UP LAW BOC 1 of 16 LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS

PRE-WEEK
UP LAW BOC 2 of 16 LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
PRE-WEEK

LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS

Q1: Who are absolutely disqualified from practicing law in the Philippines?
A1: The following are absolutely disqualified from practicing law in the Philippines:
Judges and other officials or employees of superior courts as [Sec. 35, Rule 148, ROC];
Officials and employees of the Office of the Solicitor General [Sec. 35, Rule 148, ROC];
Government prosecutors [Lim-Santiago vs. Sagucio, A.C. No. 6705 (2006)];
President, vice-president, cabinet members, their deputies and assistants [Sec. 15, Art. VII, 1987
Constitution];
Chairmen and members of constitutional commissions [Sec. 2, Art. IX-A, 1987 Constitution];
Members of the Judicial Bar Council [Sec. 2, Art. IX-A, 1987 Constitution];
Ombudsman and his deputies [par. 2, Sec. 8 (2), Art. X, 1987 Constitution];
All governors, city and municipal mayors [Sec. 90(a), RA 7160];
Civil service officers or employees whose duties require them to devote their entire time at the disposal
of the government [Catu vs. Rellosa, A.C. No. 5738 (2008)];
Those who, by special law, are prohibited from engaging in the practice of their legal profession.

Q2: Atty. A was charged and convicted of murder. After serving a portion of his sentence, Atty. A was granted
a conditional pardon. A disbarment complaint was filed against Atty. A on the ground of his conviction of a
crime involving moral turpitude. Atty. As defense is that his conditional pardon place him beyond the scope
of the rule on disbarment. Is Atty. As defense meritorious?
A2: No. Because the pardon granted to him was conditional, it merely remitted the unexecuted portion of
his term, but it does not reach the offense itself. Thus, he must be judged upon the fact of his conviction for
murder without regard to the said pardon. [In Re: Gutierrez, G.R. No. L-363 (1962)]

Q3: Prosecutor B was the ex-officio vice-chairman of the City Board of Canvassers for an election. Several
irregularities, including vote tampering and manipulations of the election returns, accompanied the
canvassing. Despite the obvious irregularities, Prosecutor B still certified the resulting Statement of Votes.
Mr. Z, a candidate in the said election, filed a disbarment complaint against Prosecutor B. May Prosecutor B
be disciplined as a lawyer?
A3: Yes. While generally a lawyer who holds a government position may not be disciplined as a member of
the bar for misconduct in the discharge of his duties as a government official, if the misconduct also
constitutes a violation of the Code of Professional Responsibility or the lawyers oath, he may be disciplined
as a member of the bar for the misconduct. In this case, Prosecutor B violated Rule 1.01 and the duty in the
lawyers oath to commit no falsehood. [Pimentel v Llorente, A.C. No. 4680 (2000)]

Q4: Atty. C moved to Spain. Subsequently, she renounced her Philippine citizenship and became a
naturalized Spanish citizen. After 10 years, she decided to return to the Philippines and re-acquire her
Philippine citizenship. Upon re-acquiring her Philippine citizenship, does she also re-acquire her
membership in the Philippine Bar?
A4: Yes. Under R.A. 9225, once she re-acquired Philippine citizenship, she remains to be a member of the
Philippine Bar. However, she cannot automatically resume in the practice of law because the same law
UP LAW BOC 3 of 16 LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
PRE-WEEK

provides that she must first apply with the proper authority (i.e. the OBC in the SC) for a license or permit
to engage in such practice.

Q5: May a disbarred lawyer represent himself in litigation?

A5: Yes. Pursuant to Sec. 34, Rule 138, ROC, a party may conduct his litigation in person. A lawyer who has
been disbarred or otherwise disqualified to practice law can validly prosecute or defend his own litigation
as much as that of a layman.

Q6: Pending before the CA 1st Division, where CA Associate Justice Juan is sitting, is an appeal regarding an
RTC ruling which ordered the dismissal of the complaint of Mr. D. The RTC decision was penned by Judge
Pedro. Mr. Ds counsel moved for the compulsory disqualification of Associate Justice Juan, alleging that the
latter has been placed in a position where he had to review his own decision since Associate Justice Juan
partly presided over the RTC case before he was appointed to the CA. Is Mr. Ds counsel correct?
A6: No, Mr. Ds counsel is not correct. An Associate Justice who only partly presided over a case in the trial
court and who did not render the final decision cannot be said to have been placed in a position where he
had to review his own decision and, as such, was not legally bound, on this ground, to inhibit himself as
ponente of the case. However, he should voluntarily inhibit himself because his earlier involvement in the
case constitutes a just or valid reason under par. 2, Sec. 1, Rule 137 [Sandoval v CA, G.R. No. 106657 (1996)]

