Law Notes

CHANROBLES PROFESSIONAL REVIEW, INC.
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS &

PRACTICAL EXERCISES
BY: JUSTICE HECTOR L. HOFILEÑA
WWW.CHANROBLESBAR.COM
e s
ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : ChanRobles Professional Review, Inc.
b l
R o
n
A.PracticeofLaw
a a r
h B
C e s
1. Concept
b l
R o
Practiceoflawisnotanatural,propertyorconstitutionalrightbut
amereprivilegetobeextendedorwithheldintheexerciseofsound
a n
capriciouslytakenfromalawyer,withoutdueprocessoflaw.
a r
judicialdiscretion.Butitisarightinthesensethatitcannotbe
h B
C e s
b l
R o
a n a r
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
www.chanroblesbar.com : www.chanroblesbar.com.ph
e s
b l
R o
a n a r
h B
C e s
b l
2.Practiceoflawisaprofession
Practiceoflawisaprofession,aformofpublictrust,notabusiness,
R o
usingbargaincountermethodstoreapalargeprofit.Thegainingofa
n r
livelihoodisbutasecondaryconsideration.
a B a
C h s
l e
o b
R
a n a r
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
a n a r
h B
C
3.
s
Theprimarycharacteristicswhichdistinguish
e
l
thelegalprofessionfrombusinessare:
b
o
(1)adutyofpublicserviceofwhichemolutment
Isabyproduct; R
a n
(2)arelationasofficerofthecourttothe
a r
h
admiinistrationofjustice; B
C e s
(3)arelationtoclientinthehighestdegree
fiduciary; b l
R o
(4)arelationtocolleaguescharacterizedby
candorandfairness.
a n a r
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o *
a n a r
4.Practiceoflawgenerally– embracesanyactivityin
h B
oroutofcourt,whichrequirestheapplicationoflaw,
C e s
legalprinciple,practiceorprocedure,andcallsfor
Monsod,201SCRA210). b l
legalknowledge,trainingandexperience( Cayetano v.
R o
Itisnotlimitedtotheconductofcasesincourt.It
a n
includeslegaladviceandcounselling,andthe
a r
h
preparationoflegaldocumentsandcontractsby
B
C
whichlegalrightsaresecured(Ulep v.LegalClinic,
e s
Inc.,223SCRA378
b l
R o
a n a r
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
5.AppearanceofNonlawyersincourt
a n a r
h B
GeneralRule:Onlylawyersmayappearandhandlecasesincourt.
C a. Student Practice Rule (Rule e138A) s

Exceptions:
b. Nonlawyers authorized l
o b by the Supreme Court –
(1) In Municipal or Metropolitan Trial Courts, a person
may appear Rin a civil case by himself of through a
friend. n r
a B a
C h
(2) In municipalities where no lawyer is available, the MTC
may appoint a person of repute forsintegrity and
e
judge
l
competence to represent a party in a criminal
b
o
proceeding.
(3) In the RTC, a party may appear
R for himself (pro se) in .
(4) Small Claims cases. n r

civil cases.
a B a
C h s
l e
o b
R
n
e s
b l
R o
6. Public Officials and the practice of law
a n a r
h B
a) Prohibition or disqualification of former government attorneys
C (1) Under R.A. 6713 – retired
e s government officials are allowed to
retirement, they are not l
practice their profession, but for a period of one year after their
o b allowed to practice in the office where they

had previously been connected.
(2) Under then

R
Code of Professional Responsibility r
not, aftera leaving government service, acceptaengagement or
A lawyer may
h in connection with any matterBin which he had

C while in said service (Rule 6.03; s
employment
intervened
455 SCRA 526 ).
l e PCGG v. Sandiganbayan,
b
(3) Under the Judiciary Retiremento
R Act (R.A. 910) – retired members
a n
of the judiciary cannot appear as counsel in cases, civil, criminal or
administrative, where the government is the adverse party.
a r
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
a n a r
h B *
C (1)Prohibitedfrompracticing– s
e President,VicePresident,
(b)RestrictionsonPublicofficials.
b l
R o
Departmentsecretaries,judgesandjustices,prosecutors,
SolicitorGeneralandmembersoftheOSG,membersof
a n
ConstitutionalCommissions,GovernorsandMayors.
a r
h B
(2)Allowedtopracticebutsubjecttorestrictions–
C s
e Sanggunians,.
Senators,membersoftheHouseofRepresentatives,Vice
b
GovernorsandViceMayors,membersofthe l
R o
(3)Approvalofdepartmentheadrequired
employees(Catuv.Rellosa,AC5738,Feb.9,2008)
CivilService
a n a r
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
a n a r
h B *
C e s
7.ThreeconditionsbeforeaGOCCcanhireaprivate
b l
lawyer:(1)privatecounselcanonlybehiredin
o
exceptionalcases;(2)theGOCCmustfirstsecurethe
R
a n
writtenconformityandacquiescenceoftheOSGor
theOGCC,asthecasemaybe;and(3)thewritten a r
h B
C
concurrenceoftheCOAmustalsobesecured.(Vargas
e s
vs.Ignes,623SCRA1).Ifsuchconsentwasnot
b l
obtained,officialswhohiredprivatelawyersshallbe
R o
personallyliable(Laguesma vs.COA. G.R.No.
185544.January13,2015)
a n a r
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
a n a r
h
8.Rightsofalawyer
B
e s
C 2.Thefirstonetosetthemachineryofjusticeinmotion.
1.Topracticelawduringhislifetime.
b l
o
3.Presumptionofregularityinhisactions.
R
n r
st
4.Deemed1 gradeCivilServiceEligibleforallpositions
a
whereknowledgeoflawisrequired,and2
B a nd
gradeeligible
C h
foranyotherposition.
s
l e
5Consideredworthyoftrustandconfidenceofthepublic,a
leaderinthecommunity
o b
R
a n a r
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
n
Dutiesandresponsibilitiesofalawyer
a a r
h B
C e s
1.Sourcesofduties
b l
a.Constitution
R o
b.Statutes
a n a r
c.Jurisprudence
h B
C
d.Lawyer’sOath(Sec.3,Rule138)
e s
e.RulesofCourt
b l
f.CodesofConduct
R o
n
(1)CodeofProfessionalEthics
a a r
h
(2)CodeofProfessionalResponsibility
B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
n
DUTIESOFALAWYER
a a r
h B
s
C .DutiestoSocietyingeneral:
e
b l
Canon1 Alawyershalluphold theConstitution,
o
obey thelawsoftheland,andpromoterespectforthe
R
n
lawandlegalprocesses(CPR)
a a r
h B
C s
Alawyerassumesresponsibilitieswellbeyondthe
e
b l
basicrequirementsofgoodcitizenship.Asaservantof
thelaw,heshouldmakehimselfanexampleforothers
toemulate.
R o
a n a r
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
a n a
Rule1.01 Alawyershallnotengageinunlawful,r
hdishonest, immoral anddeceitful conduct. B
C e s
a.Unlawfulconduct– conductinviolationofthelaw,penalornot.
b l
b.Dishonestconduct– dispositiontolie,cheat,deceive,defraudorbetray.
o
c.Immoralconduct– conductwhichiswillful,flagrantorshameless,and
R
n r
whichshowsamoralindifferencetotheopinionsofgoodandrespectable
a a
membersofthecommunity.Grosslyimmoralactisonethatissocorruptor
B
h
falseastoconstituteacriminalactorsounprincipledordisgracefulastobe
C
reprehensibletoahighdegree
e s
b l
d.Deceitfulconduct proclivityforfraudulentanddeceptive
misrepresentation,artificeordeviceuseduponanother,tothedamageor
prejudiceofthelatter.
R o
a n a r
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
GabrielaCoronelVs.Atty.NelsonA.Cunanan
a n
A.C.No.6738.August12,2015 a r
h B
C e s
l
Facts:Respondentadvisedclientstoresortto“direct
b
R o
registration”tohaveinheritedpropertiesregisteredintheir
names,andaskedformoneytogivetotheRegisterofDeeds
n
forhiscooperation.Hefailedtorenderserviceandaccount
a a r
B
forthemoney.
C h
Held:Althoughtherespondentoutlinedtothecomplainants
l e
the“ordinaryprocedure”ofanextrajudicialsettlementof
b
estateasameansoftransferringtitle,healsoproposedthe
o
R
optionof“directregistration”despitebeingfullyawarethat
a n
suchoptionwasactuallyashortcutintendedtocircumvent
thelaw,andthuspatentlycontrarytolaw.Thetransfer
a r
underthelatteroption, h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
a n a r
h B
wouldbypasstheimmediateheirsoftheirgrandparents(i.e.,
s
C thecomplainant’sparentandhercoheirsparents),and
e
b l
consequentlydeprivetheGovernmentofthecorresponding
R o
estatetaxesandtransferfeesasidefromrequiringthe
falsificationofthetransferdocuments.Heassuredthathe
a n a r
couldenablethedirecttransferwiththehelpofhiscontactsin
h B
theOfficeoftheRegisterofDeedsandotherrelevantagencies
C s
oftheGovernment,whichmeantthathewouldbebribing
e
b l
someofficialsandemployeesofthoseoffices.Theproposalof
“directregistration”wasunquestionablyunlawful,immoraland
deceitfulallatonce.
R o
a n a r
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
GabinoV.TolentinoandFlordelizaC.TolentinoVs.Atty.
a n
HenryB.SoandAtty.FerdinandL.Ancheta a r
h
A.C.No.6387.July19,2016 B
C e s
b l
R o
Facts: Atty.Anchetawashiredafterthecomplainants’
appealhadalreadybeendecidedagainstthembytheCourt
a n
ofAppeals.Heassuredthemthathecouldstillfilea
a r
h
“motiontoreopenappealedcase”.Heaskedthemforan
B
C s
acceptancefeeofP40,000.00,andP200,000.00tobepaid
e
b l
toJusticesoftheCourtofAppeals.Theygavehimthesaid
amounts,buttheysubsequentlylearnedthatnomotion
R o
wasfiledintheCourtofAppealswhosedecisionhadalready
becomefinal.
a n a r
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
a n a r
Held:Atty.Ancheta'sdeceitandevasionofdutyismanifest.He
h B
s
acceptedthecasethoughheknewthefutilityofanappeal.
C e
l
DespitereceiptoftheP40,000.00acceptancefee,hedidnot
b
actonhisclient'scase.Moreover,heprevailedupon
o
R
complainantstogivehimP200,000.00purportedlytobeused
n
tobribetheJusticesoftheCourtofAppealsinordertosecure
a a r
h
afavorableruling,palpablyshowingthathehimselfwas
B
C e s
unconvincedofthemeritsofthecase."Alawyershallnot,for
b l
anycorruptmotiveorinterest,encourageanysuitor
proceedingordelayanyman'scause.”
R o
a n a r
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
n
ArnoldPacaoVs.Atty.SinamarLimos
a a r
h
A.C.No.11246.June14,2016
B
C e s
l
Facts:Inanactionforqualifiedtheftagainstthe
b
o
complainant’swife,respondentappearedascounselforthe
R
complainingcompany.Respondentconvincedthemto
n r
enterintoanamicablesettlementwithherclient.She
a a
negotiatedwiththemforanagreementwherebytheywill
B
C h
giveheraninitialamountofP200,000.00,andshewillgive
s
themareceiptandamotiontowithdrawthecharges.They
l e
gaveherthesaidamountandshegavethemareceipt,but
o b
toldthemthatshewillfilethemotiontowithdrawincourt.
Later,whentheycheckedwiththecourt,theylearnedthat
R
nomotionhadbeenfiled,thattherespondenthad
n
withdrawnascounselforthecomplainingcompany,andshe
a a r
B
wasnotauthorizedtoenterintoanamicablesettlement
withthem.
C h s
l e
o b
R
n
e s
b l
R o
a n a r
Held: Despite her two prior suspensions, still, Atty. Limos is
h B
once again demonstrating to this Court that not only is she
C e s
unfit to stay in the legal profession for her deceitful conduct
l
but is also remiss in following the dictates of the Court, which
b
o
has supervision over her. Atty. Limos‘ unwarranted obstinacy is
R
a great insolence to the Court which cannot be tolerated. The
n
Court does not hesitate to impose the penalty of disbarment
a a r
B
when the guilty party has become a repeat offender.
C h s
Considering the serious nature of the instant offense and in
l e
light of Atty. Limos' prior misconduct which grossly degrades
disbarment is warranted.
o b
the legal profession, the imposition of the ultimate penalty of
R
a n a r
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
a n a r
h B
C e s
Rule1.02 Alawyershallnotcounselorabet
b l
activitiesaimedatdefianceofthelaworatlessening
o
confidenceinthelegalsystem.
R
n
Shouldnotpromoteanorganizationknowntobeviolatingthe
a a r
h
laworengaginginadishonestscheme(InReTurrel,2Phil.
B
266),
C e s
2008). b l
SchemetofleeceOFWs(Yuvs.Atty.Palana,A.C.7747,July14,
R o
Lawyerwhoassistedinillegalrecruitmentofoverseasworkers
– Sebastianv.Calis,314SCRA`1
a n a r
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
a n a r
h B
C e s
b l
Rule1.03 Alawyershallnot,foranycorruptmotive
R o
orinterest,encourageanysuitorproceedingordelayany
n
man’scause(Rule1.03)
a a r
Aimedagainststirringuplitigation,barratryand
h B
C
ambulancechasing.
e s
b l
R o
a n a r
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
a n a r
h B
Rule1.04 Alawyershallencouragehisclientsto
s
C avoid,and/orsettleacontroversyifitwilladmitofa
e
fairsettlement.
b l
R o
n r
Heshouldbeamediatorforconcordandaconciliatorfor
a a
h B
compromiseratherthananinstigatorofcontroversyanda
C
predatorofconflict
s
(DeYsasivs.NLRC,231SCRA505).
e
b l
R o
a n a r
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
a n a r
B
*
C h s
Canon2 Alawyershallmakehisservicesavailableinan
l e
efficientandconvenientmannercompatiblewiththe
b
independence,integrityandeffectivenessofthelegalprofession.
o
R
1.Rule2.01– Alawyershallnotreject,exceptforvalidreasons,
n
thecauseofthedefenselessoroppressed.
a a r
h
a.Butheshouldnotacceptmorecasesthanhecanhandle,
B
C
Canoy v. Ortiz, 453 SCRA 410).
e s
l
2.Rule2.02– Insuchcases,evenifthelawyerdoesnotaccepta
b
o
case,heshallnotrefusetorenderlegaladvicetotheperson
R
concernedifonlytotheextentnecessarytosafeguardthelatter’s
rights.
a n a r
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
a n a r
B
3.Rule2.03 Alawyershallnotdoorpermittobedoneany
C h s
actdesignedprimarilytosolicitlegalbusiness.
l e
a.Formingapartnershipwithanunauthorizedpersonforthe
o b
solicitationofclients(TanTekBengv.David,126SCRA289; b.
Enticingclientsofanotherlawyertotransfertheircasestohim
R
n r
foraconsideration( Linsanganvs.Tolentino,A.C.6672,Sept.4,
2009)
a B a
C h s
l e
4.Rule2.04– Alawyershallnotchargerateslowerthanthose
b
customarilyprescribedunlessthecircumstancessowarrant.
o
R
(Toavoidcutthroatcompetition,acommercialactivity)
a n a r
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
n r
CommunityLegalAidServiceRule
a
A.M.No.170309SC
B a
h s
C Rationale– lawyersarechargedwiththedutytogive
l e
o b
meaningtotheguaranteeofaccesstoadequatelegal
R
assistanceunderArt.III,Sec.11ofthe1987Constitutionby
n r
makingtheirlegalservicesavailabletothepublicinan
a a
B
efficientandconvenientmannercompatiblewiththe
C h s
independence,integrityandeffectivenessoftheprofession.
l e
b
Coveredlawyers– thosewhohavepassedtheannualBar
o
R
Examinationsstartingwiththe2017Barexamination.
a n a r
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
a n a r
Requirements– coveredlawyersarerequiredtorender120hourofpro
B
bonolegalaidservicestoqualifiedpartieswithinthefirstyearof
C h
admissiontotheBar.
s
l e
o b
Exemptions– (a)lawyerswiththeexecutiveandlegislativebranchesofthe
governmentatleast6monthsbeforeadmisiontotheBar,(b)those
R
employedafteradmissionwiththejudiciary,PublicAttorney’sOffice,
a n
NationalProsecutionOffice,OSG,OGCC,andOmbudsman,©thosewho
a r
havecompletedclinicallegaleducationprogramundertheStudentPractice
h B
Rule,(d)laywerswhohaveworkedforatlest1yearinlawfirmsofferingpro
C e s
bonolegalservicesorregularlyacceptingcounseldeoficioappointments,
b l
(e)thosewhohaveworkedformorethan1yearasstaffinaLawSchool
legalaidofficeorPublicInterestLawGroup,()thosewhohaveworkedwith
interestcases.
R o
lawyersforPublicLawGroupsformorethanoneyearandhavefiledpublic
a n a r
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
a n a r
h B
e s
C personsoflimitedmeans,(iii)individuals,groupsofoganizationsrendered
Qualifiedpartiesorlitigants:(i)indigentpartyorpauperlitigant,(ii)other
b l
o
unabletosecurefreelegalassistancebyreasonofconflictofintereston
R
theartofgovernmentprovidedlegalassistancethroughthePAO,and(iv)
n r
publicinterestcasesthathavessocietalimpactthatotherwisewouldnotbe
a a
capableofsecuringlegalassistancebyreasonofinabilityofotherlawyers,
B
h
lawfirms,orgovernmentoffices,includingPAO.
C e s
b l
R o
a n a r
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
a n a r
Canon 3 – A lawyer In making known his legal services, use
h B
only true, honest, fair, dignified and objective information
C a.
e s
Allowable advertisements – calling cards and
b l
announcements in technical journals (ULEP vs. Legal Clinic, Inc.
223 SCRA 376)
R o
n r
Rule 3.01 – A lawyer shall not use any false, fraudulent,
a
misleading, deceptive, undignified, selflaudatory or unfair
B a
C h
statement or claim regarding his qualifications or legal services.
s
e
a. Lawyer advertising himself as a “specialist in annulment of
l
marriage, improper. (Khan v. Simbillo, 409 SCRA 209)
o b
R
a n a r
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
a n a r
B
Rule 3.02 – In the choice of a firm name, no false, misleading or assumed
C h s
name shall be used. The continued use of the name of deceased partner is
said partner is deceased.

