as well as any
situation that would give rise to the impression of
the existence of such inappropriate connections.
3. Independence from family, social, or other
relationships Do not sit in litigation where a near
relative is a part of or counsel; be independent
from judicial colleagues (Sec. 2) and avoid such
actions as may reasonably tend to wake the
suspicion that his social or business relations
constitute an element in determining his judicial
course.
4. Independence from public opinion only guide is
the mandate of law.
Q: In a civil case submitted for a decision, Judge
Corpuz-Macandog acted on it based on a telephone
call from a government official telling her to decide
the case in favor of the defendant, otherwise she will
be removed. The judge explained that she did so
under pressure considering that the country was
under a revolutionary government at that time. Did
the judge commit an act of misconduct?
A: Yes. A judge must decide a case based on its merits.
For this reason, a judge is expected to be fearless in
the pursuit to render justice, to be unafraid to
displease any person, interest or power, and to be
equipped with a moral fiber strong enough to resist
temptation lurking in her office. Here, it is improper for
a judge to have decided a case based only on a
directive from a government official and not on the
judges own ascertainment of facts and applicable law
(Ramirez v. Corpuz-Macandog, A.M. No. R-351-RTJ,
Sept. 26, 1986).
Q: Mayor C was shot by B, the bodyguard of Mayor D,
inside the court room of Judge Dabalos.
Consequently, an information with no bail
recommendation was filed against B and D. The
murder case was then scheduled for raffle but before
the scheduled date, the son of Mayor C together with
their counsel, Atty. Libarios, and other sympathizers
staged a rally demanding immediate arrest of the
accused. Judge Dabalos then issued an order without
prior hearing directing the issuance of a warrant of
arrest against the accused. Did the judge commit an
act of misconduct?
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW
 JUDICIAL ETHICS
A: Yes. The judge should not issue warrant of arrest
without personally evaluating the resolution of the
prosecutor and its supporting evidence to establish
judicial probable cause (RRC, Sec.6, Rule 112). A judge
in every case should endeavor diligently to ascertain
the facts and the applicable law unswayed by partisan
or personal interests, public opinion or fear of criticism.
Here, the judge should not have allowed himself to be
swayed into issuing a warrant of arrest (Libarios v.
Dabalos A.M. No.RTJ-89-286, July 11, 1991).
Sec. 2, Canon 1, NCJC
In performing judicial duties, Judges shall be
independent from judicial colleagues in respect of
decisions which the judge is obliged to make
independently.
Degree of independence
The highest degree of independence is required of
judges. He must be independent in decision-making.
He cannot consult with staff and court officials.
However, he can ask colleagues purely academic or
hypothetical questions but not to the extent of asking
them to decide a case.
NOTE: It is every judges duty to respect the individual
independence of fellow judges.
Sec. 3, Canon 1, NCJC
Judges shall refrain from influencing in any
manner the outcome of litigation or dispute
pending before another court or administrative
agency.
(Principle of Subjudice)
A judge is prohibited from making public statements in
the media regarding a pending case so as not to arouse
public opinion for or against a party. (2007 Bar
Question)
This section affirms that a judges restraint from
exerting influence over other judicial or quasi-judicial
bodies is required for more than just propriety.
Any attempt, whether successful or not, to influence
the decision-making process of another judge,
especially one who is of lower rank and over whom a
judge exercises supervisory authority constitutes
serious misconduct.
NOTE: If the consultation is purely on an academic or
hypothetical basis, and the judge does not surrender his or
her independent decision making, there can be no breach of
Sections 2 and 3 of Canon 1 of the New Code.
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
2014 GOLDEN NOTES
116
Q: A Judge of the RTC wrote a letter to the judge of
the lower court, seeking to influence him to hear the
case and even intimating that he issue an order of
acquittal. Is it proper?
A: No, the Supreme Court ruled that a judge who tries
to influence the outcome of a case pending before
another court not only subverts the independence of
the judiciary but also undermines the peoples faith in
its integrity and impartiality. The interference in this
decision-making process of another judge is a breach
of conduct so serious as to justify dismissal from
service based only on preponderance of evidence
(Sabitsana Jr. vs. Villamor, A.M. No. 90-474, Oct. 4
1991).
Sec. 4, Canon 1, NCJC
Judges shall not allow family, social, or other
relationships to influence judicial conduct or
judgment.
The prestige of judicial office shall not be used or
lent to advance the private interests of others,
nor convey or permit others to convey the
impression that they are in a special position to
influence the judge.
Purpose of Sec. 4, Canon 1 of NCJC
It is intended to ensure that judges are spared from
potential influence of family members by disqualifying
them even before any opportunity for impropriety
presents itself.
The term judges family include:
1. Judges spouse
2. Son
3. Daughter
4. Son-in-law
5. Daughter-in-law
6. Other relative by consanguinity or affinity within
the sixth civil degree, or
7. Person who is a companion or employee of the
judge and who lives in the judges household
(NCJC of the Philippine Judiciary-Annotated,
February 2007).
When the judge is related to one of the parties within
the sixth degree of consanguinity or affinity, a judges
disqualification to sit in a case is mandatory.
NOTE: Judges should ensure that their family members,
friends and associates refrain from creating the impression
that they are in a position to influence the judge. Judges
 QUALITIES
should, therefore, at all times remind themselves that they
are not in the judiciary to give out favors but to dispense
justice. They should also make it clear to the members of
their family, friends and associates that they will neither be
influenced by anyone, nor would they allow anyone to
interfere in their work.
Sec. 5, Canon 1, NCJC
Judges shall not only be free from inappropriate
connections with, and influence by, the
executive and legislative branches of
government, but must also appear to be free
therefrom to a reasonable observer.
This section affirms the independence of the judiciary
from the two other branches of government.
NOTE: Judicial independence is the reason for leaving
exclusively to the Court the authority to deal with internal
personnel issues, even if the court employees in question are
funded by the local government (Bagatsing v. Herrera, G.R.
No. L-34952,July 25, 1975).
Q: Several employees of the city government of
Quezon City were appointed and assigned at the
office of the Clerk of Court-MeTC QC to assist the
organic staff of the Judiciary. However, the executive
judge of MeTC QC, in view of a reorganization plan,
returned those employees to different offices of QC
government saying that the court is already
overstaffed. The judge also requested the QC Mayor
to re-employ the laid off employees. Did the judge
commit any improper conduct?
A: Yes. An executive judge has no authority to cause
the transfer of court employees as the jurisdiction to
do so is lodge solely upon the SC through the Office of
the Court Administrator. This is so because of the need
to maintain judicial independence. Moreover, a judge
shall be free from inappropriate connections with and
influence from the executive and legislative branch.
Here, the judge did not act independently of the LGU
when she asked the Mayor of QC to re-employ the
displaced employees instead of informing the SC
through the OCA of the need to streamline her court
of its personal needs (Alfonso v. Alonzo-Legasto, A.M.
No. MTJ 94-995, Sept. 5, 2002).
Sec. 6, Canon 1, NCJC
Judges shall be independent in relation to
society in general and in relation to the
particular parties to a dispute which he or she
has to adjudicate.
117
NOTE: It is desirable that the judge should, as far as
reasonably possible, refrain from all relations which would
normally tend to arouse suspicion that such relations warp
or bias his judgment, and prevent an impartial attitude of
minds in the administration of judicial duties. Judges should
not fraternize with litigants and their counsel; they should
make a conscious effort to avoid them in order to avoid the
perception that their independence has been compromised
(Tan v.Rosete, A.M. No. MTJ-04-1563, Sept. 8, 2004).
Sec. 7, Canon 1, NCJC
Judges shall encourage and uphold safeguards
for the discharge of judicial duties in order to
maintain and enhance the institutional and
operational independence of the judiciary.
Sec. 8, Canon 1, NCJC
Judges shall exhibit and promote high
standards of judicial conduct in order to
reinforce public confidence in the judiciary,
which is fundamental to the maintenance of
judicial independence
Sections 7 and 8 of Canon 1 are intended to serve as
catch-all provisions for all other acts that would
guarantee the independence of the judiciary.
There can be no sure guarantee of judicial
independence than the character of those appointed
to the Bench.
Judges must remain conscious of their character and
reputation as judges and should avoid anything which
will not dignify their public positions and demean the
institution to which they belong, in whatever
atmosphere or environment they may happen to be.
INTEGRITY
CANON 2
INTEGRITY IS ESSENTIAL NOT ONLY TO THE
PROPER DISCHARGE OF THE JUDICIAL OFFICE,
BUT ALSO TO THE PERSONAL DEMEANOR OF
JUDGES.
A judge should act with integrity and behave with
integrity at all times so as to promote public
confidence in the integrity of the judiciary.
Integrity is required not only in the discharge of
judicial duties but also to the personal demeanor of
judges
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW
 JUDICIAL ETHICS
Integrity is essential not only to the proper discharge
of the judicial office but also to the personal demeanor
of judges. (NCJC, Canon 2) 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 people who run the system have
done justice. Justice must not be merely done but
must also be seen to be done. (Panaligan v. Judge Ibay,
A.M. No. TJ-06-1972, June 21, 2006)
In the Judiciary, moral integrity is more than a cardinal
virtue, it is a necessity (Pascual v. Bonifacio, AM No.
RTJ-01-1625, Mar. 10, 2003). Judges must be models
of uprightness, fairness and honesty (Rural Bank of
Barotac Nuevo, Inc v. Cartagena, A.M. No. 707-MJ, July
21, 1978).
NOTE: Under the 1989 Code, the values of INTEGRITY and
INDEPENDENCE were grouped together, but the New Code
of Judicial Conduct separated them to emphasize the need
to maintain a life of PERSONAL and PROFESSIONAL
INTEGRITY in order to properly carry out their judicial
functions.
Presumption regarding judges
Judges are presumed honest and, are men of integrity,
unless proven otherwise.
Section 1, Canon 2, NCJC
Judges shall ensure that not only is their
conduct above reproach, but that it is
perceived to be so in the view of a reasonable
observer.
The maintenance of the courts integrity is not the
sole duty of the judge. It is also the duty of court
personnel to see to it that its integrity is unblemished.
NOTE: A judges personal behavior, both in the performance
of his duties and in his daily life, must be free from any
appearance of impropriety as to be beyond reproach.
Q: Judge Ferdinand Marcos of RTC Cebu is married to
Rotilla with whom he begot 2 children. However,
during a Fun Run sponsored by Philippine Judges
Association (PJA), Judge Marcos appeared with a
woman other than his wife whom he even
introduced to Justice Davide as his living partner.
Should the judge be disciplined?
A: Yes. The Code of Judicial Conduct requires a judge
to be the embodiment of integrity, and to avoid
appearance of impropriety in all activities. Here, Judge
Marcos conduct of flaunting his mistress is a conduct
unbecoming of a judge. By living with a woman other
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
2014 GOLDEN NOTES
118
than his legal wife, Judge Marcos has demonstrated
himself to be wanting in integrity, thus, unfit to remain
in office and continue discharging the functions of a
judge. (Re: Complaint of Mrs. Rotilla A. Marcos and
Her Children against Judge Ferdinand J. Marcos, RTC,
Br. 20, Cebu City, A.M. No. 97-2-53 RTC, July 6, 2001)
Judges must always wear a robe at hearings
A judge must take care not only to remain true to the
high ideals of competence and integrity his robe
represents, but also that he wears one in the first place
(Chan v. Majaducan A.M. No. RTJ-02-1697, Oct. 15,
2003).
Sec. 2, Canon 2, NCJC
The behavior and conduct of judges must
reaffirm the peoples faith in the integrity of
the Judiciary.
Justice must not merely be done, but must
also be seen to be done.
A judge has the duty to not only render a just and
impartial decision, but also render it in such a manner
as to be free from any suspicion as to its fairness and
impartiality, and also as to the judges integrity. While
judges should possess proficiency in law in order that
they can completely construe and enforce the law, it
is more important that they should act and behave in
such a manner that the parties before them should
have confidence in their impartiality (Sibayan-Joaquin
v. Javellana, A.M. No. RTJ-00-1601, Nov. 13, 2001).
Q: Justice Mariano Del Castillo was charged with
plagiarism, twisting of cited materials, and gross
neglect in connection with the decision he wrote for
the court in G.R. No. 162230, entitled Vinuya v.
Romulo. Petitioners, members of the Malaya Lolas
Organization, seek reconsideration of the decision of
the Court dated October 12, 2010 that dismissed the
said complaint. Petitioners claim that the Court has
by its decision legalized or approved of the
commission of plagiarism in the Philippines. Should
the respondent justice be held guilty for plagiarism?
A: No. A judge writing to resolve a dispute, whether
trial or appellate, is exempted from a charge of
plagiarism even if ideas, words or phrases from a law
review article, novel thoughts published in a legal
periodical or language from a partys brief are used
without giving attribution. Thus, judges are free to use
whatever sources they deem appropriate to resolve
the matter before them, without fear of reprisal. This
exemption applies to judicial writings intended to
decide cases for two reasons: the judge is not writing
 QUALITIES
a literary work and, more importantly, the purpose of
the writing is to resolve a dispute. As a result, judges
adjudicating cases are not subject to a claim of legal
plagiarism.
Although as a rule, practicing lawyers receive
compensation for every pleading or paper they file in
court or for every opinion they render to clients,
lawyers also need to strive for technical accuracy in
their writings. They should not be exposed to charges
of plagiarism in what they write so long as they do not
depart, as officers of the court, from the objective of
assisting the Court in the administration of justice (In
matter of the Charges of Plagiarism etc.. Against
Associate Justice Mariano C. Del Castillo, A.M. No. 10-
7-17-SC, February 8, 2011).
Sec. 3, Canon 2, NCJC
Judges should take or initiate appropriate
disciplinary measures against lawyers or court
personnel for unprofessional conduct of which
the judge may have become aware.
A judge may summarily punish any person including
lawyers and court personnel, for direct contempt for
misbehavior committed in the presence of or so near
a court or a judge as to obstruct or interrupt the
proceedings before the same (RRC, Rule 71).
He may also punish any person for indirect contempt
after appropriate charge and hearing, for acts
enumerated under Section 3, Rule 71 of the Rules of
Court.
Judges duty with respect to court employees
A judge should constantly keep a watchful eye on the
conduct of his employees. His constant scrutiny of the
behavior of his employees would deter any abuse on
the part of the latter in the exercise of their duties
(Buenaventura v. Benedicto, A.C. No. 137-5, Mar. 27,
1971).
A judge cannot dismiss a court personnel. The power
to dismiss a court employee is vested in the Supreme
Court (Dailay-Papa v. Almora, A.M. Nos. 543-MC and
1525-MJ, Dec. 19, 1981).
NOTE: Judges should not be lenient in the administrative
supervision of employees. As an administrator, the judge
must ensure that all court personnel perform efficiently and
promptly in the administration of justice (Ramirez v. Corpuz-
Macandog, A.M. No. R-351-RTJ, Sept. 26, 1986).
All court personnel, from the lowliest employees to the
clerks of court, are involved in the dispensation of justice like
judges and justices, and parties seeking redress from the
119
courts for grievances look upon them also as part of the
judiciary. In performing their duties and responsibilities,
court personnel serve as sentinels of justice, that any act of
impropriety they commit immeasurably affects the honor
and dignity of the judiciary and the people's confidence in
the judiciary. They are, therefore, expected to act and
behave in a manner that should uphold the honor and
dignity of the judiciary, if only to maintain the peoples
confidence in the judiciary (Guerrero v.Ong, A.M. No. P-09-
2676, Dec. 16, 2009).
Q: While Judge Tuparin was in his chambers dictating
an order to a stenographer, two lawyers who were in
the courtroom waiting for the start of the session
almost came to blows as a result of a heated
argument. Tuparin came out of his chambers and
after identifying the lawyers involved in the
commotion promptly declared them in contempt of
court. Was the action of Judge Tuparin proper?
A: No. The act committed by the two lawyers was
indirect contempt violative of the rule punishing any
improper conduct tending directly or indirectly, to
impede, obstruct, or degrade the administration of
justice, since the judge was then engaged in dictating
an order before the morning session was called. The
act of the two lawyers constituted obstruction of the
administration of justice, which was indirect contempt.
Accordingly, they could only be punished after notice
and hearing.
IMPARTIALITY
CANON 3
IMPARTIALITY IS ESSENTIAL TO THE PROPER
DISCHARGE OF THE JUDICIAL OFFICE. IT APPLIES
NOT ONLY TO THE DECISION ITSELF BUT ALSO TO
THE PROCESS BY WHICH THE DECISION IS MADE.
Impartiality is essential to the proper discharge of the
judicial office. It applies not only to the decision itself
but also to the process by which the decision is made
(NCJC, Canon 3).
Principle of cold neutrality of an impartial judge
A judge should not only render just, correct, and
impartial decision but should do so in a manner free
from suspicion as to his fairness, impartiality and
integrity. This is an indispensable requisite of due
process (Rallos v. Gako, A.M. No.RTJ-98-1484, Mar. 17,
2000).
NOTE: A judge has both: the duty of rendering a just
decision; and, doing it in a manner completely free from
suspicion as to his fairness and as to his integrity.
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW
 JUDICIAL ETHICS
Sec. 1, Canon 3, NCJC
Judges shall perform their judicial duties
without favor, bias or prejudice.
It is the duty of all judges not only to be impartial but
also to appear impartial.
Degree of proof required to prove bias on the part of
the judge
The complainant must prove the same by clear and
convincing evidence since allegations of bias are quite
serious. Mere allegations are not sufficient to
constitute a violation of the rule.
Q: A filed an action for specific performance with the
RTC of Quezon City, presided by Judge Santiago,
against X Corporation asking for the delivery of the
title of 1 subdivision lot in Batangas which lot was
given to him in payment for his services as geodetic
surveyor. Meanwhile X Corporation filed with MTC of
Batangas an action for an unlawful detainer against
certain lot buyers on motion of A. Judge Santiago
issued TRO against X Corporation and Judge of MTC
and enjoining the latter from proceeding with the
case. X Corporation now filed a motion to inhibit the
judge on the ground that he arbitrarily issued such
TRO, but without presenting evidence showing
partiality on the part of the judge. Should the judge
be inhibited?
A: No. For a judge to be inhibited, allegations of
partiality and pre-judgment must be proven by clear
and convincing evidence. Here, mere allegation that
the judge arbitrarily issued the TRO without presenting
evidence showing bias on his part is not sufficient.
While Judge Santiago acted in excess of his jurisdiction
when he issued the TRO for such should only be
enforceable within his territorial jurisdiction, such
error may not necessarily warrant inhibition at most it
is correctible by certiorari (Dimo Realty &Development,
Inc. v. Dimaculangan, G.R. No. 130991, Mar. 11, 2004).
Extra-judicial source rule
It means that the decision is based on some influence
other than the facts and law presented in the
courtroom.