Q7: Mr. Y filed a complaint of disbarment against Atty. F on the ground of immorality because of a criminal
complaint for issuing a bouncing check, in violation of B.P. Blg. 22 filed against him. Atty. F sought the
dismissal of the complaint, raising the defense that the said criminal complaint was dismissed with finality
by the Court of Appeals for the failure of the prosecution to prove his guilt beyond reasonable doubt. Is Atty.
F correct?
A7: No, Atty. F is not correct. Even if his guilt was not proved beyond reasonable doubt in the criminal
prosecution for violation of B.P. Blg. 22, issuing a bouncing check reflects on the lawyers moral character
and he may be disciplined [applying by analogy the ruling in Calub v Suller, A.C. No. 1474 (2000)]

Q8: When is public comment and criticism of a court decision permissible? When would it be improper?
A8: A lawyer, like every citizen, enjoys the right to comment on and criticize the decision of a court. 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. (Rule 11.04, CPR)

Q9: Atty. H is a seasoned litigator who, during bar review season, conducts special lectures on remedial law
in different law schools. For this year, she conducted 3 lectures, each lecture lasting for 3 hours. May these
lectures be credited as MCLE activities?
A9: Yes, this is sanctioned under par. 3, Sec. 2, Rule 5, B.M. 850.

Q10: Who may be appointed as counsel de officio? May a lawyer decline to act as counsel de officio?
A10: The following may appointed as counsel de officio:
UP LAW BOC 4 of 16 LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
PRE-WEEK

(1) A member of the bar in good standing who, by reason of their experience and ability, can competently
defend the accused;
(2) In localities without lawyers:
(a) Any person resident of the province and of good repute for probity and ability [Sec. 7, Rule 116,
ROC];
(b) A municipal judge or a lawyer employed in any branch, subdivision or instrumentality of the
government within the province [Sec. 1, PD 543].

A lawyer may decline to act as counsel de oficio only for serious and sufficient cause (Rule 14.02, CPR)

Q11: When is there a conflict of interest?

A11: The test to determine whether is a conflict of interest is the probability, not certainty, of conflict. It exists
when
1) there are conflicting duties;
2) when the acceptance of the new relation invite or actually lead to unfaithfulness or double-dealing to
another client, and;
3) when the attorney will be called upon to use against his first client any knowledge acquired in the
previous employment.

Q12: Mr. V filed a disbarment complaint against his neighbor Atty. I for allegedly grossly immoral acts.
Subsequently, Mr. V and Atty. I were able to talk and settle the matters between them. Thus, Mr. V filed a
Motion to Withdraw the Disbarment complaint. Atty. I moved for the dismissal of the disbarment case. Will
the case be dismissed?
A12: No. The withdrawal of a disbarment case against a lawyer does not terminate or abate the jurisdiction
of the IBP and of this Court to continue an administrative proceeding against a lawyer respondent as a
member of the Philippine Bar. The complainant in a disbarment case is not a direct party to the case, but
a witness who brought the matter to the attention of the Court. [Quiachon v. Atty. Joseph Ador Ramos, A.C.
No. 9317 (2014)].

Q13: Atty. J was implicated as a principal by inducement in a high-profile murder case, but the case against
him was subsequently dropped. The OCA then initiated disbarment proceedings against him on the grossly
immoral conduct based on his implication in the murder case. Atty. J alleged that the OCA cannot initiate
the disbarment proceedings against him and asked that it be dismissed. Is Atty. J correct?
A13: No, Atty. J is not correct. Any interested person or the Court (through the OCA) motu proprio may
initiate disciplinary proceedings. The right to institute disbarment proceedings is not confined to clients
nor is it necessary that the person complaining suffered injury from the alleged wrongdoing. Disbarment
proceedings are matters of public interest and the only basis for the judgment is the proof or failure of proof
of the charges [Figueras vs Jimenez, A.C. No. 9116 (2014)].

Q14: Atty. K was suspended as a member of the Bar for 1 year. During his suspension, the JSYK Firm allowed
him to continue working in the office to help in the preparing and drafting pleadings and other legal
documents. He was not allowed to meet or have any direct contact with clients or was a signatory to any of
UP LAW BOC 5 of 16 LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
PRE-WEEK

the documents he helped prepared. The OCA found out about this and initiated disbarment proceedings
against Atty. K for illegal practice of law. Will the case prosper?
A14: Yes. The practice of law is any activity in or out of court which requires the application of law, legal
principle, practice, or procedure, and calls for legal knowledge, training, and experience [Cayetano vs.
Monsod, G.R. No. 100113 (1991)]. Based on this, the acts of Atty. K would constitute practice of law, which
is he not allowed to do because of his suspension.

Q15: Ms. U approached her friend Atty. L, complaining about how her current counsel Atty. M is mishandling
her complaint for damages because of the latters gross negligence. Thus, Ms. U asked Atty. L is he could
represent her instead. Should Atty. L accept the offer?
A16: No. Acceptance of Ms. Us case would constitute encroachment upon the professional employment of
another lawyer which is in violation of Rule 8.02, CPR. He can, however, advise Ms. U to terminate the
services of Atty. M and/or file an administrative case against Atty. M.