l e
permissible provided that the firm indicates in all its communications that
o b
a. Use of foreign firm name not allowed (Dacanay v. Baker & McKenzie,
R
A.C. Case No. 2131, May 10, 1985)
a n a r
h B
Rule 3.03 – When a partner accepts public office, he shall withdraw from
C s
the firm and his name shall be dripped from the firm name unless is
allowed to practice law concurrently
l e
o b
Rule 3.04 –A lawyer shall not pay or give anything of value to
R
representatives of the mass media in anticipation of or in return for
a n
publicity to attract legal business (Rule 3.04)
a r
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
a n a r
* Canon 4 A lawyer shall participate in the development
h B
of the legal system by initiating or supporting efforts in law
C e s
reform and in the improvement of the administration of
justice .
b l
R o
* Canon 5 A lawyer shall keep abreast of legal
a n
developments, participate in continuing legal education
a r
h
programs, support efforts to achieve high standards in law
B
C s
schools as well as in the practical training of students and
e
assist in disseminating the law and jurisprudence.
b l
R o
a n a r
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
a n
MandatoryContinuingLegalEducation a r
h B
C e s
1. Purpose: to ensure thatb
l
law and jurisprudence;o
members of the bar keep abreast with
R of the practice of law.
maintain the ethics of the profession; and
n r
enhance the standards
a B a
C h
2. Requirements:
s
36 hours of MCLE every three years: 6 hours for
legal ethics,
l e in substantive
4 hours to trial and pretrial skills,
alternative dispute resolution, 9 hours to updates
5 hours to
o b
and procedural laws, 4 hours to legal writing
hours to international law and international
and oral advocacy , 2
conventions, 6 hours
to subject as may be prescribed byR the MCLE committee.
a n a r
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
3.Exemptions:
a n
a. President and VicePresident, Secretaries and
a r
h
Undersecretaries of Executive Departments,
B
C e s
b. Senators and Members of the House of Representatives,
b l
c. Chief Justice and Associate Justices of the Supreme Court,
R o
incumbent and retired members of the judiciary, incumbent
members of the Judicial and Bar Council, incumbent court
a n
lawyers covered by the Philippine Judicial Academy,
a r
h
d. Chief State Counsel, Chief State Prosecutor, and Assistant B
C
Secretaries of the Department of Justice,
e s
b l
e. Solicitor General and Assistant Solicitor General,
o
f. Government Corporate Counsel, Deputy and Assistant
R
n r
Government Corporate Counsel,
a
g. Chairmen and Members of Constitutional Commissions.
Ba
C h s
l e
o b
R
n
e s
b l
R o
a n a
h. The Ombudsman, overall Deputy Ombudsman, Deputy r
h B
Ombudsman and Special Prosecutor of the Office of the
C e s
Ombudsman and Special Prosecutor of the Office of the
Ombudsman,
b l
functions,
R o
i. Heads of government agencies exercising quasijudicial
a n
j. Incumbent deans, bar reviewers and professors of law who
a r
h
have teaching experience for a lest ten years in accredited law
B
schools.
C e s
b l
k. The Chancellor, ViceChancellor and members of the Corps
Judicial Academy,
R o
of Professors and Professorial Lecturers of the Philippine
a n a r
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
a nl.Governorsandmayors, a r
h B
C s
m.Thosewhoarenotinlawpractice,privateor
e
public.
b l
R o
n.Thosewhohaveretiredfromlawpractice
approvedbytheIBPBoardofGovernors.
a
o.Goodcause.n a r
h B
C e s
b l
R o
a n a r
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
n r
VirgilioJ.Mapalad,Sr.vs.Atty.AnselmoS.Echanez
a a
h
A.C.10911,June6,2017
B
C e s
l
Facts:Inseveralpleadingsfiledincourt,respondentindicated
b
R o
SeveralMCLEComplianceNo.withoutindictingthedatethereof.
UponinquirywiththeMCLEOffice,itwasdiscoveredthathehas
n
notcompliedwithanyMCLErequirementatall.
a a r
h B
Held:InrepeatedlyusingfalseMCLEnumbersinhispleadings
C s
filedincourt,therespondentactedinmanifestbadfaith,
e
l
dishonestyanddeceit.Hemisledthecourts,litigants,hisown
o b
clientsincluded,professionalcolleaguesandallotherswho
dependedonsuchpleadingsforinformation.Hemademockery
R
ofthisCourt.Hehadalreadybeensanctionedbythecourttwice.
DISBARRED.
a n a r
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
Canon6– Thesecanonsshallapplytolawyersin*
a n a
governmentserviceinthedischargeoftheirofficial r
h
tasks. B
C e s
l
Rule6.01– Theprimarydutyofalawyerengagedinpublic
b
R o
prosecutionisnottoconvictbuttoseetoitthatjusticeis
done.Thesuppressionoffactsortheconcealmentof
n
witnessescapableofestablishingtheinnocence3ofthe
a a r
B
accusedishighlyreprehensibleandiscausefordisciplinary
action
C h s
l e
“Prosecutorsrepresentasovereignwhoseobligationtogovern
o b
impartiallyisascompellingasitsobligationtogovernatall;andwhose
interest,therefore,inacriminalcaseisnotthatitshallwinacase,but
R
thatjusticeshallbedone.”(Suarezvs.Platon,69Phil.556)
a n a r
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
a n a r
h B
s
CRule6.02– Alawyerinthegovernmentserviceshall
e
b l
notusehispublicpositiontopromoteoradvancehis
o
privateinterests,norallowthelattertointerferewith
hispublicduties. R
a n a r
B
Appliestolawyersingovernmentservicewhoareallowedby
C h s
lawtoengageinprivatepractice,andtothosewho,though
l e
prohibitedfromengaginginprivatepractice,havefriends,
oflaw.
o b
formerassociates,andrelativeswhoareintheactivepractice
R
a n a r
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
a n a r
h B
C e s
l
Rule6.03–Alawyershallnotafterleavinggovernment
b
R o
service,acceptengagementoremploymentinconnection
withanymatterinwhichhehadintervenedwhileinthesaid
service.
a n a r
h B
“Matter”means“anydiscrete,isolatableactaswellasidentifiable
C s
transactionorconductinvolvingaparticularsituationandspecificparty
e
l
andnotmerelynactofdrafting,enforcingorinterpretinggovernmentor
law”.
o b
agencyprocedures,regulationsorlaws,orbriefingabstractpriociplesof

R
“intervene”onlyincludes“anactofapersonwhohasthepowerto
n
influencethesubjectproceedings”(PCGGvs.Sandiganbayan,455SCRA
a a r
B
526)
C h s
l e
o b
R
n
e s
b l
R o
Ma.CeciliaClarissaC.AdvinculaVs.Atty.LeonardoC.
n
Advincula
a a r
h
A.C.No.9226.June14,2016
B
C e s
b l
R o
Facts:Asalastnote,Atty.Advinculamanifestedinhis
compliancedatedFebruary26,2013thathehad
a n
immediatelyacceptedtheresolutionoftheIBPBoardof
a r
h
Governorssuspendinghimfromthepracticeoflawfortwo
B
C
months(forimmoralconductbeforehebecamealawyer,as
e s
b l
finalandexecutory;thathehadthengoneonleavefrom
workintheNBIfortwomonthsstartinginNovemberand
R o
lastinguntiltheendofDecember,2012;andthatsuchleave
aLegalOfficeroftheNBI.
a n
fromworkinvolvedrefrainingfromperforminghisdutiesas
a r
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
a n a r
h B
Held:Aleaveofabsencewillnotsuffice.Thisissoconsidering
s
C thathispositionmandatedhimtobeamemberofthe
e
b l
PhilippineBaringoodstanding.Thesuspensionfromthe
R o
practiceoflawwillnotbeapenaltyifitdoesnotnegatehis
continuanceinofficefortheperiodofthesuspension.Ifthe
a n a r
ruleisdifferent,thisexerciseofreprobationofanerringlawyer
h B
bytheCourtisrenderedinutileandbecomesamockery
C s
becausehecancontinuetoreceivehissalariesandother
e
l
benefitsbysimplygoingonleaveforthedurationofhis
suspensionfromthepracticeoflaw. b
R o
(Suspendedfor3months)
a n a r
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
n r
RonaldoC.FacturanVs.ProsecutorAlfredoL.Barcelona,Jr.
a a
h
A.C.No.11069.June8,2016
B
C e s
l
Facts:Apublicprosecutordelayeddecisionofacaseby
b
hidingtherecords.
R o
Held:Indeed,respondent'sactionsandomissionsinthis
a n
case,i.e.,hisfailuretoresolveLS.No.04211andtoturn
a r
h
overthecaserecordsthereofdespiteorderstodoso,
B
C
appeartohavebeencommittedforthebenefitofandto
e s
b l
safeguardprivateinterests.Asalawyerwhoisalsoapublic
officer,respondentmiserablyfailedtocopewiththestrict
R o
demandsandhighstandardsofthelegalprofession.
a n a r
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
n
Atty.RutilloB.PasokVs.Atty.FelipeG.Zapatos
a a r
h
A.C.No.7388.October19,2016
B
C e s
l
Facts:AretiredRTCjudgeappearedascounselinacasethat
b
allegedpoverty.
R o
hepresidedoverwhenstillanMCTCjudge.Hepleaded
n
Held:Therespondent,inhiscapacityasthejudgeofthe
a a r
h
MCTCofTangubCity,presidedoverthecasebefore
B
C s
eventuallyinhibitinghimselffromfurtherproceedings.His
e
b l
actofpresidingconstitutedinterventionwithinthemeaning
oftherule(Rule6.03)whosetextdoesnotmentionthe
R o
degreeorlengthoftheinterventionintheparticularcaseor
matter.
a n a r
h B
Suspendedforonemonth.
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
n
ArthurG.Monaresvs.Atty.LeviS.Munoz
a a r
h
A.C.No.5582,January24,2017
B
C e s
l
Facts:RespondentwasappointedProvincialLegalOfficerof
b
o
Albayin1995.Hewasallowedtocontinuepracticinglawby
R
GovernorBicharaandDILGSecretaryAlunan,subjecttothe
n r
condition,amongothers,thatnogovernmenttimeshallbe
a a
usedinconnectionwithsuchpractice.Theconsentofthe
B
C h
Governorwasrenewedtwice,aftereachreelectionofthe
s
Governor.TheconsentoftheDILGSecretarywasnot
l e
renewed,butassumedtobevaliduntilrevoked.
o b
Complainantschargedhimwithunlawfullyengagingin
privatepracticeoflaw.Hehadpreviouslybeendisciplined
R
bytheOmbudsmanforunlawfulpracticeoflaw,and
n
convictedbytheMunicipalTrialCoourtforviolationof
a a r
B
R.A.6713.
C h s
l e
o b
R
n
e s
b l
R o
a n a r
h B
Held.Consideringthatrespondentappearedincourtatleast88
C e s
timesinhandling30casesfromApril1996toAugust2001,itis
b l
obviousthatheusedgovernmenttime{40hoursaweek)inhis
privatepractice.Heshouldhavealsoobtainedrenewalsofthe
R o
consentoftheDILGSecretary.
a n a r
h
(Suspendedforthreeyears)
B
C e s
b l
R o
a n a r
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
n r
2.Dutiestothelegalprofession.*
a a
h B
C s
Canon7– Alawyershallatalltimesupholdthe
e
b l
integrityanddignityofthelegalprofessionand
supporttheactivitiesoftheIntegratedBar.
R o
n
IntegratedBarofPhilippines
a a r
h B
C e s
(1)IntegrationoftheBaristheofficialunificationofthe
b l
entirelawyerpopulationordainedbytheSupremeCourton
o
January16,1973.
R
a n
(2)IntegrationoftheBarisconstitutional(InreIntegration,
a r
49SCRA22)
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
a n a r
h B
C e s
b l
(3)ObjectivesoftheIBP:toelevatestandardofthelegal
profession,improvetheadministrationofjustice,enable
o
Bartodischargeitspublicresponsibilitymoreeffectively.
R
a n
(4).PurposesoftheIBPinclude:
a r
h B
C e s
(a)toassistintheadministrationofjustice
b l
(b)fosterandmaintainhighidealsofintegrity,learning,
conduct
R o
professionalcompetence,publicserviceand
amongitsmembers,n r
a B a
C h s
l e
o b
R
n
e s
b l
R o
a n a r
h B
C s
(c)tosafeguardtheprofessionalinterestsofitsmembers,
e
b l
(d)Tocultivateamongitsmembersaspiritofcordialityand
brotherhood,
R o
a n a r
B
(e)Toprovideaforumfordiscussionoflaw,jurisprudence,law
h
C s
reform,pleading,practiceandprocedure,andtheBartothe
Benchandthepublic,
e
b l
o
(f)Toencourageandfosterlegaleducation,
R
a n a r
B
(g)Topromoteacontinuingprogramoflegalresearchandmake
h
reportsandrecommendationsthereon.
C s
l e
o b
R
n
e s
b l
R o
a n a r
B
(5)MembershipintheIBPisobligatoryonalllawyers.A
C h s
memberingoodstandingwhois75yearsoldorwhohas
e
beenlawyerfor40yearsorisunabletopracticelawdueto
l
b
physicaldisabilityorjudiciallyadjudgedmentalincapacity,
o
mayberetiredfromtheIBPuponpetitiontotheBoardof
R
Governors.
a n
(6)EverymemberoftheIntegratedBar,eventhoseabroad,
shallpayannualduesfixedbytheBoardofGovernors. a r
h
Failuretopayduescanbeagroundforsuspensionand/or B
C
disbarment(InreEdillon,84SCRA554).
e s
b l
(7)Nonpaymentofduesisnotexcusedby“limitedpracticeof
SCRA529)
R o
law”and“seniorcitizen’sdiscount”(Santosvs.Llamas,322
a n a r
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
n r
Rule 7.01 – A lawyer shall be answerable for knowingly making a
a a
h B
false statement or suppressing a material fact in application for
C s
admission to the bar. (In re Lanuevo, 66 SCRA 245, Diao vs.
e
l
Martinez, 7 SCRA 475.
b
Rule 7.02 – A lawyer shall not support the application of any
o
R
person known to be unqualified. In respect to character,
n
education or other relevant attribute.
a a r
B
Rule 7.03 – A lawyer shall not engage in conduct that adversely
C h s
affects his fitness to practice law, nor shall he, whether in
l e
public or private life, behave in a scandalous manner to the
o b
discredit of the legal profession. (Guevarra v. Eala, AC 7136,
August 2007, Nelson Valdez vs. Atty. Antolin Dabon, Jr. A.C. No.
7353, November 16, 2015). R
a n a r
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
n r
IntestateEstateofJoseUyVs.Atty.PacificoM.Maghari
a
A.C.No.10525.September1,2015
B a
h s
C Facts:Inseveralpleadingsfiledinintestateestatecase,respondentfiled
l e
o b
pleadingswithcontactdetails(rollofattorneynumber,IBPnumber,PTR,
R
MCLEcompliance,ofanotherlawyer.
a n a r
Held:Respondentdidnotmerelycommiterrorsingoodfaith.Thetruth
isfarfromit.First,respondentviolatedclearlegalrequirements,and
h B
indicatedpatentlyfalseinformation.Second,thewayhedidso
C s
demonstratesthathedidsoknowingly.Third,hedidsorepeatedly.
e
l
Beforeoureyesisapatternofdeceit.Fourth,theinformationheused
o b
wasshowntohavebeenappropriatedfromanotherlawyer.Notonly
washedeceitful;hewasalsolarcenous.Fifth,hisactnotonlyof
R
usurpinganotherlawyer’sdetailsbutalsoofhisrepeatedlychanging
n
informationfromonepleadingtoanotherdemonstratestheintentto
r
thestandardsoflegalpractice.a a
mockandridiculecourtsandlegalprocesses.Respondenttoyedwith
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
a n a r
Noamountoffeignedignoranceandadhominemattackson
h B
complainantcannegatethegravityofrespondent’sactions.His
C e s
insolentandmockingviolationofstatutoryandregulatory
l
requirementsisaviolationofhisdutiestosocietyandto
b
o
courts.Hisswipingofanotherlawyer’sinformationisa
R
violationofhisdutiestothelegalprofession.Theunnecessary
n
risksthathefoiledonhisclientasapossibleresultof
a a r
B
deficientlysignedpleadingsviolatehisdutiestohisclient.Thus,
C h s
respondentdidnotonlyactinadeceitfulmannerandviolate
thesolemnoathhetooktobeadmittedintothelegal
l e
ProfessionalResponsibility.
o b
profession;healsoviolatedeverysinglechapteroftheCodeof
R
n r
(Suspendedfor2years.)
a Ba
C h s
l e
o b
R
n
e s
b l
R o
CherylE.VascoTamarayvs.Atty.DeborahZ.Daquiz
a n
A.C.No.10868,January26,2016 a r
h B
C e s
b l
Facts:Respondentconvincedcomplainantnottoopposeapetitionfor
annulmentofmarriagetobefiledbyherhusband.Butthepetitionfiled
R
respondentashercounsel.o
bytherespondentwasoneallegedlyfiledbythecomplainant,withthe
n r
Held:ThecourtfindsthatrespondentviolatedCanons1,7,10and17of
a a
B
theCodeofProfessionalResponsibility.
h s
Canon1byfilingacomplaintwithcomplainantastheplaintiffand
C
respondentashercounsel,whichisfalse.
l e
Canon7byallowingaforgedsignaturetobeappliedtoafalsecomplaint
shepreparedandnotarized.
o b
R
Canon10,bybeinguntruthfultothecourt.
a n
Canon17,forappearingascounselforthecomplainantagainstthe
interestofherrealclient,thecomplainant’shusband.
a r
DISBARRED
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
a n a r
Canon8.Alawyershallconducthimselfwithcourtesy,
fairnessandcandortowardsprofessionalcolleagues,and
h B
avoidharassingtacticsagainstopposingcounsel.
C e s
b l
Rule8.01.Alawyershallnotuseabusive,offensiveand
R o
improperlanguage(abogadongpolpol– Noblevs.Aty.Ailes,
n
A.C.No.10628,July1,2015).
a a r
h B
C s
Rule8.02.Alawyershallnot,directlyorindirectly,encroach
e
b l
ontheprofessionalemploymentofanotherlawyer.,however,
itistherightofanylawyer,withoutfearorfavor,togive
R o
properadviceandassistancetothoseseekingreliefagainst
unfaithfulorneglectfulcounsel.
a n a r
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
a n a r
h B
s
C a.Alawyershallnotinanywaycommunicateuponthesubject
e
b l
ofcontroversywithapartyrepresentedbycounsel,muchless
R o
shouldheundertaketonegotiateorcompromisethematter
withhim,butshoulddealonlywithhiscounsel(Canon9,
n r
CanonsofProfesionalEthics,CamachovPagulayan,328SCRA
a a
631
h B
C e s
b.Enticingclientsofanotherlawyertotransfertheircasestohis
l
office,forafee(Linsanganv.Tolentino,AC6672,Sep.4,200)–
b
R o
a n a r
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
a n a r
Canon9– Alawyershallnot,directlyorindirectly,assist.inthe
h
unauthorizedpracticeoflaw.
B
C e s
Rule9.01 Alawyershallnotdelegatetoanyunqualified
b l
persontheperformanceofanytaskwhichbylawmayonlybe
R o
performedamemberofthebaringoodstanding.
a.Lawyermaynotauthorizesecretarytosignpleadings.
a n a r
(Tapayvs.Atty.Bancolo,A.C.No,9804,March20,1013)or
h B
delegatedutyofexaminingdocumentsfornotarization(Angvs.
C
Gupana,A.C.4545,Feb,5,2014)
e s
associate,alawyerundersuspension. b
l
b.Alawyerisprohibitedfromtakinginasapartneror
R o
c.Dutystartswithoneself(InRe:PetitiontoSignontheRoll
a n
ofAttorneys,MichaelA.Medado,Petitioner,B.M.No.2540,
a r
September24,2013.
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
a n a r
h B
Rule9.02– Alawyershallnotdivideorstipulatetodividea
C e s
feeforlegalserviceswithpersonsnotlicensedtopractice
law,except:
b l
o
a.Whenthereisapreexistingagreementwith
R
partnerorassociatethat,uponthelatter’sdeath,money
a n
shallbepaidoverareasonableperiodoftimetohisestate
ortopersonsspecifiedintheagreement. a r
h B
C b.wherethelawyerundertakestocomplete
e s
unfinishedbusinessofdeceasedlawyer.
b l
R o
c.Wherealawyerorlawfirmincludesnonlawyer
employeesinaretirementplanevenifheplanisbasedin
a n
wholeorinpartonaprofitsharingagreement. a r
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
3.DutiestotheCourt
a n a r
h B
Canon10.Alawyerowescandor,fairnessandgoodfaithto
C thecourt.
e s
b l
Rule10.01– Alawyershallnotdoanyfalsehoodnorconsenttothe
doingofanyincourt;norshallhemisleadthecourtbyanyartificeofallow
o
thecourttobemisled.
R
a.Allegingfalsedateofreceiptofcourtdecision– Pereav.Almado,
n r
399SCA322)
a a
b.Allegingviolationofpatentwhichhasalreadyexpired(Sonic
B
C h
SteelIndustries,Inc.vs.Atty.Chua,A.C.No.6042,July1,2013)
s
e
c.Doesnotincludeobligationtoallegefactsconstitutingadefensefor
l
theadverseparty(Fernandezv.DeRamosVillalon,A.C.7552,Nov.22,
b
2006).
Tamarayvs.Atty.DeborahZ.Daquiz(
A.C.No.10868,January26,2016 R o
d.AppearingascounselforapartywithoutauthorityCherylE.Vasco
a n
e.IntestateEstateofUyvs.Atty,PacificoMaghari,AC.No.10525.
a r
B
September1,2015)
C h s
l e
o b
R
n
e s
b l
R o
a
n a r
h B
Rule10.02–Alawyermustmotknowinglymisquoteor
s
C argumentofopposingcounsel,orthetextofadecisionor
misinterpretthecontentsofthepaper,thelanguageorthe
e
b l
authority,orknowinglyciteasalawprovisionalreadyrendered
o
inoperativebyrepealoramendment,orassertasafactthat
R
n r
whichhasnotbeenproved.
a B a
a.“Copywordforword,quotationmarkbyquotationmark”(InsularLife
h s
AssuranceCo.Ltd.EmployeesAssociationvs.InsularLifeAssuranceCo.,Ltd.,
C e
37SCRA244)
b l
Rule10.03.Alawyershallobservetherulesofprocedureand
o
shallnotmisusethemtodefeattheendsofjustice.
R
n r
a.Employingdilatorytacticstopreventenforcementofafinaljudgment
a
(Salabanvs.Atty.Villaruel,A.C.No.8084.August24,2015).
B a
C h s
l e
o b
R
n
e s
b l
R o
A.C.No.7325.January21,2015
a n a r
Dr.DomicianoF.Villahermosa,Sr.Vs.Atty.IsidroL.
h
Caracol B
C e s
l
Facts:Respondentappearedforlandownerinanagrarian
b
R o
case.Subsequently,heaskedforawritofexecution,
withoutstatingthathisclientalreadydied.
n
Held: However, Atty. Caracol knew that Efren had already
a a r
h
passed away at the time he filed the Motion for Issuance of
B
C
Second Alias Writ of Execution and Demolition. As an
e s
b l
honest, prudent and conscientious lawyer, he should have
informed the Court of his client’s passing and presented
R o
authority that he was retained by the client’s successorsin
a n
interest and thus the parties may have been substituted.
a r
B
(Suspendedfor1year)
C h s
l e
o b
R
n
e s
b l
R o
n r
A.C.No.5116,April13,2015
a a
DavaoImportDistributors,Inc.vs,Atty.JohnnyLandero
B
C h s
l e
o b
Facts:Respondentrepresentedcomplainantinan
R
a n
actionforreplevinintheMTC.Thecomplaintwas
a r
dismissedduetoplaintiff’sfailuretoappearatthe
h B
C s
pretrial.ThedecisionwasaffirmedbytheRTC.
e
b l
Respondentfiledamotionforextensionoftimeto
fileanappealtotheCA,butinhismotion,he
R o
statedalaterdateofreceiptoftheRTCdecision.
a n a r
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
Held:Respondentneedslecturingthatsympathy
a n a r
h B
towardsaclientdoesnotjustifyhisactofstatingin
C s
hismotionforextensionthathereceivedtheRTC
e
b l
Decisionatalaterdatetomakeitappearthatthe
filingofthesaidmotioniswellwithintheperiodfor
R o
filinganappeal.Givenhisyearsofexperienceinthe
n
legalprofession,respondentshouldbewellaware
a a r
h
that"[a]lawyerisfirstandforemostanofficerofthe B
C
court.Thus,whileheoweshisentiredevotiontothe
e s
b l
interestandcausesofhisclient,hemustensurethat
R o
heactswithintheboundsofreasonandcommon
sense,alwaysawarethatheisaninstrumentoftruth
andjustice.
a n a r
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
n r
PatrocinaH.SalabaoVs.Atty.AndresC.Villaruel,Jr.
a a
h
A.C.No.8084.August24,2015
B
C e s
b l
R o
Facts:“Inthiscase,thejudgmentinfavorofcomplainanthadbecome
finalandexecutorybyJuly27,2005.Respondenthoweverproceededto
a n
filenolessthantwelve(12)motionsandcasesinvariouscourts
subsequenttotheEntryofJudgment.”
a r
h B
Held:“Itisquiteclearthatrespondenthasmadeamockeryofthe
C e s
judicialprocessbyabusingCourtprocesses,employingdilatorytacticsto
b l
frustratetheexecutionofafinaljudgment,andfeigningignoranceofhis
dutiesasanofficerofthecourt.Hehasbreachedhissworndutyto
R o
assistinthespeedyandefficientadministrationofjustice,andviolated
theLawyer’sOath,Rules10.03and12.04oftheCodeofProfessional
n
Responsibility,andRule138,Sec.20(c)and(g)oftheRulesofCourt.In
a a r
B
sodoing,heisadministrativelyliableforhisactions.”