Q: A motion to inhibit Judge Dicdican was filed on the
ground of partiality and bias on his part for allegedly
denying a motion to hear affirmative defenses
thereby denying the movant the opportunity to be
heard. Should the judge be inhibited?
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
2014 GOLDEN NOTES
120
A: No. Judge Dicdican cannot be charged with bias and
partiality, merely on the basis of his decision not to
grant a motion for a preliminary hearing. Allegations
and perceptions of bias from the mere tenor and
language of a judge are insufficient to show pre-
judgment. Moreover, as long as opinions formed in the
course of judicial proceedings are based on the
evidence presented and the conduct observed by the
judge, such opinion even if later found to be
erroneous on appeal or made with grave abuse of
discretion on certiorari will not necessarily prove
personal bias or prejudice on the part of the judge. To
allow inhibition for such reason would open floodgates
to abuse. Here, the denial of the motion to hear
affirmative defenses is based on the Rules of Court
which provides that preliminary hearing of defenses is
discretionary, hence the judge cannot be charged with
partiality on the basis of such decision (Gochan v.
Gochan,G.R. No. 143089, Feb. 27, 2003).
Sec. 2, Canon 3, NCJC
Judges shall ensure that his or her conduct,
both in and out of court, maintains and
enhances the confidence of the public, the
legal profession and litigants in the
impartiality of the judge and of the Judiciary.
Rationale: No judge should handle a case in which he
might be perceived, rightly or wrongly, to be
susceptible to bias and impartiality. His judgment must
not be tainted by even the slightest suspicion of
improbity or preconceived interest. The rule is aimed
at preserving at all times the faith and confidence in
courts of justice by any party to the litigation (Urbanes,
Jr. v. C.A., G.R. No. 117964, Mar.28, 2001).
There is undue interference where the judges
participation in the conduct of the trial tends to build
or to bolster a case of one of the parties (Ty v. Banco
Filipino Savings and Mortgage Bank, CA and Hon. Tac-
an G.R. Nos. 149797-98, Feb. 13, 2004).
Q: Banco Filipino filed a complaint for reconveyance
of property against Ty and Tala Realty Services Corp.,
which complaint was dismissed on the ground of lack
of jurisdiction. However, on motion for
reconsideration filed by Banco Filipino, the case was
reinstated and the judge even relieved Banco Filipino
from its obligation to prove service of its motion for
reconsideration and presumed actual receipt of the
same by the other party. Thereafter, the judge
directed the respondents to present certain
documents within a certain period of time despite
failure of Banco Filipino to tender the costs for such
production and inspection. Tala then filed a motion
 QUALITIES
for inhibition but the same was denied by the judge.
Did the judge commit any improper conduct?
A: Yes. The rule is that a judge may not be legally
prohibited from sitting in litigation, but when
circumstances appear that will induce doubt to his
honest actuations and probity in favor of either party,
or incite such state of mind; he should conduct a
careful self-examination. He should exercise his
discretion in a way that the people's faith in the courts
of justice is not impaired. The better course for the
judge under such circumstances is to disqualify himself.
That way, he avoids being misunderstood; his
reputation for probity and objectivity is preserved.
What is more important, the ideal of impartial
administration of justice is lived up to. Here, the judge,
by assuming actual receipt by the respondents of
proof of service of the motion for reconsideration,
absolving Banco Filipino from paying the expenses of
production of documents, and suggesting to Banco
Filipino what evidence to present to prove its case,
transgressed the boundaries of impartiality. Thus, the
judge should inhibit himself (Ty v. Banco Filipino
Savings and Mortgage Bank, et. al., G.R. Nos. 149797-
98, Feb. 13, 2004).
A trial judge can ask questions from witnesses. In
every examination of a witness, the court shall take
active part in examining him to determine his
credibility as well as the truth of his testimony and to
elicit the answers that it needs for resolving the issues
(Judicial Affidavit Rule, Sec. 7).
NOTE: In disposing of a criminal case, a judge should avoid
appearing like an advocate for either party. It is also
improper for the judge to push actively for amicable
settlement against the wishes of the complainant. A judges
unwelcome persistence makes the judge vulnerable to
suspicions of favoritism (Montemayor v. Bermejo, Jr.,A.M.
No.MTJ-04-1535, Mar. 12, 2004).
Sec. 3, Canon 3,NCJC
Judges shall, so far as is reasonable, so
conduct themselves as to minimize the
occasions on which it will be necessary for
them to be disqualified from hearing or
deciding cases.
Meaning of duty to sit
It means that a judge must ensure that he will not be
unnecessarily disqualified from a case.
A judge cannot inhibit himself as he pleases. A decision
to inhibit must be based on good, sound or ethical
grounds, or for just and valid reasons. It is not enough
121
that a party cast some tenuous allegations of partiality
at the judge.
Rule of necessity
It states that a judge is not disqualified to sit in a case
where there is no other judge available to hear and
decide the case. Furthermore, when all judges will be
disqualified as a result, it will not be permitted to
destroy the only tribunal with the power in the
premises. The doctrine operates on the principle that
a basic judge is better than no judge at all. It is the duty
of the disqualified judge to hear and decide the case
regardless of objections or disagreements (Parayno
v.Meneses, G.R. No. 112684, Apr. 26, 1994).
Sec. 4, Canon 3, NCJC
Judges shall not knowingly, while a
proceeding is before or could come before
them, make any comment that might
reasonably be expected to affect the outcome
of such proceeding or impair the manifest
fairness of the process.
Nor shall judges make any comment in public
or otherwise that might affect the fair trial of
any person or issue.
A judges language, both written and spoken, must be
guarded and measured, lest the best of intentions be
misconstrued (Fecundo v. Berjamen,G.R. No. 88105,
Dec. 18, 1989).
Reason for the rule
This Section warns judges against making any
comment that might reasonably be expected to affect
the outcome of the proceedings before them; or those
that the judge may later decide but not yet before him;
or "impair the manifest fairness of the process.
Q: Justice Antonio Carpio penned a decision
regarding the invalidity of the amended joint venture
agreement between Public Estates Authority (PEA)
and Amari Coastal Bay Development Corporation
saying that the agreement is unconstitutional as PEA
cannot transfer ownership of a reclaimed land to a
private corporation. Amari now filed a motion to
inhibit Justice Carpio on the ground of bias and pre-
judgment allegedly because he had previously wrote
in his column in Manila Times a statement to the
effect that the law requires public bidding of
reclaimed projects and that the PEA-Amari contract is
flawed for it was not bid by the PEA. Decide on the
motion.
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW
 JUDICIAL ETHICS
A: The motion to inhibit must be denied for three
reasons:
1. The motion to inhibit must be denied if filed after
a member of the court had already rendered his
opinion on the merits of the case. Here, the
motion was filed after Justice Carpio had already
rendered a decision;
2. The ratio decidendi of the decision was not based
on his statements on the column. Here, the
decision was based on constitutional grounds and
not in the absence of public bidding; and
3. Judges and justices are not disqualified from
participating in a case just because they have
written legal articles on the law involved in the
case (Chavez v. PEA, G.R. No. 133250, May 6,
2003).
No absolute prohibition against judges from making
comments
Not all comments are impermissible. Judges may
express their open-mindedness regarding a pending
issue in cases where the judges comments do not
necessarily favor one side over the other.
However, judges should avoid side remarks, hasty
conclusions, loose statements or gratuitous
utterances that suggest they are prejudging a case.
Judges should be aware that the media might consider
them a good and credible source of opinion or ideas,
and therefore should refrain from making any
comment on a pending case. Not only is there danger
of being misquoted, but also of compromising the
rights of the litigants in the case.
Sec. 5, Canon 3, NCJC
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.
The phrase any proceedings include, but are not
limited to instances where:
The judge has actual bias or prejudice concerning a
party or personal knowledge of disputed evidentiary
facts concerning the proceedings (NCJC, Sec. 5(a),
Canon 3);
The rule also requires disqualification if a judge
has outside knowledge of disputed facts. To be a
ground for disqualification, the knowledge must
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
2014 GOLDEN NOTES
122
be obtained extra-judicially like out-of-court
observations.
This prohibition also disallows extra-judicial
research on the internet.
The judge previously served as a lawyer or was a
material witness in the matter in controversy (CJC,
Sec. 5(b), Canon 3);
A judge may be disqualified if he was formerly
associated with one of the parties or their counsel.
A judge who previously notarized the affidavit of a
person to be presented as a witness in a case before
him shall be disqualified from proceeding with the
case.
The judge, or a member of his or her family, has an
economic interest in the outcome of the matter in
controversy (NCJC, Sec. 5(c), Canon 3);
A municipal judge who filed complaints in his own
court for robbery and malicious mischief against a
party for the purpose of protecting the property
interests of the judges co-heirs, and then issued
warrants of arrest against the party, was found guilty
of serious misconduct and ordered dismissed from the
bench before he was able to rescue himself (Oktubre
v. Velasco A.M. No. MTJ-02-02-1444, July 20, 2004).
The judge served as executor, administrator,
guardian, trustee or lawyer in the case or 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 (NCJC,
Sec. 5(d), Canon 3);
The restriction extends to judges who served as
lawyers in closely related cases.
The judges ruling in a lower court is the subject of
review (NCJC, Sec. 5(e), Canon 3);
An associate justice of the Court of Appeals refused to
inhibit himself from reviewing the decision in a case
which he had partially heard as a trial judge prior to his
promotion, on the ground that the decision was not
written by him. The Supreme Court upheld his refusal,
but nevertheless commented that he "should have
been more prudent and circumspect and declined to
take on the case owing to his earlier involvement in the
case. The Court has held that a judge should not
handle a case in which he might be perceived, rightly
or wrongly, to be susceptible to bias and prejudice.
(Sandoval v. CA, G.R. No. 106657,Aug. 1, 1996).
 QUALITIES
The judge is related by consanguinity or affinity to a
party litigant within the 6th civil degree or to counsel
within the 4th civil degree (NCJC, Sec. 5(f), Canon 3);
NOTE: A preliminary injunction issued by a judge in favor of
his sister before inhibiting himself was found reprehensible
(Hurtado v.Judajena, G.R. No. L-40603, July 13, 1978).
No judge should preside in a case which he is not
wholly free, disinterested, impartial and independent
(Garcia v. De La Pena. A.M.No.MTJ-92-637, Feb. 9,
1994).
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 (NCJC, Sec. (g), Canon 3).
This rule is intended to ensure judges impartiality by
preventing situations in which a judge must consider
familial interests in the conflicts before him or her. If
the public is aware of a family members financial
interest, the public may question the judges
impartiality
Q: When Atty. Rojas was appointed as a judge, he
inherited a criminal case in which he acted as
prosecutor. He explained that his delay in inhibiting
himself from presiding on that case was because it
was only after the belated transcription of the
stenographic notes that he remembered that he
handled that case. He also says that the counsels did
not object and he never held full-blown hearings
anyway. Should Judge Rojas be reprimanded?
A: Yes. The Rules of Court prevent judges from trying
cases where they acted as counsel without the
consent of the parties. This prevents not only a conflict
of interest but also the appearance of impropriety on
the part of the judge. Here, the judge should not have
taken part in the proceeding as his impartiality will
naturally be questioned considering that he previously
handled the case as prosecutor. He should administer
justice impartially & without delay. The prohibition
does not only cover hearings but all judicial acts (e.g.
orders, resolutions) some of which, Judge Rojas did
make (Re: Inhibition of Judge Eddie R. Rojas, A.M. No.
98-6-185-RTC, Oct. 30, 1998).
Q: Judge Mijares was charged with grave misconduct
for taking cognizance and deciding a special
proceeding for correction of entry in the record of her
grandson, notwithstanding such relationship. It was
also alleged that the judge dispensed with the
publication requirement in said proceeding. In her
answer, Judge Mijares contended that the
123
prohibition provided for under the Code does not
apply to special proceeding which is not controversial
in nature and since she does not have any pecuniary
interest in the case. Is the contention correct?
A: No. A judge who is related to a party within the 6th
degree of consanguinity is mandated to inhibit himself
from hearing the case notwithstanding lack of
pecuniary interest in the case. This is so because lack
of such interest does not mean that she can already be
free from bias and partiality in resolving the case by
reason of her close blood relationship as evident from
the fact that here, she waived the publication
requirement in order to save the petitioner from the
payment of publication fee. Thus, the judges taking
cognizance of the petition is improper (Villaluz
v.Mijares, A.M. No. RTJ -98-1402 288, Apr. 3, 1998).
Degree of compliance required by the rule under
Canon 3, Section 5 of NCJC
Strict compliance of the rule is required so as to
protect the rights of the parties and assure an
impartial administration of justice, as well as to
prevent erosion of the people's confidence in the
judiciary (Marfil v. Cuachon, A.M. No. 2360-MJ ,Aug.
31, 1981). The grounds for disqualification of a judge
enumerated under Sec. 5 of Canon 3 are not exclusive.
The provision provides that it is not limited to the
grounds therein provided.
Sec. 6, Canon 3, NCJC
A judge disqualified as stated above may,
instead of withdrawing from the proceeding,
disclose on the records the basis of
disqualification.
If, based on such disclosure, the parties and
lawyers, independently of the judges
participation, all agree in writing that the
reason for inhibition is immaterial or
unsubstantial, the judge may then participate
in the proceeding.
The agreement, signed by all parties and
lawyers, shall be incorporated in the record of
Types of disqualification
the proceedings.
1. Mandatory or compulsory disqualification
2. Voluntary disqualification or inhibition
Inhibition
An act when a judge personally prevents himself from
taking cognizance of the case. This is made through a
written petition to inhibit which shall state the
grounds for the same. The explanation of the judge
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW
 JUDICIAL ETHICS
whether or not to take cognizance of the case must
also be in writing.
If the judge inhibits himself from taking cognizance of
the case, the same cannot be appealed. However, the
judge should not immediately inhibit himself. He
should make a careful examination by first taking into
consideration the following:
1. General consideration whether or not peoples
faith in the judicial system will be impaired
2. Special consideration He must reflect on the
probability that the losing party will nurture at the
back of his mind that he tilted the scale of justice
Disqualification v. Inhibition
DISQUALIFICATION INHIBITION
There are specific The rule only provides
grounds enumerated broad basis for
under the rules of court inhibition.
for disqualification.
The judge has no The rule leaves the
discretion; mandatory matter to the judges
sound discretion
Grounds for mandatory disqualification
1. When he, or his wife, or child is pecuniarily
interested as heir, legatee, creditor, or otherwise;
2. When he is related to either party within the 6th
degree of consanguinity or affinity or to counsel
within the 4th civil degree;
3. When he has been an executor, guardian,
administrator, trustee, or counsel; or
4. When he has presided in an inferior court where
his ruling or decision is subject to review, without
the written consent of the parties. (Rule 137, RRC)
Voluntary inhibition of a judge
The judge may in his discretion inhibit himself, for just
and valid reasons other than the grounds for
mandatory disqualification. The rule on voluntary
disqualification or inhibition is discretionary upon the
judge on the basis of his conscience.
This leaves the discretion to the judge to decide for
himself questions as to whether he will desist from
sitting in a case for other just and valid reasons with
only his conscience to guide him, unless he cannot
discern for himself his inability to meet the test of cold
neutrality required of him, in which event the
appellate court will see to it that he disqualifies himself.
A decision to disqualify himself is not conclusive and
his competency may be determined on application for
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
2014 GOLDEN NOTES
124
mandamus to compel him to act. Judges decision to
continue hearing a case in which he is not legally
prohibited from trying notwithstanding challenge to
his objectivity may not constitute reversible error.
The filing of an administrative case against a judge
disqualify does not automatically disqualify him from
sitting in a case. It must be shown that there are other
acts or conducts by the judge which constitute a
ground for his disqualification.
A judge may by mandamus be compelled to act on
questions regarding his disqualification from sitting in
a case.
Time to file the petition to disqualify a judge
It must be filed before rendition of the judgment, and
cannot be raised on appeal. Otherwise, the parties are
deemed to have waived any objection regarding the
impartiality of the judge.
Q: A judge rendered a decision in a criminal case
finding the accused guilty of estafa. Counsel for the
accused filed a motion for reconsideration which was
submitted without arguments. Later, another lawyer
entered his appearance for the accused. The judge
issued an order inhibiting himself from further sitting
in the case because the latter lawyer had been among
those who recommended him to the bench. Can the
judges voluntary inhibition be sustained?
A: The judge may not voluntarily inhibit himself by the
mere fact that a lawyer recommended him to the
bench. In fact, the appearance of said lawyer is a test
as to whether the judge can act independently and
courageously in deciding the case according to his
conscience. Inhibition is not allowed at every instance
that a friend, classmate, associate or patron of a
presiding judge appears before him as counsel for one
of the parties to a case. Utang na loob, per se, should
not be a hindrance to the administration of justice. Nor
should recognition of such value in Philippine society
prevent the performance of ones duties as judge.
However, in order to avoid any suspicion of partiality,
it is better for the judge to voluntarily inhibit himself
(Query of Executive Judge Estrella T. Estrada, Regional
Trial Court of Malolos, Bulacan, on the Conflicting
Views of Regional Trial Court Judges Masadao and
Elizaga Re: Criminal Case No. 4954-M, A.M. No. 87-9-
3918-RTC, Oct. 26, 1987).
Q: Does a judges active participation during the
hearing of the writ of preliminary injunction amount
to an evident display of his bias and partiality in favor
 QUALITIES
of the private respondents and should he therefore
disqualify himself from further hearing the civil case?
A: No. Mere intervention of the respondent judge
during the hearing of preliminary injunction by simply
asking the materiality of a question directed upon the
witness and ruling against the petitioners are within
the prerogatives and powers of the judge. The fact that
the judge asked questions in the course of the trial
does not make him a biased judge (Hizon v. Dela
Fuente,G.R. No. 152328, Mar. 23, 2004).
Remittal of disqualification
A judge disqualified may, instead of withdrawing from
the proceeding, disclose in the records the basis of
disqualification. If, based on such disclosure, the
parties and lawyers, independently of the judges
participation, all agree in writing that the reason for
the inhibition is immaterial or insubstantial; the judge
may then participate in the proceeding. The
agreement, signed by all parties and lawyers, shall be