Q16: What are the main requirements for instituting disciplinary or disbarment proceedings against
attorneys?
A16: The requirements are:
1) a verified complaint stating clearly and concisely the facts complained of and;
2) affidavits of persons having personal knowledge of the facts therein alleged and/or by such documents
as may substantiate said facts.
Additional requirements for those initiated by the IBP Board of Governors:
1. Six (6) copies of the verified complaint shall be filed with the Secretary of the IBP or the Secretary
of any of its chapters and
2. Transmittal by the secretary of the IBP or chapter secretary to the IBP Board of Governors for
assignment to an investigator.
(Rule 139-B, as amended in Bar Matter No. 1960)

Q17: What are the grounds for suspension and disbarment?

A17: The grounds are given in Sec. 27, Rule 138
(1) Deceit
(2) Malpractice, or other gross misconduct in office any malfeasance or dereliction of
(3) duty committed by a lawyer
(4) Grossly immoral conduct
(5) Conviction of a crime involving moral turpitude
(6) Violation of oath of office
(7) Willful disobedience of any lawful order of a superior court
(8) Corruptly or willfully appearing as an attorney for a party to case without an authority to do so

However, this enumeration is not exclusive. A lawyer may be disciplined or suspended for any misconduct
in his professional or private capacity which shows him to be wanting in moral character.
UP LAW BOC 6 of 16 LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
PRE-WEEK

Q18: Mr. T filed a disbarment complaint against Atty. N. Mr. T alleged that 10 years prior, Atty. N seduced his
daughter, who was a minor then, and caused her trauma and anxiety. Atty. N moved for the dismissal of the
complaint saying it can no longer be prosecuted because the offense has already prescribed. Will the
complaint prosper?
A18: The complaint will prosper. Disbarment proceedings are imprescriptible. Unlike ordinary
proceedings, it is not subject to the defense of prescription. The ordinary statute of limitations has no
application to disbarment proceedings [Calo vs. Degamo, A.C. No. 516 (1967)].

Q19: What are the powers a notary public?

A19: A notary public can perform the following notarial acts:
1. Acknowledgments;
2. Oaths and affirmations;
3. Jurats;
4. Signature witnessings; and
5. Copy certifications (Sec. 1(a), Rule III, Notarial Rules).

A notary public is also authorized to Certify the affixing of signature by thumb or other mark on an
instrument or document presented for notarization [Sec. 1(b), Rule III, Notarial Rules]

Finally, a notary public is authorized to sign on behalf of a person who is physically unable to sign or make
a mark on an instrument or document [Sec. 1(c), Rule III, Notarial Rules]

Q20: Mr. S retained the services of Atty. O as counsel for his suit for judicial partition of co-owned properties
against Mr. R. In the course of the proceedings, Atty. O discovered that Mr. S was a homosexual (Mr. R was
actually his former boyfriend) and an atheist. Atty. O, who was a devout Catholic, filed a motion to withdraw
as counsel with Mr. Ss express consent, saying that he had unreconcilable differences with Mr. S. Rule on
the motion.
A20: The motion of Atty. O should be denied. He has no valid cause to terminate his services. The
unreconcilable differences he is invoking is solely based on his client being homosexual and atheist. Under
Rule 14.01, CPR, 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 the person.

Q21: State the lawyers oath.

A21: I, ___________________, do solemnly swear that I will maintain allegiance to the Republic of the
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 or willingly promote or sue any groundless, false or unlawful suit, nor give aid nor consent
to the same;
UP LAW BOC 7 of 16 LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
PRE-WEEK

I will delay no man for money or malice, and will conduct myself as a lawyer according to the best of my
knowledge and discretion with all good fidelity as well to the courts as to my clients; and

I impose upon myself this voluntary obligation without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion.

So help me God.

Q22: Mr. P engaged the services of Atty. Q and Atty. R as co-counsels in his suit for recovery of possession of
real property. In the course of the proceedings, a conflict as to what legal course is to be taken arose between
Atty. Q and Atty. R. Whose judgment should prevail?
A22: When lawyers jointly associated in a cause cannot agree as to any matter vital to the interest of the
client, the conflict of opinion should be frankly stated to the client for final determination. The clients
decision should be accepted unless the nature of the difference make it impractical for the lawyer whose
judgment was overruled to cooperative effectively. In such a case, said lawyer may withdraw his services
under par. (c), Rule 22.01.

Q23: Is a counsel liable to his client for damages because of his (the counsels) mistake?
A23: No, except when it was due to his inexcusable negligence. Under Rule 18.03, a lawyer shall not neglect
a legal matter entrusted to him and his negligence in connection therewith shall make him liable. There
must be a showing that had the lawyer exercised due diligence, the client under the facts and the law would
have succeeded in recovering from the adverse party or in resisting the claim of latter.