C h
(Suspendedfor18months)
s
l e
o b
R
n
e s
b l
R o
a n a r
h B
C Canon11 e s
Alawyershallobserveandmaintaintherespect
similarconductbyothers.b
l
duetothecourtsandtojudicialofficersandshouldinsiston
R o
a n a r
Rule11.01Alawyershallappearincourtproperlyattired.
h B
C e s
Rule11.02.Alawyershallpunctuallyappearatcourthearings
b l
a.Alsocoverspromptcompliancetothecourt’sorders.
lateorbeingabsent. R o
b.Judgesmaycitelawyersincontemptofcourtforcoming
a n a r
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
a n a r
h B
Rule11.03.Alawyershallabstainfromscandalous,offensive
C 11.03) s
ormenacinglanguageorbehaviorbeforethedcourts.(Rule
e
b l
a.Alawyer’slanguageshouldalwaysupliftthedignityof
o
thelegalprofession.
R
b.Forthefelicityofhisclient,hemaybepardonedfor
n
someinfelicitiesinlanguage.
a a r
B
c.ThereareenoughwordsintheEnglishlanguagewhich
C h
areforcefulbutrespectful.
s
l e
d.UseofimproperlanguageinFacebook(MariaVictoria
G.BeloG.Henaresvs.Atty.Roberto“Argee”Guevarra.A.C.
No.11394.December1,2016)
o b
R
a n a r
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
n r
Rule11.04– AlawyershallnotattributetoaJudgemotivesnot
a a
h B
supportedbytherecordorhavingnomaterialitytothecase.
C e s
b l
R o
a.GratuitousstatementthatamemberoftheSupreme
Courthasbeenbribed(Inre:SupremeCourtResolution
a n
dated28April2003inG.R.Nos.145817and145822,A.C.
a r
h
No.6332,April17,2012)
B
C e s
b l
b.Allegingthatjudgeissofthearted(EdgardoArreolavs.
o
Atty.MariaVilmaMendoza,A.C.No.10135,Jan.15,2014)
R
a n a r
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
a n a r
Rule11.05.Alawyershallnotcriticizethepersonalorofficial
h B
conductofajudgeinaninsultingorintemperatelanguage.
C e s
a.Itisthecardinalcondtionofallsuchcriticismthatitshall
b l
bebonafideandshallnotspilloverhewallsofdecencyand
o
propriety(InReAlmacen,31SCRA581)
R
a n
Rule11.06.Alawyershallsubmitgrievancesagainstajudgeto
a r
h
theproperauthoritiesonly. B
C e s
a.Acomplaintforfalsificationofacertificateofservice
b l
againstajudgefiledwiththeOmbusdmanshouldbereferred
o
totheSupremeCourt(Macedavs.Ombudsman,24SCRA464)
R
a n
b.Disbarmentcomplaintsfiledagainstjudgesshouldbe
a r
h
referredbytheIBP totheSupremeCourt.
B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
Canon12.Alawyershallexerteveryeffortandconsiderithis
n r
dutytoassistinthespeedyandeffectiveadministrationof
a
justice.
B a
C h s
l e
o b
Rule12.01– Alawyershallnotappearfortrialunlesshehas
adequatelypreparedhimselfwiththelawandthefactsofhiscase,
R
theevidencehewilladduceandtheorderofitsprofference.He
withthecopies. a n
shouldalsobereadywiththeoriginaldocumentsforcomparison
a r
h B
C e s
thesamecause.(Forumshopping)
b l
Rule12.02– Alawyershallnotfilemultipleactionsarisingfrom
R o
a n a r
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
a n
a.Thereisforumshoppingwhen
a r
h B
C s
i.Asaresultofanadversedecisioninoneforum,aparty
e
seeksafavorableopinioninanotherforum(otherthanan
l
appealorcertiorari)
o b
iiWhenapartyinstitutestwoormoreactionsorproceedings
R
n r
groundedonthesamecause;:
a
iii.Whenacaseisfiledincourtwhileanadministrative
B a
h
proceedingispending.
C s
l e
iv.Whereacasefordamagesisfiledincourtbutreallyforthe
b
purposeofannulinganadverseadministrativedecision.
o
R
v.Wherecaseisfiledinviolationoftherulesonresjudicata
orlitispendentia,
a n a r
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
a n
BCases: a r
h B
C s
1.Whilethereliefsprayedforintheinitiatorypleadingsof
e
b l
thetwocasesaredifferentinform,arulinginonecasewould
haveresolvedtheother,andviceversa(Anastacio N.Teodoro
o
IIIVs.Atty.RomeoS.Gonzales,.A.C,6760,an.30,2013)
R
a n
2.MotionthatJusticeNachura inhibithimselfbutrestof
divisiontoremain,constitutesforumshopping(InreSupreme a r
h B
s
CourtResolutiondated28April2003inG.R.Nos.145817and
C
145822, A.C.6332,April17,2012)
e
b l
3.Lawyerwrote6complaintswithsamefalsecertifiction
R
A.Z.Nazareno,A.C.No.6677,June10,2014)
o
againstforumshopping(Eufrocina Crisostomovs.Atty.Philip
a n a r
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
a n a r
Failure to comply with the foregoing requirements shall not
h B
s
be curable by mere amendment of the complaint or other
C e
initiatory pleading but shall be cause for the dismissal of the
b l
case without prejudice, unless otherwise provided, upon
R o
motion and after hearing. The submission of a false
certification or noncompliance with any of the undertakings
a n
therein shall constitute indirect contempt of court, without
a r
h
prejudice to the corresponding administrative and criminal
B
C s
actions . If the acts of the party or his counsel clearly constitute
e
b
ground for summary dismissal with prejudice and shalll
willful and deliberate forum shopping, the same shall be
o
constitute direct contempt, as well as a cause for administrative
R
n r
sanctions. (par. 2, Sec.5, Rule 7, Rules of Court)
a Ba
C h s
l e
o b
R
n
e s
b l
R o
a n a r
h B
C e s
b l
Rule12.03– Alawyershallnot,afterobtainingextensionsof
R o
timetofilepleadings,memorandaorbriefs,lettheperiod
lapsewithoutsubmittingthesameorofferinganexplanation
a n
forhisfailuretodoso.
a r
h B
a.Alawyershouldnotpresumethathismotionforextensionwillbe
granted.
C e s
l
b.Theperiodofextensionstartswheretheoriginalperiodends.
b
R o
a n a r
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
a n a r
h B
s
C theexecutionofajudgmentormisusecourtprocesses.
Rule12.04– Alawyershallnotundulydelayacase,impede
e
b l
o
a.Claimingclient’spropertytobehistosavethemfromexecution(Hegna
R
v.Paderanga,AC5955,Sep.8,2009)
n
Rule12.05– Alawyershallrefrainfromtalkingtohiswitness
a a r
B
duringabreakorrecessinthetrial,whilethewitnessisstill
C h
underexamination.
s
l e
Rule12.06.Alawyershallnotknowinglyassistawitnessto
misrepresenthimselfortoimpersonateanother.
o b
R
Rule12.07Alawyershallnotabuse,browbeatorharassa
n
witnessnorneedlesslyinconveniencehim.
a a r
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
a n a r
h B
C except: s
Rule12.08Alawyershallavoidtestifyinginbehalfofhisclient,
e
b l
o
i.Onformalmatters,suchasthemailing,authenticationor
R
custodyofaninstrumentandthelike,or
a n a r
ii.Onsubstantialmatters,incasewherehistestimonyis
h B counsel.
essentialtotheendofjustice,inwhicheventhemust,during
C
histestimony,
s
entrust the ttrial of the case to another
e
wherehistestimonyisessential
b l
R o
a n a r
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
Canon13.Alawyershallrelyuponthemeritsofhis
n r
causeandrefrainfromanyimproprietywhichtendst
a a
B
influence,orgivestheappearanceofinfluencingthe
h
C court.
e s
b l
Rule 13.01 – A lawyer shall not extend extraordinary
attention or hospitality to, nor seek opportunity for cultiating
familiarity with judges.
R o
a n
a. Respondent is dutybound to actively avoid any act that tends
a r
h
to influence, or may be seen to influence, the outcome of an B
C e s
ongoing case, lest the people’s faith in the judicial process is
diluted. (Jimenez
A.C. No. 8108 July 15, 2014J
vs. Atty.
b l Verano,
R o
a n
Rule 13.02 – A lawyer shall not make public statements in the
media tending to arouse public opinion for or against a party. ) a r
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
a n a r
h B
Rule13.03 s
C branchofgovernmentinthenormalcourseofjudicial
Shallnotinviteinterferencebyanother
e
b l
proceedings.
R o
a n a r
a.AppealtotheOfficeofthePresidentunconstitutional
(Bumanlagh B
s
vs. Bumanlag. 74 SCRA 92)
C e
b l
R o
a n a r
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
o
4.Dutiestoaclient
R
n
Canon14– Alawyershallnotrefusehisservicesto
a a r
theneedy.
h B
C e s
a.Lawyerclientrelationshipstrictlypersonal,highly
confidentialandfiduciary.
b l
R o
b.Creationoflawyerclientrelationship– whentheadviceof
alawyerissoughtonaprofessionalmatter,andhegivesit.
a n a r
h
Rule14.01– Alawyershallnotdeclinetorepresentaperson B
C e s
solelyonaccountofthelatter’srace,sex,creedorstatusoflife,
b l
orbecauseofhisownopinionregardingtheguiltofsaidperson.
R o
a n a r
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
a n a r
Rule14.02=Alawyershallnotdecline,exceptforserious
h B
andsufficientcause,anappointmentascounseldeoficiooras
s
C amicuscuriaeorarequestfromtheIntegratedBarofthe
e
b l
Philippinesoranyofitschaptersforrenditionoffreelegalaid.
o
R lawyerappointedbythecourtto
n r
counseldeoficio–
a B a
representanindigentparty;oppositeofcounselde
C h
parte.
s
l e
amicuscuriae– friendofthecourt;appointedtoadvise
thecourtincomplexcases. b
o
R theentirebarprobono
n r
amicuscuriaeparexcellance–
–
a
legalservicewithoutexpectingpayment
B a
C h s
l e
o b
R
n
e s
b l
R o
a n a r
Rule14.03– Alawyermaynotrefusetoacceptrepresentation
h B
C s
ofanindigentclientunless:
l e
a.Heisnotinapositiontocarryouttheworkeffectivelyor
competently;or
o b
R
b.helaborsunderaconflictofinterestbetweenhimandthe
a n
prospectiveclient,orbetweenapresentclientandthe
prospectiveclient. a r
h B
C s
Rule14.04.Alawyerwhoacceptsthecauseofapersonunable
e
b l
topayhisprofessionalfeesshallobservethesamestandardof
conductgoverninghisrelationshipwithapayingclient.
R o
a n a r
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
n r
Canon15.Alawyershallobservecandor,fairnessandloyalty
a a
B
inallhisdealingsandtransactionswithhisclient.*
C h s
Rule15.01Alawyer,inconferringwithaprospective
l e
client,shall ascertainassoonaspracticable,whetherthe
b
matterwouldinvolveaconflictwithanotherclientorhisown
o
R
interest,andifso,shallforthwithinformtheprospectiveclient.
n
Rule15.02Alawyershallbeboundbytheruleon
a a r
B
privilegedcommunicationinrespectofmattersdisclosedto
C h
himbyaprospectiveclient.
s
l e
Rule15.03Alawyershallnotrepresentconflicting
afulldisclosureofthefacts. o b
interestsexceptbywrittenconsentofallconcernedgivenafter
R
a n a r
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
n
i.Typesofconflictofinterest:
a a r
h Concurrentormultiplerepresentation
B
C e
Sequentialorsuccessiverepresentations
b l
o
ii.Testsofconflictofinterest:
R
a n
(1)Whetheralawyerisdutyboundtofightforanissueor
claiminbehalfofoneclient,andatthesametime,toopposethat a r
h B
s
claimforanotherclient;
C e
b l
(2)Whethertheacceptanceofanewrelationwould
R o
preventthefulldischargeofhisdutyofundividedloyaltytohis
client.
a n a r
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
a n a r
h B
C e s
b l
:KHWKHUWKHDFFHSWDQFHRIDQHZUHODWLRQZRXOGLQYLWH
VXVSLFLRQRIXQIDLWKIXOQHVVRUGRXEOHGHDOLQJLQWKH
R o
SHUIRUPDQFHRIKLVGXW\RIILGHOLW\DQGOR\DOW\
a n a r
:KHWKHULQWKHDFFHSWDQFHRIWKHQHZUHODWLRQKH
h B
C s
ZRXOGEHFDOOHGXSRQWRLQMXUHKLVIRUPHUFOLHQWRQDPDWWHU
e
b l
WKDWKHKDVKDQGOHGIRUKLPRUUHTXLUHKLPWRUHYHDO
LQIRUPDWLRQWKDWKLVIRUPHUFOLHQWKDVJLYHQWRKLP
R o
a n a r
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
n
CasesonConflictofInterest
a a r
h B
s
C 2.Conflictbetweenlawyerandaccountant(Nakpilvs.Valdes,285SCRA
1.Arisesfromlawyerclientrelationship(Hiladovs.David,84Phil.538)
e
748) b l
R o
3.Corporatecounselinaderivativesuit(Hornillavs.Salunat,405SCRA
n r
220).
a
4.Engaginginbusinesstocompetewithclient(Quiambaovs.
B a
h
Bamba,A.C.6708,Aug.25,2005)
C s
e
5.Counselandpartyplaintiffatthesametime(Gamillavs.Mariño,399
l
SCRA108)
o b
6.Acceptingacaseagainstformerclient(Anglovs.Valencia,A.C.No.10587,
Feb.25,2015)
R
a n a r
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
n
SilvestraMedinavs.Atty.RufinoLizardo
a a r
h
A.C.N0.10533,January31,2017
B
C e s
l
Facts:Silvestraandhernephewdeliveredtwotitlesto
b
R o
respondentinconnectionwithacaseforpartitionofthe
landscoveredbythem.Afterthecasewasdecided,
n
respondentrefusedtoreturnthetitlestothem,becausea
a a r
B
certainMartinezaskedhimtokeepthetitles,toprotecthis
C h s
rightsasabuyerofthepropertiescoveredbythesaidtitle
l
andwastheonewhospentforthepartitionproceedings.e
o b
R
Held: Therespondent’srepresentationofMartinezwithout
n
theconsentofSilvestraandhernephew,istantamounttoa
a a r
B
conflictofinterest,whichrequiresthewrittenconsentofall
thepartiesconcerned.
C h s
l e
o b
R
n
e s
b l
R o
MABINICOLLEGES,INC.,vs.ATTY.JOSED.PAJARILLO
a n
A.C.10187,July22,2015 a r
h B
C e s
l
Facts:RespondentwascorporatesecretaryofMabini
b
R o
Colleges,andlegalcounselofParacaleRuralBank(PRD).
MabiniborrowedmoneyfromRPB,andfailedtopay.The
n
bank,throughrespondentfiledanactiontoforeclosethe
a a r
B
mortgageexecutedbyMabiniRespondentwaschargedwith
C h s
conflictofinterest.Hearguedthathisroleinthecollege
l e
wasonlycorporatesecretaryandnotlegalcounsel(although
o b
itwasproventhathehadreceivedretainerfeesfromthe
bank.Healsoarguedthathedidnotrevealanything
R
confidentialtothebank,andthatthedirectorswhobrought
a n
thecomplaintswerenotdulyauthorizedbytheBoardof
a r
Directorstofileit.
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
n r
Held:Theruleprohibitingconflictofinterestappliesto
a a
h B
situationswhereinalawyerwouldberepresentingaclient
C e s
whoseinterestisdirectlyadversetoanyofhispresentor
b l
formerclients.10Italsoapplieswhenthelawyerrepresentsa
clientagainstaformerclientinacontroversythatisrelated,
R o
directlyorindirectly,tothesubjectmatteroftheprevious
a n
litigationinwhichheappearedfortheformerclient.Thisrule
appliesregardlessofthedegreeofadverseinterests.Whata a r
h
lawyeroweshisformerclientistomaintaininviolatethe B
C e s
client’sconfidenceortorefrainfromdoinganythingwhichwill
b l
injuriouslyaffecthiminanymatterinwhichhepreviously
R o
representedhim.Thelawyerclientrelationshipexistsfromthe
momentthatthelawyerisconsulted(Hiladovs,David).A
n
disbarmentproceedingmaybeinitiatedbyanyperson.
a a r
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
n
WilfredoAnglovs.Atty.JoseMa.Valencia,etal.
a a r
h
A.C.No.10587,Feb.25,2015
B
C e s
l
Facts:Respondentswerechargedwithconflictofinterests
b
R o
infilingacriminalcaseagainstpartieswhomtheypreviously
representedinlaborcases.Theirdefenseisthattheir
n
associationwasnotaformalpartnershipbuta“special
a a r
B
arrangement”.
C h
Held:AstheCourtobserves,thelawfirm’sunethical s
l e
acceptanceofthecriminalcasearosefromitsfailureto
b
organizeandimplementasystembywhichitwouldhave
o
R
beenabletokeeptrackofallcasesassignedtoitshandling
a n
lawyerstotheendof,amongothers,ensuringthatevery
engagementitacceptsstandsclearofanypotentialconflict
a r
ofinterest. h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
a n a r
“Assuch,alawyerisprohibitedfromrepresentingnewclients
whoseinterestsopposethoseofaformerclientinanymanner,
h B
whetherofnottheyarepartiesinthesameactionoron
C e s
totallyunrelatedcases.Theprohibitionisfoundedon
b l
principlesofpublicpolicyandgoodtaste.”
R o
Afinalpoint,theCourtclarifiesthatrespondents’pronounced
a n
liabilityisnotalteredbythefactthatthelaborcasesagainst a r
h
thecomplainanthadlongbeenterminated.Verily,the B
C
terminationofthelawyerclientrelationprovidesno
e s
b l
justificationforalawyertorepresentaninterestadversetoor
R o
inconflictwiththatofaformerclient.Theclient’sconfidence
oncereposedshouldnotbedivestedbymereexpirationof
professionalemployment.”
a n a r
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
a n a r
Rule15.04Alawyermay,withthewrittenconsentofall
h B
concerned,actasmediator,conciliatororarbitratorinsettling
C disputes.
e s
b l
a.Buehsvs.Bacatan,A.A.6674,June30,2009
R o
a n
Rule15.05.Alawyer,whenadvisinghisclient,shallgivea
candidandhonestopiniononthemeritsandpossibleresultsof a r
h
theclient’scase,neitheroverstatingnorunderstatingthe B
C
prospectsonthecase.
e s
b l
R o
Rule15.06 Alawyershallnotstateorimplythatheisableto
n
influenceanypublicofficial,tribunalorlegislativebody.
a a r
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
a n a r
h B
s
C Rule15.07Alawyershallimpressonhisclient
e
b l
compliancewiththelawsandprinciplesofjustice.
R o
a.Alawyerisnotagunforhire.
n
Rule15.08.Alawyerwhoisengagedinanother
a a r
h B
professionoroccupationconcurrentlywiththe
C s
practiceoflawshallmakecleartohisclientwhether
e
l
heisactingasalawyerorinanothercapacity(Art.
b
15.08)(Nakpilvs.Valdes)
R o
a n a r
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
n
FLORDELIZAMADRIAvs.ATTY.CARLOSRIVERA
a a r
h
A.C.11256,March7,2017
B
C e s
l
Facts:Respondentwasretainedtosecureanannulmentof
b
o
thecomplainant’smarriage.Afterreceiptofhisfees,he
R
assuredherthatthecomplainthasbeenfiledandsheneed
n r
notgotocourttofollowupbecausethedecisionwillbesent
a a
toher.Subsequently,hefurnishedherwithacopyofthe
B
C h
decisionandacertificateoffinality.Investigationsdisclosed
thattheywerefake.
s
l e
Held:Simulatingacourtdecisionandcertificateoffinalityis
o b
anoutrightcriminalfalsificationorforgery.Itreflectsahigh
degreeofmoralturpitude.Thedefensethatthelawyerdid
R
soduetotheproddingoftheclient,isnoexcuse.
n r
RespondentDISBARRED. a a
RespondentviolatedRule1.01and15.07oftheCPR.
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
Canon 16 A lawyer shall hold in trust all moneys
a n a
and properties of his client that may come into his r
h
possession. * B
C e s
Rule 16.01 A lawyer shall account for all money or
b l
property collected or received for or received from the client
R o
a. Money given for a purpose must be used for such purpose;
n r
otherwise, returned to client immediately.
b.
a
Failure to do so will raise presumption that lawyer
B a
2009)
C h
misappropriated it. (De ChavezBlanco v. Lumasag, Jr., AC 5195, Apr. 10,
s
Rule 16.02 A lawyer shall keep the funds
l e of each client
separate and apart from his own and b
o
those of others kept by
him.
a. Velez vs. De Vera, A.C. 6697,n
R
a
July 25, 2006
a r
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
a n a r
Rule 16.03. A lawyer shall deliver the funds and property of
client upon demand. However, he shall have a lien over the funds
h B
s
and may apply so much thereof as may be necessary to satisfy his
C e
lawful fees and disbursements, giving notice promptly thereafter
b l
to his client. He shall also have a lien to the same extent on all
R o
judgments and execution as he has secured for his client as
provided for inthe Rules of Court.
a n a r
a.ALawyermaynotapplyclient’sfundstohisfeesifclientisstill
h
objectingtotheamountthereof.(Lemoinev.Balon,414SCRA511).
B