incorporated in the record of the proceedings. (NCJC,
Sec. 6, Canon 3)
Requirements for a judge to continue hearing a case
despite the existence of reasons for disqualifications
1. The bona fide disclosure to the parties in
litigation; and
2. The express acceptance by all the parties of the
cited reason as not material or substantial.
PROPRIETY
CANON 4
PROPRIETY AND THE APPEARANCE OF
PROPRIETY ARE ESSENTIAL TO THE
PERFORMANCE OF ALL THE ACTIVITIES OF A
JUDGE.
NOTE: The judges own perception of motives is not relevant
when considering appearance of impropriety.
Sec. 1, Canon 4, NCJC
Judges shall avoid impropriety and the
appearance of impropriety in all of their
activities.
NOTE: The public holds judges to higher standards of
integrity and ethical conduct than lawyers and other persons
not invested with public trust.
125
Prohibition provided by the Code
It prohibits not only actual impropriety but even the
mere appearance of impropriety.
Appearance of impropriety
When the conduct of a judge would create
unreasonable minds a perception that the judges
ability to carry out judicial responsibilities with
integrity, impartiality and competence is impaired.
NOTE: Acts done by a judge which are not illegal may still
constitute a violation of this rule.
Q: After the prosecution cross-examined Sheila, a
witness for the accused, Judge Pedro asked her ten
additional questions that were so intense, they made
her cry. One question forced Sheila to admit that her
mother was living with another man, a fact that
weighed against the accused. This prompted the
latters counsel to move to move to expunge the
judges questions for building on the prosecutions
case. Judge Pedro denied the motion, insisting that
bolstering a partys case is incidental to the courts
desire to be clarified. Did Judge Pedro commit an
impropriety? (2011 Bar Question)
A: Yes, because he effectively deprived the defense of
its right to due process when he acted both as
prosecutor and judge.
Examples of acts of a judge which are not illegal but
will constitute a violation of this rule
1. The act of a judge of hearing cases on a day when he
is supposed to be on official leave (Re: Anonymous
complaint Against Judge Edmundo Acua, A.M. No.
RTJ-04-1891, July 28, 2005).
2. Photograph showing the judge and a subordinate
coming out of a hotel together even if there was no
clear evidence of sexual congress between them is
enough to give rise to the appearance of impropriety
that the code strongly warns against (Liwanag v. Lustre,
A.M. No. MTJ-98-1168, Apr. 21 1999).
3. Joking remark made by a judge to a litigant
suggesting that the litigant prove he harbored no ill
feelings towards the judge (Co v. Plata, A.M. No. MTJ-
03-1501,Mar. 14, 2005).
Q: During the hearing of an election protest filed by
the brother of Judge Dojillo, the latter sat beside the
counsel of his brother allegedly to give moral support.
Did the judge commit any improper conduct?
A: Yes. The judge violated the rule on impropriety
under Sec 1, Canon 4, NCJC for even if he did not
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW
 JUDICIAL ETHICS
intend to use his position as a judge to influence the
outcome of his brothers election protest, it cannot be
denied that his presence in the courtroom during the
hearing of his brothers case would immediately give
cause for the community to suspect that his being a
colleague in the judiciary would influence the judge
trying the case to favor his brother (Vidal v. Judge
Dojillo Jr., A.M. No. MTJ-05-1591, July 14, 2005).
NOTE: The Judges act in riding in defendants car deserves
the stern probation of the Court. By such act, he openly
exposed himself and the office he holds to suspicion, thus
impairing the trust and faith of the people in the
administration of justice. A judges official conduct should be
free from the appearance of impropriety and his personal
conduct and behavior should be beyond reproach (Spouses
Cabreana v. Avelino A.M. No. 1733 CFI, Sept. 30, 1981).
Q: Judge Duque of the RTC was charged with
Impropriety, Corruption and Gross Misconduct.
Reyes alleged that she was a party-in-intervention in
Land Registration filed by the Philippine Savings Bank
against the spouses Choi. In a Decision, Judge Duque
granted the motion for the issuance of a writ of
possession in favor of the bank. Complainant Reyes
filed an Urgent Petition for Lifting and Setting Aside
of Writ of Possession and Quashal of Notice to
Vacate claiming that she bought the subject
property from the spouses Choi and that she was in
actual possession of the property with full knowledge
of the bank. At the hearing, Atty. Ubana, the lawyer
of Reyes, introduced her to Judge Duque who
allegedly gave Reyes 30 days to settle matters with
the bank. She was unable to re-negotiate with the
bank. Reyes then allegedly received a phone call from
Judge Duque and he instructed Reyes to go to his
house and bring some money in order that he can
deny the pending motion to break open. When she
already had the money, she went to his house. The
son of Judge Duque opened the gate. At his house,
Judge Duque demanded money from her.
Another incident happened, whereby Reyes went to
the house of Judge Duque for the payment of a sum
of money. Judge Duque allegedly scolded her for not
bringing the whole amount. Judge Duque then locked
the main door of his house and asked Reyes to step
into his office. Judge Duque held the waist of Reyes,
embraced and kissed her. Reyes tried to struggle and
free herself. Judge Duque raised her skirt, opened her
blouse and sucked her breasts. He touched her
private parts and attempted to have sexual
intercourse with Reyes. Reyes shouted for help but
the TV was too loud. As a desperate move, Reyes
appealed to Judge Duque saying: kung gusto mo,
huwag dito. Sa hotel, sasama ako sayo. Judge
Duque suddenly stopped his sexual advances and
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
2014 GOLDEN NOTES
126
ordered Reyes to fix her hair. Is the respondent judge
guilty of impropriety and gross misconduct?
A: Yes. Judges should avoid impropriety and the
appearance of impropriety in all of their activities.
Judges should conduct themselves in a way that is
consistent with the dignity of the judicial office. Judges,
like any other citizen, are entitled to freedom of
expression, belief, association and assembly, but in
exercising such rights, they should always conduct
themselves in such a manner as to preserve the dignity
of the judicial office and the impartiality and
independence of the judiciary.
The conduct of Judge Duque fell short of the exacting
standards for members of the judiciary. He failed to
behave in a manner that would promote confidence in
the judiciary. Considering that a judge is a visible
representation of the law and of justice, he is naturally
expected to be the epitome of integrity and should be
beyond reproach. Judge Duques conduct indubitably
bore the marks of impropriety and immorality. He
failed to live up to the high moral standards of the
judiciary and even transgressed the ordinary norms of
decency of society. Had Judge Duque not retired, his
misconduct would have merited his dismissal from the
service (Reyes v. Duque, A.M. No. RTJ-08-2136 , Sept.
21, 2010).
Sec. 2, Canon 4, NCJC
As a subject of constant public scrutiny, judges
must accept personal restrictions that might
be viewed as burdensome by the ordinary
citizen and should do so freely and willingly. In
particular, judges shall conduct themselves in
a way that is consistent with the dignity of the
judicial office.
Membership in the judiciary circumscribes ones
personal conduct and imposes upon him certain
restrictions, the faithful observance of which, is the
price one has to pay for holding such a distinguished
position. Accordingly, a magistrate of the law must
comport himself in a manner that his conduct must be
free of a whiff of impropriety, not only with respect to
the performance of his official duties, but also to his
behavior outside his sala and as a private individual.
His conduct must be able to withstand the most
searching public scrutiny, for the ethical principles and
sense of propriety of a judge are essential to the
preservation of the peoples faith in the judicial system
lest public confidence in the judiciary would be eroded
by the incompetent, irresponsible and negligent
conduct of judges (Bayaca v. Judge Ramos, A.M. No.
MTJ-07-1676, Jan. 29, 2009).
 QUALITIES
Dignified conduct
It is best described as conduct befitting men and
women possessed of temperance and respect for the
law and for others.
Q: Judge Gonzales together with his two male friends
went to the house of A and asked the two girls who
were then boarding in As house to accompany his
two male friends and take a stroll in the beach. When
the girls refused, the judge admonished them.
Consequently, the judge was charged with conduct
unbecoming of a judge. Will the action prosper?
A: Yes. A judge should so comport himself as not to
degrade or bring embarrassment to his office. Here,
Judge Gonzales act of imposing his will on the
complainants constitutes conducts unbecoming of a
judge who should be civil, humble and considerate of
the rights of others (Mariano v. Gonzales, A.M. No.
2180-MJ 114, May 31, 1982).
Sec. 3, Canon 4, NCJC
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 or appearance of favoritism or
partiality.
This section is directed at bolstering the principle of
cold neutrality of an impartial judge as it requires
judges to scrupulously guard against any act that may
be construed as an expression of bias in favor of a
litigant.
NOTE: Constant company with a lawyer tends to breed
intimacy and camaraderie to the point that favors in the
future may be asked from the judge which he may find it
hard to resist. If a judge is seen eating and drinking in public
places with a lawyer who has cases pending in his or her sala,
public suspicion may be aroused, thus tending to erode the
trust of litigants in the impartiality of the judge (Padilla v.
Zantua, G.R. No. 110990, Oct. 23, 1994).
Q: Complainant Prosecutor filed an administrative
complaint against respondent Sandiganbayan
Justices for grave misconduct, conduct unbecoming a
Justice, and conduct grossly prejudicial to the interest
of the service. Allegedly, during a hearing, Justice Ong
uttered words like We are playing Gods here, we will
do what we want to do, your contempt is already out,
we fined you eighteen thousand pesos, even if you
will appeal, by that time I will be there, Justice of the
Supreme Court. Also, he often asked lawyers from
which law schools they had graduated, and
127
frequently inquired whether the law school in which
Justice Hernandez had studied and from which he
had graduated was better than his (Justice Ongs)
own alma mater. The complainant opined that the
query was manifestly intended to emphasize that the
San Beda College of Law, the alma mater of Justice
Ong, and the UP College of Law, that of Justice
Hernandez, were the best law schools. On another
occasion in that hearing in Cebu City, Justice
Hernandez discourteously shouted at Prosecutor
Hazelina Tujan-Militante, who was then observing
trial from the gallery and said You are better than
Director Somido? Are you better than Director Chua?
Are you here to supervise Somido? Your office is
wasting funds for one prosecutor who is doing
nothing. Finally, Justice Hernandez berated Atty.
Pangalangan, the father of former UP Law Dean Raul
Pangalangan, and uttered words such as Just
because your son is always nominated by the JBC to
Malacaang, you are acting like that! Do not forget
that the brain of the child follows that of their (sic)
mother. Should the respondent justices be held
liable for conduct unbecoming?
A: Yes. Publicizing professional qualifications or
boasting of having studied in and graduated from
certain law schools, no matter how prestigious, might
have even revealed, on the part of Justice Ong and
Justice Hernandez, shows their bias for or against
some lawyers. Their conduct was impermissible,
consequently, for Section 3, Canon 4 of the New Code
of Judicial Conduct for the Philippine Judiciary,
demands that judges avoid situations that may
reasonably give rise to the suspicion or appearance of
favoritism or partiality in their personal relations with
individual members of the legal profession who
practice regularly in their courts. Judges should be
dignified in demeanor, and refined in speech. In
performing their judicial duties, they should not
manifest bias or prejudice by word or conduct towards
any person or group on irrelevant grounds. It is very
essential that they should live up to the high standards
their noble position on the Bench demands. Their
language must be guarded and measured, lest the best
of intentions be misconstrued. In this regard, Section
3, Canon 5 of the New Code of Judicial Conduct for the
Philippine Judiciary, mandates judges to carry out
judicial duties with appropriate consideration for all
persons, such as the parties, witnesses, lawyers, court
staff, and judicial colleagues, without differentiation
on any irrelevant ground, immaterial to the proper
performance of such duties (Jamsani-Rodriguez v. Ong,
A.M. No. 08-19-SB-J, Aug. 24, 2010).
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW
 JUDICIAL ETHICS
Sec. 4, Canon 4, NCJC
Judges shall not participate in the
determination of a case in which any member
of their family represents a litigant or is
associated in any manner with the case.
This rule rests on the principle that no judge should preside
in a case in which the judge is not wholly free, disinterested,
impartial and independent.
Sec. 5, Canon 4, NCJC
Judges shall not allow the use of their residence
by a member of the legal profession to receive
clients of the latter or of other members of the
legal profession.
The reason is that judges are required to always exhibit
cold neutrality of an impartial judge.
NOTE: It was inappropriate for a judge to have entertained a
litigant in his house particularly when the case is still pending
before his sala (J. King and Sons. v. Hontanosas, Adm. Matter
No. RTJ-03-1802, Sept. 21, 2004).
Sec. 6, Canon 4, NCJC
Judges, like any other citizen, are entitled to
freedom of expression, belief, association and
assembly, but in exercising such rights, they
shall always conduct themselves in such a
manner as to preserve the dignity of the judicial
office and the impartiality and independence of
the judiciary.
While judges are not expected to live a hermit-like
existence or cease functioning as citizens of the
Republic, they should remember that they do not
disrobe themselves of their judicial office upon leaving
their salas. In the exercise of their civil liberties, they
should be circumspect and ever mindful that their
continuing commitment to upholding the judiciary and
its values places upon them certain implied restraints
to their freedom.
Q: In an anonymous letter sent to the OCA, Judge
Acua was charged with improper conduct for
allegedly making humiliating statements such as
putris, and putang-ina. In his comment, Judge
Acua explained that those words are only his
favorite expressions and they are not directed to any
particular person. He also explained that his behavior
is justified by the fact that he is still mourning the
sudden demise of his eldest son. Is the Judge guilty of
improper conduct?
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
2014 GOLDEN NOTES
128
A: Yes. Judges are demanded to be always temperate,
patient and courteous both in the conduct and
language. Indeed, judges should so behave at all times
because having accepted the esteemed position of a
judge he ought to have known that more is expected
of him than ordinary citizen. Here, the judges use of
humiliating and insensitive expressions like putris
and putang-ina is improper as such intemperate
language detracts from how he should conduct himself.
Moreover, it does not matter whether such
expressions were directed to a particular person or not,
as they give the impression of a persons ill manners
(Re: Anonymous complaint Against Judge Acua, A.M.
No. RTJ-04-1891, July 28, 2005).
NOTE: Judges in the exercise of their civil liberties, should be
circumspect and ever mindful of their continuing
commitment to uphold the judiciary and its value places
upon them certain implied restraints to their freedom. A
judge was admonished for the appearance of engaging in
partisan politics when he participated in a political rally
sponsored by one party, even though he only explained the
mechanics of block voting to the audience (Macias v. Arula,
A.M. No. 1895-CFI, July 20, 1982).
Sec. 7, Canon 4, NCJC
Judges shall inform themselves about their
personal fiduciary and financial interests and
shall make reasonable efforts to be informed
about the financial interests of members of
their family.
NOTE: This section should be read in conjunction with Sec. 7
of the R.A. 6713 (Code of Conduct and Ethical standards for
Public Officials and Employee), which prohibits certain
personal fiduciary and financial conflicts. A judge shall
refrain from financial and business dealings that tend to
reflect adversely on the court's impartiality, interfere with
the proper performance of judicial activities, or increase
involvement with lawyers or persons likely to come before
the court.
Sec. 8, Canon 4, NCJC
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 of anyone else, nor shall they convey or
permit others to convey the impression that
anyone is in a special position improperly to
influence them in the performance of judicial
duties.
Prohibited acts by the rule
1. Judges act of using judicial office to advance
private interests
 QUALITIES
NOTE: An RTC judge took advantage of his position, by
filing in the Makati court a collection case in which he
and his wife were the complainants. The Court ruled
that although a stipulation in the contract gave the
judge, as creditor, choice of venue, the judge had
nonetheless fallen short of what is expected of him as a
judicial officer. This act of the judge would lead the
public, and in particular the judges adversary, to
suspect that the judge would use the choice of venue as
a means to exert influence in favor of himself (Javier v.
De Guzman, A.M. No. RTJ-89-380, Dec. 19, 1990.)
2. Judges act of giving impression that he can be
influenced to use the judicial office to advance the
private interests of others.
NOTE: Another common violation of this rule is using
judicial power to exact personal vengeance.
Q: Judge Escano was charged with allegedly using
court facilities (bulletin board) in advertising for
attractive waitresses and cooks for possible
employment in their restaurant business. In addition,
the judge also allowed the use of the court address to
receive applications as well as his office in screening
the applicants. In his comment, the judge explained
that he merely wanted to give assistance to his wife,
and the posting of advertisements as well as the
conduct of screening in his office is the most
convenient way for him considering the difficulty of
locating the residence. Did the judge commit any
unethical act?
A: Yes. Judges shall not use or lend the prestige of the
judicial office to advance their private interests for
those of a member of a family. This is so to avoid
possible interference which may be created by such
business involvements in the exercise of their duties
which may tend to corrode the respect and dignity of
the court as bastion of justice. Here, the act of the
judge in using the court facilities to promote family
business is improper (Dionisio v. Escano, A.M.No. RTJ-
98-1400, Feb. 1, 1999).
Ticket fixing
It is misconduct in which judges impermissibly take
advantage of their public position to avoid punishment
for traffic violations.
Sec. 9, Canon 4, NCJC
Confidential information acquired by judges in
their judicial capacity shall not be used or
disclosed for any other purpose not related to
their judicial duties.
129
Rationale: The prohibition will discourage, if not stop
judges from making business speculations in some
business ventures, the secrets of which they learned
by reason of their position as judges.
Q: Judge Lilagam was charged with improper conduct
for allowing his wife to have access to court records.
In his answer, the judge admitted that he requested
his wife who was previously a legal researcher, to go
over the records and pinpoint problem areas and to
suggest measures to rectify the same and to improve
the system of case monitoring. Is the judge guilty of
improper conduct?
A: Yes. Records of cases are necessarily confidential,
and to preserve their integrity and confidentiality,
access thereto ought to be limited only to the judge,
the parties or their counsel and the appropriate court
personnel in charge of the custody of said records.
Here, since Mrs. Lilagam is not a court employee
specifically in charge of the custody of said records, the
judges act of allowing her to have access thereto is
improper as such would convey the impression that
she is the one who can influence the judges official
function (Gordon v. Lilagam, A.M. No. RTJ-00-1564,
July 26, 2001).
Violation of the rule which constitutes criminal
offense
The following , under Sec. 3[k] of R.A. 3019, and under
Art. 229 and 230 of the RPC, are violation of the rule
which also constitute criminal offense:
1. Divulging valuable information of a confidential