Q24: Who are exempted from complying with the MCLE requirements?
A24:
(1) The President and the Vice President of the Philippines, and the Secretaries and Undersecretaries of
Executives 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 the Judicial and Bar Council and incumbent court lawyers covered by the
Philippine Judicial Academy program of continuing judicial education
(4) The Chief State Counsel, Chief State Prosecutor and Assistant Secretaries of the Department of Justice
(5) The Solicitor General and the Assistant Solicitor General
(6) The Government Corporate Counsel, Deputy and Assistant Government Corporate Counsel
(7) The Chairmen 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 ten
years accredited law schools
(11) The Chancellor, Vice-Chancellor and members of the Corps of Professors and Professorial Lectures of
the Philippine Judicial Academy
UP LAW BOC 8 of 16 LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
PRE-WEEK

(12) Governors and Mayors

(13) Those who are not in law practice, private or public
(14) Those who have retired from law practice with the approval of the IBP Board of Governors

Q25: What is a notarial register?

A25: A notarial register refers to a permanently bound book with numbered pages containing a
chronological record of notarial acts performed by a notary public [Sec. 5, Rule II, Notarial Rules].

Q26: Describe how disciplinary proceedings against judges are initiated.

A26: Disciplinary proceedings against judges may be initiated:
(1) motu propio by the Supreme Court;
(2) upon the verified complaint, supported by affidavits of persons who have personal knowledge of the
facts alleged therein or by documents which may substantiate said allegations; or
(3) Upon an anonymous complaint, supported by public records of indubitable integrity.

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, the Rules of Court, or the Code of Judicial Conduct
[Sec. 1, Rule 140, ROC].

Q27: What is the difference between a charging lien and retaining lien?
A27: Retaining lien gives the lawyer the right to retain a clients money, property and documents which
have legally come into his possession until the attorney has been paid all his fees for all his services.
Charging lien gives the lawyer the right to charge a judgment for money and its execution with his fees for
services rendered. [Sec. 37, Rule 138]

Q28: Mr. AA, through his counsel Atty. BB, filed a collection suit. When Mr. AA retained Atty. BB, they did
not have an agreement as to Atty. BBs compensation. However, they agreed that Atty. BB would be paid
10% of whatever would be awarded to Mr. AA. However, Mr. AA lost the suit. Atty. BB is now asking Mr. AA
for payment of his attorneys fees. Mr. AA refuses to pay, saying that because he lost the suit and no award
was given him, Atty. BB is not entitled to any compensation. Atty. BB countered that he is entitled to
compensation on a quantum meruit basis. Who is correct?
A28: Mr. AA is correct. The parties entered into a contingency agreement wherein the manner by which the
attorney is paid is based on a contingent fee that is conditioned upon the securing of a favorable judgment
and recovery of money or property and the amount of which may be on a percentage basis. While
contingent fee contracts are subject to the supervision and close scrutiny of the court in order that clients
may be protected from unjust charges, it is a valid agreement [Masmud vs. NLRC, G.R. No. 183385 (2009)].

Q29: What are 2 concepts of attorneys fees? Differentiate.

A29: The 2 concepts of attorneys fees are 1) ordinary concept and 2) extraordinary concept. The ordinary
concept of attorney fees is the reasonable compensation paid to a lawyer for the legal services he has
rendered to a client; its basis of this compensation is the fact of employment by the client. On the other
hand, the extraordinary concept of attorneys fees is an indemnity for damages ordered by the court to be
UP LAW BOC 9 of 16 LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
PRE-WEEK

paid by the losing party to the prevailing party in litigation; its basis is any of the cases authorized by law
and is payable not to the lawyer but to the client unless they have agreed that the award shall pertain to
the lawyer as additional compensation or as part thereof.

Q30: Atty. CC represented Ms. DD in her complaint for damages against Mr. EE. After trial, judgment was
rendered in favor of Ms. DD. The decision became final and a writ of execution was subsequently issued. The
sheriff levied on Mr. EEs 500 sqm parcel of land. Pursuant to their contingent fee contract, Ms. DD executed
a deed of assignment in favor of Atty. CC of the said land. Is the assignment valid?
A30: Yes. The assignment to a lawyer of a portion of the property levied on by the sheriff for the satisfaction
of a judgment in favor of his client does not violate Art. 1491, NCC if the property was not involved in
litigation handled by the lawyer [Daroy vs. Abecia, A.C. No. 3046 (1998)]. In this case, the litigation where
Atty. CC is involved in is one for damages and the said land was not involved.