C e s
b.Alawyerwillnotbeorderedtoreturnmoneygiventohimfor
b l
“facilitationfee”.(ArellanoUniversityv.Mijares,AC380,Nov.30.2009)But
seeChuvs.Guico,A.C.No.10573.January13,2015,wherelawyerwasordered
o
torestitutemoneygivenforanunlawfulpurpose.)
R
n r
c.Retaininglienandcharginglien– Section37,Rule138,RevisedRules
ofCourt.
a Ba
C h s
l e
o b
R
n
e s
b l
R o
n
Rule16.04 Alawyershallnotborrowmoneyfromhis
a a r
B
clientunlesstheclient’sinterestsarefullyprotectedbythe
C h s
natureofthecaseorbyindependentadvice.Neithershalla
l e
lawyerlendmoneytohisclientexcept,whenintheinterest
b
ofjustice,hehastoadvancenecessaryexpensesinalegal
o
R
materheishandlingfortheclient.
n
a.Lawyerborrowingfromclient Wongv.Moya,AC
a a r
B
6972,2008,Sps.Concepcionv.Atty.delaRosa,AC10681,
C
Feb.3,2015 h s
l e
ProhibitionunderArticle1491oftheCivilCode.
Conditions: o b
R
(a)Lawyerclientrelationship;
a n
(b)Client’spropertyinvolvedinalitigation; a r
h B
C
(c)Lawyerishandlinglitigationfortheclient;
e s
l
(d)Litigationisstillpending;
(e)Lawyeracquiresthepropertydirectlyorindirectly:
o b
R
n
e s
b l
R o
ChristopherSantosvs.Atty.JosephA.Arojado
a n
A.C.No.8502,June27,2018 a r
h B
C e s
l
Facts:Complainantwasthedefendantinanunlawful
b
R o
detainercasefiledbyLiliaRodriguez,withtherespondent
washercounsel.Complainantclaimedthatwhilethecase
n
waspending,oneofthepropertiesinvolvedwassoldbyLilia
a a r
B
toJuliusArojado,therespondent’sson.Heclaimedthatthis
C h
wasinviolationofArticle1491oftheNewCivilCode.
s
l e
Held:Respondentlawyerwasnotthepurchaserorbuyerof
b
thepropertyinlitigation.Thereisnoevidencethatthe
o
R
respondentusedhissonasaconduittogainthepropertyin
question.
Complaintdismissed. a n a r
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
n
PaulinaT.YuVs.Atty.BerlinR.DelaCruz
a a r
h
A.C.No.10912.January19,2016
B
C e s
l
Facts:Lawyerborrowedhisclient’sjewelriestobepawned
b
worthP135,000.00.
R o
byhimandreturnedlater.Hefailedtoreturnthejewelries
n
Held:Theruleagainstborrowingofmoneybyalawyerfrom
a a r
h
hisclientisintendedtopreventthelawyerfromtaking
B
C
advantageofhisinfluenceoverhisclient.23Therule
e s
b l
presumesthattheclientisdisadvantagedbythelawyer's
abilitytouseallthelegalmaneuveringstorenegeonhis
R o
obligation.24Sufficeittosay,theborrowingofmoneyor
a n
propertyfromaclientoutsidethelimitslaiddowninthe
CPRisanunethicalactthatwarrantssanction.
a r
h
.(Suspendedfor3years) B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
a n a r
h B
Canon17– Alawyerowesfidelitytothecauseofhis
s
C clientandshallbemindfulofthetrustand
e
confidencereposedinhim.*
b l
R o
a.Dutyoffidelitycarriesthecorollaryobligationofservingthe
a n a r
clientwithcompetenceanddiligence,championinghiscause
withzealwithintheboundsofthelaw,andexertionofutmost
h B
s
learningandability.Totheendthatnothingshallbetakenor
C e
withheldfromtheclientexceptbytherulesoflawlegally
applied.
b l
R o
d.Thedutyoffidelityoutlastseventhedeathoftheclient
(HeirsofFalamevs.Atty.Baguio,A.C.6t876,March7,2008
a n a r
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
Canon18.Alawyershallservehisclientwith
a n
competenceanddiligence.*
a r
h B
e s
Cshouldknowthatheisnotqualifiedtorender.However,hemayrendersuch
Rule18.01– Alawyershallnotundertakealegalservicewhichheknowsor
b l
o
serviceif,withtheconsentofhisclient,hecanobtainascollaboratingcounsela
R
lawyerwhoiscompetentonthematter.(NenitaD.Sanchezvs.Atty.RomeoG
annulmentofmarriage)n r
Agullos,A.C.No.10543.March16,2016– mistakinglegalseparationfor
a B a
C h
Rule18.02– Alawyershallnothandleanylegalmatterwithout
adequatepreparation..
s
l e
Rule18.03 Alawyershallnotneglectalegalmatterentrustedtohimand
Villaseca,A.C.No.7922,October1,2013)
o b
hisnegligencewillrenderhimliable.(Rule18.03)(Mattusvs.Talentov.
R
n r
Rule18.04– Alawyershallkeeptheclientinformedofthestatusofhis
a
caseandshallrespondwithinreasonabletimetohisclient’srequestfor
B a
h
information.
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
NenitaD.SanchezVs.Atty.RomeoG.Aguilos
a n
A.C.No.10543.March16,2016
a r
B
Facts:Lawyerwasretainedtofileapetitionforannulmentof
h
C s
marriage.Hepreparedapetitionforlegalseparation.Askedto
e
b l
returntheattorney’sfeespaidtohiminadvance,heinsisted
thattheclientreallysoughthisservicesforlegalseparation
o
only,andsheshouldpaymoreifshewantedannulment.
R
a n
Held:Clearly,therespondentmisrepresentedhisprofessional
competenceandskilltothecomplainant.Astheforegoing a r
h B
s
findingsreveal,hedidnotknowthedistinctionbetweenthe
C e
groundsforlegalseparationandforannulmentofmarriage.
b l
Suchknowledgewouldhavebeenbasicandexpectedofhimas
R o
alawyeracceptingaprofessionalengagementforeithercauses
ofaction.Hisexplanationthattheclientinitiallyintendedto
n
pursuetheactionforlegalseparationshouldbedisbelieved.
a a r
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
o
Therespondentshouldnothaveacceptedtheengagement
R
a n a r
becauseasitwaslaterrevealed,itwaswayabovehisability
andcompetencetohandlethecaseforannulmentofmarriage.
h B
s
Asaconsequence,hehadnobasistoacceptanyamountas
C e
attorney’sfeesfromthecomplainant.Hedidnotevenbeginto
b l
performthecontemplatedtaskheundertookforthe
R o
complainantbecauseitwasimprobablethattheagreement
withherwastobringtheactionforlegalseparation.Hishaving
a n
supposedlypreparedthepetitionforlegalseparationinsteadof
a r
h
thepetitionforannulmentofmarriagewaseitherhiswayof
B
C s
coveringupforhisincompetence,orhismeansofchargingher
e
hadalreadyreceived. b l
more.Eitherwaydidnotentitlehimtoretaintheamounthe
o
(FinedP10,000.00andorderedtoreturnP70,000.00attorney’s
R
fees)
a n a r
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
VicenteM.GimenaVs.Atty.SalvadorT.Sabio
a n
A.C.No.7178.August23,2016 a r
h B
C e s
b l
R o
Facts:Respondentfiledanunsignedpositionpaper,and
failedtosignitinspiteofthearbiter’sordertodoso.Asa
a n
result,judgmentwasrenderedagainsthisclient.Hefailed
a r
h
tonotifyhisclientandthejudgmentbecamefinal.
B
C e s
Held:Alawyerispresumedtobepromptanddiligentinthe
b l
performanceofhisobligationsandintheprotectionofhis
R o
client'sinterestandinthedischargeofhisdutiesasan
officerofthecourt.Here,however,thispresumptionis
n
overturnedbyclearandconvincingevidencethat
a a r
B
respondentwasgrosslynegligentascounselofthecompany
C h
andcomplainantinthecase.
s
l e
o b
R
n
e s
b l
R o
n
HEIRSOFNESTORTANSR.vs.ATTY.NESTORBELTRAN
a a r
h
A.C.5819,February1,2017
B
C e s
b l
R o
Facts:Complainantsretainedrespondenttofileacivilsuittoannula
saleofcommercialproperties.Respondentorderedhissecretarytopay
a n
thedocketfeesthencomputedatPP1,722.
a r
Unfortunately,theclerkofcourterredintheassessmentofthedocket
h B
s
fees.Tocorrecttheerror,theRTCorderedthepaymentofadditional
C e
fees.Theorderwasreceivedbytherespondenttwoweeksafterhehad
b l
withdrawnhisappearancewiththeconsentofhisclients.Hedidnot
notifyhisformerclientsoftheorder.Consequently,theadditional
thereof.
R o
docketfeeswerenotpaidandthecomplaintwasdismissedbyreason
a n
Complainantschargedrespondentswithnegligence.
a r
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
a n a r
Held:Atty.Beltranshouldhaveactedwithprudenceby
h B
s
informinghispreviousclientabouthisreceiptoftheorderfor
C e
paymentofadditionalfees.Afterall,lawyersareofficersof
b l
thecourt,andlikethecourt,therespondentisdutyboundto
R o
takestepstoadvancetocauseofjustice.
Lawyersareexpectedtobeacquaintedwiththerudimentsof
lawand
a n a r
h
legalprocedure.Aclientwhodealswithcounselhastheright B
C e s
toexpectnotjustagoodamountofprofessionallearningand
b l
competence,butalsoawholeheartedfealtytotheclient's
cause
R o
SUSPENDEDfor2months. a n a r
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
a n
law. *
a r
Canon 19 – A lawyer shall represent his client with zeal within the bounds of the
h B
C e s
b l
Rule 19.01 – A lawyer shall employ only fair reasonable
means to obtain the lawful objectives of his client and shall not
R o
present, participate in presenting, or threatening ro present
a n
unfounded criminal charges to obtain an improper advantage in
any case or proceeding. Briones v. Jimenez, AC 6691, April 17,
a r
h
2007, Peña v. Aparicio, AC 7208, June 25, 2007. Rural Bank of B
C
Calape v. Florido, AC 5736, June 29, 2010)
e s
b l
R o
a n a r
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
a n a r
h B
Rule 19.02. A lawyer who has received information that his
C e s
client has, in the course of the representation, perpetuated a
b l
fraud upon a person or tribunal, shall promptly call upon the
client to rectify the same and failing which he shall terminate
R o
the relationship with such client in accordance with the Rules
of Court.
a n a r
B
a. But he may not reveal the client’s fraud because it
C h
might violate the confidentiality of their relationship.
s
l e
o b
R
a n a r
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
a n a r
h B
Rule 19.03 – A lawyer shall not allow his client to
C s
dictate the procedure in handling the case.
e
b l
a. The employment of a lawyer confers upon him general authority to do
o
on behalf of his client such acts necessary or incidental to the prosecution
R
of the suit entrusted to him.
n
b. But the lawyer is more than an agent of the client.
a a r
h B
c. The authority to appear for the client is presumed and lasts until the
C s
termination of the litigation.
l e
d, A lawyer has authority to bind the client in all matters of ordinary
o b
judicial procedure The cause of action,the claimrdemand sued upon, and
the subject matter, is subject the control of the client.
R
e. Notice to the lawyer is notice to the client.
a n
f. Negligence of the lawyer binding on the client. Exception : where the
a r
h
negligence is gross and client is deprived of due procs of law,
B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
CANON20.Alawyershallchargeonlyfairand
n
reasonablefees.*
a r
aa.Alawyerhastherighttohaveandrecoverafairand
h B
s
C b.Thecompensationofalawyershouldbeamereincidentof
reasonablecompensationforhisservices.
e
thepracticeoflaw. b l
R o
c.Alawyerisentitledtojudicialprotectionagainstinjustice,
a n
abuseonthepartofhiscounsel.
a r
impositionorfraudonthepartofhisclientastheclientagainst
h B
s
d.Generally,alawyer’srighttocompensationrequiresthe
C
existenceofalawyerclientrelationshipand
etherenditionof
servicestotheclient.
b l
obligationtopayattorney’sfees. o
e.Awrittenagreementisnotnecessarytoestablishaclient’s
R
a n a r
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
n a r
af.Anagreementforattorney’sfeesisalwayssubjecttothe
h B
C controlofthecourts.
e s
b l
R o
g.Alawyermayrecoverattorney’sfeesonthebasisof
quantummeruitwhen(1)thereisnoagreementastothefees,
n r
(2)whenthereisanagreementwhichhasbeensetasidebythe
a a
h B
courtorthepartiesthemselves,(3)whentheagreentfor
C s
attorney’sfeeshsbeensetsideduetoformaldefects,(4)when
e
l
thelawyer’sserviceshasbeenterminatedwithjustcause.
b
R o
a n a r
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
a n a r
Rule20.01– Alawyershallbeguidedbythefollowingfactorsindetermining
h B
hisfees:
C s
a.Thetimespentandextentofservicesrenderedorrequired
e
l
b.Thenoveltyanddifficultyofquestionsinvolved
b
o
c.Theimportanceofsubjectmatter
R
d.Theskilldemanded
n r
e.Theprobabilityoflosingotheremploymentasaresultofacceptanceof
a a
h
thepreferredcase.
B
C e s
f.Thecustomarychargesforsimilarservicesandthescheduleoffeesof
theIBPchaptertowhichhebelongs.
b l
o
g.Theamountinvolvedinthecontroversyandthebenefitsresultingto
theclientfromtheservices.
R
a n
h.Thecontingencyorcertaintyofcompensation
a r
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
a n a r
h B
s
i.Thecharacteroftheemployment,whetheroccasionalor
C established,and e
b l
j.Theprofessionalstandingofalawyer.
R o
n r
Rule20.02– Alawyershall,incasesofreferral,withthe
a a
h B
consentoftheclient,beentitledtodivisionoffeesin
C s
proportiontotheworkperformedandtheresponsibility
e
assumed.
b l
R o
a n a r
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
.
a n a r
h B *
C s
Acceptancefee referstothechargeimposedbythelawyerformerely
e
b l
acceptingacase, becauseoncethelawyeragreestorepresentaclient,he
isprecludedfromhandlingthecaseoftheopposingpartybasedonthe
2015)
R o
prohibitiononconflictofinterest(Dalupanvs.Gacott,A.C.5067,June29,
a n a r
h B
But “Further,restitutionofacceptancefeestocomplainantisproper.….
C s
Thereisnoreasonforrespondenttoretaintheprofessionalfeespaidby
e
l
complainantforhercollectioncaseswhentherewasnoshowingthat
b
respondentperformedanyactinfurtheranceofthesecases.”(Helen
o
Changvs.Atty.JoseR.Hidalgo,A.C.No.6934.April6,2016)
R
a n a r
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
.
a n a r
h B
*
s
C wherebythelawyeragreestohandletheclient’scasebuthisfee,usuallya
Contingencyfeearrangements– contractbetweenlawyerandclient
e
b l
proportionofthefundsorpropertythatmayberecovered,shallbe
R o
contingentonhissuccessinhandlingthecase.Becausehetakesariskin
thepaymentofhisfees,alargeramountisallowed.Acontingentfee
agreementisvalid.
a n a r
h B
s
C wherethelawyer’sfeeisalsocontingentonhissuccess
Acontingencyfeearrangementisdifferentfromachampertous
e
l
agreement
b
inachievingthegoalofhisclient,butwiththeadditionalstipulation
o
champertous agreement is invalid. R
thatallexpensesofthelitigationwillbeshoulderedbyhim.A
a n a r
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
n
EugenioE.CortezVs.Atty.HernandoP.Costes
a a r
h
A.C.No.9119.March12,2018
B
C e s
l
Complainantretainedtheservicesofrespondenttohandle
b
R o
anillegaldismissalcaseagainsthisformeremployer.The
respondenthandledthecase,whichresultedinanawardof
n
P1milliontocomplainant.Respondentclaimedonehalfof
a a r
B
thatascontingentfee.Complainantinsistedthattheagreed
C h
feewasfor12%only.
s
l
Held:Contingentfeeshouldbebymeansofawritten e
b
retaineragreement.Theclaimfora50%contingentfeeis
o
R
excessive.Ontheotherhand,theclaimforonly10%onthe
a n
basisoftheLaborCodeiserroneous,becausetheLabor
Codereferstotheextraordinaryattorney’sfeesonly.
a r
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
o
.Attorney’sliens:*
R
a n r
Retaining lien – a lawyer is allowed to retain possession of
a
B
the monies properties and documents of his client until he is paid
C h
his fees.
s
l e
Requisites are: (1) lawyer obtained possession by virtue of a
lawyer has not been paid. o b