character, acquired by his office or by him on
account of his official position to unauthorized
persons, or releasing such information in advance
of its authorized release date (R.A. 3019, Sec. 3[k]).
2. Revelation of secrets by an officer Any public
officer who shall reveal any secret known to him
by reason of his official capacity, or shall
wrongfully deliver papers or copies of papers of
which he may have charge and which should not
be published, shall suffer imprisonment (RPC,
Art.229) .
3. Public officer revealing secrets of private
individual Any public officer to whom the secrets
of any private individual shall become known by
reason of his office who shall reveal such secrets,
shall suffer the penalties of arresto mayor and a
fine (RPC, Art.230).
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW
 JUDICIAL ETHICS
Sec. 10, Canon 4, NCJC
Subject to the proper performance of judicial
duties, judges may:
1. Write, lecture, teach and participate in
activities concerning the law, the legal system,
the administration of justice or related matter;
2. Appear at a public hearing before an official
body concerned with matters relating to the law,
the legal system, the administration of justice or
related matters;
3. Engage in other activities if such activities do
not detract from the dignity of the judicial office
or otherwise interfere with the performance of
judicial duties.
This section allows the judge to participate in legal
academia and public discourse on legal matters with
the proviso that there shall be no interference in the
performance of the judges primary functions with
respect to his or her jurisdiction. In dealing with the
media however, the Philippine Judicial Academy
suggests that a judge or court should avoid
acrimonious debate with reporters and the public, for
a knee jerk reaction from the court or judge may only
provoke negative follow-up reports and articles.
This sections tolerance of judicially-related activities is
limited by Sec. 12, Article VIII of the Constitution, which
prohibits judges from being designated to any agency
performing quasi-judicial or administrative functions.
Judge cannot be a member of Provincial Committee
on Justice
Such membership would violate the constitutional
provision on the discharge by members of the judiciary
of administrative functions in quasi-judicial or
administrative agencies. This does not mean, however,
that judges should adopt an attitude of monastic
insensibility or unbecoming indifference to the
Provincial/City Committee on Justice. As incumbent
judges, they form part of the structure of government.
Even as non-members, Judges should render
assistance to said Committees to help promote the
laudable purposes for which they exist, but only when
such assistance may be reasonably incidental to the
fulfillment of their judicial duties. (In Re: Designation
of Judge Rodolfo U. Manzano, A.M. No. 88-7-1861-RTC,
Oct. 5, 1988)
NOTE: Under Sec. 10(c), Section 10, Canon 4, a judge may
engage in private business without the written permission of
the Supreme Court (Borre v. Moya,A.M. No. 1765-CFI, Oct.
17, 1980).
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
2014 GOLDEN NOTES
130
Sec. 11, Canon 4, NCJC
Judges shall not practice law whilst the holder
of judicial office.
This prohibition is based on the inherent
incompatibility of the rights, duties and functions of
the office of an attorney with the powers, duties and
functions of a judge.
NOTE: Sec. 35 of Rule 138 of the Rules of Court prohibits
judges from engaging in the practice of law or giving
professional advice to clients. Philippine courts not only
prohibit judges from overtly representing clients as counsel
of record, but also from acting more subtly in a way more
befitting an advocate than a judge.
The rule disqualifying a municipal judge from engaging in the
practice of law seeks to avoid the evil of possible use of the
power and influence of his office to affect the outcome of
the litigation where he is retained as counsel. Compelling
reasons of public policy lie behind this prohibition, and
judges are expected to conduct themselves in such a manner
as to preclude any suspicion that they are representing the
interests of party litigant (Dia-Anonuevo v. Bercacio, A.M. No.
177-MTJ, Nov. 27, 1975)
Q: Judge Malanyaon was present in the hearing of her
daughter to advise her on what to do and say during
the hearing, to the point of coaching her. Was the act
of the judge considered contrary to Section 11, Canon
4 of the NCJC, prohibiting judges from engaging in the
private practice of law or giving professional advice
to clients?
A: Yes. The Court held that the judge engaged in the
private practice of law by assisting his daughter at his
wifes administrative case, coaching his daughter in
making manifestations or posing motions to the
hearing officer, and preparing the questions that he
prompted to his daughter (Decena vs. Malanyaon A.M.
No. RTJ-10-2217, April 8, 2013).
Q: Respondent Judge Lelina was administratively
charged for violation of Section 35, Rule 138 of the
Rules of Court and Rule 5.07, Canon 5 of the Code of
Judicial Conduct. He was then preventively
suspended by the Court on account of an earlier
administrative complaint filed charging him with
harassment in connection with the criminal
complaint for Rape and the complaint for Abduction
with Rape and Slight Illegal Detention. He then filed
a Motion for Early Resolution of the criminal case
praying for a resolution in his favor. Subsequently he
appealed to the Court to grant him the permission to
practice law during the remainder of his preventive
suspension or, if such cannot be granted, to consider
him resigned from the judiciary. It turned out that
before he filed the above-said Manifestation, Appeal
 QUALITIES
and Omnibus Motion, Judge Lelina engaged in the
private practice of law. Did the judge commit any
unethical act?
A: Yes. Since Section 35, Rule 138 of the Rules of Court
and Section 11, Canon 4 of the New Code of Judicial
Conduct for the Philippine Judiciary does not make
any distinction in prohibiting judges from engaging in
the private practice of law while holding judicial office,
no distinction should be made in its application. In the
present case, Judge Lelina having been merely
suspended and not dismissed from the service, he was
still bound under the prohibition. (Binalay v. Lelina
Jr,A.M. No. RTJ-08-2132, July 31, 2009)
Q: In an extrajudicial settlement of the estate of the
late Juan Mayaman, the heirs requested Judge
Maawain, a family friend, to go over the document
prepared by a new lawyer before they signed it.
Judge Maawain agreed and even acted as an
instrumental witness. Did Judge Maawain engage in
the unauthorized practice of law? Why? (2002 Bar
Question)
A: No. In the case of de Castro v. Capulong, 118SCRA 5
(1982), the Supreme Court held that a judge who
merely acted as a witness to a document and who
explained to the party waiving his rights of redemption
over mortgaged properties the consequences thereof,
does not engage himself in the practice of law. This
appears to be more applicable to the case of Judge
Maawain. He did not give professional advice in
anticipation of litigation. He was just asked to review a
deed of extrajudicial settlement of estate. He signed
merely as an instrumental witness and not as a legal
counsel. Besides, his act was an isolated act.
Sec. 12, Canon 4, NCJC
Judges may form or join associations of
judges or participate in other organizations
representing the interests of judges.
This rule recognizes the difference between
membership in associations of judges and
membership in associations of other legal
professionals. While attendance at lavish events
hosted by lawyers might create an appearance of
impropriety, participation in judges-only organizations
does not.
Rules relating to prohibition against accepting gifts,
bequests, or loans
GR: Sections 13 and 14 of Canon 4 of the NCJC.
131
XPN: Section 15 of Canon 4 of the NCJC.
Sec. 13, Canon 4, NCJC
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 in connection with the performance of
judicial duties.
Sec. 14, Canon 4, NCJC
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, to be done or omitted to be
done in connection with their duties or
functions.
This section is intended to assure that what the judge
cannot do directly (soliciting gifts), may not be done
indirectly through the use of employees or staff
members.
NOTE: Section 13 should be read in conjunction with Section
7(d) of R.A. 6713 (Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards for
Public officials and Employee) which provides that, public
officials and employees shall not solicit or accept, directly or
indirectly, any gift, gratuity, favor, entertainment, loan or
anything of money value from any person in the course of
their official duties or in connection with any operation being
regulated by, or any transaction which may be affected by
the functions of their office.
Q: Judge Ganay received law books worth fifty
thousand pesos, cellular phones and monthly cellular
phone prepaid cards from the property guardians of
the late Rev. Fr. Aspiras, who was then the ward of
the court. Further, he issued Orders directing the
manager of the PNB, La Union Branch to draw checks
amounting to thousands of pesos from the account of
the late Rev. Fr. Aspiras
A: Respondent Judge Ganay clearly fell short of the
exacting standards set by the New Code of Judicial
Conduct for the Philippine Judiciary. His acts constitute
impropriety which the Court cannot allow.
Respondent Judge Ganays act of issuing Orders to
draw checks create the impression of impropriety and
subjects the court to suspicion of irregularities in the
conduct of the proceedings (Heirs of the late Rev. Fr.
Jose Aspiras v.Judge Ganay, A.M. No. RTJ-07-2055, Dec.
17, 2009).
Q: X was charged with grave threat before the sala of
Judge Elias Lelina. During the pendency of the case, X
offered a business partnership to the daughter of
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW
 JUDICIAL ETHICS
Judge Lelina who then accepted the same. Should the
judge be disciplined?
A: Yes. Judges should not allow members of their
family to accept gifts nor favor in relation to anything
done, to be done, or omitted to be done by the judge
in connection with the performance of his official
duties. Here, the judges act of allowing his daughter
to accept the business offer of X despite knowledge of
the possible intention of the latter who has pending
case in his sala is improper (Dulay v. Lelina Jr., A.M. No.
RTJ-99-1516, July 14, 2005).
Sec. 15, Canon 4, NCJC
Subject to law and to any legal
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 reasonably be perceived
as intended to influence the judge in the
performance of official duties or otherwise
give rise to an appearance of partiality.
Judges are allowed to accept token gifts, awards, or
benefits when given as a consequence of a special
occasion.
Gifts and grants allowed from foreign countries
1. The acceptance and retention by a public official
or employee of a gift of nominal value tendered
and received as a souvenir or mark of courtesy;
2. The acceptance by a public official or employee of
a gift in the nature of a scholarship or fellowship
grant or medical treatment; or
3. The acceptance by a public official or employee of
travel grants or expenses for travel taking place
entirely outside the Philippines (such as
allowances, transportation, food and lodging) of
more than nominal value if such acceptance is
appropriate or consistent with the interest of the
Philippines, and permitted by the head office,
branch or agency to which the judge belongs (Sec.
7[d], R.A. 6713).
Indirect and direct bribery of judges
Acceptance of gifts given by reason of the office of the
judge is indirect bribery (RPC, Art. 211) Acts punishable
in direct bribery are as follows:
a) By agreeing to perform an act which constitute a
crime in connection with his official duties for a
consideration.
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
2014 GOLDEN NOTES
132
b) By accepting a gift in consideration of the
execution of an act which does not constitute a
crime in consideration with the performance of
his official duty.
c) By refraining, from doing something which it is his
official duty to do, in consideration of gift or
promise (RPC, Art. 210).
Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act: Judges receiving
gifts or other material benefits
GR: Yes, the judge is liable criminally for directly or
indirectly receiving gifts, presents or other pecuniary
or material benefit for himself or for another under
conditions provided in Section 2, pars. b and c of the
law.
XPN: Unsolicited gifts or presents of small value
offered or given as a mere ordinary token of gratitude
or friendship according to local custom or usage (RA
3019, Section 14)
NOTE: Under Section 16 Article XI of the 1987Constitution
No loan, guarantee or other form of financial controlled
bank or financial institution to members of the Supreme
Court during their tenure.
It is a serious misconduct for a judge to receive money from
a litigant in the form of loans which he never intended to pay
back. Even if the judge intends to pay, it is an act of
impropriety to take a loan from a party litigant. The judge
could not be wholly free from bias in deciding a case where
his lender is a party. A judge should always strive to be free
from suspicion and all forms of improprieties (Ompoc v.
Judge Torres, A.M. No. MTJ-86-11, Sept. 27, 1989).
NOTE: To ensure equality of treatment to all before the
courts is essential to the due performance of the judicial
office. As the guardians of justice, courts must adhere to the
principle of equality. People expect the courts to be
unaffected by differences in social status, degree of
education and even physical abilities.
EQUALITY
CANON 5
ENSURING EQUALITY OF TREATMENT TO ALL
BEFORE THE COURTS IS ESSENTIAL TO THE DUE
PERFORMANCE OF THE JUDICIAL OFFICE.
A judge must be able to render substantial justice and
maintain public confidence in the judicial system, by
being aware of the diversity in society. With that
awareness, a judge should not yield to first impression,
reach hasty conclusions or prejudge matters (Castillo v.
Judge Juan, 62 SCRA 124).
 QUALITIES
Sec. 1, Canon 5, NCJC
Judges shall be aware of and understand
diversity in society and differences arising
from various sources, including, but not
limited to, race, color, sex, religion, national
origin, caste, disability, age, marital status,
sexual orientation, social and economic
status, and other like causes.
To render substantial justice and maintain public
confidence in the judicial system, judges are expected
to be aware of the diversity in society that results from
an increased worldwide exchange of people and ideas.
NOTE: Judges should be mindful of the various international
instruments and treaties ratified by the Philippines, which
affirm the equality of all human beings and establish a norm
of non-discrimination without distinction as to race, sex,
language, or religion. Judges should not yield to first
impression, reach hasty conclusions or prejudge matters.
They have a duty to ensure that the minority status of a party
plays no part in their decisions.
Sec. 2, Canon 5, NCJC
Judges shall not, in the performance of
judicial duties, by words or conduct,
manifests bias or prejudice towards any
person or group on irrelevant grounds.
Magistrates of law must comport themselves at all
times in such a manner that their conduct, can
withstand the highest level of public scrutiny.
Judges should avoid private remarks, hasty
conclusions, or distasteful jokes that may give even
erroneous impressions of prejudice and lead the public
to believe that cases before them are being prejudged.
Sec. 3, Canon 5, NCJC
Judges shall carry out judicial duties with
appropriate consideration for all persons,
such as the parties, witnesses, lawyers, court
staff and judicial colleagues, without
differentiation on any irrelevant ground,
immaterial to the proper performance of
such duties.
As arbiters of the law, judges should be conscientious,
studious, courteous, patient and punctual in the
discharge of their judicial duties, recognizing that time
of litigants, witnesses and counsel is of value. Judges
should act with decorum toward jurors, parties, court
staff, spectators, and alike.
133
Q: Judge Tormis made a comment in a certain case to
the effect that the same should be dismissed as the
act complained of was already decriminalized by a
special law. Thereafter, Judge Navarro, who
previously handled the case before he was appointed
as a judge, barged into the office of Judge Tormis
telling to the staff that their judge does not know her
law. Judge Tormis then retaliated by saying that to
her, the office of Judge Navarro does not exist. Are
the judges guilty of conduct unbecoming of a judge?
A: Yes. Judges, being dispensers of justice should not
act in a way that would cast suspicion in order to
preserve faith in the administration of justice. They
should so behave to avoid poor public impression on
the judiciary. Here, the judges act of fighting each
other by uttering derogatory remarks against each
other is a conduct unbecoming of a judge for which
they should be disciplined as their fight has impaired
the image of the judiciary (Navarro v. Tormis, A.M. No.
MTJ-00-1337, Apr. 27, 2004).
Q: Atty. Quinto was the defense counsel in a criminal
case. In his verified complaint, he alleged that during
the hearing, he manifested that he was waiving the
presentation of evidence for the accused. Judge Vios
then allegedly got angry, shouted and scolded him,
stating that the defense had no right to waive the
presentation of evidence. He did not even listen to
Atty. Quintos explanation and, thereafter,
compelled the latter to withdraw his appearance as
counsel of the accused, under pain of contempt. In
the presence of the complainant, Judge Vios
appointed a counsel deofficio. May Judge Vios be
held administratively liable for compelling the lawyer
to withdraw as counsel for the accused under pain of
contempt?
A: Yes. A judge should avoid unconsciously falling into
the attitude of mind that the litigants are made for
the courts, instead of the courts for the litigants. Here,
the judge should be held liable for misconduct when
he threatened to punish complainant for contempt of
court if he would refuse to withdraw his appearance,
as counsel for the accused, when the latter insisted on
waiving the presentation of the evidence for the
defense (Atty. Quinto v. Judge Vios, A.M. No. MTJ-04-
1551, May 21, 2004).
Sec. 4, Canon 5, NCJC
Judges shall not knowingly permit court staff
or others subject to his or her influence,
direction or control to differentiate between
persons concerned, in a matter before the
judge, on any irrelevant ground.
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW
 JUDICIAL ETHICS
Duties of judges under this section
1. To ensure that court personnel under their
supervision do not discriminate by dispensing
special favors or disclosing confidential
information to any unauthorized person,
regardless of whether such information came
from authorized or unauthorized sources; and
2. To organize their courts to ensure the prompt and
convenient dispatch of business and should not
tolerate misconduct by clerks, sheriffs and other
assistants who are sometimes prone to expect
favors or special treatment due to their
professional relationship with the judge.
NOTE: All personnel involved in the dispensation of justice
should conduct themselves with a high degree of
responsibility (Mataga v. Rosete, A.M. No.MTJ-03-1488, Oct.
13, 2004).
Sec. 5, Canon 5, NCIC
Judges shall require lawyers in proceedings
before the court to refrain from manifesting, by
words or conduct, bias or prejudice based on
irrelevant grounds, except such as are legally
relevant to an issue in proceedings and may be
the subject of legitimate advocacy.
Judges should conduct proceedings in court with
dignity and in a manner that reflects the importance
and seriousness of proceedings. They should maintain
order and proper decorum in the court (1989 Code of
Judicial Conduct, Rule 3.03, Canon 3).
Judges have the duty to prevent lawyers from abusing
witnesses with unfair treatment.
As courts are expected to ensure equality, any lawyer
who makes an insensitive or demeaning comment in
court should be admonished.
Q: During the hearing of a case for statutory rape filed
against X, the lawyer is asking the 6-year-old victim
to relate exactly and step by step the sexual
intercourse between her and the accused. The lawyer
is also asking questions whether at the time of the
alleged rape, the accuseds penis was hard, and
whether at the time they were caught, the accused
was still pushing and pulling his penis inside her
vagina. Should the judge allow such questions?
A: No. The judge shall require lawyers to refrain from
making abusive and uncalled for queries. Here, the fact
that the victim of rape is a child of tender years, there
is more reason to require the lawyer to be tactful. No
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
2014 GOLDEN NOTES
134
woman especially child of tender years would exactly
remember step by step the sexual intercourse in the
hands of the maniacal beast. Hence, all the questions