Q31: Ms. FF is the defendant in a case for recovery of real property. She retained Atty. GG as counsel. Ms. FF
lost in the trial court. Atty. GG seasonably filed a motion for reconsideration, but it was denied. Upon reading
the trial courts Decision and Resolution and going through the records of the case, Atty. GG was convinced
that the chances of getting a reversal was slim and difficult. Thus, he decided not to file an appeal without
informing Ms. FF. When Ms. FF found out, she filed a complaint for the discipline of Atty. GG. Atty. GG invokes
Rule 19.03, CPR as a defense, saying that it is within his exclusive control on whether or not an appeal as
regards should be filed. Is Atty. GG correct?
A31: Atty. GG is not correct. What is meant by Rule 19.03 is that matters of law (i.e. all the proceedings in
court to enforce the remedy, to bring the claim, demand, cause of action, or subject matter of the suit to
hearing, trial, determination, judgment, and execution) are within the exclusive control of the attorney
[Belandres vs. Lopez Sugar Central Mill, G.R. No. L-6869 (1955)]. This does not mean that the discretion on
whether or not an appeal should be taken is within the attorneys control. Such is a matter of substance --
An attorney may not impair, compromise, settle, surrender, or destroy them without his client's consent.
Even if the lawyer was honestly and sincerely protecting the interests of his client, he still does not have the
right to waive the appeal without the knowledge and consent of his client [Abay v. Montesino, A.C. No. 5718
(2003)]. Furthermore, Rule 18.04, CPR mandates that a lawyer shall keep the client informed of the status
of his case.

Q32: What are the requisites for the rule on privileged communication to apply between an attorney and a
client?
A32:
(1)The person to whom information is given is a lawyer.
(2) There is a legal relationship existing, except in cases of prospective clients
(3) Legal advice must be sought from the attorney in his professional capacity with respect to
communications relating to that purpose
(4) The client must intend the communication be confidential.
Q33: Atty. HHH resigned from WWF Firm and put up his own firm called WWE. Ms. JJ is a current client of
WWF Firm, when Atty. HHH was still part of said firm he never dealt with her directly or indirectly. Ms. JJ,
through WWF Firm, filed a suit against Ms. KK. Ms. KK sought to retain Atty. HHH. Can Atty. HHH accept the
case?
UP LAW BOC 10 of 16 LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
PRE-WEEK

A33: No. An attorney that resigned from a law firm to put up his own practice is prohibited from accepting
cases against clients of said law firm even if he has not personally handled the case of said client. The
professional employment of a law firm is equivalent to the retainer of the members thereof even though
only one of them is consulted; conversely, the employment of one member of a law firm is generally
considered as employment of the law firm [Agpalo (2004)]

Q34: Atty. II, on behalf of his client, filed a Complaint for Unlawful Detainer. In the pleading, he cited a
Supreme Court case to support his allegation and quoted a portion which he stated reflected the ratio
decidendi of the case. However, he knew that what he actually quoted was only an obiter dictum. May Atty. II
be disciplined?
A34: Yes. Rule 10.02, CPR expressly provides that a lawyer shall not knowingly misquote or misrepresent
the contents of a 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.

Q35: Mr. LL was being prosecuted for his alleged involvement in an illegal recruitment case. Atty. MM was
and is still Mr. LL. Atty. MM was called to the stand by the prosecution. The prosecutor asked him regarding
meetings he had with Mr. LL prior to the commission of the alleged illegal recruitment. Atty. MM invoked
privileged communication. Is the invocation proper?
A35: No, it was not proper. Atty. MM cannot invoke privileged communication. If the crime was committed
in the past, the privilege applies. If it is still to be committed, the privilege does not apply, because the
communication between a lawyer and his client must be for a lawful purpose or in furtherance of a lawful
end to be privileged [People vs. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 115439 (1996)].

Q36: Mr. OO retained the services of Atty. NN in his case for damages. In the trial court, judgment was
rendered against Mr. OO. Mr. OO, through Atty. NN, appealed. Pending resolution of the appeal, Atty. NN
figured into a car accident wherein he was seriously injured such that he had to stay in the hospital for 3
months to recover. Atty. NN thus withdrew from the case and Mr. OO had to retain the services of a new
attorney. Ultimately, judgment was rendered in favor of Mr. OO. Atty. NN is now seeking compensation for
his services. Mr. OO refused to pay, saying that because Atty. NN did not represent him until the finality of
his case, he was not entitled to any compensation. Is Mr. OO correct?
A36: No, Mr. OO is not correct. Atty. NN is entitled to compensation on a quantum meruit basis. One of the
circumstances that authorizes the grant of attorneys fees on the basis of quantum meruit is when the
counsel, for justifiable cause, was not able to finish the case to its conclusion. In this case, the serious
injuries that Atty. NN suffered causing him to be hospitalized for 3 months falls under par. d, Rule 22.01 as
a valid ground for withdrawing as counsel; thus, there was a justifiable cause for him not being able to
finish the case.

Q37: When can a client terminate the services of his/her counsel?