lawyerclient relationship, (2) lawyer has rendered services, (3)
R
a n
Retaining lien is a passive lien. There is no action required of
the lawyer to take to establish the lien. If the documents are a r
h B
s
needed to be used as evidence, the lawyer may be ordered to
C e
give them to the client, provided the latter posts a bond for the
attorney’s fees.
b l
o
A retaining lien is lost once the lawyer loses possession.
R
a n
A retaining lien is a general lien. It can be exercised to
enforce the payment of the lawyers fees in all the services he has a r
h B
s
rendered to the client.
C e
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
Charging lien – the right of a lawyer to charge the judgment and
n
all its executions for the payment of his fees.
a a r
h B
The charging lien is an activeslien. The lawyer is required to
C file a motion in the case helisehandling to charge the judgment
b
client and the adverse o
with his fees. Copies of his motion should be furnished to his
R party, who will be obliged to pay his fees
n
before paying his client.
a a r
h B
C
Necessarily
e s
a charging lien can be established only on a
judgment for a sum of money.
b l
o
RIt can be utilized only for the
n r
A charging lien is a special lien.
a
payment of the lawyer’s services in the case he is handling.
B a
C h s
l e
o b
R
n
e s
b l
R o
a n
EdmundoNavarezVs.Atty.ManuelAbrogarIII
G.R.No.191641.September2,2015 a r
h B
C e s
b l
o
Theregistrationofthelienshouldalsobe
R
n r
distinguishedfromtheenforcementofthelien.
a
Registrationmerelydeterminesthebirthofthelien.
B a
h
Theenforcementofthelien,ontheotherhand,can
C s
onlytakeplaceonceafinalmoneyjudgmenthas
l e
beensecuredinfavoroftheclient.
o b
R
a n a r
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
a n a r
h B
Theenforcementofthelienisaclaimforattorney]sfeesthat
C e s
maybeprosecutedintheveryactionwheretheattorney
b l
renderedhisservicesorinaseparateaction.
R o
However,amotionfortheenforcementofthelienisinthe
natureofofanactioncommencedbyalawyeragainsthisclient
a n
forattorney’sfees.Asineveryactionforasumofmoney,the
a r
h
attorneymovantmustfirstpaytheprescribeddocketfees
B
C e s
beforethetrialcourtcanacquirejurisdictiontoorderthe
paymentofattorney’sfees.
b l
R o
a n a r
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
o
Feesandcontroversieswithclients.*
R
n a
aRule 20.03. A lawyer shall not, withoutr
h Breward, costs, commission,
the full knowledge and
s
C interest, rebate of forwarding eallowance
consent of the client, accept any fee,
whatsoever related to his b l

professional
or other compensation
employment from anyone
R o
other than the client. (Spouses Rafols vs. Barrios, AC 4973, Mar
n r
15, 2010)
a a
B with clients
h s
Chis compensation and resort to judicial
Rule 20.04. A lawyer should avoid controversies
prevent imposition, injustice of fraud. bl

concerning e action only to
R o
a n a r
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
JoseAntonioF.BalingitVs.Atty.RenatoM.Cervantes
a n
andAtty.TeodoroB.Delarmente a r
h
A.C.No.11059.November9,2016 B
C e s
l
ComplainantisanaturalizedBritishcitizen.Histwosons
b
o
figuredinamotorcycleincidentinAntipolowhereinoneof
R
hissonsandagrandsondiedandtheotherwashospitalized.
n r
Acriminalcasewasfiledagainsttheotherpartyinthe
a a
incident,aDr.David.Thereafter,complainantretainedthe
B
C h
servicesoftherespondentstofileacivilcasefordamages
s
againstDr.David.Therespondentsmadehimsigna
l e
retainershipagreement,inwhichtheywillbepaidan
o b
acceptancefeeofP45,000.00,appearancefeeofP5,000,00
perappearance,andasuccessfeeof10%ofwhatevermay
R
becollectedfromthedefendant.Theacceptancefeewas
n
paid,buttherespondentsfailedtofileacomplaintfor
a a r
B
damages,allegedlyforfailureofthecomplainanttopaythe
acceptancefeeinfull. h
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
n r
ComplainantisanaturalizedBritishcitizen.Histwosons
a a
h B
figuredinamotorcycleincidentinAntipolowhereinoneofhis
C e s
sonsandagrandsondiedandtheotherwashospitalized.A
b l
criminalcasewasfiledagainsttheotherpartyintheincident,a
Dr.David.Thereafter,complainantretainedtheservicesofthe
R o
respondentstofileacivilcasefordamagesagainstDr.David.
a n
Therespondentsmadehimsignaretainershipagreement,in
whichtheywillbepaidanacceptancefeeofP45,000.00, a r
h
appearancefeeofP5,000,00perappearance,andasuccessfee B
C e s
of10%ofwhatevermaybecollectedfromthedefendant.The
b l
acceptancefeewaspaid,buttherespondentsfailedtofilea
topaytheacceptancefeeinfull.
R o
complaintfordamages,allegedlyforfailureofthecomplainant
a n a r
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
.Inthemeantime,mediationproceedingswerehadinthe
a n a r
criminalcase,andtheaccusedagreedtopaythecomplainant
h B
P1millioninexchangeforthequashingoftheInformation.
C e s
Uponlearningaboutthis,therespondentsdemanded10%of
l
theP1million,plusP5,000.00appearancefeefromthe
b
o
complainant.Thecomplainantrefused,onthegroundthatthe
R
amountwasreceivedinthecriminalcaseandnotinthecivil
a n
casewhichtherespondentswerehiredtofile.The
respondentsfiledacriminalcaseforestafaagainstthe a r
h B
s
complainantandadeportationchargeagainsthimforbeingan
C e
undesirablealien.Thecomplainantfiledadisbarmentcase
againstthem.
b l
R o
a n a r
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
Concepts of attorney’s fees. *
a n1. Ordinary – the fee that the client pays his