asked are excessive (People v. Boras, G.R. No. 127495,
Dec. 22, 2000).
COMPETENCE AND DILIGENCE
CANON 6
COMPETENCE AND DILIGENCE ARE PRE-
REQUISITES TO THE DUE PERFORMANCE OF
JUDICIAL OFFICE.
A judge upon assumption to office, becomes the
visible representation of law and of justice, hence, the
Constitution (Section 7 (3), Article VIII), prescribes that
he must be a person of proven competence as a
requisite of his membership in the judiciary.
A judge should be the epitome of competence,
integrity and independence to be able to render
justice and uphold public confidence in the legal
system. He must be conversant with basic legal
principles and well-settled doctrines. He should strive
for excellence and seek the truth with passion (Rino v.
Judge Cawaling, A.M. No. MTJ-02-1391, June 7, 2004).
NOTE: As members of the judiciary, judges ought to know
the fundamental legal principles; otherwise, they are
susceptible to administrative sanction for gross ignorance of
the law (Heirs of Piedad v.Estrella, A.M. No. RTJ-09-2170, Dec.
16, 2009).
Q: Judge Ramos was charged with gross misconduct,
dishonesty, gross ignorance of the law, arbitrary
detention, incompetence, grave abuse of discretion,
and conduct prejudicial to the best interest of the
service allegedly for erroneously issuing a warrant of
arrest against Bayaca. It was alleged that Bayaca was
convicted by Judge Ramos in a criminal case for arson
through reckless imprudence and imposed upon him
the penalty of imprisonment, with all the accessory
penalties imposed by law in addition to the payment
of costs and damages. On appeal, the RTC deleted the
penalty of imprisonment. However, Judge Ramos
subsequently issued a warrant of arrest and
Commitment on Final Sentence which led to
complainants incarceration at the Solano District Jail
from August 8 to 28, 2006. In his comment, the judge
clarified that his issuance of the warrant of arrest
against Bacaya was a mistake done in good faith and
that the same was just a simple negligence. Should
the judge be disciplined?
A: Yes. The judge was inexcusably negligent when he
issued a Warrant of Arrest and Commitment to Final
 QUALITIES
Sentence despite the deletion by the appellate court
of that portion of the judgment imposing the penalty
of imprisonment. In the performance of his duties,
Judge Ramos failed to observe that diligence,
prudence and circumspection which the law requires
in the rendition of any public service. If only Judge
Ramos had exercised the requisite thoroughness and
caution, he would have noted not only the
modification of the monetary awards by the appellate
court, but also the deletion of the penalty of
imprisonment upon which the Warrant of Arrest and
Commitment to Final Sentence that he signed was
based (Bayaca v. Judge Ramos,A.M. No. MTJ-07-1676,
Jan. 29, 2009).
Sec.1, Canon 6, NCJC
The judicial duties of a judge take precedence
over all activities.
Duties of a judge under this section
1. A judge must perform his judicial duties with
regard to a case where he is not disqualified to do
so and, may not divest himself of such case if he is
not so disqualified; and
2. A judge shall not inhibit himself simply to avoid
sitting on difficult or controversial cases.
Q: An administrative case against Judge Calderon was
filed for incurring leaves of absence for almost a
straight period of 3 years. In his comment, he claimed
that he was suffering from a lingering illness of
malignant hypertension which claim was supported
by medical certificates prepared by his personal
doctor. However, when the court physician
conducted some tests, the same contradicted the
diagnosis given by the judges personal doctor. Is
Judge Calderon guilty of gross misconduct?
A: Yes. A judge shall be cautious of his court duties.
Here, the judge should have been aware that, in
frequently leaving his station, he has caused great
disservice to many litigants and has denied them
speedy justice (Re: Leaves of Absence Without
Approval of Judge Eric Calderon, Municipal Trial Court
Judge of Calumpit, Bulacan, A.M. No. 98-8-105-MTC,
Jan. 26, 1999).
Q: Judge Limsiaco was charged with gross ignorance
of the law and procedure and violations of the Code
of Judicial Conduct when it was established by the
records and by his own admission that he decided an
ejectment case before his sala more than two (2)
years after it was declared submitted for resolution.
Due to his delay of rendering the decision, he was
135
held guilty of the said charge. He moved for an
extension of time to file a motion for reconsideration.
Despite the extension of time given however, Judge
Limsiaco failed to file his motion for reconsideration
and the required explanation thrice. In another
complaint against him for Delay in the Disposition of
a Case, the OCA issued an order for him to file a
comment for the administrative complaint. Is the
respondent judge administratively liable for
unethical conduct and gross inefficiency under the
provisions of the New Code of Judicial Conduct,
specifically, Sections 7 and 8 of Canon 1, and Section
5 of Canon 6?
A: Yes. A judge is the visible representation of the law,
and more importantly of justice; he or she must,
therefore, be the first to follow the law and weave an
example for the others to follow. For a judge to exhibit
indifference to a resolution requiring him to comment
on the accusations in the complaint thoroughly and
substantially is gross misconduct, and may even be
considered as outright disrespect for the Court. The
office of the judge requires him to obey all the lawful
orders of his superiors. After all, a resolution of the
Supreme Court is not a mere request and should be
complied with promptly and completely. Such failure
to comply accordingly betrays not only a recalcitrant
streak in character, but has likewise been considered
as an utter lack of interest to remain with, if not
contempt of the judicial system. A resolution of the
Supreme Court requiring comment on an
administrative complaint against officials and
employees of the judiciary should not be construed as
a mere request from the Court. Nor should it be
complied with partially, inadequately or selectively.
Respondents in administrative complaints should
comment on all accusations or allegations against
them in the administrative complaints because it is
their duty to preserve the integrity of the judiciary.
Moreover, the Court should not and will not tolerate
future indifference of respondents to administrative
complaints and to resolutions requiring comment on
such administrative complaints. Under the
circumstances, the conduct exhibited by Judge
Limsiaco constitutes no less than clear acts of defiance
against the Courts authority. His conduct also reveals
his deliberate disrespect and indifference to the
authority of the Court, shown by his failure to heed our
warnings and directives. Judge Limsiacos actions
further disclose his inability to accept our instructions.
Moreover, his conduct failed to provide a good
example for other court personnel, and the public as
well, in placing significance to the Courts directives
and the importance of complying with them (Inoturan,
v.Limsiaco, Jr., A.M. No. MTJ-01-1362, Feb. 22, 2011).
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW
 JUDICIAL ETHICS
Sec. 2, Canon 6, NCJC
Judges shall devote their professional
activity to judicial duties, which include not
only the performance of judicial functions
and responsibilities in court and the making
of decisions, but also other tasks relevant to
the judicial office or the courts operations.
Violations of this section often involve a failure to keep
records or handle funds in compliance with court rules.
Q: Judge Daguman was charged with neglect of duty
in failing to retain a copy and to register with the
Local Civil Registrar a marriage contract. In his
comment, the judge explained that his failure to do
so was occasioned by circumstances beyond his
control. He averred that after the wedding ceremony,
the copies of the marriage contract were left on top
of his desk in his private office where the ceremony
was held but after few days, when he gathered all the
documents relating to the marriage, the copies were
already missing. He also explained that he was not
able to inform the parties about the fact of loss as
they were already out of the country. Should the
judge be disciplined?
A: Yes. A judge is charged with extra care in ensuring
that records of the cases and official documents in his
custody are intact. Moreover, judges must adopt a
system of record management, and organize their
dockets in order to bolster the prompt and efficient
dispatch of business. Here, the circumstances show
that the loss of the documents was occasioned by the
carelessness on the part of the judge. The judge should
not have left such important documents in his table to
be gathered only after few days, instead, he should
have devised a filing system in his court so as to avoid
such incident (Beso v.Daguman, A.M. No. MTJ-99-
1211, Jan. 28, 2000).
Q: X charged Judge Garillo with dishonesty and
corrupt practices for allegedly requiring the former to
deposit with the latter a sum of money in connection
with a pending case in the latters sala but failed to
give the deposited sums of money to the adverse
party. It was also alleged that when X demanded the
return of money, the judge failed to return the same
despite his promise. Is the judge guilty of serious
misconduct?
A: Yes. A judge should always be a symbol of rectitude
and propriety, and should always comport himself in a
manner that will raise no doubt whatsoever about his
honesty. Here, the judges act of misappropriating the
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
2014 GOLDEN NOTES
136
money entrusted to him by litigants in connection with
a case pending in his court constitutes gross
misconduct. Moreover, the judge violated Circular No.
50-95 which provides that, fiduciary collections should
be deposited with the Land Bank of the Philippines.
Because of his actuations, the image of the judiciary
was impaired (De Pacete v. Judge Garillo, A.M. No.
MTJ-03-1473, Aug. 20, 2003).
Judges should return records upon retirement
Since the proper and efficient management of the
court is the responsibility of the judge, he is the one
directly responsible for the proper discharge of official
functions. Thus, a judge is obliged to return to the
court the records of the cases filed in his sala upon his
retirement (Office of the Court Administrator v. Retired
Judge Carteciano, A.M. No. MTJ-07-1664, Feb. 18,
2008).
Sec. 3, Canon 6, NCJC
Judges shall take reasonable steps to
maintain and enhance their knowledge, skills
and personal qualities necessary for the
proper performance of judicial duties, taking
advantage for this purpose the training and
other facilities which should be made
available, under judicial control, to judges.
Service in the judiciary means a continuous study and
research on the law from beginning to end. Judges are
regarded as persons learned in the law. Ignorance of
the law excuses no one has special application to
judges.
Though good faith and absence of malice or corruption
are sufficient defenses, such does not apply where the
issues are so simple and the applicable legal principles
evident and basic as to be beyond possible margin of
error (Corpus v.Ochotoresa, A.M. No. RTJ 04-1861, July
30, 2004).
One who accepts the exalted position of a judge owes
the public and the Court the duty to maintain
professional competence at all times. When a judge
displays an utter lack of familiarity with the rules, he
erodes the confidence of the public in the courts. A
judge owes the public and the Court the duty to be
proficient in the law and is expected to keep abreast
of laws and prevailing jurisprudence. Ignorance of the
law by a judge can easily be the mainspring of injustice
(Villanueva v.Judge Buaya, A.M. No. RTJ-08-2131, Nov.
22, 2010).
 QUALITIES
Q: Judge Delos Santos averred that Judge Mangino of
the MTC Tarlac approved the bail bond for
provisional liberty of the accused Santos who was
arrested and whose criminal cases were pending in
Angeles City. It was also made to appear from the
contents of the said bond that the accused appeared
before notary public Ancanan in Makati City.
According to the accused, she never went to Tarlac
and appeared before said Judge Mangino. She also
alleged that she never went to Makati City and
appeared before Notary Public Ancanan. Is Judge
Mangino guilty of grave misconduct?
A: Yes. Judges should be diligently acquainted with the
law and jurisprudence. As an advocate of justice and a
visible representation of the law, a judge is expected
to keep abreast with and be proficient in the
application and interpretation of the law. Here, by
mere glancing at the bail bond application, the judge
ought to know that he had absolutely no authority or
jurisdiction to approve the bail bond of the accused as
the case was pending with another court. By approving
the bail bond application, the judge failed to exert such
conscientiousness, studiousness, and thoroughness
expected and demanded of a judge (Judge de los
Santos v. Judge Mangino,A.M. No. MTJ-03-1496, July
10, 2003).
Q: Judge Gacott Jr. dismissed an election case on the
ground of non-payment of docket fees, although the
case had been previously admitted and was deemed
properly filed by the original Judge (who inhibited
himself due to relationship to one of the parties).
Judge Gacott issued the dismissal order relying on a
case (Manchester v.CA) which states that - a case is
deemed commenced only upon the payment of the
proper docket fees. To his opinion, the required fees
in this case were not yet paid by the protestant.
Enojas charged him with gross ignorance of the law.
Is Judge Gacott Jr. guilty of gross ignorance of the
law?
A: Yes. A judge is duty bound to adhere to, and apply
the recent jurisprudence, and he cannot feign
ignorance thereof, because he is required to be an
embodiment of, among other things, judicial
competence. Here, the ruling relied upon by the judge
does not apply to election cases as in the latter case
the filing fee is fixed and the claim for damages, to
which the docket fess shall be made to apply, is merely
ancillary to the main cause of action and is not even
determinative of the courts jurisdiction. It must also
be noted that in this case, the original judge already
made an order that from the deposit given by the
protestant for the expenses of reopening the
questioned ballots, an amount shall be allocated for
the payment of the required fees. Thus, the election
137
protest was already properly filed (Enojas v. Judge
Gacott, Jr., A.M. No. RTJ-99-1513, Jan. 19, 2000).
Sec. 4, Canon 6, NCJC
Judges shall keep themselves informed
about relevant developments of
international law, including international
conventions and other instruments
establishing human rights norms.
Norms of international law has become the concern of
judges because they form part of legal standards by
which their competence and diligence required by the
New Code of Judicial Conduct are to be measured.
Sec. 5, Canon 6, NCJC
Judges shall perform all judicial duties,
including the delivery of reserved decisions,
efficiently, fairly and with reasonable
promptness.
A judge may be subject to an administrative fine for
inefficiency, neglect, and unreasonable delay in
elevating the records of a civil case to the Court of
Appeals. A delay of three years in the transmission of
court records to the appellate court, where a period of
30 days is required, is inexcusable (Pataleon v.
Guidez,A.M. No. RTJ-00-1525, Jan. 25, 2000).
Q: The records disclose that on February 21, 1994,
Cabasares filed a Complaint for Malicious Mischief
against a certain Rodolfo Hebaya. The case was
docketed as Criminal Case No. 8864 and subsequently
assigned to the branch of respondent Judge. As early
as February 27, 2002, the case had been submitted
for decision, but respondent judge did not pen a
decision. He was charged with violation of Section 15
(1), Article VIII of the Constitution and Canon 3, Rule
3.05 of the Code of Judicial Conduct. The judge
contend that it have escaped his mind.
A: Judges should meticulously observe the periods
prescribed by the Constitution for deciding cases
because failure to comply with the said period
transgresses the parties constitutional right to speedy
disposition of their cases. Thus, failure to decide cases
within the ninety (90)-day reglementary period may
warrant imposition of administrative sanctions on the
erring judge. However, the Court is not unmindful of
circumstances that justify the delay in the disposition
of the cases assigned to judges. When a judge sees
such circumstances before the reglementary period
ends, all that is needed is to simply ask the Court, with
the appropriate justification, for an extension of time
within which to decide the case. Evidently,
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW
 JUDICIAL ETHICS
respondent Judge failed to do any of these options.
Since the judge retired from service he was only fined
(Antonio Y. Cabasares v. Judge Filemon A. Tandinco, Jr.
Municipal Trial Court in Cities, 8th Judicial Region,
Calbayog City, Western Samar, A.M. No. MTJ-11-
1793, Oct. 19, 2011).
Flag lawyer
Refers to a lawyer of non-governmental organizations
(NGOs) and peoples organizations (POs) who by the
nature of his work already render free legal aid to
indigent and pauper litigants. (BAR MATTER No.
2012,Feb. 10, 2009, Section 4a(iii))
Sec. 6, Canon 6, NCJC
Judges shall maintain order and decorum in
all proceedings before the court and be
patient, dignified and courteous in relation to
litigants, witnesses, lawyers and others with
whom the judge deals in an official capacity.
Judges shall require similar conduct of legal
representatives, court staff and others
subject to their influence, direction or
control.
Besides possessing the requisite learning in the law, a
magistrate must exhibit that hallmark judicial
temperament of utmost sobriety and self-restraint
which are indispensable qualities of every judge
(Rodriguez v. Bonifacio, A.M. No. RTJ-99-1510, Nov. 6,
2000).
Q: Judge Belen was charged with conduct
unbecoming of a judge allegedly for humiliating,
demeaning and berating a young lawyer who
appeared in his sala. It was alleged that when the
judge learned that the lawyer was an alumnus of
MCQU and not of UP, the judge made the following
statement youre not from UP. Then you cannot
equate yourself to me because there is a saying and I
know this, not all law students are created equal, not
all law schools are created equal, not all lawyers are
created equal despite what the Supreme Being stated
that we all are created equal in His form and
substance. Should the judge be disciplined?
A: Yes. The judges sarcastic, humiliating, threatening
and boastful remarks to a young lawyer are improper.
A judge must be aware that an alumnus of a particular
law school has no monopoly of knowledge of the law.
By hurdling the Bar Examinations, taking of the
Lawyers oath, and signing of the Roll of Attorneys, a
lawyer is presumed to be competent to discharge his
functions and duties as, inter alia, an officer of the
court, irrespective of where he obtained his law
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
2014 GOLDEN NOTES
138
degree. For a judge to determine the fitness or
competence of a lawyer primarily on the basis of his
alma mater is clearly an engagement in an
argumentum ad hominem. As a judge, he must
address the merits of the case and not on the person
of the counsel. Judges must be that even on the face
of boorish behavior from those they deal with, they
ought to conduct themselves in a manner befitting
gentlemen and high officers of the court (Atty. Mane v.
Judge Belen, A.M. No.RTJ-08-2119, June 30, 2008).
Q: Judge Ante Jr. was charged with conduct
unbecoming of a judge. It was alleged that when the
court employee placed the docket book on top of the
filing cabinet, the same fell on the floor causing loud
sound. Unexpectedly, the judge shouted saying why
did you throw the docket book? You get out of here,
punyeta, we dont need you! The judge also threw a
monobloc chair at the court employee. Should the
judge be disciplined?
A: Yes. The judge, for shouting invectives and hitting
complainant with a chair displayed a predisposition to
use physical violence and intemperate language which
reveals a marked lack of judicial temperament and
self-restraint - traits which, aside from the basic
equipment of learning in the law - are indispensable
qualities of every judge (Briones v. Judge Ante Jr., A.M.
No.MTJ-02-1411, Apr. 11, 2002).
Sec. 7, Canon 6, NCJC
Judges shall not engage in conduct
incompatible with the diligent discharge of
judicial duties.
Duty of the judge under this section
A judge shall not accept duties that will interfere with
his devotion to the expeditious and proper
administration of his official functions
NOTE: When a judge, along with two other people, acted as
real estate agents for the sale of a parcel of land for which
he agreed to give a commission of P100,000 to each of his
companions, and after the transaction was completed only
gave the complainants P25,000 each, the high Court held
that the judge violated the section of the prior Code of
Judicial Conduct (Catbagan v. Barte, A.M. No. MTJ-02-1452,
Apr. 6, 2005).
 DISCIPLINE OF MEMBERS OF THE JUDICIARY