A37: A client can terminate the services of his/her counsel at any time, with or without cause, with or
without or even against the counsels consent. [Lim v. Villarosa, A.C. No. 5303 (2006)]
UP LAW BOC 11 of 16 LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
PRE-WEEK

Q38: Atty. PP entered his appearance as counsel for petitioner Ms. QQ in her case for specific performance
pending before the RTC. Ms. QQ, through her counsel Atty. RR, manifested that she did not authorize Atty.
PP to appear for her. Atty. PP then withdrew his appearance. She later filed a complaint for the suspension
of Atty. PP from the practice of law. Atty. PP replied that he only entered his appearance in Ms. QQs suit
because Ms. QQs husband, who was his college classmate, requested him to. Should Atty. RR be
suspended?
A38: No. Under Sec. 27, Rule 138, unauthorized appearance is a ground for suspension or disbarment only
if done corruptly or willfully. If he has acted in good faith, the complaint for suspension will fail [Garrido v.
Quisumbing, 28 SCRA 614 (1969)]. In this case, Atty. PP only entered his appearance to accommodate Ms.
QQs husbands request and he immediately withdrew upon Ms. QQs complaint. This shows that his
unauthorized appearance was done in good faith.

Q39: Atty. SS was retained as counsel by Ms. TT in a case where she was the defendant. It was agreed that
the compensation would be P20,000 plus P1,000 per appearance. After the petitioners presented their case,
Atty. SS filed a notice of withdrawal of appearance for Ms. TT on the ground that the latter refused his request
for an increase in his attorneys fee (from P20,000 to P30,000), which is the ordinary rate attorneys are paid
in their area. Is the ground for withdrawal valid?
A39: No, it is not valid. Rule 22.01, CPR provides that a lawyer may withdraw his service when his client
deliberately fails to pay for his services or fails to comply with the retainer agreement. This was not the case
here. Here, Ms. TT was only refusing to agree with the demand of Atty. SS for an increase in his fees, which
she has a right to do because she and Atty. SS entered into a contract whose terms cannot be altered
without her consent.

Q40: Mr. UU filed a disbarment complaint against his counsel Atty. VV on the ground that the latter was
convicted of estafa and violation of B.P. Blg. 22. While the disbarment proceedings were pending, the
President granted Atty. VV absolute pardon. Atty. VV then moved for the dismissal of the disbarment case.
Should the motion be granted?
A40: No, the motion should not be granted. An absolute pardon operates to wipe out the conviction and
the offense itself and thus, if the disbarment proceedings against a lawyer is based solely on the fact of
conviction, such proceedings will be barred [In re Atty. Saturnino Parcasio, A.M. No. 1000 (1976)]. However,
where the proceeding is founded on the professional misconduct involved in the transaction (which happen
to culminate in his conviction), the effect of the pardon is only to relieve him of the penal consequences of
his act, and thus, does not prevent the disbarment proceeding because such may constitute proof that the
lawyer does not possess good moral character [In re Marcelino Lontok (1922)]

Q41: After serving his/her period of suspension, is the suspended lawyer automatically allowed to engage in
the practice of law? Explain.
A41: No, the order of suspension of the lawyer must first be lifted. Upon expiration of the period of
suspension, the suspended lawyer should 1) file a sworn statement with the court, through the OBC, stating
that he/she has desisted from the practice of law and has not appeared in any court during the period of
his or her suspension, and 2) furnish the IBP local chapter and to the executive judge of the courts where
the said lawyer has pending cases, and/or where has appeared as counsel copies of the sworn statement.
[Maniago v. De Dios, A.C. No. 7472 (2010)].

Q42: What are the qualifications of a notary public?

UP LAW BOC 12 of 16 LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
PRE-WEEK

A42:
1. Must be a Filipino citizen
2. Must be over 21 years old
3. Must be a resident of the Philippines for at least 1 year
4. Must maintain a regular place of work or business in the city or province where com-mission is to
be issued
5. Must be a member of the Philippine Bar in good standing, with clearances from: The Office of the
Bar Confidant of the Supreme Court, and the IBP
6. Must not have been convicted in the first instance of any crime involving moral turpitude [Sec. 1,
Rule III, Notarial Rules]

Q43: What are the requirements for every practicing lawyer under the Rule on Mandatory Legal Aid Service?
A43: There are 2 requirements. The first is to render a minimum of 60 hours of free legal aid services to
indigent litigants in a year, spread within a period of twelve 12 months, with a minimum of 5 hours of free
legal aid services each month. The second is to coordinate with the Clerk of Court for cases where free legal
aid service may be done and obtain a certificate from the Clerk of Court attesting to the number of hours
spent rendering free legal aid services in a case.

Q44: Mr. XX, represented by Atty. WW, is the plaintiff in a civil case for damages. After trial, judgment was
rendered in favor of Mr. XX. Such judgment became final. Mr. YY, the defendant in the civil case, issued a
check for P1M payable to cash to satisfy the judgment; instead of delivering it to Mr. XX, Mr. YY delivered it
to Atty. WW. When Mr. XX demanded the check, Atty. WW refused to give it, saying that he was holding it to
secure payment of his attorneys fees. Subsequently, Atty. WW delivered P750k to Mr. XX, which the latter
duly received. The latter demanded the rest of the P1M, but Atty. WW refused, saying that he was entitled to
the rest. Mr. XX thus filed a complaint for disbarment against Atty. WW. Atty. WWs defense is that based on
his verbal contingent contract with Mr. XX, his attorneys fees would be 25% of whatever Mr. XX is going to
get from the suit, and thus, he had the right to keep the P250k from the P1M awarded to Mr. XX. Is Atty. WW
justified in retaining the said amount?
A44: No. Moneys collected by an attorney on a judgment rendered in favor of his client constitute trust
funds and must be immediately paid over to the client. This is pursuant to Canon 16 and Rule 16.01, CPR.
Here, Atty. WWs actions breached the trust reposed on him by Mr. XX and put his private and personal
interest before his clients. While under Rule 16.03 an attorney has a lien for fees on moneys in his hands
collected for his client, this does not relive him of his duty to promptly account for the moneys received; his
failure to do so constitutes professional misconduct. [Rayos vs Hernandez, G.R. No. 169079 (2007)]

Q45:. Ms. ZZ was having problems with informal settlers in her parcel of land in Batangas. Ms. ZZ went to
Atty. ABs office and asked her for advice on how the said settlers could be evicted. Atty. AB asked her
questions regarding the property, her title to it, and other information surrounding the situation. Atty. AB
then told her that she could file a case of forcible entry against the settlers. Ms. ZZ thanked Atty. AB and told
her to keep what she said between the two of them. Ms. ZZ, however, did not heed the advice of Atty. AB and
decided to just peacefully settle the matters with the settlers on her own. Is Atty. AB bound by the rule on
privileged communication?
A45: Yes. Ms. ZZ is considered a prospective client. Thus, the attorney-client privilege already attached,
pursuant to Rule 15.02, CPR.
UP LAW BOC 13 of 16 LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
PRE-WEEK

Q46: Is a contingent fee paid to a lawyer consisting partly in cash and partly of the property subject to
litigation valid?
A46: No, such agreement is void for being contrary to public policy. Any agreement by a lawyer to conduct
the litigation in his own account, to pay the expenses thereof or to save his client therefrom and to receive
as his fee a portion of the proceeds of the judgment is obnoxious to the law. The rule of the profession that
forbids a lawyer from contracting with his client for part of the thing in litigation in exchange for conducting
the case at the lawyers expense is designed to prevent the lawyer from acquiring an interest between him
and his client. [The Conjugal Partnership of the Spouses Vicente Cadavedo and Benita Arcoy-Cadavedo, G.R.
No. 173188, (2014)]

Q47: Atty. EF was the retained as the counsel of the private complainants in a case for arson. Ms. GH, one of
the suspects for the arson, while being detained by the police authorities, approached Atty. EF (not knowing
that he was the counsel for the private complainants) and ask for the latters help in securing her freedom.
Atty. EF allegedly told Ms. GH that she would be set free if she signed certain documents. Wanting to be set
free, she signed the documents, which turned out to be extrajudicial confessions. By virtue of these, Ms. GH
was charged with the arson. Eventually, the case as against Ms. GH was dismissed. Ms. GH then filed a
disbarment complaint against Atty. EF. Atty. EF put up the defense that it was Ms. GH who approached her
and asked her to draft the extrajudicial confessions. Is the defense of Atty. EF valid?
A47: No. The fact that it was Ms. GH who approached Atty. EF is of no moment; Atty. EF should not have
acceded to her request given the prohibition against representing conflicting interests under Rule 15.03,
CPR [Perez vs. dela Torre, A.C. No. 6160 (2006)]

Q48: What factors are taken into consideration charging reasonable compensation for an attorneys services?
A48: The factors are given in Rule 20.01, CPR as follows:
a) The time spent and the extent of the services 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 form 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

Q49: Ms. IJ, a businesswoman, sought the assistance of Atty. LM who, unknown to her, was a PAO lawyer, in
filing an action for damages against the Mr. OP. Atty. LM accepted attorneys fees from Ms. IJ. Subsequently,
Ms. IJ learned that Atty. LM was a PAO lawyer and filed a disbarment case against him. Can Atty. LM be
disciplined?
A49: Yes. Atty. LM violated Rule 18.01, CPR. Rule 18.01 states that a lawyer shall not undertake a legal
service which he knows or should know that he is not qualified to render. The prohibition on the private
UP LAW BOC 14 of 16 LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
PRE-WEEK

practice of profession of PAO lawyers disqualified Atty. LM from acting as Ms. IJs counsel. [Ramos vs.
Imbang, A.C. No. 6788, (2007)]

Q50: ST, a law student and officer of MVP Labor Union, entered his appearance as representative of a
member of the said union before the Labor Arbiter in a case for illegal dismissal, non-payment of wages, and
non-payment of ECOLA benefits. UV, counsel for the company, objected to STs appearance on the ground
that he is not a lawyer, and thus, his appearance is not authorized. Is UV correct?
A50: No, UV is not correct. Art. 228, Labor Code expressly authorizes non-lawyers to appear before the
NLRC or any Labor Arbiter in representation of their organization or members thereof.

Q51: Empire Legal Aid Clinic (ELAC) had posters along EDSA promoting their legal services and soliciting
fees for valid marriages, divorces, and/or annulments. A case was filed against ELAC to restrain them. ELAC
claims that its advertisements are not unethical. IS ELAC correct?
A51: No. The best advertising possible for a lawyer is a well-merited reputation for professional capacity
and fidelity to trust, which must be earned as the outcome of character and conduct. Generally advertising
or solicitation are not permitted except in reputable law lists and in a simple professional card. Taking into
consideration the nature and contents of the advertisements for which respondent is being taken to task,
which even includes a quotation of the fees charged for services rendered, the same cannot fall under any
of the above-mentioned exceptions. [Ulep v. Legal Clinic Inc., A.C. No. L-553, (1993)]

Q52: What is the difference between an Acknowledgment, an Oath or Affirmation, a Jurat, and a Witnessing?
A52:
Basic Definition Common Requisites
Represents to the notary public that (1) Appears in person before the
the signature was voluntarily affixed for notary public and presents an
Acknowledgment the purposes stated in the instrument integrally complete instrument or
and declares that instrument was document;
executed as a free and voluntary act
Avows under penalty of law to the
Oath or Affirmation (2) Is attested to be personally
whole truth [Sec. 2 (c), Rule II]
known to the notary public or
Sign the instrument and take an oath
or affirmation before the notary public identified by the notary public
Jurat through competent evidence of
as to such instrument [Sec. 6 (c), (d),
Rule II] identity as defined by the Notarial
Signature Signs the instrument in the presence of Rules
witnessing the notary public [Sec. 14 (c), Rule II]

Q53: Distinguish Grossly Immoral Conduct from Immoral Conduct

A53:
UP LAW BOC 15 of 16 LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
PRE-WEEK

Immoral Conduct Grossly Immoral Conduct

Acts that are willful, flagrant, or shameless, and
that show a moral indifference to the opinion of
the upright and respectable members of the
community
When it is so corrupt as to constitute a criminal act,
or so unprincipled as to be reprehensible to a high
degree, or when committed under such scandalous
or revolting circumstances as to shock the
communitys sense of decency
Penalty of disbarment

[Perez v. Catindig, A.C. No. 5816 (2015)]

Q54: What are the purposes of the IBP?

A54:
(1) To assist in the administration of justice;
(2) To foster and maintain on the part of its members high ideals of integrity, learning, professional
competence, public service and conduct;
(3) To safeguard the professional interest of its members;
(4) To cultivate among its members a spirit of cordiality and brotherhood;
(5) To provide a forum for the discussion of law, jurisprudence, law reform, pleading, practice and
procedure, and the relations of the bar to the bench and to the public, and publish information relating
thereto;
(6) To encourage and foster legal education;
(7) To promote a continuing program of legal research in substantive and adjective law, and make reports
and recommendations thereon. [Sec. 2, IBP By-Laws]

Q55: YY gave Atty. XX his prized Rolex Daytona for the purposes of pledging the watch to a bank. Atty. XX
pledged the watch as instructed. He then issued a check to YY to cover the proceeds from the pledge. The
check was dishonored for the reason Account Closed. Can Atty. XX be disciplined?
A55: Yes. A lawyer who borrows jewelry from his client in order to obtain and appropriate for himself the
proceeds from a pledge is liable under Rule 16.04 under Canon 16. . A lawyer shall not borrow money from
his client unless the clients interests are fully protected by the nature of the case or by independent advice
[Yu v. Dela Cruz, A.C. No. 10912, (2016)]

Q56: Outline the Procedure for Disbarment

A56:
UP LAW BOC 16 of 16 LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
PRE-WEEK

Institution either by:

(a) The Supreme Court, motu proprio, or

(b) The IBP Board of Governors, motu proprio or upon referral
by the Supreme Court or by a Chapter Board of Officers or
(c) Upon verified complaint by any person

6 copies of the verified complaint shall be filed

with the Secretary of the IBP or Secretary of any of
its chapter and shall be forwarded to the IBP
Board of Governors.

Investigation by the National Grievance

investigators.

Submission of investigative report to the IBP Board

of Governors.

Board of Governors decides within 30 days and

transmits decision to the SC within 10 days from
resolution

SC renders final decision for disbarment/

suspension/ dismissal.