a r
h
counsel for the latter’s services. B
C e s
l
2. Extraordinary attorney’s fees as an item of
b
damages which the court may order a losing party to
o
R
pay to the winning party. As a general rule, attorney’s
n
fees in the concept of damages is not recoverable
a a r
Public policy requires that no penalty be placed on the
h B
C
right to litigate.
e s
b
Exceptions are provided in Article 2208 of the l
Civil Code.
R o
a n
Claim for attorney’s fees must be pleaded.
Reasons for award must be stated in body of decision. a r
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
a n a r
h B*
C e s
Canon 21 – A lawyer shall preserve the confidences or
b l
secrets of his client even after the attorneyclient
relation is terminated.
R o
a. Conditions:
a n a r
h
1.Existence of a lawyerclient relationship or a prospective
B
C
lawyerclient relationship.
e s
2. The client made the communication in confidence.
b l
capacity.
R o
3. The legal advice is sought from the lawyer in his professional
a n a r
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
a n a r
h B
C a. When authorized by theeclient
b. Exceptions (when allowed):
s ;
b l
R
c. When necessary
o
b. When required by law;
to collect his fees or to defend himself.
His employees andn
a to partners or associates of the a r
associates or by judicial action (Rule 21.01)
h
d. Disclosure B firm, unless
C by the client (Rule 21.04)
prohibited
e s
e. Disclosure of a crime to be or inlthe process of being
committed.
o b
R
a n a r
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
a n a r
h B
C Rule21.02– e s
Alawyershallnot,tothedisadvantageofhisclient,use
b l
informationacquiredinthecourseofemployment,nowshallheusethe
sametohisadvantageorthatofathirdperson,unlesstheclientwithfull
o
knowledgeofthecircumstancesconsentsthereto.
R
a n a r
Rule21.03– Alawyershallnot,withoutthewrittenconsentofhisclient,
h B
giveinformationfromhisfilestoanoutsideagencyseekingsuch
C e s
informationforauditing,statistical,bookkeeping,accountingdata
processingoranysimilarpurpose
b l
R o
Rule21.04– Alawyermaydisclosetheaffairsofaclientofthefirmto
n
partnersorassociatesthereofunlessprohibitedbytheclient.
a a r
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
a n a r
h B
Rule21.05– Alawyershalladoptsuchmeasuresasmaybe
s
C requiredtopreventthosewhoseservicesareutilizedbyhim,
e
b l
fromdisclosingorusingconfidencesorsecretsoftheclient.
R o
n r
Rule21.06– Alawyershallavoidindiscreetconversationabout
a a
B
aclient’saffairsevenwithmembersofhisfamily.
C h s
l e
Rule21.07– Alawyershallnotrevealthathehasbeen
o b
consultedaboutaparticularcaseexcepttoavoidapossible
conflictofinterest.
R
a n a r
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
Canon22 Alawyershallwithdrawhisservicesonlyforgood
a n a r
causeanduponnoticeappropriateinthecircumstances.
h B
Rule22.01– Alawyermaywithdrawhisservicesinanyofthe
C followingcauses:
e s
b l
(a)Whentheclientpursuesanillegalorimmoralcourseofconductin
R o
connectionwiththematterheishandling;
(b)Whentheclientinsiststhatthelawyerpursueconductviolativeofthese
canonsandrules.
a n a r
h B
©Whenhisinabilitytoworkwithcocounselwillnotpromotethebest
C
interestoftheclient.
e s
forhimtocarryouttheemploymenteffectively.
b l
(d)Whenthementalorphysicalconditionofthelawyerrendersitdifficult
o
(e)Whentheclientdeliberatelyfailstopaythefeesfortheservicesorfails
R
n r
tocomplywiththeretaineragreement.
a
(f)Whenthelawyeriselectedorappointedtoapublicoffice,and
Ba
(g)Othersimilarcases.
C h s
l e
o b
R
n
e s
b l
R o
a n a r
h B
Requisitesforsubstitutionofattorney:
s
C a.Writtenapplicationforsubstitution;
e
b l
b.Writtenconsentoftheclient;
o
c.Writtenconsentoftheattorneytobesubstitutedorat
R
n r
leastnoticeofthemotionforsubstitutionservedon
a a
him.
h B
C
Rule22.02
e s
Alawyerwhowithdrawsorisdischargedshall,
b l
subjecttoaretainerlien,immeditaelyturnoverallpapersand
propertytowhichtheclientisentitled,andshallcooperate
R o
withhissuccessorintheorderlytransferofthematter,
thematter. a n
includingallinformationnecessaryfortheproperhandlingof
a r
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
a n
LIABILITIESOFLAWYERS a r
h B
C e s
A. CivilLiability
b l
R o
1.Maybeheldliabletoclientfornegligenceorfailureto
accountforclient’sfunds.
a n
2.Maynotbeheldliabletothirdpartiesforbringingan
a r
h
actionagainstthem. B
C e s
3.Maynotbeheldliableforlibelinpleadingsaslongas
materialandrelevant.
b l
longasingoodfaith. R o
4.Maynotbeheldliableformistakenadvicetoclientsas
a n a r
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
n
B.CriminalLiability
a r
a1.Forwillfullyornegligentlycausingdamageor
h B
s
C client;forconflictofinterest(Art.209RPC)
injurytotheclient;forrevealingthesecretsofthe
e
b l
R o
2.Formisappropriationofclient’sfunds
3.Forsubornationofperjuryorintroductionof
falseevidence. a n a r
h B
C e s
b l
R o
a n a r
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
n
C.ContemptofCourt
a a r
1. DirectorindirectcontemptB
h
s
C 2.Civilorcriminalcontempt
l e
o b
R
a n a r
h B
C e s
b l
R o
a n a r
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
D.SUSPENSION,DISBARMENTANDDISCIPLINEOF
a n
LAWYERS a r
h B
C e s *
b l
1.Natureandcharacteristicsofdisciplinaryactionsagainst
lawyers.
R o
n r
(a) sui generis –disciplinary proceedings are a class of their
a
own, neither civil nor criminal, but an investigation into the
B a
C h
character of a lawyer to determine his fitness to continue in the
s
e
practice of law. They involve no private interest and afford no
public welfare. b l
redress for private grievance. They are undertaken solely for
R o
(b) prescription the Statute of Limitations does not apply.
a n
Neither does prescription preclude disbarment proceedings.
However, it may indicate ulterior motive of the part of the a r
h B
s
complainant or innocence of the respondent. But, see Isenhardt
vs. Real. C e
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
2.Grounds:*
n
a (b)Actsofmisconductafteradmission;
6593,Feb.4,2010)
a r
(a)Actsofmisconductbeforeadmission(Garridov.Garrido,AC
h B
C e s
l
(1)Deceit
(2)Malpractice
o b
(3)Grossmisconductinoffice
R
n r
(4)Convictionofacrimeinvolvingmoralturpitude
a
(5)Grosslyimmoralconduct
B a
h
(6)Violationofthelawyer’soath
C s
e
(7)Willfuldisobedienceofalawfulorderofthe
l
b
court
authority
R o
(8)Corruptlyappearingforapartywithout
n
(9)Solicitationofcases(Sec.27,Rule138)
a a r
B
Ingeneral,lossofgoodmoralcharacter.
C h s
l e
o b
R
n
e s
b l
R o
3. Proceedings: *
a n r
(a) initiated by the Supreme court motu propio or by the IBP,
a
h B
or upon verified complaint by any person filed with the
C Supreme Court or an IBP Chapter.
e s
b l
(b) if complaint prima facie meritorious, referred to the IBP,
R o
or the Solicitor General, any officer of the Court or a
n
judge of a lower court.
a a r
h
(c) IBP Board of Governors assigns complaint to Commission
B
C
on Bar Discipline (CBD).
e s
b l
(d) CBD will assign complaint to a Commissioner or group of
Commissioners.
R o
n
(e) If complaint found meritorious, Commissioner(s) will
a a r
h
require respondent to file an answer.
B
C
(f) Commissioner will conduct hearing in which respondent
e s
is accorded due process.
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
(g) a
n a r
h B
After hearing, Commissioner(s) will submit Report and
C s
e dismissal of the case
Recommendation to IBP Board of Governors.
b l
(h) Board of Governors will recommend
o
or suspension or disbarment of the respondent to the
Supreme Court. R
n r
aCourt renders decision, by divisionBifapenalty
h
(i) The Supreme
C
is a fine of P10,000 less and/or suspension fors
eis fine of more
one year or
l
forbmore than one
less, and by the court en banc, if penalty
than 10,000.00 and/or suspensiono
R
year, or disbarment.
a n a r
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
a n a r
h4. Discipline B
of Filipino Lawyers Practice in Foreign
C Jurisdiction: e s
b l
(a) They may likewise be disciplined in the
R o
Philippines if their misconduct in the foreign
n
jurisdiction also constitutes ground for discipline here.
a a r
h
(b) But they are entitled to due process here, and B
C
the decision of the authorities abroad shall only be
e s
considered as prima facie evidence of misconduct.
b l
R o
a n a r
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
ReadmissiontotheBar*
a n
1.Lawyerswhoweresuspended:
a r
h B
C
Guidelines:
e s
b l
a. After a finding that the respondent lawyer must be suspended
from the practice of law, the Court shall render a decision imposing
the penalty.
R o
n r
b.Unless the Court explicitly states that decision is immediately
a
executory upon receipt thereof, the respondent has 15 days within
B a
C h
which to file a motion for reconsideration thereof. Denial of the
s
motion for reconsideration shall render the decision final and
executory.
l e
o b
c. Upon expiration of the period of suspension, the respondent
R
shall file a Sworn Statement with the Court through the Office of
n r
the Bar Confidant stating therein that he or she has desisted from
a
the practice of law and has not appeared in any court during the
Ba
C h
period of his or her suspension.
s
l e
o b
R
n
e s
b l
R o
a n a r
h B
C s
d. Copies of the sworn statement shall be furnished the Local Chapter
l e
of the IBP and to the Executive Judge of the courts where he or she
o b
has pending cases and/or has appeared as counsel.
e. The Sworn Statement shall be considered as proof of respondent’s
R
a n
compliance with the order of suspension.
f. Any finding or report contrary to the statements made by the lawyer a r
h B
C
under oath shall be ground for imposition of a more severe
e s
l
punishment, or disbarment, as may be warranted. (Maniago vs.
Atty. De Dios, A.C. No. 78472, March 30, 2010)
o b
R
a
period of suspension. He must n
Note: Lawyer is not automatically reinstated
wait for the order of the r
by the expiration of the
a
court
h BNo.
5333, March 13, 2017)C
reinstating him. (Rosa Yap
s
Paras vs. Justo de Jesus Paras, A.C.
e
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
a n a r
h B
e s
C a.Updatingandpaymentinfulloftheannual
2.Lawyerswhohavebeenrepatriated:
b l
R o
membershipduesintheIBP;
b.Paymentofprofessionaltax;
a n
c.Completionofatleast36credithoursofMCLE;
a r
h B
C s
d.Retakingofthelawyer’soath.(PetitionforLeaveto
e
l
ResumePracticeofLaw,BenjaminM.Dacanay,540
SCRA424)
o b
R
a n a r
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
n
ϯ͘͘͘>ĂǁǇĞƌƐǁŚŽŚĂǀĞďĞĞŶĚŝƐďĂƌƌĞĚ:
a a r
h B
C e s
l
a.Proofofremorseandreformation(certificationsofthe
b
o
IBP,judgesandprominentmembersofthecommunity.
R
b.Lapseofsufficienttimefromimpositionofpenalty.
n
c.Productiveyearsaheadthatcanbeputtogooduse.
a a r
h B
d.Showingofpromise(intellectualaptitude,legal
C s
scholarship)andpotentialforpublicservice.
e
b l
e.Otherrelevantfactorsandcircumstances.
Ofcourse,mustsatisfythecourtthatheisapersonofgood
moralcharacter.
R o
n
FlorenceMacarrubo vs.Atty.EdmundoI.Macarrubo,
a a r
h
A.C.6148,January22,2013.
B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
n
E.NOTARIALPRACTICE
a a r
h
1. Qualifications of Notary Public: * B
C a. Citizen of the Philippines e s
b. Over 21 years of age b l
R o
b. Resident of the Philippines for at least 1 year
a n
d. Maintains a regular place of work In the city or a r
h B
C
province where the commission is to be issued,
e s
e. Member of the Philippine bar in good standing
b l
o
f. Has not been convicted in the first instance of a
R
crime involving moral turpitude.
a n a r
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
n r
2.Termofoffice:two(2)years,commencingfromthefirst
a a
dayofJanuaryoftheyearinwhichthecommissionwas
B
hissued.*
C 3.Powersandlimitations:*es
b l
o
Powers– Acknowledgments
R
Oathsandaffirmations
a n
Jurats a r
h B
C Copycertifications
Signaturewitnessing
e s
b l
o
AnyotheractauthorizedbytheRules
R
n r
a.Witnessingsigningbythumbmark
a
b.Signingonbehalfofdisabledperson.
B a
C h s
l e
o b
R
n
e s
b l
R o
n r
4.Jurat– referstoanactinwhichanindividualonasingleoccasionappears
a a
inpersonbeforeanotarypublicandpresentsaninstrumentordocument,is
B
h personallyknowntothenotarypublicofidentifiedthroughcompetent
s
C thenotary,andtakesanoathoraffirmationastosuchinstrumentor
evidenceofidentity,signstheinstrumentordocumentinthepresenceof
l e
document.
o b
R
Acknowledgment– referstoanactinwhichanindividualonasingle
a n a r
occasion,appearsinpersonbeforethennotarypublicandpresentsan
h B
integrallycompleteinstrumentordocument,isattestedtobepersonally
C s
knowntothenotarypublicoridentifiedthroughcompetentevidenceof
e
identity,representstothenotarypublicthatthesignatureonthe
b l
instrumentofdocumentwasvoluntarilyaffixedbyhim,anddeclaresthathe
o
hasexecutedtheinstrumentordocumentashisfreeandvoluntaryactand
R
deed,anifheactsinaparticularrepresentativecapacity,thathehasthe
n r
authoritytosigninthatcapacity.
a B a
C h s
l e
o b
R
n
e s
b l
R o
Limitations: *
a n
of the instrument:
a r
a. A notary shall not perform a notarial act if the person involved as signatory
h B
s
(1) is not in the notary’s presence personally at the time of
C e
l
notarization, (Heirs of Villanueva v. Beradio, AC 6270, Jasn 23, 2007)
b
(2) is not personally known to the notary or identified
o
R
through competent document of identity. (Gonzales v. Padiernos, AC
n
6713, Dec. 8, 2008)
a a r
h
b A notary is disqualified from performing a notarial act if he:
B
C s
(1) is a party to the document or instrument to be notarized;
e
l
(2) will receive as a direct or indirect result any advantage,
b
o
right, title, interest, cash, property or other consideration;
R
(3) is a spouse, common law partner, ancestor, descendant or
a n
relative by affinity or consanguinity of the principal within
a r
the fourth civil degree
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
a n a r
c. A Notary public shall not perform a notarial act if
h B
(1) he knows or has good reason to believe that the
C e s
l
transaction is unlawful or immoral,
b
(2) the signatory shows a demeanor which engenders
o
R
reasonable doubt as to the consequence of the
a n
transaction,
a r
h
(3) The signatory is not acting of his own free will. B
C
d. A Notary Public shall not
e s
b l
(1) execute a certificate containing information known or
believed to be false,
R o
that is incomplete. a n
(2) affix an official signature or seal on a notarial certificate
a r
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
n r
*4.NotarialRegister– apermanentlyboundbookcontaininga
a a
B
chronologicalrecordofnotarialacts,withthefollowing
C h particulars:
s
a.Entrynumber’ l e
o
b.dateandtimeofact, b
R
n r
c.typeofnotarialact,
a
d.typeanddescriptionofinstrument,
B a
C h
e.nameandaddressofeachprincipal,
s
f.nameoraddressofeachwitness,
l e
g.feecharged,
o b
R
h.addresswherenotarizationwasperformedifnotin
regularplaceofwork,
a n a r
h B
s
i.anyothercircumstance.
C e
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o *
n r
5.JurisdictionofNotaryPublicandplaceofnotarization:
a
aa.Jurisdiction– territorialjurisdictionofthecommissioning
h B
C e s
court.(TanTiongBiov.Gonzales,AC6634,Aug.
l
b.Placeofnotarization– b
23,2007)
R o regularplaceofwork,except:
n r
(1)publicoffice,conventionhalls,andsimilarplaces
a
whereoathsofofficemaybeadministered,
B a
h
Cthesigningofdocumentsorinstrumentsrequiring s
(2)publicfunctionareasinhotelsandsimilarplacesfor
l e
notarization,
o b
R
(3)hospitalsandothermedicalinstitutionswherea
a n
partytoaninstrumentisconfinedfortreatment.,
a r
h
(4)anyplacewhereapartytoaninstrumentisunder
B
C
detention.
e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o *
n r
6.RevocationofCommission– Executivejudgemayrevokecommission:
a a
h B
a.Foranygroundforwhichanapplicationforacommissionmaybe
C
denied;
e s
b.Wherethenotarypublic–
b l
(1)failstokeepanotarialregister;
R o
(2)failstomakeaproperentryinhisnotarialregister;
n
(3)failstosendacopyofhisentriestotheExecutive
a a r
h
within10daysofthefollowingmonth;
B
C e s
(4)failstoaffixtoacknowledgmentsdateofexpiration
ofhiscommission;
b l
ExecutiveJudge;
R o
(5)failstosubmithisnotarialregister,whenfilled,tothe
a n
(6)failstomakehisreporttotheExecutiveJudgewithina
a r
h
reasonabletime,concerningtheperformanceofhis
B
C
duties,asmayberequiredbytheJudge
e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
a n a r
(7) fails to require the presence of a principal at the time
h B
s
of a notarial act;
C e
b l
(8) fails to identify a principal on the basis of personal
knowledge or competent evidence;
R o
(9) executes a false or incomplete certificate;
a n
(10) knowingly perform or fails to perform any other act
a r
h B
s
prohibited or mandated by the Rules;
C e
l
(11) commits any other dereliction or act which in the
b
o
judgment of the Executive Judge constitutes good cause
R
for revocation of commission or imposition of
administrative sanction.
a n a r
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
a n
7.Competentevidenceofidentity–
a r *
h B
a. at least one current identification document issued by
C e s
an official agency bearing the photograph and signature of
the individual; or
b l
R o
b. the oath or affirmation of one credible witness not
privy of the instrument, document or transaction who is
a n
personally known to the notary public, or
a r
h B
s
c. the oath of affirmation of two witnesses neither of
C
whom is privy to the instrument, document or transaction e
b l
who each personally knows the individual and shows to the
notary public documentary identification.
R o
a n a r
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
8.Sanctions:*
a n a
TheExecutiveJudgeshallcausetheprosecutionofanyr
h
personwho: B
C e s
(a)knowinglyactsorimpersonatesanotarypublic;
b l
(b)knowinglyobtains,conceals,defaces,ordestroysthe
o
seal,notarialregister,orofficialrecordsofanotarypublic,and
R
a n
(c)knowinglysolicits,coerces,orinanywayinfluencesa
notarypublictocommitofficialmisconduct. a r
h B
C
TheExecutiveJudgeconcernedshallsubmitsemestral
e s
notariespublic. b l
reportstotheSupremeCourtondisciplineandprosecutionof
R o
a n a r
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
a n
II.JUDICIALETHICS a r
h B
C e s
A. Sources:
b l
1. Constitution
R o
n r
2. Laws (Civil Code, Penal Code, AntiGraft Code, R.A 6713
3. a
Rules of Court
B a
4.
C h
Canons of Judicial Ethics
s
5. Code of Judicial Conduct (prom. Sept. 5, 1989)
l e
6.
o b
New Code of Judicial Conduct for the Philippine Judiciary
(prom. April 27, 2004) R
.
a n a r
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
a nB.Qualificationsforappointment:
a r
h B
1.ForSupremeCourtandlowercollegiatecourts:
C e s
l
a.NaturalborncitizenofthePhilippines;
b
b.Atleast40yearsofage;
o
R
c.Judgeofalowercourtorpracticedlawfor
a n
atleast15years.(Sec.7[1],Art. VIII,Phil.Const.)
a r
h
2.ForRTCjudges: B
C e s
l
a.NaturalborncitizenofthePhilippines;
b.Atleast35yearsofage;
o b
R
c.Engagedinpracticeoflaworheldpublicoffice
a n
requiringadmissiontopracticeoflawasarequisite
a r
h
foratleast10years.(JudiciaryReorg.Act) B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
n
a3.ForMTCjudges: a r
h B
C s
a.NaturalborncitizenofthePhilippines
b.Atleast30yearsofage;e
b l
c.Engagedinthepracticeoflaworheldofficerequiring
R o
admissiontothebarasareuisiteforatleast5years.
(JudiciaryReorg.Act)
a n
4.ForallmembersoftheJudiciary
a r
h B
AmemberofheJudiciarymustbeapersonofproven
C e s
competence,integrity,probityandindependence(Sec.7
[3],Art.VIII,Constitution)
b l
R o
a n a r
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
a n a r
C.JudicialandBarCouncil(Sec.8,Art.VIII,Const.)
h B
C s
1.Function recommendingappointeestotheJudiciary
e
l
(atleast3foreveryvacancy).
b
o
2.Composition:
R
a.ChiefJusticeasexofficioChairman
a n
b.SecretaryofJustice(exoficiomember)
a r
h
c.Representative(s)ofCongress(exoficiomember) B
C
d.RepresentativeoftheIntegratedBar
e s
e.ProfessorofLaw
b l
o
f.RetiredMemberoftheSupremeCourt
R
n r
c.Representativeoftheprivatepractice
a
(Regularmembersforatermof4years)
Ba
C h s
l e
o b
R
n
e s
b l
R o
a n a
D. Qualities required of judges under the New Code ofr
h B
Conduct for the Philippine Judiciary:
s
C 1. Independence is a prerequisite
e trial. A judge shall therefore
to the rule of law and a
fundamental guarantee of alfair
o b
uphold and exemplify judicial independence in both its individual
R (Canon 1) .
and institutional aspects
a n a r
Sec. h B function
s
1 – Judges shall exercise their judicial
C on the basis of their assessment
independently
e of the law, free
of the facts and in
b l
accordance with a conscientious understanding
R o
of any extraneous influence, inducement,
interference, direct or indirect, from
pressure, threat or
any quarter or for any
reason..
a n a r
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
a n a r
B
Sec. 2 – In performing judicial duties, judges shall be
C h s
independent from judicial colleagues in respect of decisions
e
which the judge is obliged to make independently.
l
o b
Sec. 3 Judges shall refrain from influencing in any manner the
outcome of litigation or dispute pending before anther court or
R
n r
administrative agency.
a
Sabitsana v. Villamor, 202 SCRA 405 – pressuring MTC judge
B a
C h s
In Re Justice Demetria, 355 SCRA 366 – CA justice interfering
with prosecution of drug case;
l e
o b
OCA vs. Judge de Guzman, 26 SCRA 292 – influencing another
RTC judge to cancel notice of lis pendens. R
thers. a n a r
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
n r
Sec.4 Judgesshallnotallowfamily,socialorother
a a
h B
relationshipstoinfluencejudicialconductorjudgment.The
C s
prestigeofjudicialofficeshallnotbeusedorlenttoadvance
e
b l
theprivateinterestsofothers,norconveyorpermitothersto
conveytheimpressionthattheyareinaspecialpositionto
influencethejudge.
R o
a n a r
B
Sec.5– Judgesshallnotonlybefreefrominappropriate
h
C s
connectionswith,andinfluenceby,theexecutiveand
e
b l
legislativebranchesofgovernment,butmustalsoappearto
befreetherefromtoareasonableobserver.
R o
a n a r
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
a n a r
2. Integrity is essential not only to the proper discharge
h B
C s
of the judicial office, but also to the personal
e
l
demeanor of judges.
b
Sec. 1 – Judges shall ensure that not only is their conduct
o
R
above reproach , but that it is perceived to be so in the view of
n r
a reasonable observer.
a
In the judiciary, moral integrity is more than a cardinal
B a
C h
virtue. It is a necessity. (Fernandez v. Hamoy, 436 SCRA 186)
s
e
Ignorance of the law is a mark of incompetence, and
l
b
where the law involved is elementary, ignorance thereof is
o
considered an indication of lack of integrity (Macalintal v. Teh,
280 SCRA 623)
R
a n a r
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
a n a r
Sec. 2 – The behavior and conduct of judges must reaffirm the
h B
people’s faith in the integrity of the Judiciary. Justice must not
C s
ethe presence of the other party must be
merely be done, but must also be seen to be done.
b l
a. Inchamber meetings without
b. Maliciously kissing o
avoided (Capuno vs. Jaramillo,243 SCRA 213)
SCRA 354, Dawa vs. De R

female subordinates (TalensDbon vs.Arceo, 29
c. Judge musta
n Asa, 292 SCRA 703)
guard against losing his temper (Echano a
r
SCRA 738) h B vs. Sunga, 102
Sec. 3 C e s
measures against lawyers or bcourt l personnel for
Judges should take or initiate appropriate disciplinary
unprofessional conduct of which the

R o judge may have become
n r
aware.
a B a
C h s
l e
o b
R
n
e s
b l
R o
a n r
*Canon3 Impartialityisessentialtotheproper
a
B
dischargeofthejudicialoffice. Itappliesnotonlyto
h
C s
thedecisionsitselfbutalsototheprocessbywhich
e
thedecisionwasmade.
b l
R
favor,biasorprejudice. o
Sec.1– Judgesshallperformtheirjudicialdutieswithout
a n a
Sec.2 Judgesshallensurethathisorherconduct,bothin r
h
andoutofcourt,maintainsandenhancestheconfidence
B of
C e s
thepublic,thelegalprofessionandlitigantsintheimpartiality
ofthejudgeandofthejudiciary.
b l
Paraynov.Meneses,231SCRA807–o
Pimentelv.Salanga,21SCRA160– people’sfaithinthejudiciary
R dutytosit
n
a Dignum.
Datuin,Jr.vs.Soriano,391SCRA2– Regularityispresumed,Notatu
a r
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
a n a r
Sec.3– Judgesshall,sofarasisreasonable,soconduct
h B
themselvesastominimizetheoccasionsonwhichitwillbe
C e s
necessaryforthemtobedisqualified fromhearingordeciding
cases.
b l
R o
a.Fraternizationwithlawyersandlitigantsshouldbevoided.
Sec.4– Judgesshallnotknowingly,whileaproceedingisbefore
a n
orcouldcomebeforethem,makeanycommentthatmightbe
a r
h
reasonablybeexpectedtoaffecttheoutcomeofsuch
B
C e s
proceedingorimpairthemanifestfairnessoftheprocess.Nor
b l
shalljudgesmakeanycommentinpublicorotherwisethat
mightaffectthefairtrialoranypersonorissue..
R o
a.Publicityforpersonalvaingloryshouldbeavoided.
a n a r
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
Sec.5– Judgesshalldisqualifythemselvesinanyproceedingsin
a n a r
whichtheyareunabletodecidethematterimpartiallyorinwhich
h B
itmayappeartoareasonableobserverthattheyareunableto
C s
decidethematterimpartially.Suchproceedingsinclude,butarenot
e
l
limitedtoinstanceswhere:
b
i. Taken from Sec. 1, Rule 137 of Revised Rules of Court.
o
R
ii Disqualification distinguished from inhibition
a n a r
B
(a)Thejudgehasactualbiasorprejudiceconcerningapartyor
C h
personalknowledgeofdisputedevidentiaryfacts.
s
l e
(1)Biasandpartialitymuststemfromextrajudicialsource
witnessinthematterincontroversy. o b
(b)Thejudgehaspreviouslyservedasalawyerorwasamaterial
R
n
(1)Thejudge’sobjectivitywillbeimpaired.
a a r
B
(2)Thejudgeisnotprecludedfromtestifyingafterinhibiting
C h s
l e
o b
R
n
e s
b l
R o
a n a r
B
(c)Thejudgeoramemberofhisfamilyhasaneconomic
C h s
interestintheoutcomeofthematterincontroversy.
l e
(1)Octubrevs.Valano,434SCRA636Judgedidnotdisqualifyhimself
complainant
o b
andissuedawartantorarrestinacriminalcasewhereheisthe
R
n r
(d)Thejudgeservedasexecutor,administrator,guardian,
a a
trusteeorlawyerinthematterincontroversy,oraformer
B
C h
associateofthejudgeservedascounselduringtheir
s
therein. l e
association,orthejudgeorlawyerwasamaterialwitness
o b
(e)Thejudge’srulinginalowercourtisthesubjectofreview.
R partial participation
n r
Sandoval v. CA, 260 SCRA 283 –
a B a
C h s
l e
o b
R
n
e s
b l
R o
a n a r
(f) The judge is related by consanguinity or affinity to a party litigant within
h B
the sixth civil degree or to counsel within the fourth civil degree.
C e s
Villaluz v. Mijares, 288 SCRA 594 – petitioner’ is judge’s daughter
b l
(g) The judge knows that his or her spouse or child has a financial interest
as heir, legatee, creditor, fiduciary, or otherwise, in the subject matter in
R o
controversy, or in a party to the proceeding, or any other interest that could
be substantially affected by the outcome of the proceedings.
a n a r
h B
Sec. 6. If the parties and lawyer, independently of the judge’s participation,
C e s
all agree in writing that the reason for the inhibition is immaterial or
b l
unsubstantial, the judge may then participate in the proceedings. The
agreement, signed by all the parties and lawyers, shall be incorporated in
the record of the proceedings.
R o
“Remittal of disqualification” – Code of Judicial conduct
a n a r
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
a n a r
Inhibitionondiscretinarygrounds;butdecisionisnotconclusive:
h B
a.Amatterofconscienceandsounddiscretion.
s
C b.Judgeshaveadutytosit,andinhibitionshouldberesorted
e
tosparingly,
b l
R o
c.Vda.DeBonifaciovs.BLTBusCo.,34SCRA618– factthatoneofthe
counselsappearingwasclassmateofthejudgeisnotagroundfor
inhibition.
a n a r
h
d.Paredes,Jr.vs.Sandiganbayn,252SCRA541–
B
meredivergenceof
C
opnionastolawapplicablenotagroundforinhibition.
e s
againstajudgenotagroundfordisqualification. l
e.Mantaringvs.Roman,254SCRA158– filingofanadministrativecase
o b
R
f,BellosilloSaludo,A.M>3297,April6,1989– Memberhipinacollege
fraternityorcivicgroupnotagroundforinhibition.
a n
g.Bautistavs,Causapin,652SCRA442– drinkingspreewithlitigants
a r
groundforinhibition.
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
a n a r
Canon 4. Propriety and the appearance of propriety are
h
essential to all activities of a judge.
B prevailing customs and usages
C (American Heritage Dictionary) es
a. Concept of propriety – conformity to
Sec. 1 – Judges shall avoid

b l impropriety and appearance of
a. His behavior notR

o
impropriety in all their activitie s.
only on the bench but also in every day life should
a
be beyond reproach.
n
se improper can be perceived by the largera
r
h
b.. Acts not per
B community as
C of improper conduct: s
such.
i. Judge who heard case while on vacation l

c. Instances
e
shirt (Liwanag v. Lusre, A.M> MTJ08981168, b
and dressed only in a polo
R o April 21, 1999);

ii. tasteless jokes in a wedding ceremony (Hadap v. Lee, 114 SCRA
559);
a n a r
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
a n a r
iii. drunken behavior in public (De la Paz v. Inutan, 64 SCRA 540).
h B who did graduate from UP
C (Mane vs, Judge Belen, A.M. RTJ082119,
iv. making insulting statements to a lawyer
e s
l
June 30, 2001)
081712, Aug. 20, 2008)

o b
v. Use of court letterhead for private letter (Ladigonvs. Garong, A.M. MTJ
vi. Immorlity R
vii. Intoxication. n r
a B a
h
viii. Use of guns to terrorize or pistolwhip
Cintemperate language s
ix. Use of
l e
x. Failure to pay debts
o b
R
a n a r
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
a n a r
Section2– Asasubjectofconstantpublicscrutiny,judgesmust
h B
C s
acceptpersonalrestrictionsthatmightbeviewedas
e
burdensomebytheordinarycitizenandshoulddosofreely
l
o b
andwillingly.Inparticular,judgesshallconductthemselvesina
waythatisconsistentwiththedignityofthejudicialoffice.
R
a n
a.Useofintemperatelanguageimproper,evenifaddressed a r
h B
C
noone(ReAnonyumous ComplaintagainstJudgeEdmundoT.
e s
l
Acuña,464SCRA250,Cua Shuk Yinvs.Perello,474SCRA472)
b
R o
a n a r
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
Sec. 3 – R
o
the nlegal profession who practice regularly in r
Judges shall, In their personal relations with individual members of
a might reasonably give rise to the B a their courts, avoid situations
C hwhich
favoritism or partiality.
s
suspicion or appearance of
l
Padilla vs. Zantua, 237 SCRA 670 e – eating with lawyer in public
o b
Sec. 4 – A judge shall not participate in the determination of a case in which
manner with the case. R

any member of their family represents a litigant or is associated in any
Vidal v. Dojillo,n r
a a
Jr., 483 SCRA 264 –moral support for brother
Sec. 5 Judges shall not allow the use of their residence byB
C h s
a member of the
e
legal profession to receive clients of the latter or of other members of the
legal profession.
b l
Sec. 6 – Judges, like any other citizen, are entitled to freedom of expression,
always conduct themselves in such a manner
R o
belief, association and assembly, but in exercising such rights, they shall
as to preserve the dignity of
Macias v. Arula, 115 SCRA 135n r

the judicial office and the impartiality and independence of the Judiciary.
a – participating in a political rally
B a
C
In re Judge Acuña, 464 SCRAh 250 – use of expletives
s
l e
o b
R
n
e s
b l
o
Sec. 7 –RJudges shall inform themselves about their personal
n
a to be informed about he financial
fiduciary
a
and financial interests and shall r make reasonable
hefforts B interests of members
C of their family. e s
b l
office to advance theiro
Sec. 8 – Judges shall not use or lend the prestige of the judicial
of their family, or R
private interests or those of a member
permit othersatonconvey the impression that anyone r
of any one else, nor shall they convey or
improperly to influence B
a is in a
C h
special position
s
them in the
Dionisio v. Escaño, 302 SCRA 411l–eposting notices for

performance of judicial duties..
o
family restaurant business in court bulletinb board
R
n acquired by a judges in their r
a used or disclosed for any otherBa
Sec. 9 – Confidential information
purpose related to their h
judicial capacity shall not be
C judicial duties.
e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
a n a r
Sec. 10 – Subject to the proper performance of judicial duties,
h
judges may: B
C e s
(a) Write, lecture, teach and participate in activities
b l
concerning the law, the legal system, the administration of
R o
justice or related activities.
(b) Appear at a public hearing before an official body
a n
concerned with matters relating to the law, the legal system,
a r
h
the administration of justice or related matters;
B
C e s
(c) Engage in other activities if such activities do not detract
b l
from the dignity of the judicial office or otherwise interfere
with the performance of judicial duties.
R o
In re Designation of Judge Rodolfo Manzano, AM 887861RTC –
a n
consitutional prohibition against designation of judges to agencies
a r
B
performing quasijudicial or administrative functions.
C h s
l e
o b
R
n
e s
b l
R o
a n a r
h B the holder of judicial office.
C Carual v. Brusola, 317 SCRA 34 e– smay serve as executor, administrator,
Sec. 11 Judges shall not practice law while
l
member of immediate family,band will not interfere with performance of
trustee, guardian or other fiduciary when estate or trust, or ward, is
judicial duties
R o
a n a r
MTC judges as notaries public ex officio, may not notarize private
are paid to the government’s account. B

documenrts, except (1) when no lawyers available in the municipality, and
h
(2) notarial feees
Sec. 12 –C s
l e
Judges may form or join associations of judges or participate in
b
other organization representing the interests of judges.
R o
Sec. 13 – Judges and members of their families
accept any gift, bequest, loan or favor in relation
shall neither ask for nor
to anything done or to be
judicial duties.
a n
done or entitled to be done by him in connection with the performance of
a r
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
Sec. 14. Judges shall not knowingly permit court staff or others subject to
n r
their influence, direction or authority, to ask for or accept any gift, bequest,
a a
B
loan or favor in relation to anything done or to be done or entitled to be
C h s
done in connection with their duties and functions.
e
Sec. 15. Subject to law and to any legal requirements of public disclosure,
l
b
judges may receive a token gift, award or benefit as appropriate to the
o
occasion on which it is made, provided that such gift, award or benefit
R
might not be reasonably perceived as intended to influence the judge in the
n r
performance of official duties or otherwise give rise to an appearance of
partiality.
a B a
C h
Gifts from foreign sources governed by Sec. 7 (d) of R.A. 6713.
s
l e
o b
R
a n a r
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
a n a
Canon 5. Ensuring Equality of treatment to all beforer
h B
the courts is essential to the due performance of
C judicial duties.
e s
b l
Sec. 1 – Judges shall be aware of and understand
R o
diversity in society and differences arising from various
sources., including, but not limited to, race., color sex,
n
religion, national origin, caste, disability, age, marital status,
a a r
B
sexual orientation, social and economic status, and other like
causes.
C h s
a. Awareness
l e
of international instruments concerning equality of human
b
beings, and rights of women and children.
R o
b. Gender and Development Mainstreaming
Judicial System adopted on December 9, 2003.
Plan for the Philippine
a n a r
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
Sec. 2 – Judges shall not, in the performance of judicial
a n
towards any person or group on irrelevant grounds.a r
duties, by words or conduct, manifest bias or prejudice
h B
C s
Sec.3 Judges shall carry out judicial duties with
e
appropriate consideration for all persons, such as the parties,
b l
witnesses, lawyers, court staff and judicial colleagues, without
o
differentiation on any irrelevant ground, immaterial to the
R
proper performance of such duties..
n
Sec. 4. Judges shall not knowingly permit court staff or
a a r
B
others subject to his or her influence, direction or control to
h
differentiate between persons concerned in a matter before
C s
the judge on any irrelevant ground.
l e
o b
Sec. 5 – Judges shall require lawyers in proceedings before
the court to refrain from manifesting bias or prejudice based on
R
irrelevant grounds, except such as are legally relevant to an
advocacy.. a n
issue in proceedings and may be the subject of legitimate
a r
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R
Canon 6.
o Competence and diligence are
a n a r
prerequisites to the due performance of judicial office.
h B take precedence over
C all other activities. s
Sec. 1 – The judicial duties of a judge
e
b l
a. The primary duty of judge is to hear and decide cases.
o
Sec. 2 – Judges R
b CA justice dismissed for failure to decide cases and motions on time
n r
shall devote their professional activity to
judicial duties,a which include not only the performance a
h B the making of
C but also other tasks relevant etosthe judicial office

judicial functions and responsibilities in court and
l
of decisions,
or the court’s operations.
o b
R
a. Other tasks of judge – record keeping and supervision of personnel.
a n a r
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
a n a r
Sec. 3 – Judges shall take reasonable steps to maintain and
h B
enhance their knowledge, skills and personal qualities
C e s
necessary for the proper performance of judicial duties, taking
b l
advantage for this purpose the training and other facilities
judges.
R o
which should be made available under judicial control, to
a n a
Verginesa v. Dilag, 580 SCRA 491 – presumed to have more than r
h
cursory knowledge of rules of procedure.
B
Sec. 4 –C s
e international
Judges shall keep themselves informed about relevant
b l
developments of international law, including
norms.
R o
conventions and other instruments establishing human rights
a n
Two general source of international law – customary and r
a
conventional norms.
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
n r
Sec. 5 – Judges shall perform all judicial duties, including the delivery of
a a
reserved decisions, efficiently, fairly and with reasonable promptness.
B
C h s
a. Periods for decision fixed by the Constitution:
l e
24 months for the Supreme Court
o b
12 months for the lower collegiate courts
3 months for lower courts
R
n r
to be counted from submission ( filing of last pleading or
a
memorandum required )
B a
C h s
Sec. 6. Judges shall maintain order and decorum in all proceedings before
e
the court, and be patient, dignified and courteous in relation to litigants,
l
b
witnesses, lawyers and others with whom the judge deals in an official
o
capacity. Judges shall require similar conduct of legal representatives, court
R
staff and others subject to their influence, direction or control.
discharge of judicial duties.

a n
Sec. 7 – Judges shall not engage in conduct incompatible with the diligent
a r
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
n
E.Powersanddutiesofcourtsandjudicialofficers
a a r
h (Rule135,RevisedRulesofCourt)
B
C e s
1. l
Sec.1– Courtsalwaysopen;justicetobepromptlyand
b
o
impartiallyadministered.
2.
R
Sec.2 Publicityofpleadingsandrecords
a n a r
a.Sittingofeverycourtshallbepublic,butpublicmaybeexcludedin
h B
theinterestofmoralityordecency.
C s
b.Recordsofeverycourtshallbeavailableforinspection,unless
forbiddenintheinterestofmoralityordecency.
e
3.
b l
Sec.3.Processofanysuperiorcourtmaybeenforcedin
4.
anypartofthePhilippines.
R o
Sec.4– Processofinferiorcourtsshallbeenforceable
a n
withintheprovincewherethemunicipalityorcitylies.
a r
h
Shallnotbeenforcedoutsidetheprovinceexceptwiththe
B
approvalof
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
a n r
thejudgeoftheRTCofsaidprovince,andonlyinthe
a
B
followingcases:
C h s
a.orderfordeliveryofpersonalpropertylyingoutsidetheprovince,
l e
b.attachmentorrealorpersonalpropertylyingoutsidetheprovince,
provinces,
o b
c.actionisagainsttwoormoredefendantsresidingindifferent
R
n r
d.whereplacewherecasehasbeenbroughtIsspecifiedinthecontract
a
Writsofexecutionissuedbyinferiorcourtsmaybeenforced
B a
C h
inanypartofthePhilippines.
s
e
Criminalprocessissuedbyajudgeofaninferiorcourtmay
l
b
beservedoutsidehisprovince whenthedistrictjudgeor
o
provincialfiscalshallcertifythattheinterestsofjusticeso
R
require.
a n a r
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
a n a r
h
5.Inherentpowersofcourts: B
C e s
a.Topreserveandenforceorderinitsimmediate
presence.
b l
o
b.Toenforceorderinproceedingsbeforeitorbefore
R
n r
personsempoweredtoconductjudicialinvestigationunderits
authority.
a B a
h s
c.Tocompelobedienceofitsjudgments,ordersor
Candtolawfulordersofajudgeoutofcourt,ina
processes
l e
casependingtherein.
o b
d.Tocontrolinfurtheranceofjusticetheconductofthe
R
ministerialofficers,andofallotherpersonsinanymanner
a n
connectedwithacasebeforeit,ineverymannerappertaining
a r
therein.
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
a n a r
h
B
C s
e.Tocompelattendanceofpersonstotestifyinacase
e
l
pendingtherein.
b
f.Toadministerorcausetobeadministeredoathsina
o
R
casependingtherein,andinallothercaseswhereitmaybe
a n
necessaryintheexerciseofitspowers,
a r
B
g.Toamendandcontrolitsprocessandorderssoasto
C h
makethemconformabletolawandjustice,
s

l e
h.Toauthorizeacopyofalostordestroyedpleadingor
b
otherpapertobefiledandusedinsteadoftheoriginalandto
o
R
restoreandsupplydeficienciesinitsrecordsandproceedings.
a n a r
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
a n a r
h B
s
C officer,allauxiliarywrits,processesandothermeans
6.Whenbylawjurisdictionisconferredinacourtorjudicial
e
b l
necessarytocarryitintoeffectmaybeemployedbysuch
o
courtorofficer;andiftheproceduretobefollowedisnot
R
n r
specificallypointedoutbylaw,anysuitableprocessormoreof
a a
proceedingmaybeadoptedwhichappearsconformabletothe
B
C h
spiritofsaidlaworrules.
s
l e
o b
7.Alltrialsuponthemeritsshallbeconductedinopencourt
andsofarasconvenientinaregularcourtroom.Allotheracts
R
n r
maybedoneinchambers.
a B a
C h s
l e
o b
R
n
e s
b l
R o
a n a r
8.AnRTCjudgeshallhavepowertohearanddetermineany
h B
C s
interlocutorymotionwhenwithinthedistrictthough
e
outsidehisprovince,afterduenoticetotheparties.A
l
o b
petitionforhabeascorpus,orforreleaseuponbailor
reductionofbailmaybeheardbyanRTCjudgeatanyplace
R
inhisjudicialdistrict.
a n
9.AnRTCjudgetransferredorreassignedtoanotherprovince
a r
h
maydecideacasetotallyheardbyhimanywhereinthe B
C e s
Philippines.Ifthecasehasonlybeenheardpartiallybyhim,
l
thepartiesmayasktheSupremeCourttoauthorizehimto
b
o
continuehearingandtodecidethecase.
R
a n a r
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
n r
F.DisciplineofMembersofthejudiciary*
a a
B byimpeachmentonly.
C h a.MembersoftheSupremeCourt–
s
(1)Grounds:
l e
b
(ii)TreasonRo
(i)CulpableviolationoftheConstitution
a n
(iii)Bribery
a r
h B
C(v)Otherhighcrimes s
(iv)GraftandCorruption
l e
(vi)Betrayalofpublictrust b
R o
(Sec.2,Art.XI,1987Constitution)
a n a r
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
a n
(2)Procedure:
a r
h B
(i)VerifiedcomplaintbyanymemberoftheHouseof
C e s
Representatives,orbyanycitizenendorsedbyanymemberof
theHouse.
b l
o
(ii)IncludedintheOrderofBusinesswithin10session
days;
R
n
(iii)Referraltoacommitteewithin3sessiondays;
a a r
h
(iv)Afterhearing,CommitteetosubmitReportapproved
B
C
bymajorityofitsmemberswithin60sessiondays;
e s
days.
b l
(v)Reportcalendaredforconsiderationwithin10session
R o
(vi)Affirmationorreversalbyatleast1/3ofallthe
n r
membersoftheHouse.
a Ba
C h s
l e
o b
R
n
e s
b l
R o
a n a r
h B
s
C (vi)Incaseverifiedcomplaintorresolutionisfiledbyatleast
e
b l
1/3oftheMembersoftheHouse,thesameshallconstitutethe
proceed. R o
ArticlesofImpeachment,andtrialbytheSenateshallforthwith
a n a r
(vii)TheSenateshallhavesolepowertotryanddecideall
h
casesofimpeachment. B
C e s
(3)Sanction:Removalfromofficeanddisqualificationtohold
b l
anyofficeundertheRepublicofthePhilippines,,andliability
o
toprosecutionandpunishmentaccordingtolaw.
R
a n a r
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
a n
b.Otherjusticesandjudges
a r
h Grounds:
B
C e s
1. Under Sec. 67 of the Judiciary Act of 1948 – Serious
b
misconduct and inefficiency. l
R
serious and light charges.o
2. Under Sections 8, 9 and 10 of Rule 140: serious, less
Serious:
a n a r
h
1. Bribery, direct or indirect B
C e s
2. Dishonesty and violations of the AntiGraft Law (RA 3019)
b l
3. Gross misconduct constituting violations of the Code
of Judicial Conduct.
R o
n
4. Knowingly rendering an unjust judgment or order.
a a r
B
5. Conviction of a crime involving moral turpitude
C h s
l e
o b
R
n
e s
b l
R o
6. Willful failure to pay a just debt
a n a r
7. Borrowing from lawyers and litigants in a case pending
h
before the court
B
C 8. Immorality
e s
b l
9. Gross ignorance of the law or procedure
R o
10. Partisan political activities
n
11. Alcoholism and/or vicious habits
a a r
h B
C
Less serious
e s
b l
1. Undue delay in rendering a decision or order. or in
transmitting the records of the court
R o
n r
2. Frequent and unjustified absences without leave or
habitual tardiness
a Ba
C h s
l e
o b
R
n
e s
b l
R o
3. Unauthorized practice of law
a n a r
4. Violation of Supreme Court rules, directives, and circulars
h B
5. Receiving additional or double compensation unless
C specifically authorized by law.
e s
b l
6. Untruthful statements in the certificate of service, and
7. Simple misconduct
R o
Light
a n a r
h
1. Vulgar and unbecoming conduct
B
C
2. Gambling in public
e s
b l
3. Fraternizing with lawyers and litigants with pending cases
in court
R o
n
4. Undue delay in the submission of monthly reports.
a a r
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
How R
o
n initiated
ab. upon verified complaint by person with a r
B personal
a. Initiated motu propio by the Supreme Court, o
C h s
knowledge, or
l e
loquitor applicable.
o b
Macalintal v. Teh, 280 vs 623 – verification nor required if res ipsa
R supported by public records of

n r
c. anonymous complaint
a
indubitable integrity.
B a
h
C sufficient in form And substance,erespondent
Procedure:
s required to
l
a. If complaint
comment within 10 days,
b. Reference to OCA for evaluation,
o b
Justice) to CA justice, (if respondentn
R
is RTC judge), RTC judge (if respondent r
c. Reference for investigation retired SC justice (if respondent is CA
a B a
h
is MTC judge).
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
a n a r
h B
C s
d. Hearing by investigating judge or justice,
l e
o b
e. Report submitted by investigating judge or justice.
R
a n
f. Action by Supreme Court.
a r
h B
C e s
b l
R o
a n a r
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
n r
e. Sanctions imposed by the Supreme Court on erring members
a
of the Judiciary.
B a
C h s
l e
1. If the judge is guilty of a serious charge:
b
(a) dismissal from the service,
o
R
(b) forfeiture of all or part of the benefits as the Court may
a n
determine, except accrued leave benefits;
a r
h
(c) disqualification from reinstatement or appointment to B
C e
any public office, including government owned or controlled s
corporation,
b l
R o
(d) Suspension from office without salary and other
benefits for more than 3 but not exceeding 6 months. and
a n
(e) A fine of more than P20,000.00 but not exceeding
a r
P40,000.00. h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
a n r
2.Ifthejudgeisguiltyofalessseriouscharge:
a
h B
s
C notlessthan1normorethan3months,or
(a)Suspension fromofficewithoutsalaryandotherbenefitsfor
e
b l
(b)AfineofmorethanP10,000.00butnorexceeding
o
P20,000.00.
R
n
3.Ifthejudgeisguiltyofalightcharge:
a a r
B
(a)AfineofnotlessthanP1,000.00butnotexceeding
C h
P10,000.00,and/or
s
(b)Censure,
l e
b
(c)Reprimand,
(d)Admonitionwithwarning.
R o
a n a r
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
n
Civilliabilityofjudges
a a r
h B
1. Generalrule– notpersonallyliablefordamagestoperson
C s
injuredinconsequenceofanactperformedwithinthescope
e
faith.
b l
ofhisofficialauthority,withoutmalice,negligenceorbad
R o
a.Goodfaithisalwayspresumed.
Exceptions:
a n a r
h
a.AdministrativeCodeof1987
B
C
b.Articles27and32oftheNewCivilCode
e s
b l
R o
a n a r
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n
e s
b l
R o
Criminalliabilityofjudges
1. a
n a r
h UnderRevisedPenalCode.
B
e s
C Unjustjudgmentrenderedthroughnegligence(Art.205)
Knowinglyrenderinganunjustjudgment(Art.204,RPC)
b l
R o
Unjustinterlocutoryorder(Art.206)
Maliciousdelayinadministrationofjustice(Art.207)
a n
Bribery,direct(At.210)orindirect(Art.211)
a r
h B
s
Opendisobedience(Art.231)
C e
l
Falsification(Art.171)
2. UndertheAntiGraftAct(R.A.3019) b
R o
Inducinganotherofficertoviolateduties(Sec.3a)
n
Requestingorreceivingagift,employment(Sec.3b,c,d)
a a r
h B
C e s
b l
R o
n

Law Notes

Diunggah oleh

Informasi Dokumen

Judul Asli

Hak Cipta

Format Tersedia

Bagikan dokumen Ini

Bagikan atau Tanam Dokumen

Opsi Berbagi

Apakah menurut Anda dokumen ini bermanfaat?

Apakah konten ini tidak pantas?

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

Law Notes

Diunggah oleh

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

CHANROBLES PROFESSIONAL REVIEW, INC.

LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS &

BY: JUSTICE HECTOR L. HOFILEÑA

C a. Student Practice Rule (Rule e138A) s

(4) Small Claims cases. n r

o b allowed to practice in the office where they

(2) Under then

h in connection with any matterBin which he had

said partner is deceased.

lawyer has not been paid. o b

whatsoever related to his b l

prevent imposition, injustice of fraud. bl

a n1. Ordinary – the fee that the client pays his

SCRA 354, Dawa vs. De R

unprofessional conduct of which the

Sec. 1 – Judges shall avoid

a. His behavior notR

i. Judge who heard case while on vacation l

R o April 21, 1999);

081712, Aug. 20, 2008)

manner with the case. R

Macias v. Arula, 115 SCRA 135n r

Dionisio v. Escaño, 302 SCRA 411l–eposting notices for

are paid to the government’s account. B

C but also other tasks relevant etosthe judicial office

discharge of judicial duties.

R supported by public records of

Anda mungkin juga menyukai