DISCIPLINE OF THE MEMBERS OF THE JUDICIARY Object of impeachment

Power to discipline members of the bench
The Supreme Court shall have the administrative
supervision over all courts and the personnel (1987
Consitution, Section 6, Art. VIII).
The Court en banc has the power to discipline all
judges of lower courts including justices of the Court
of Appeals (1987 Constiution, Section 11, Art. VIII).
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.).
The nature of impeachment proceedings against SC
justices is Sui Generis or a class of its own
Grounds for impeachment

Disbarment of judges and justices 1. Treason

2. Bribery
Judges and justices, being lawyers, may also be 3. Other High Crimes
disbarred, if found guilty of certain crimes and/or 4. Graft and Corruption
other causes for disbarment under the Rules of Court. 5. Betrayal of Public Trust (1987 Constitution, Sec. 2
Art. XI)
Justices of the Supreme Court however may not be
disbarred unless and until they shall have been first Impeachable officers
impeached in accordance with the Constitution.
1. The President
NOTE: While it is the duty of the court to investigate and 2. Vice-President
determine the truth behind every matter in complaints
3. Members of the Supreme Court
against judges and other court personnel, it is also their duty
4. Members of the Constitutional Commissions
to see to it that they are protected and exonerated from
baseless administrative charges. The Court will not shirk 5. Ombudsman
from its responsibility of imposing discipline upon its
magistrates, but neither will it hesitate to shield them from All other public officers and employees may be
unfounded suits that serve to disrupt rather than promote removed from office as provided by law, but not by
the orderly administration of justice (Ocenar v. Judge impeachment (1987 Constitution, Sec. 2 Art. XI).
Mabutin, A.M. No. MTJ 05- 1582, Feb. 28, 2005).
The Philippine Congress holds the sole power in
A judge may be disciplined for acts committed before impeachment process.
his appointment to the judiciary 1. House of Representatives - initiates all cases of
It is settled that a judge may be disciplined for acts impeachment.
committed prior to his appointment to the judiciary. In 2. Senate tries and decides on all the cases.
fact, even the new Rule itself recognizes this, as it
Who can file an impeachment complaint
provides for the immediate forwarding to the
Supreme Court for disposition and adjudication of
1. Any member of the House of Representatives
charges against justices and judges before the IBP,
2. Any citizen with an endorsement of any member
including those filed prior to their appointment to the
of the House of Representatives.
judiciary (Heinz Heck vs. Judge Anthony E. Santos,
regional trial court, branch 19, Cagayan De Oro City NOTE: When the President of the Philippines is impeached,
A.M. No. Rtj-01-1657, 23 February 2004, en banc). the Chief Justice presides over the impeachment trial; in all
other cases of impeachment, the Senate President presides.

DISCIPLINE OF THE MEMBERS OF THE SUPREME Procedure of impeachment

COURT
1. Initiate impeachment through filing of a verified
Impeachment complaint
2. Include in Order of Business within 10 session
It is a constitutional process of removing public days
servants from office as an assurance against abusive 3. Referred to the proper committee within 3
officials in the country (Impeachment Primer, Official session days
Gazette, 2012). 4. Committee conducts hearing
5. Committee votes

UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS

139 FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW
 JUDICIAL ETHICS
6. If YES, the matter will be referred to the Plenary
within 60 days.
7. Plenary votes at least 1/3 vote is required
8. If at least 1/3 vote is attained, Resolution and
Articles of Impeachment are referred to Senate
9. House elects its prosecutors
10. Senate as plenary body adopts its rules on
impeachment
11. Senate convenes as impeachment court
12. Senate issues summons to respondent
13. Respondent appears and files answer
14. Senate receives testimonial and documentary
evidence
15. Senator-judges interpose questions
16. Submission for voting (Convict or Acquit)
Fast track procedure for impeachment
If an impeachment complaint or resolution is filed by
at least one-third (1/3) of all members of the House,
the Articles of Impeachment shall be sent to Senate for
trial.
Determination for conviction or acquittal
Senators are expected to vote according to their
conscience. The standard of proof required is NOT
proof beyond reasonable doubt because it is not a
criminal trial. Rather, it is a political process
(Impeachment Primer, Official Gazette, 2012).
Votes needed for conviction
A vote of at least two-thirds (2/3) of all members of the
Senate for any one article of impeachment.
NOTE: 16 votes are required to convict on any article while 8
Negative votes can prevent conviction on any article.
Result of conviction
Removal from office. The Senate can additionally
impose penalty of disqualification from holding any
office in the Philippine government.
However, the party convicted shall nevertheless be
subject to prosecution, trial, and punishment
according to law. Criminal liability must be established
by criminal trial (Impeachment Primer, Official Gazette,
2012).
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
2014 GOLDEN NOTES
140
ETHICAL LESSONS FROM THE FORMER CHIEF JUSTICE
CORONAS IMPEACHMENT
Grounds for impeachment against former Chief
Justice Renato Corona
1. Betrayal of public trust through:
a. Track record marked by partiality and
subservience in cases involving the Arroyo
administration from the time of his
appointment as Supreme Court justice and
until his dubious appointment as a midnight
chief justice to the present. (Article I)
b. Wanton arbitrariness and partiality in
consistently disregarding the principle of res
judicata in the cases involving the 16 newly-
created cities, and the promotion of Dinagat
Island into a province. (Article V)
c. Arrogating unto himself, and to a committee
he created, the authority and jurisdiction to
improperly investigate a justice of the
Supreme Court for the purpose of exculpating
him. Such authority and jurisdiction is properly
reposed by the Constitution in the House of
Representatives via impeachment. (Article VI)
d. Partiality in granting a temporary restraining
order (TRO) in favor of former president Gloria
Macapagal-Arroyo and her husband Jose
Miguel Arroyo in order to give them an
opportunity to escape prosecution and to
frustrate the ends of justice, and in distorting
the supreme court decision on the effectivity
of the TRO in view of a clear failure to comply
with the conditions of the Supreme Court own
TRO. (Article VII)
e. Commission of graft and corruption when he
failed and refused to account for the judiciary
development fund (JDF) and special allowance
for the judiciary (SAJ) collections. (Article VIII)
2. Culpable violation of the Constitution through:
a. 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 (Article II)
b. Failure to meet and observe the stringent
standards under Art. VIII, Section 7 (3) of the
Constitution that provides that [a] member
of the judiciary must be a person of proven
competence, integrity, probity, and
independence in allowing the Supreme court
to act on mere letters filed by a counsel
which caused the issuance of flip-flopping
decisions in final and executory cases; in
creating an excessive entanglement with
Mrs. Arroyo through her appointment of his
wife to office; and in discussing with litigants
 DISCIPLINE OF MEMBERS OF THE JUDICIARY
regarding cases pending before the Supreme
Court. (Article III)
c. Blatant disregard of the principle of
separation of powers by issuing a status quo
ante order against the House of
Representatives in the case concerning the
impeachment of then Ombudsman
Merceditas Navarro-Gutierrez (Article IV).
Reason for CJ Coronas Impeachment
He was convicted under Article II of the Articles of
impeachment, which is 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.
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).
Mandate of the Chief Justice to disclose his statement
of assets and Lliabilities
1. 1987 Constitution - Section 17. A public officer or
employee shall, upon assumption of office and as
often thereafter as may be required by law,
submit a declaration under oath of his assets,
liabilities, and net worth. In the case of the
President, the Vice-President, the Members of the
Cabinet, the Congress, the Supreme Court, the
Constitutional Commissions and other
constitutional offices, and officers of the armed
141
forces with general or flag rank, the declaration
shall be disclosed to the public in the manner
provided by law.
2. 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.
Statements of Assets and Liabilities and Financial
Disclosure. - All public officials and employees,
except those who serve in an honorary capacity,
laborers and casual or temporary workers, shall
file under oath their Statement of Assets,
Liabilities and Net Worth and a Disclosure of
Business Interests and Financial Connections and
those of their spouses and unmarried children
under eighteen (18) years of age living in their
households.
The Statements of Assets, Liabilities and Net
Worth and the Disclosure of Business Interests
and Financial Connections shall be filed by:
xxx
(2) Senators and Congressmen, with the
Secretaries of the Senate and the House of
Representatives, respectively; Justices, with the
Clerk of Court of the Supreme Court; Judges, with
the Court Administrator; and all national
executive officials with the Office of the President.
Basis for the publics right to inquire upon the
statement of assets and liabilities of public officers
The postulate of public office is a public trust,
institutionalized in the Constitution to protect the
people from abuse of governmental power, would
certainly be mere empty words if access to such
information of public concern is denied.
The right to information (Section 7, Article III of
Constitution) goes hand-in-hand with the
constitutional policies of full public disclosure and
honesty in the public service. It is meant to enhance
the widening role of the citizenry in governmental
decision-making as well as in checking abuse in
government (Valmonte v. Belmonte, Jr., 252 Phil. 264,
February 13 1989).
Established limitations to the right to information,
with its companion right of access to official records
1. National security matters and intelligence
information
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW
 JUDICIAL ETHICS
2. Trade secrets and banking transactions
3. Criminal matters
4. Other confidential information such as
confidential or classified information officially
known to public officers and employees by reason
of their office and not made available to the public
as well as diplomatic correspondence, closed door
Cabinet meetings and executive sessions of either
house of Congress, and the internal deliberations
of the Supreme Court.
Probity
It is the uncompromising adherence to the highest
principles and ideals or impeachable integrity
(Webster's 3rd New International Dictionary).
Importance of probity as a quality of a magistrate
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- 01-1655, July 8,
2004).
Integrity
It is a steadfast adherence to a strict moral or ethical
code. It is honesty and honorableness put into one.
Observance of integrity in the judiciary
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. When the judge himself
becomes the transgressor of the law which he is sworn
to apply, he places his office in disrepute, encourages
disrespect for the law and impairs public confidence in
the integrity of the judiciary itself (Lachica vs
Tormis, A.M. No. MTJ-05-1609, September 20, 2005).
Importance of maintaining the confidence of the
people upon the judiciary
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
2014 GOLDEN NOTES
142
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).
DISCIPLINE OF LOWER COURT JUDGES AND JUSTICES
OF THE COURT OF APPEALS AND 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
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. Motu proprio by the Supreme Court;
2. 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.
3. Anonymous complaint supported by public
records of indubitable integrity filed with the
Supreme Court.
Form and content of the complaint
The complaint shall be in writing and shall state clearly
and concisely the acts and omissions constituting
violations of standards of conduct prescribed for
judges by law, the Rules of Court, or the Code of
Judicial Conduct.
 DISCIPLINE OF MEMBERS OF THE JUDICIARY
GROUNDS
Grounds for discipline of judges
1. Serious Misconduct implies malice or wrongful
intent, not mere error of judgment. Judicial acts
complained of:
a. Must be corrupt or inspired by an intention to
violate the law; or
b. Were in persistent disregard for well-known
legal rules.
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.
Q: Should a judge be held administratively liable for
ignorance of the law for granting bail to an accused in
a criminal case without the requisite bail hearing, and
despite the fact that there was an eyewitness to the
murder who made a positive identification of the
accused?
A: Yes. It is already settled that when a judge grants
bail to a person charged with a capital offense, or an
offense punishable by reclusion perpetua or life
imprisonment without conducting the required bail
hearing, he is considered guilty of ignorance or
incompetence the gravity of which cannot be excused
by a claim of good faith or excusable negligence. When
a judge displays an utter unfamiliarity with the law and
the rules, he erodes the confidence of the public in the
courts. A judge owes the public and the court the duty
to be proficient in the law and is expected to keep
abreast of laws and the prevailing jurisprudence.
Ignorance of the law by a judge can easily be the
mainspring of injustice (Grageda v. Judge Tresvalles,
A.M. MTJ No. 04-1526, Feb. 2, 2004).
Q: Respondent judge failed to cause the raffle of an
injunction case and failed to follow the procedural
requirements in issuing a TRO and a writ of
preliminary injunction as he issued them without
prior notice to the defendant and without a hearing.
Is he liable for gross ignorance of the law?
A: Yes. Though not every judicial error bespeaks
ignorance of the law or of the rules, and that, when
committed in good faith, does not warrant
administrative sanction, the rule applies only in cases
143
within the parameters of tolerable misjudgment.
When the law or the rule is so elementary, not to be
aware of it or to act as if one does not know it
constitutes gross ignorance of the law. A judge is
expected to keep abreast of the developments and
amendments thereto, as well as of prevailing
jurisprudence. Ignorance of the law by a judge can
easily be the mainspring of injustice. In the absence of
fraud, dishonesty or corruption, the acts of a judge in
his judicial capacity are not subject to disciplinary
action. However, the assailed judicial acts must not be
in gross violation of clearly established law or
procedure, which every judge must be familiar with
(Sps. Lago v. Judge Abul, Jr., A.M. No. RTJ-10-2255, Jan.
17, 2011).
Q: Santiago and Sanchez were complainants in two
different criminal cases before the MTC of Bulacan
and the RTC of Pampanga respectively. The suspects
in each of the criminal cases were caught and
detained by authorities. However, both suspects
were released by order of Judge Jovellanos of MCTC
Pangasinan. The complainants questioned both
Orders for Release, alleging that the requirements for
the bail bond had not been fulfilled and that the said
judge had no jurisdiction to order the release. Is
Judge Jovellanos guilty of gross incompetence and
gross ignorance of the law?
A: Yes. A judge should be acquainted with legal norms
and precepts as well as with statutes and procedural
rules. Unfamiliarity with the Rules of Court is a sign of
incompetence. He must have the basic rules at the
palm of his hands as he is expected to maintain
professional competence at all times. Here, there are
two defects in the Orders for Release signed by Judge
Jovellanos. First, in both cases, the detainees had not
registered the bailbond in accordance with the Rules
of Criminal Procedure. One may not be given
provisional liberty if the bailbond is not registered with
the proper office. Secondly, Judge Jovellanos did not
have jurisdiction to order the release of the detainees
as the cases were not pending in his court and the
suspects were not arrested within his jurisdiction
(Santiago v. Judge Jovellanos, A.M. No. MTJ-00-1289,
Aug. 1, 2000).
NOTE: Judges are not expected to be infallible; not every
error or irregularity committed by judges in the performance
of official duties is subject to administrative sanction. In the
absence of bad faith, fraud, dishonesty, or deliberate intent
to do injustice, incorrect rulings do not constitute
misconduct and may give rise to a charge of gross ignorance
of the law (Cruz v. Iturralde, A.M. No. MTJ-03-1775, Apr. 30,
2003).
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW
 JUDICIAL ETHICS
Q: Cruz was the defendant in an ejectment case filed
by the Province of Bulacan involving a parcel of land
owned by the said province. A decision was rendered
against Cruz. He then filed an appeal and several
motions for reconsideration but Justice Alino-
Hormachuelos before whom the motions were filed
subsequently denied all. Consequently, Cruz charged
all the judges and justices with grave misconduct,
gross inexcusable negligence, and rendering a void
judgment. Should the judges be held liable for grave
misconduct and gross ignorance of the law?
A: No. The Court has consistently held that judges will
not be held administratively liable for mere errors of
judgment in their rulings or decisions absent a showing
of malice or gross ignorance on their part. Bad faith or
malice cannot be inferred simply because the
judgment is adverse to a party. To hold a judge
administratively accountable for every erroneous
ruling or decision he renders, assuming that he has
erred, would be nothing short of harassment and
would make his position unbearable. Here, the fact
that the judge or justices rendered a decision not
favorable to Cruz is not enough to make them liable
for grave misconduct (Cruz v. Justice Alino-
Hormachuelos et. al., A.M. No. CA-04-38, Mar. 31,
2004).
Disciplinary and criminal actions not a substitute for
judicial remedy
Disciplinary and criminal actions against a judge, are
not complementary or suppletory of, nor a substitute
for, judicial remedies, whether ordinary or
extraordinary. Resort to and exhaustion of judicial
remedies are prerequisites for the taking of other
measures against the persons of the judges concerned,
whether of civil, administrative, or criminal nature. It
is only after the available judicial remedies have been
exhausted and the appellate tribunals have spoken
with finality that the door to an inquiry into his
criminal, civil, or administrative liability may be said to
have opened, or closed (Maquiran v. Grageda, A.M.
No. RTJ-04-1888, Feb. 11, 2005).
Q: Santiagos Petition for Reconstitution of
Lost/Destroyed Original Certificate of Title was
granted by the Quezon City RTC. The Republic of the
Philippines through the Office of the Solicitor General
appealed the decision to the Court of Appeals the
case of which was raffled to the Division where
Justice Enriquez was Chairperson. The special division
reversed and set aside the Decision of the Quezon
City RTC. Motion for Reconsideration having been
denied, complainant filed the present complaint
before the SC. Pending the decision of the SC, an
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
2014 GOLDEN NOTES
144
administrative charge of Gross Ignorance of the
law/Gross Incompetence was filed against
respondent Associate Enriquez. Is the filing of the
administrative complaint against him proper?
A: No. The remedy of the aggrieved party is not to file
an administrative complaint against the judge, but to
elevate the assailed decision or order to the higher
court for review and correction. An administrative
complaint is not an appropriate remedy where judicial
recourse is still available, such as a motion for
reconsideration, an appeal, or a petition for certiorari,
unless the assailed order or decision is tainted with
fraud, malice, or dishonesty.
The failure to interpret the law or to properly
appreciate the evidence presented does not
necessarily render a judge administratively liable.
A judicial officer cannot be called to account in a civil
action for acts done by him in the exercise of his
judicial function, however erroneous. In the words of
Alzua and Arnalot v. Johnson, it is a general principle
of the highest importance to the proper
administration of justice that a judicial officer, in
exercising the authority vested in him, shall be free to
act upon his own convictions, without apprehension of
personal consequences to himself." This concept of
judicial immunity rests upon consideration of public
policy, its purpose being to preserve the integrity and
independence of the judiciary. This principle is of
universal application and applies to all grades of
judicial officers from the highest judge of the nation
and to the lowest officer who sits as a court (Santiago
III v. Justice Enriquez, Jr. A.M. No. CA-09-47-J, Feb. 13,
2009).
Classifications of administrative charges
1. Serious
2. Less serious
3. Light
NOTE: Administrative penalties imposed on judges are both
punitive and corrective (2011 Bar Question).
Serious charges
1. Bribery, direct or indirect
2. Dishonesty and violations of the Anti-Graft and
Corrupt Practices Law (R.A. 3019)
3. Gross misconduct constituting violations of the
Code of Judicial Conduct
4. Knowingly rendering an unjust judgment or order
as determined by a competent court in an
appropriate proceeding
5. Conviction of a crime involving moral turpitude
 DISCIPLINE OF MEMBERS OF THE JUDICIARY
6. Willful failure to pay a just debt
7. Borrowing money or property from lawyers and
litigants in a case pending before the court
8. Immorality
9. Gross ignorance of the law or procedure
10. Partisan political activities
11. Alcoholism and/or vicious habits
Less serious charges
1. Undue delay in rendering a decision or order, or in
transmitting the records of a case
2. Frequently and unjustified absences without
leave or habitual tardiness
3. Unauthorized practice of law
4. Violation of Supreme Court rules, directives, and
circulars
5. Receiving additional or double compensation
unless specifically authorized by law
6. Untruthful statements in the certificate of service
7. Simple misconduct
Light charges
1. Vulgar and unbecoming conduct
2. Gambling in public
3. Fraternizing with lawyers and litigants with
pending case/cases in his court
4. Undue delay in the submission of monthly reports
Confidentiality of proceedings
Proceedings against judges of regular and special
courts and justices of the Court of Appeals and the
Sandiganbayan shall be private and confidential, but a
copy of the decision or resolution of the Court shall be
attached to the record of the respondent in the Office
of the Court Administrator (RRC, Sec 12, Rule 140).
Resignation or retirement pending administrative
case
The retirement of a judge or any judicial officer from
service does not preclude the finding of any
administrative liability to which he should still be
answerable. Also, the withdrawal or recantation of the
complaint does not necessarily result in the dismissal
of the case (Atty. Molina v. Judge Paz, A.M. No. RTJ -
01-1638, Dec. 8, 2003).
NOTE: The acceptance by the President of the resignation
does not necessarily render the case moot or deprive the SC
of the authority to investigate the charges. The court retains
its jurisdiction either to pronounce the respondent officially
innocent of the charges or declare him guilty thereof. A
contrary rule will be fraught with injustice and pregnant with
145
dreadful and dangerous implications (Pesole v. Rodriguez
A.M. No. 755-MTJ, Jan. 31, 1978).
Q: May the heirs of a judge who was found guilty of
gross neglect of duty and dismissed from the service
with disqualification from holding public office for an
offense committed before he was appointed judge,
be entitled to gratuity benefits?
A: Yes. Upon demise, the administrative complaint of
the OCA had to be considered closed and terminated.
Therefore, there is no valid reason why the heirs of the
deceased should not be entitled to gratuity benefits
for the period he rendered service as MTCC judge up
to the finality of the CSC Resolution which imposed the
penalty of "dismissal from service with all the
accessory penalties including disqualification from
holding public office and forfeiture of benefits.
The penalty of disqualification from holding public
office and forfeiture of benefits may not be applied
retroactively, however, the judge should be
considered terminated from service in the judiciary as
his appointment as MTCC judge is deemed conditional
upon his exoneration of the CSC administrative
charges against him (Re: Application for
retirement/gratuity benefits under R.A. 910 as
amended by R.A. 5095 and P.D. 1438 filed by Mrs.
Butacan, surviving spouse of the late Hon. Jimmy
Butacan, former judge of MTC, Tuguegarao City, who
died on July 28, 2005,A.M. No. 12535-Ret, Apr. 22,
2008).
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.
Q: May a judge be disciplined by the Supreme Court
based solely on a complaint filed by the complainant
and the answer of respondent judge? If so, in what
circumstances? What is the rationale behind this
power of the Supreme Court? (1996 Bar Question)
A: A judge may be disciplined by the Supreme Court
based solely on the basis of the complaint filed by the
complainant and the answer of the respondent judge,
under the principle of res ipsa loquitor. The Supreme
Court has held that when the facts alleged in the
complaint are admitted or are already shown on the
record, and no credible explanation that would negate
the strong inference of evil intent is forthcoming, no
further hearing to establish such facts to support a
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW
 JUDICIAL ETHICS
judgment as to culpability of the respondent is
necessary (In Re: Petition for dismissal of Judge Dizon).
NOTE: The doctrine of res ipsa loquitur does not and cannot
dispense with the twin requirements of due process, notice
and the opportunity to be heard. It merely dispenses with
the procedure laid down in Rule 140, RRC (Rule 140:
Discipline of Judges of Regular and Special Courts and
Justices of the Court of Appeals and the Sandiganbayan).
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.
Suspension pendente lite not applicable to judges
While it is true that preventive suspension pendente
lite does not violate the right of the accused to be
presumed innocent as the same is not a penalty, the
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
2014 GOLDEN NOTES
146
rules on preventive suspension of judges, not having
been expressly included in the Rules of Court, are
amorphous at best.
Moreover, it is established that any administrative
complaint leveled against a judge must always be
examined with a discriminating eye, for its
consequential effects are, by their nature, highly penal,
such that the respondent judge stands to face the
sanction of dismissal or disbarment. As
aforementioned, the filing of criminal cases against
judges may be used as tools to harass them and may
in the long run create adverse consequences (Re:
Conviction of Judge Adoracion G. Angeles, A.M. No. 06-
9-545-RTC, Jan. 31, 2008).
Grievance procedure in the rules of court is not
applicable to justices and judges
Complaints against justices and judges are filed with
the Supreme Court which has exclusive administrative
supervision over all courts and the personnel thereof
pursuant to Section 6 Art. VIII, Constitution. The Court
en banc has the power to discipline all judges of lower
courts including justices of the Court of Appeals (1987
Constitution, Section 11, Art. VII).
As a matter of practice, the Supreme Court has
assigned complaints against Municipal or
Metropolitan Trial Judges to an Executive Judge of a
Regional Trial Court and complaints against judges of
Regional Trial Courts to a justice of the Court of
Appeals, while a complaint against a member of the
Court of Appeals would probably be assigned to a
member of the Supreme Court for investigation,
report and recommendation. Retired SC Justices are
now tasked for this purpose.
Rules on the liability of judges
GR: A judge is not liable administratively, civilly, or
criminally, when he acts within his legal powers and
jurisdiction, even though such acts are erroneous so
long as he acts in good faith. In such a case, the remedy
of aggrieved party is not to file an administrative
complaint against the judge but to elevate the error to
a higher court for review and correction.
NOTE: The reason behind such rule is to free the judge from
apprehension of personal consequences to himself and to
preserve the integrity and independence of the judiciary.
XPN: Where an error is gross or patent, deliberate and
malicious, or is incurred with evident bad faith; or
when there is fraud, dishonesty, or corruption.
Civil liabilities under the New Civil Code
 DISCIPLINE OF MEMBERS OF THE JUDICIARY
1. Article 27 refusal or neglect without just cause
by a public servant to perform his official duty
2. Article 32 directly or indirectly obstructing,
defeating, violating or in any manner impeding or
impairing civil liberties guaranteed by the
Constitution
This responsibility for damages is not, however,
demandable of judges except when his act or omission
constitutes a violation of the Penal Code or other penal
statute.
Disabilities/restrictions under the New Civil Code
1. Article 1491 (5) Justices, judges, prosecuting
attorneys, clerks of court of superior and inferior
courts and other officers and employees
connected with the administration of justice
cannot acquire by purchase, even at a public or
judicial action, either in person or through the
mediation of another the property and rights in
litigation or levied upon an execution before the
court within whose jurisdiction or territory they
exercise their respective functions.
This prohibition includes the act of acquiring by
assignment and shall apply to lawyers, with respect to
the property and rights that may be the object of any
litigation in which they may take part by virtue of their
profession (1996 Bar Question).
2. Article 739 Donations made to a judge, his wife,
descendants and ascendants by reason of his
office are void.
Criminal Liabilities under the RPC and the Anti-Graft
and Corrupt Practices Act
1. Misfeasance
a. Article 204 Knowingly rendering unjust
judgment.
b. Manifestly Unjust Judgment one which is
so patently against the law, public order,
public policy and good morals that a person
of ordinary discernment can easily sense its
invalidity and injustice.
NOTE: It must be shown beyond doubt that the
judgment is unjust as it is contrary to law or is not
supported by evidence and the same was made
with conscious and deliberate intent to do an
injustice (In Re: Climaco, A.C. No. 134-J, January 21,
1974).
If the decision rendered by the judge is still on
appeal, the judge cannot be disqualified on the
147
ground of knowingly rendering an unjust judgment
(Abad v. Bleza, A.M. No. R-227-RTJ, October 13,
1986).
2. Article 205 Judgment rendered through
negligence committed by reason of inexcusable
negligence or ignorance.
NOTE: Negligence and ignorance are inexcusable if they
imply a manifest injustice, which cannot be explained by
reasonable interpretation (In Re: Climaco, A.C. No. 134-J,
January 21, 1974).
3. Article 206 Knowingly rendering an unjust
interlocutory order; and
4. Maliciously delaying the administration of justice.
NOTE: The act must be committed maliciously with
deliberate intent to prejudice a party in a case.
IMPEACHMENT
(ETHICAL ASPECTS)
Constitutional provisions on the accountability of
public officers
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
(1987 Constitution, Sec. 1, Article XI).
Nature of public office
A public office is a public trust. It is not to be
understood as a position of honor, prestige and power
but a position of rendering service to the public.
Principle of accountability
It sets down the mandate 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.
Purpose of impeachment in relation the
accountability of public officers
Its purpose 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.
Importance of maintaining public trust in public
offices
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW
 JUDICIAL ETHICS

It is essential that responsible and competent public Factors to be considered in reinstatement

officers be chosen for public office to maintain the
faith and confidence of the people to the government 1.
otherwise it becomes ineffective. No popular
government can survive without the confidence of the 2.
people. It is the lone guarantee and justification of its
existence. 3.
SANCTIONS IMPOSED BY THE SUPREME COURT ON 4.
ERRING MEMBERS OF THE JUDICIARY
Unsullied name and service of record prior to
dismissal
Commitment to avoid situation that spur
suspicion of arbitrary conditions
Complainant mellowed down in pushing from his
removal
Length of time separated from service

Sanctions for a judge found guilty of a serious charge

Any of the following sanctions may be imposed:

1. Dismissal from the service, forfeiture of all or part
of the benefits as the Court may determine, and
disqualification from reinstatement or
appointment to any public office, including
government-owned or controlled corporations.
Provided, however, that the forfeiture of benefits
shall in no case include accrued leave credits
2. Suspension from office without salary and other
benefits for more than three (3) but not exceeding
six (6) months
3. A fine of more than P20,000.00 but not exceeding
P40,000.00

Sanctions for a judge found guilty of a less serious

charge

1. Suspension from office without salary and other

benefits for not less than one (1) nor more than
three (3) months; or
2. A fine of more than P10,000.00 but not exceeding
P20,000.00.

Sanctions for a judge found guilty of a light charge

Any of the following sanctions shall be imposed:

1. A fine of not less than P1,000.00 but not
exceeding P10,000.00 and/or
2. Censure
3. Reprimand
4. Admonition with warning

REINSTATEMENT OF A JUDGE
PREVIOUSLY DISCIPLINED

Propriety of reinstatement

Reinstatement is proper when there is no indication

that the judge is inspired by corrupt motives or
reprehensive purpose in the performance of his
functions.

UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS

2014 GOLDEN NOTES
148
 DISCIPLINE OF MEMBERS OF THE JUDICIARY

PROCEDURE FOR DISCIPLINE OF JUDGES OF REGULAR AND SPECIAL COURTS AND

JUSTICES OF THE COURT OF APPEALS AND THE SANDIGANBAYAN
(A.M. NO. 01-8-10-SC)
(2005 Bar Question)

If the complaint is sufficient in form and

substance, a copy thereof shall be If the complaint is not sufficient
served upon the respondent and he in form and substance, the same
shall be required to comment within 10 shall be dismissed.
days from date of service.

Upon the filing of the respondents

comment or upon the expiration of the
time for filing the same and unless other
pleadings or documents are required, the
Supreme Court shall refer the matter to:

Office of the Court Administrator for The investigating justice or judge shall
evaluation, report, and set a day of the HEARING and send
recommendation notice thereof to both parties. At such
hearing the parties may present oral
Or assign the case for investigation,
and documentary evidence.
report, and recommendation to a
retired member of the Supreme Court,
If, after due notice, the respondent
if the respondent is a justice of the CA
fails to appear, the investigation shall
and the Sandiganbayan
proceed ex parte.
Or to a justice of the CA, if the
The investigating justice or judge shall
respondent is a judge of a Regional Trial
terminate the investigation within
Court or of a special court of equivalent
ninety (90) days from the date of its
rank
commencement or within such
Or to a judge of the Regional Trial Court extension as the Supreme Court may
if the respondent is a judge of an grant.
inferior court.

Within thirty (30) days from the termination of the

investigation, the investigating Justice or Judge shall submit to
The Court shall take such the Supreme Court a REPORT containing findings of fact and
ACTION on the report as the recommendation. The report shall be accompanied by the
facts and the law may warrant. record containing the evidence and the pleadings filed by the
parties. The report shall be confidential and shall be for the
exclusive use of the Court.

NOTE: Before the Court approved this resolution, administrative and disbarment cases against members of the bar who were
likewise members of the court were treated separately. However, pursuant to the new rule, an administrative case against a
judge of a regular court based on grounds which are also grounds for the disciplinary action against members of the Bar shall be
automatically considered as disciplinary proceedings against such judge as a member of the Bar.

Since membership in the bar is an integral qualification for membership in the bench, the moral fitness of a judge also reflects his
moral fitness as a lawyer. A judge who disobeys the basic rules of judicial conduct also violates his oath as a lawyer (Samson v.
Judge Caballero, A.M. No. RTJ-08-2138, Aug. 5, 2009)

UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS

149 FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW
 JUDICIAL ETHICS

DISCIPLINE OF LOWER COURT JUDGES AND

JUSTICES OF THE COURT OF APPEALS AND The self-examination of the judge is necessary. He should
SANDIGANBAYAN exercise his discretion in a way that peoples faith in the
courts of justice will not be impaired. His decision, as to
whether to hear the case or not should be based and
DISQUALIFICATION OF JUSTICES AND JUDGES
dependent to giving importance to the confidence in the
(RULE 137) impartiality of a judge.

COMPULSORY

Disqualification of justices and judges

Section 1 of Rule 317 provides that a judge is

mandated by law to be disqualified if any of the
following instance, is present:

1. The judge, or his wife, or child is pecuniarily

interested as heir, legatee, creditor or otherwise
2. 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)
3. The judge has been an executor, administrator,
guardian, trustee or counsel
4. The judge has presided in any inferior court when
his ruling or decision is the subject of review

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 compulsory/voluntary disqualification

The same rule also provides that the judge may hear
and decide the case despite the presence of a
disqualification provided the interested parties both
give a written consent, signed by them and entered
upon the record. It has been decided by the Supreme
Court that oral consent is not valid, even though both
parties have agreed (Lazo v. Judge Tiong, 300 SCRA 173,
1998).

VOLUNTARY

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).

UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS

2014 GOLDEN NOTES
150
 COURT RECORDS AND GENERAL DUTIES OF CLERKS AND STENOGRAPHERS
POWERS AND DUTIES OF COURTS AND JUDICIAL
OFFICERS (RULE 135)
When pleading/motion for trial of cases/ other pleadings
may be filed
Section 1, Rule 135 of Rules of Court provides: Courts
always open; justice to be promptly and impartially
administered. Courts of justice shall always be open,
except on legal holidays, for the filing of any pleading,
motion or other papers, for the trial of cases, hearing
of motions, and for the issuance of orders or rendition of
judgments. Justice shall be impartially administered
without unnecessary delay.
GR: Courts of justice shall always be open; Justice to
be promptly and impartially administered.
XPN: Legal holidays
NOTE: Upon the request of the local government unit concerned,
the Executive Judges of the MeTCs or the MTCCs of the cities and
municipalities comprising Metro Manila and of the cities of Baguio,
Bacolod, Cagayan de Oro, Cebu, Davao and Iloilo may assign all
judges to hold night court sessions daily from Monday to Friday
and on official holidays and special days, from four-thirty oclock
in the afternoon to eleven oclock in the evening, on rotation basis,
and in pairs of two (Sec. 15, A.M. No. 03-8-02-SC).
Exclusion of the public from the proceedings
Section 2, Rule 135 of Rules of Court provides: Publicity of
proceedings and records-- The sitting of every court of
justice shall be public, but any court may, in its discretion,
exclude the public when the evidence to be adduced is of
such nature as to require their exclusion in the interest of
morality or decency. xxx
GR: The sitting of every court of justice shall be
public
XPN: When the evidence to be adduced is of such
nature as to require their exclusion in the interest
of morality or decency.
Records of a court of justice is NOT always public
Section 2, Rule 135 of Rules of Court provides: 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, unless the court shall, in
any special case, have forbidden their publicity, in the
interest of morality or decency.
GR: The records of every court of justice shall be
public records and shall be available for the inspection
151
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 the processes in inferior courts
GR: Within the province where the municipality or city lies.
XPN: Outside its boundary, provided it is with the approval
of judge of first instance of said province.
Criminal processes served outside judges jurisdiction is
allowed
When the district judge, or in his absence the provincial
fiscal, shall certify that in his opinion the interests of justice
require such service.
Section 4 of Rule 135 of Rules of Court provides: Process of
inferior courts The process of inferior courts shall be
enforceable within the province where the municipality or
city lies. It shall not be served outside the boundaries of the
province in which they are comprised except with the
approval of the judge of first instance of said province, and
only in the following cases:
a. When an order for the delivery of personal property
lying outside the province is to be complied with;
b. When an attachment of real or personal property lying
outside the province is to be made;
c. When the action is against two or more defendants
residing in different provinces;
d. When the place where the case has been brought is
that specified in a contract in writing between the
parties, or is the place of the execution of such
contract as appears therefrom.
Writs of execution issued by inferior courts may be
enforced in any part of the Philippines without any
previous approval of the judge of first instance.
Criminal process may be issued by a justice of the peace or
other inferior court, to be served outside his province,
when the district judge, or in his absence the provincial
fiscal, shall certify that in his opinion the interests of justice
require such service.
Instances in which Superior Court processes are
enforceable in any part of the Philippines
1. A case is pending to bring in a defendant
2. For the arrest of an accused person
3. Execution of any order or judgment of the court
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW
 JUDICIAL ETHICS

Cases where the judge of the first instance of a particular
province can approve the service of process of inferior
courts outside the boundaries of province in which they
are comprised
1. When an order for the delivery of personal property
lying outside the province is to be complied with;
2. When an attachment of real or personal property lying
outside the province is to be made;
3. When the action is against two or more defendants
residing in different provinces;
4. When the place where the case has been brought is
that specified in a contract in writing between the
parties, or is the place of the execution of such
contract as appears therefrom
auxiliary writs, processes and other means necessary to
carry it into effect may be employed by such court or
officer; and if the procedure to be followed in the exercise
of such jurisdiction is not specifically pointed out by law or
by these rules, any suitable process or mode of proceeding
may be adopted which appears conformable to the spirit of
said law or rules.
Instances where the hearings may be had at any place in
the judicial district which the judge shall deem convenient
1. On the filing of a petition for the writ of habeas corpus
2. For release upon bail or reduction of bail in any Court
of First Instance (Section 8, Rule 135 of Rules of Court)
.

Inherent powers of the courts Supreme Court can authorize the judge to continue
hearing and to decide said case notwithstanding his
Section 5, Rule 135 of Rules of Court provides: transfer or appointment to another court of equal
jurisdiction
Inherent powers of courts-- Every court shall have power:
a. To preserve and enforce order in its immediate 1. If a case has been heard only in part.
presence; 2. If no other judge had heard the case in part.
b. To enforce order in proceedings before it, or
before a person or persons empowered to Section 9, Rule 135 of Rules of Court provides:
conduct a judicial investigation under its
authority; Signing judgments out of province.If a case has been
c. To compel obedience to its judgments, orders and heard only in part, the Supreme Court, upon petition of any
processes, and to the lawful orders of a judge out of the parties to the case and the recommendation of the
of court, in a case pending therein; respective district judge, may
d. To control, in furtherance of justice, the conduct
of its ministerial officers, and of all other persons
in any manner connected with a case before it, in
every manner appertaining thereto;
e. To compel the attendance of persons to testify in
a case pending therein;
f. To administer or cause to be administered oaths
in a case pending therein, and in all other cases
where it may be necessary in the exercise of its
powers;
g. to amend and control its process and orders so as
to make them comfortable to law and justice;
h. To authorize a copy of a lost or destroyed pleading
or other paper to be filed and used instead of the
original, and to restore, and supply deficiencies in
its records and proceedings.

Carrying jurisdiction into effect

All auxiliary writs, processes and other means necessary to

carry jurisdiction into effect may be employed by court or
officer.

Section 6, Rule 135 of Rules of Court provides:

Means to carry jurisdiction into effect. -- When by law

jurisdiction is conferred on a court or judicial officer, all
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
2014 GOLDEN NOTES
152
 LEGAL FEES
LEGAL FEES
(RULE 141, A.M. NO. 04-2-04-SC)
MANNER OF PAYMENT
Payment shall be made upon the filing of the pleading
or other application which initiates an action or
proceeding. The fees prescribed shall be paid in full
upon filing of the pleading or application.
FEES IN LIEN
Where the court in its final judgment awards a claim
not alleged, or a relief different from, or more than
that claimed in the pleading, the party concerned shall
pay the additional fees which shall constitute a lien on
the judgment in satisfaction of said lien.
PERSONS AUTHORIZED TO COLLECT LEGAL FEES
Except as otherwise provided, these officers and
persons, together with their assistants and deputies,
may demand, receive, and take the several fees
hereinafter mentioned and allowed for any business
by them respectively done by virtue of their several
offices, and no more:
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
The following persons are also entitled to receive fees/
compensation under rule 141:
1. Stenographers
2. Witnesses
3. Appraisers
4. Commissioners in eminent domain
proceedings
5. Commissioners in the proceedings for
partition of real estate
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.
Basis of the amount of fee in filing an action or
proceeding with the Court of Tax Appeals
1. In an action or proceeding, including petition for
intervention, and for all services in the same
amount of fee would be based on the:
153
a. Sum claimed or amount of disputed tax or
customs assessment, inclusive of interest,
penalties and surcharges, damages of
whatever kind and attorneys fees
b. Value of the article of property in seizure
cases.
If the value of the subject matter cannot be
estimated P 5,000.
2. Petition for review from a decision of the RTC or
of the Central Board of Assessment Appeals or a
special civil action with the CTA or an appeal from
a decision of a CTA Division to the CTA En Banc
P3,000.00.
Consequences if fees are not paid
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 proceedings.
Basis of the amount of fee in filing permissive OR
COMPULSORY counter-claim, CROSS-CLAIM, money
claim against an estate not based on judgment, third-
party, fourth-party, etc. complaint, complaint-in-
intervention in the RTC
TOTAL SUM CLAIMED, Inclusive of Interests, Penalties,
Surcharges, Damages of whatever kind, and Attorneys
Fees, Litigation Expenses and Costs
In cases involving REAL property in litigation it is
based on the fair market value as:
1. stated in the current tax declaration or
2. current zonal valuation of the bureau of internal
revenue, whichever is higher,
3. if there is none, the stated value of the property
in litigation
In case of PERSONAL property, the FAIR MARKET
value of the property in litigation as alleged by the
claimant.
Basis for determining amount of fees in personal
actions in first level courts
The value of the subject matter involved, or the
amount of the demand, inclusive of
interests, PENALTIES, SURCHARGES, damages of
whatever kind, attorneys fees, litigation expenses and
costs.
Basis for determining amount of fees in real actions
The FAIR MARKET value of the property:
1. Stated in the current tax declaration or
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW
 JUDICIAL ETHICS
2. Current zonal valuation of the bureau of internal
revenue, whichever is higher, or,
If not declared for taxation purposes, the estimated
value thereof shall be alleged by the claimant and shall
be the basis in computing the fees.
Exemptions to fees to real actions
In forcible entry and unlawful detainer, the amount
of fees would depend on whether damages or costs
are prayed for.
Witnesses are entitled to fees
Witnesses in the Supreme Court, in the Court of
Appeals and in the Regional Trial Courts and in the
1st level courts, either in actions or special
proceedings, shall be entitled to P200.00 per day,
inclusive of ALL EXPENSES;
Fees to which witnesses may be entitled in a civil
action shall be allowed on the certification of the clerk
of court or judge of his appearance in the case.
Limitations
1. A witness shall not be allowed compensation for
his attendance in more than one case or more
than one side of the same case at the same time,
but may elect in which of several cases or on
which side of a case, when he is summoned by
both sides, to claim his attendance.
2. A person who is compelled to attend court on
other business shall not be paid as a witness.
Sheriffs expense is NOT the same as Sheriffs fees
Sheriffs expenses are not exacted for any service
rendered by the court; they are the amount deposited
to the Clerk of Court upon filing of the complaint to
defray the actual travel expenses of the sheriff,
process server or other court-authorized persons in
the service of summons, subpoena and other court
processes that would be issued relative to the trial of
the case. . It is not the same as sheriffs fees under
Section 10, Rule 141 of the Rules of Court, which refers
to those imposed by the court for services rendered to
a party incident to the proceedings before it (Re: Letter
dated April 18, 2011 of Chief Public Attorney Persida Rueda-
Acosta Requesting Exemption From the Payment Of Sheriffs
Expenses, A.M. No. 11-10-03-0, July 30, 2013).
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS
2014 GOLDEN NOTES
154
Persons exempt from payment of legal fees
1. Indigent litigants
2. Republic of the Philippines
NOTE: The clients of PAO shall be exempt from payment of
docket and other fees incidental to instituting an action in
court and other quasi-judicial bodies, as an original
proceeding or on appeal. (R.A. No. 9406, Section 6)
Rule with regard to indigent litigants
Indigent litigants are exempt from payment of legal
fees. However, the legal fees shall be a lien on any
judgment rendered in the case favorable to the
indigent litigant unless the court otherwise provides.
Requisites for the indigents to be able to enjoy
exemption
He must execute an affidavit that he and his
immediate family do not earn a gross income
abovementioned, and they do not own any real
property with the fair value aforementioned,
supported by an affidavit of a disinterested person
attesting to the truth of the litigants affidavit. The
current tax declaration, if any, shall be attached to the
litigants affidavit.
Any falsity in the affidavit of litigant or disinterested
person shall be sufficient cause to dismiss the
complaint or action or to strike out the pleading of that
party, without prejudice to whatever criminal liability
may have been incurred. (Sec. 19)
Rule as to Republic of the Philippines
The Republic of the Philippines, its agencies and
instrumentalities are exempt from paying the legal
fees provided in the rule.
Exemption to the rule that the Republic is exempt
from paying legal fees
Local governments and government-owned or
controlled corporations with or without independent
charters are not exempt from paying such fees.
However, all court actions, criminal or civil, instituted
at the instance of the provincial, city or municipal
treasurer or assessor under Sec. 280 of the Local
Government Code of 1991 shall be exempt from the
payment of court and sheriffs fees.
 LEGAL FEES

Purpose of mediation fund

The Fund shall be utilized for the promotion of court-

annexed mediation and other relevant modes of
alternative dispute resolution (ADR), training of
mediators, payment of mediators fees, and operating
expenses of the Philippine Mediation Center (PMC)
units including expenses for technical assistance and
organizations/individuals,
transportation/communication expenses,
photocopying, supplies and equipment, expense
allowance and miscellaneous expenses, whenever
necessary, subject to auditing rules and regulations.

Fees do NOT form part of the Judiciary Development

Fund

The mediation fees shall not form part of the Judiciary

Development Fund (JDF) under P.D. No. 1949 nor of
the special allowances granted to justices and judges
under Republic Act No. 9227.

The amount collected shall be receipted and separated

as part of a special fund to be known as the Mediation
Fund and shall accrue to the SC-PHILJA-PMC Fund,
disbursements from which are and shall be pursuant
to guidelines approved by the Supreme Court.

Exceptions in paying mediation fees

The following are exempt from contributing to the

mediation fund:
1. Pauper litigant.
NOTE: However, the court shall provide that the unpaid
contribution to the Mediation Fund shall be considered
a lien on any monetary award in a judgment favorable
to the pauper litigant.

2. Accused-appellant

UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS

155 FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW
 JUDICIAL ETHICS

COSTS A: Yes, the rejection by CA indicated that the three

(RULE 142)
RECOVERY OF COSTS
PREVAILING PARTY
Costs allowed to a prevailing party
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 (RRC, Sec. 1, Rule 142)
Costs shall not be allowed to the Republic of the
Philippines. (RRC, Sec. 1, Rule 142)
Q: Is the Land bank of the Philippines liable to the
cost of suit in the performance of a governmental
function such as disbursement of agrarian funds to
satisfy awards of just compensation?
A: No, the Land Bank of the Philippines is in the
performance of a Governmental function in an
agrarian reform proceeding, hence, according to Rule
142, it is exempt from the payment of Cost of Suit
(Land Bank of the Philippines vs. Esther Anson Rivera,
G.R. No. 182431, Nov. 17, 2010).
lower courts with legal capacity and official function to
resolve issues, all found the same set of facts. In this
recourse, the petitioners presented no ground
sufficient to persuade the court to warrant a review of
the uniform findings of fact. Given the frivolousness of
the appeal, the court imposes treble costs of suit on
the petitioners under Rule 142 (Maglana Rice and Corn
Mill Inc. vs. Annie L. Tan, G.R. No. 159051, Sept. 21,
2011).
FALSE ALLEGATIONS
A 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. The amount fixed by the Judge and taxed as
costs (RRC, Sec. 4, Rule 142).
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 (RRC, Sec. 12, Rule 142).

DISMISSED APPEAL OR ACTION

Power of the court to render judgment for costs even

if an Appeal has been dismissed

If an Action or Appeal is dismissed, for want of

Jurisdiction or otherwise, the Court retains the power
to render judgment for Costs, as justice may require
(RRC, Sec. 2, Rule 142).

FRIVOLOUS APPEAL

If an appeal is deemed frivolous, 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
(RRC, Sec. 3, Rule 142).

Q: A vehicular accident between a Fuso truck owned

by Maglana Rice and Corn Mill and a Honda Accord
owned by Sps. Tan occurred on Aug. 28, 1996. Sps.
Tan filed a complaint in the MTCC which was favored.
The petitioners appealed, but RTC upheld the MTCC.
Petitioners further appealed to the CA, which was
denied for lack of merit. The MR being also denied,
hence the appeal to the Supreme Court. The issue is
whether or not the appeal is frivolous.

UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS

2014 GOLDEN NOTES
156
 BIBLIOGRAPHY

Agpalo, R.E. (2002) Legal and Judicial Ethics. Rex Book

Store.

Antiquera, E. (1992, 2007) Code of Professional

Responsibility. Rex Books Store.

Blacks Law Dictionary, 7th Edition 1990, 2004,

Thomson West

Funa, D.B. (2009) Legal and Judicial Ethics. Central

Book Supply.

Francisco, V.J. (1958) Legal and Judicial Ethics. East

Publishing.

Pineda, E.L. (2009) Legal Ethics Annotated. Central

Book Supply.

Code of Professional Responsibility Annotated,

Philippine Judicial Academy Publication.

Ethical Consideration 8-1, 1978, Model Code of

Professional Responsibility, American Bar Association

Websites:

www.lawphil.net
www.chanrobles.com
www.sc.gov.ph

UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS

157 FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW