University of Santo Tomas

Faculty of Civil Law

LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
Questions Asked More Than Once
(QuAMTO 2018)
*QUAMTO is a compilation of past bar questions with answers as suggested by UPLC and other
distinct luminaries in the academe, and updated by the UST Academics Committee to fit for the 2018
Bar Exams.
*Bar questions are arranged per topic in accordance with the bar syllabus released by the Supreme
Court and were selected based on their occurrence on past bar examinations from 1987 to 2017.
ACADEMICS COMMITTEE SECRETARY GENERAL
EDREA JEAN V. RAMIREZ
ARIANNA LAINE T. EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE
SARMIENTO
MARIA ANGELICA J. HADLOC
MARIELLA A. MARASIGAN
GENA MYRTLE P. TERRE
LAURISSE MARIE T. LAYOUT AND DESIGN
PERIANES
JED NATHANIEL M.
GONZALEZ

1
LEGAL ETHICS
Q: What do you understand by Legal Ethics? Discuss its importance and state its sources.
A: Legal ethics is that branch of moral science which treats of the duties that an attorney owes to the
court, to his client, to his colleagues, in the profession, and to society.
The sources of legal ethics are the Constitution, the Rules of Court, some particular provisions of
statutes, the Code of Professional Responsibility and Judicial decisions.
Legal ethics is important in order to maintain a high moral standard for the lawyer in performing his
duties as an officer of the court, his duties to his client, to the members of the legal profession as well
as to society. Lawyers wield so much power and influence in society. Unless their acts are regulated by
high norms of ethical conduct they are likely to abuse them.
PRACTICE OF LAW (RULE 138)
Definition of the practice of law
Q: Atty. Yabang was suspended as a member of the Bar for period of one (1) year. During the
period of suspension, he was permitted by his law firm to continue working in their office,
drafting and preparing pleadings and other legal documents, but was not allowed to come into
direct contact with the firms’ clients. Atty. Yabang was subsequently sued for illegal practice of
law. Would the case prosper? Explain. (2005 Bar)
A:The Supreme Court has defined the practice of law as any activity in or out of court, which requires
the application of law, legal principle, practice or procedure and calls for legal knowledge, training and
experience (Cayetano vs. Monsod, 201 SCRA 210 [1991]). Based on this definition, the acts of Atty.
Yabang of preparing pleadings and other legal documents would constitute practice of law. More so, if
his activities are for the benefit of his law firm, because the employment of a law firm is the
employment of all the members thereof. The case against him will prosper.
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
The traditional concept of practice of law requires the existence of a lawyer-client relationship as a
requisite. Pursuant to this concept, inasmuch as Atty. Yabang was not allowed by his law firm to come
into direct contact with the firm’s clients during the period of his suspension, he cannot be considered
as having engaged in illegal practice of law. . The case against him will not prosper.
Q: Evelyn, Luisa. Myra, Josefina, Pamela and Rose are bona fide members of the Philippine bar.
They agree to form a close corporation to be named LEGALCARE the principal purpose of
which is “to provide clients legal services, research and advice as well as trial advocacy for a
fee." The services shall be rendered not only by these enterprising pioneers of LEGALCARE
but also by lawyers to be employed by the projected corporation on regular monthly salary
basis.
May LEGALCARE be legally incorporated? Discuss fully. (1995 Bar)
A:A corporation cannot engage in the practice of law even by hiring lawyers to perform legal work. It
has been held that only a natural person can engage in the practice of law. A lawyer is burdened with
peculiar duties and responsibilities. A corporation cannot take an oath of office, be an officer of the
court or subjected to court discipline: it cannot engage in law practice directly, it cannot evade the
requirements by employing competent lawyers to practice for it (Matter of Cooperative Law Co., N.Y.
579). Hence, LEGALCARE cannot be legally incorporated because the principal purpose involves the
practice of law.
Practice of law is a privilege, not a right
Q: Is the practice oflaw a right or a privilege? Discuss fully. (1995 Bar)
A:The practice of law is basically a privilege because it is limited to persons of good moral character
with special qualifications duly ascertained and certified (5 Am. Jur. 270). Thus, only those persons are
allowed to practice law, who by reason of attainments previously acquired through education and
study, have been recognized by the courts as possessing profound knowledge of legal science.
Attorneys are the court’s constituency - to aid it in the administration of justice (Dodge v. State, 38 NE
745).
Law as a profession, not a business or trade
Q: Why is law a profession and not a trade? (2006 Bar)
A: Law is a profession and not a trade because its basic ideal is to render public service and secure
justice for those who seek its aid. The gaining of a livelihood is only a secondary consideration.
Q: You are the managing partner of a law firm. A new foreign airline company, recently granted
rights by the Civil Aeronautics Board at the NAIA, is scouting for a law firm which could handle
its cases in the Philippines and provide legal services to the company and its personnel. After
discussing with you the extent of the legal services your law firm is prepared to render, the
general manager gives you a letter-proposal from another law firm in which its time-billing rates
and professional fees for various legal services are indicated. You are asked to submit a similar
letter-proposal stating your firm's proposed fees. The airline company's general manager also
tells you that, if your proposed fees would at least be 25 per cent lower than those proposed by
the other firm, you will get the company's legal business. How would you react to the
suggestion? (1997 Bar)
A:I will emphasize to the General Manager that the practice of law is a profession and not a trade.
Consequently, I will not propose a lower fee just for the sake of competing with another firm. Because
such practice smacks of commercialism. Moreover, Rule 2. 04 of the Code of Professional
Responsibility provides that a lawyer shall not charge rates lower than those customarily prescribed
unless the circumstances so warrant. I will charge fees that will be reasonable under the
circumstances.
Q: As a new lawyer, Attorney Novato started with a practice limited to small claims cases, legal
counseling, and notarization of documents. He put up a solo practice law office and was
assisted by his wife who served as his secretary/helper. He used a makeshift hut in a vacant lot
near the local courts and a local transport regulatory agency. With this strategic location, he
enjoyed heavy patronage assisting walk-in clients in the preparation and filing of pleadings and
in the preparation and notarization of contracts and documents, and charges a reasonable fee
for the service. He draws electric power from an extension wire connected to an adjoining small
restaurant. He put up a shingle that reads: “Atty. Novato, Specialist in Small Claims, Fastest in
Notarization; the Be stand Cheapest in Copier Services.”
Is Atty. Novato’s manner of carrying out his professional practice –i.e., mixing business with
the practice of law, announcing his activities via a shingle and locating his office as above-
described – in keeping with appropriate ethical and professional practice? (2013 Bar)
A: No. Atty. Novato’s manner of carrying out his professional practice is not in keeping with appropriate
ethical and professional practice. He has degraded the law profession, which may result to loss of
respect to lawyers as a whole.
The use of a makeshift hut standing alone would create the impression that the lawyer does not have a
permanent address which is required to be stated in all pleadings he signs as well as required to be
shown in documents he notarizes.
His shingle shows that he has considered the law profession as a business. He should have a
separate shingle for his copier services business.
When he included in his shingle the phrases “Specialist in Small Claims” and “Fastest in
Notarization,”he has transgressed the rule that a lawyer in making known his legal services shall use
only dignified information or statement of facts (Code of Professional Responsibility, Canon 3). So also
the norm that a lawyer shall not use or permit the use of any misleading, undignified, self-laudatory or
unfair statement or claim regarding his qualifications or legal services (Ibid., Canon 3, Rule 3.01).
The use of the phrases “Specialist in Small Claims”and “Fastest in Notarization”is misleading
advertisement because they are likely to create an unjustified expectation about the results the lawyer
can achieve or implies that the lawyer can achieve results by improper means (ABA Model Rule 7.1.b).
Q: Cite some of the characteristics of the legal profession which distinguish it from business.
(2015 Bar)
A: The primary characteristics which distinguish the legal profession from a business are:
1. a duty of public service of which emolument is a by-product and in which one may attain the highest
eminence without making much money;
2. a relation as officer of the court to the administration of justice involving thorough sincerity, integrity
and reliability;
3. a relation to client in the highest degree fiduciary;
4. A relation to colleagues characterized by candor, fairness and unwillingness to resort to current
business methods of advertising and encroachment on their, or dealing directly with their clients (In Re
Sycip, 92 SCRA 1).

Qualifications for admission to the Bar

Q: Upon learning from newspaper reports that bar candidate Vic Pugote passed the bar
examinations. Miss Adorable immediately lodged a complaint with the QUAMTO (1987-2017)
3
Supreme Court, praying that Vic Pugote be disallowed from taking the oath as a member of the
Philippine Bar because he was maintaining illicit sexual relations with several women other
than his lawfully wedded spouse. However, from unexplained reasons, he succeeded to take
his oath as a lawyer. Later, when confronted with Miss Adorable’s complaint formally, Pugote
moved for its dismissal on the ground that it is already moot and academic.
Should Miss Adorable’s complaint be dismissed or not? Explain briefly. (2004 Bar)
A: It should not be dismissed. Her charge involves a matter of good moral character which is not only
a requisite for admission to the Bar, but also a continuing condition for remaining a member of the
Bar. As such, the admission of Vic Pugote to the Bar does not render the question moot and
academic.
Q: Miguel Jactar, a fourth year law student, drove his vehicle recklessly and hit the rear
bumper of SimplicioMedroso’s vehicle. Instead of stopping, Jactar accelerated and sped away.
Medroso pursued Jactar and caught up with him at an intersection.
In their confrontation, Jactar dared Medroso to sue, bragged about his connections with the
courts, and even uttered veiled threats against Medroso. During the police investigation that
followed, Medroso learned that Jactar was reviewing for the Bar examinations.
Under these facts, list and justify the potential objections that can be made against Jactar’s
admission to the practice of law. (2013 Bar)
A: The potential objection that can be made against Jactar’s admission to the practice of law is the
absence of good moral character (Rules of Court, Rule 138, Sec. 2).
Jactar’s bragging about his connection with the courts and uttering veiled threats against Medroso are
indications of his lack of good moral character. His acts are contrary to justice, honesty, modesty or
good morals (In Re Basa, 41 Phil. 276). He has acted in a manner that has violated the private and
social duties which a man owes to his fellowmen, or to society in general, contrary to the accepted
and customary rule of right and duty between man and man (Tak Ng v. Republic, G.R. No. L-13017,
106 Phil. 730, December 23, 1959).
NOTE: Any answer which explains the nature of absence of good moral character should be given full
credit.
The following additional objection should not result to a deduction nor should an absence of the
additional objection also result to a deduction.
a. If light threats would be filed against him, then another potential objection would be the pendency of
charges against him, involving moral turpitude (Rules of Court, Rule 138, Sec. 2).
b. The question states, “Under these facts, list and justify the potential objections that can be made
against Jactar’s admission to the practice of law.”
c. The question requires that an assumption be made that Jactar has passed the Bar Examination and
is about to take his oath as an attorney. It is suggested that the better question should have been:
“Under these facts, list and justify the potential objections that can be made against Jactar’s being
admitted to take the Bar Examination.”

Q: Prior to his admission to the freshman year in a reputable law school, bar examinee A was
charged before the Municipal Trial Court with damage to property through reckless
imprudence for accidentally sideswiping a parked jeepney. The case was amicably settled with
A agreeing to pay the claim of the jeepney owner for P1,000.00. In his application to take the
1997 Bar Examinations, A did not disclose the above incident. Is he qualified to take the Bar
Examinations? (1997, 2005 Bar)
A: Rule 7.01 of the Code of Professional Responsibility provides that “a lawyer shall be answerable
for knowingly making a false statement or suppressing a material fact in connection with his
application for admission to the bar”. In the case of In Re: Ramon Galang, 66 SCRA 245, the
respondent repeatedly omitted to make mention of the fact that there was a pending criminal case for
slight physical injuries against him in all four (4) applications for admission to take the bar
examinations. He was found to have fraudulently concealed and withheld such fact from the Supreme
Court and committed perjury. The Supreme Court cited the rule that “the concealment of an attorney
in his application to take the bar examinations of the fact that he had been charged with, or indicted
for, an alleged crime, is a ground for revocation of his license to practice law.”
A’s failure to disclose that he had been charged with damage to property through reckless imprudence
in his application for admission to the bar examinations disqualifies him. It does not matter that the
offense charged does not involve moral turpitude or has been amicably settled. When the applicant
concealed a charge of a crime against him but which crime does not involve moral turpitude, this
concealment UST BAR OPERATIONS
Legal and Judicial Ethics
4
nevertheless will be taken against him. It is the fact of concealment and not the commission of the
crime itself that makes him morally unfit to become a lawyer (In Re: Ramon Galang, A.C. No. 1163,
August 29, 1975).
Q: Does the legislature have the power to regulate admission to the bar and the practice of
law? Discuss fully. (1995 Bar)
A: Congress under the 1987 Constitution has no power to regulate admission to the Bar and the
practice of law. Unlike the 1935 and 1973 Constitutions, the 1987 Constitution no longer provides for
the power of the legislature to repeal, alter and supplement the rules promulgated by the Supreme
Court. Under the 1935 Constitution, the legislature had the power to repeal, alter the rules
promulgated by the Supreme Court although the power and the responsibility to admit members of the
bar resides in the Supreme Court (In Re: Cunanan, 50 OG 1602). Under the 1987 Constitution
however, the Supreme Court has the exclusive power to promulgate rules concerning the
enforcement of rights, pleadings and practice and procedures of all courts and the admission to the
practice of law (See Art. 8. Section 5, subpar. 3-5).
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
Agpalo has pointed out that the legislature, in the exercise of police power, may enact laws regulating
the practice of law to protect the public and promote public welfare, but it may not pass a law that will
control the Supreme Court in the performance of its function to decide who may be admitted into the
practice of law (Agpalo, Legal Ethics, 5th Edition, p. 5). Constitutional Commissioner Joaquin C.
Bemas also submits that the matter stays as if the 1935 and 1973 provisions had been re-enacted
(Bernas, The Constitution of the Republic of the Philippines. 1992 ed., Vol. II. p. 293).
APPEARANCE OF NON-LAWYERS
Law student practice rule (Rule 18-A)
Q: Enumerate the instances when a law student may appear in court as counsel for a litigant.
(2006 Bar)
A:
a. Under the Student Practice Rule, a law student who has successfully completed his third year of
the regular four-year prescribed law curriculum and is enrolled in a recognized law school’s clinical
legal education program approved by the Supreme court, may appear without compensation in any
civil, criminal or administrative case before any trial court, tribunal, board or officer, to represent
indigent clients accepted by the legal clinic
of the law school, under the direct supervision and control of a member of the Integrated Bar of the
Philippines if he appears in a Regional Trial Court, and without such supervision if he appears in an
inferior court (Bar Matter 730, June 10, 1997);
b. When he appears as an agent or friend of a litigant in an inferior court (Sec. 34, Rule 138, Revised
Rules of Court);
c. When he is authorized by law to appear for the Government of the Philippines (Sec. 33, Rule 138,
Revised Rules of Court);
d. In remote municipalities where members of the bar are not available, the judge of an inferior court
may appoint a non-lawyer who is a resident the province and of good repute for probity and ability, to
aid the defendant in his defense (Sec. 4, Rule 116, Revised Rules of Court);
e. A law student may appear before the National Labor Relations Commission or any Labor Arbiter if
(a) he represents himself, as a party to the case, (b) he represents an organization or its members
with written authorization from them, or (c) he is a duly-accredited member of any legal aid office duly
recognized by the Department of Justice or the Integrated Bar of the Philippines in cases referred to
by the latter (Art. 222, Labor Code;Kanlaon Construction Enterprises Co., Inc. v. NLRC, 279 SCRA
337 [1997]); and
f. Under the Cadastral Act, a non-lawyer may represent a claimant before the Cadastral Court (Sec. 8,
Act No.2250).

Q: What is the student practice rule? (2009 Bar)

A: The Student Practice Rule (Rule 138-A) is the Rule authorizing a law student who has successfully
completed his 3rd year of the regular four-year prescribed law curriculum and is enrolled in a
recognized law school’s clinical legal education program approved by the Supreme Court, to appear
without compensation in any civil, criminal or administrative case before any trial court, tribunal or
board or officer, to represent indigent clients accepted by the legal clinic of the law school, under the
direct supervision and control of a member of the IBP accredited by the law school.
Non-lawyers in courts
Q: Generally, only those who are members of the bar can appear in court. Are there exceptions
to this rule? Explain (1996 Bar)
A: The exceptions to the rule that only those who are members of the bar can appear in court are the
following: QUAMTO (1987-2017)
5
a. In the municipal trial court, a party may conduct his litigation in person or with the aid of an agent or
friend (Sec. 34. Rule 138).
b. In any other court, a party may conduct his litigation personally (Id.)
c. In criminal proceedings before a municipal trial court in a locality where a duly licensed member of
the bar is not available, the court may in its discretion admit or assign a person, resident of the
province and of good repute for probity and ability, to aid the defendant in his defense, although the
person so assigned is not a duly authorized member of the bar (Sec. 4. Rule 116).
d. Any official or other person appointed or designated in accordance with law to appear for the
Government of the Philippines shall have all the rights of a duly authorized member of the bar to
appear in any case in which said government has an interest direct or indirect (Sec. 33. Rule 138).
e. A senior law student who is enrolled in a recognized law school’s clinical education program
approved by the Supreme Court may appear before any court without compensation to represent
indigent clients accepted by the Legal Clinic of the law school (Rule 138-A).
f. Non-lawyers may appear before the NLRC or any Labor Arbiter if they represent themselves or their
labor organization or members thereof (Art. 222, Labor Code).
g. Under the Cadastral Act, a non-lawyer can rep-resent a claimant before the Cadastral Court (Sec.
9. Act. 2259).

Q: A, a mere high school graduate, with the aid of a friend who is a college undergraduate, filed
a complaint for recovery of a sum of money in the amount of Four Thousand (P4, 000.00)
Pesos in the Metropolitan Trial Court of his town. The Clerk of Court told A that his complaint
might be dismissed for insufficiency as to form because neither he nor his friend who is
assisting him is a lawyer. Is the Clerk of Court correct? (1999 Bar)
A: The Clerk of Court is not correct. In the Justice of the Peace courts (now known as Municipal Trial
Court or Municipal Circuit Trial Courts or Metropolitan Trial Court), a party may conduct his litigation in
person, with the aid of an agent or friend appointed by him for that purpose, or with the aid of an
attorney (Sec. 34, Rule 138, Rules of Court).
Q: A, a law graduate but has not passed the bar examination, filed a Complaint in the Regional
Trial Court for recovery of Fifty Thousand (P50, 000.00) Pesos owed him by B. At the hearing of
the case after Answer was filed, A appeared by himself alone and without counsel to prosecute
his case. The defendant pointed out to the Court that A was not a member of the bar and
suggested that for his own protection, A should engage the services of a counsel duly
accredited as a member of the Bar. The Judge intimated his willingness to reset the hearing of
the case to another day to enable plaintiff to engage the services of counsel. Plaintiff replied
he could manage to prosecute his own case, it being but a simple case for collection of sum of
money. If you were the Judge, will you allow A to continue prosecuting his case by himself
alone? (1999 Bar)
A: Section 34, Rule 138 of the Rules of Court provides that in a Regional Trial Court, a party may
conduct his litigation personally or by aid of an attorney, and his appearance must be either personal
or by a duly authorized member of the bar. Hence, if I were the Judge, I will allow A to continue
prosecuting his case alone, but I will warn him about the risks involved in his doing so because of his
lack of knowledge of law and legal procedure.

ALTERNATIVE ANSWERS:
a. If I were the Judge, I will not allow A to prosecute his case. Although he is a law graduate, it does
not appear that he is familiar with procedural law, having filed the case with the RTC which has no
jurisdiction over the case in view of the amount involved. The judge is duty bound to see to it that
there is no miscarriage of justice.
b. No. I shall dismiss the case for lack of jurisdiction because the amount of P50.000.00 is within the
jurisdictional ambit of the Municipal Trial Court. Consequently, A could not continue prosecuting the
case.

Non-lawyers in administrative tribunals

Q: Raul Catapang, a law graduate and vice-president for labor relations of XYZ Labor Union,
entered his appearance as representative of a member of the union before the Labor Arbiter in
a case for illegal dismissal, unpaid wages and overtime pay. Counsel for the Company
objected to Raul’s appearance and moved for his disqualification on the ground that he is not
a lawyer. If you were the Labor Arbiter, how would you resolve the motion? Why? (2002 Bar)
A: I will deny the motion to disqualify Raul. Article 222 of the Labor Code authorizes non-lawyers to
appear before the National Labor Relations Commission or any Labor Arbiter in representation of their
organization or members thereof.
SANCTIONS FOR PRACTICE OR APPEARANCE WITHOUT AUTHORITY UST BAR
OPERATIONS
Legal and Judicial Ethics
6
Lawyers without authority
Q:
A. The Supreme Court suspended indefinitely Atty. Fernandez from the practice of law for
gross immorality. He asked the Municipal Circuit Trial Court Judge of his town if he can be
appointed counsel de officio for Tony, a childhood friend who is accused of theft. The judge
refused because Atty. Fernandez’s name appears in the Supreme Court’s List of Suspended
Lawyers. Atty. Fernandez then inquired if he can appear as a friend for Tony to defend him. If
you were the judge, will you authorize him to appear in your court as a friend for Tony?

B. Supposing Tony is a defendant in a civil case for collection of sum of money before the
same court, can Atty. Fernandez appear for him to conduct his litigation? (2006 Bar)

A:
A. I will not authorize him to appear as a friend of Tony. The accused in a criminal case is entitled to
be represented by legal counsel, and only a lawyer can be appointed as counsel de officio. Although a
municipal trial court may appoint a person of good refute to aid the accused as counsel de officio in
his defense, this is applicable only where members of the bar are not present (Sec. 4, Rule 116,
Revised Rules of Court). Necessarily, the friend referred to one who is not a lawyer. Atty. Fernandez
is a lawyer but under indefinite suspension. He should not be allowed to practice law even as a
counsel de officio.

B. Even if Tony is a defendant in a civil case, Atty. Fernandez cannot be allowed to appear for him to
conduct his litigation; otherwise, the judge will be violating Canon 9 of the Code of Professional
Responsibility which provides that "a lawyer shall not, directly or indirectly, assist in the unauthorized
practice of law.

ALTERNATIVE ANSWERSTO 1 AND 2:

Yes, if Atty. Fernandez was appointed by Tony. Even if Atty. Fernandez was suspended indefinitely,
he may appear as an. agent or friend of Tony, the party litigant in the Municipal Trial Court, if Tony
appoints him to conduct his case (Sec. 34, Rule 138, Revised Rules of Court, Cantimbuhan v. Cruz,
Jr., 126 SCRA 190 [1983]).
Q: Atty. E entered his appearance as counsel for defendant F in a case pending before the
Regional Trial Court. F later complained that he did not authorize Atty. E to appear for him. F
moved that the court suspend Atty. E from the practice of law. May the judge grant the motion?
Explain. (2000 Bar)
A: The judge may grant the motion. Unauthorized appearance is a ground for suspension or
disbarment (Sec. 27, Rule 138, Rules of Court).
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
It depends. A lawyer’s appearance for a party without the authority of the latter must be willful, corrupt
or contumacious in order that he may be held administratively liable therefor. But if he has acted in
good faith, the complaint for suspension will fail (Garrido v. Qutsumbing, 28 SCRA 614 [1969]).
PUBLIC OFFICIALS AND THE PRACTICE OF LAW
Prohibition or disqualification of former government attorneys
Q: Atty. Herminio de Pano is a former Prosecutor of the City of Manila who established his own
law office after taking advantage of the Early Retirement Law. He was approached by Estrella
Cabigao to act as private prosecutor in an estafa case in which she is the complainant. It
appears that said estafa case was investigated by Atty. de Panowhen he was still a Prosecutor.
Should Atty. de Pano accept employment as private prosecutor in said estafa case? Explain.
(1992 Bar)
A:Atty. de Pano should not accept the employment as private prosecutor as he will be violating Canon
6, Rule 6.03 of the Code of Professional Responsibility which provides that a lawyer shall not, after
leaving government service, accept employment in connection with any matter in which he had
intervened while in said service.
Q: Lawyer U, a retired Tanodbayan prosecutor, now in the private practice of law entered his
appearance for and in behalf of an accused in a case before the Sandiganbayan. The
prosecution moved for his disqualification on the ground that he had earlier appeared for the
prosecution in the case and is knowledgeable about the prosecution's evidence, both
documentary and testimonial. U contended that he merely appeared at the arraignment on
behalf of the prosecutor assigned to the case who was absent at the time. Decide. (1991 Bar)
A: Lawyer U should be disqualified from entering his appearance in this case even only for
arraignment of the accused. His appearance QUAMTO (1987-2017)
7
is deemed to be appearing for conflicting interest.
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
Canon 36 provides that a lawyer, having once held public office or having been in public employ,
should not, after his retirement, accept employment in connection with any matter he has investigated
or passed upon while in such office or employ. The contention of U that he merely appeared at the
arraignment on behalf of the absent prosecutor, is not enough. As a former Tanod-bayan prosecutor,
he certainly had occasion to obtain knowledge about the prosecution’s evidence.
Public officials who cannot practice law or can practice law with restrictions
Q:A town mayor was indicted for homicide through reckless imprudence arising from a
vehicular accident. May his father-in-law who is a lawyer and a Sangguniang Panlalawigan
member represent him in court? Reason. (2000 Bar)
A: Yes, his father-in-law may represent him in court. Under the Local Government Code (R.A. 7160),
members of the Sanggunian may engage in the practice of law, except in the following: (1) they shall
not appear as counsel before any court in any civil case wherein a local government unit or any office,
agency or instrumentality of the government is the adverse party; (2) they shall not appear as counsel
in any criminal case wherein an officer or employee of the national or local government is accused of
an offense committed in relation to his office; (3) they shall not collect any fee for their appearance in
administrative proceedings including the local government unit of which he is an official; and (4) they
shall not use property and personnel of the Government except when the Sanggunian member
concerned is defending the interests of the government. In this case, the town mayor was indicted for
homicide through reckless imprudence, an offense that is not related to his office.
Q:In a civil case before the Regional Trial Court between Mercy Sanchez and Cora Delano,
Sanchez engaged the services of the Reyes Cruz & Santos Law Offices. Delano moved for the
disqualification of the Reyes Cruz & Santos Law Offices on the ground that Atty. Cruz is an
incumbent senator. Rule on the motion with reasons. (1990 Bar)
A:As a judge, I will require that the name of Atty. Cruz, an incumbent Senator, be dropped from any
pleading filed in court or from any oral appearance for the law firm by any other member of the law
firm, and should the law firm refuse, I will disqualify the law firm. My reasons are as follows:
Article VI, Sec. 14 of the 1987 Constitution provides that “no Senator or Member of the House of
Representatives may personally appear as counsel before any court of Justice or before the Electoral
Tribunals, or quasi-judicial and other administrative bodies." What is prohibited is personal
appearance of the Senator Atty. Cruz, and for as long as the Senator does not personally appear in
court for Mercy Sanchez, the prohibition does not apply. Personal appearance includes not only
arguing or attending a hearing of a case in court but also the signing of a pleading and filing it in court.
Hence, the Senator should not allow his name to appear in pleadings filed in court by itself or as part
of a law firm name, such as Reyes Cruz and Santos Law Offices, under the signature of another
lawyer in the law firm, nor should he allow the firm name with his name therein to appear as counsel
through another lawyer, without indirectly violating the constitutional restriction, because the signature
of an agent amounts to a signing by the Senator through another lawyer is in effect his appearance,
the office of attorney being originally one of agency, and because the Senator cannot do indirectly
what the Constitution prohibits directly. The lawyer actually appearing for Mercy Sanchez should drop
the name of Atty. Cruz from any pleading or from any oral appearance in court, otherwise the law firm
could be disqualified. Moreover, Rule 6.02 of the Code of Professional Responsibility prohibits a
lawyer in government from using his public position to promote or advance his private interests, and
the Senator’s name appearing in pleadings or in appearances by other lawyers in the law firm may be
misconstrued as indirectly influencing the judge to decide the case in favor of the law firm’s client,
which can only be avoided by dropping the name of the Senator from the firm name whenever it
appears in court.
ALTERNATIVE ANSWERS:
a. The motion to disqualify the Reyes Cruz and Santos Law Offices may not prosper as Article VI,
Section 14 of the Constitution prohibits a Senator or Member of the House of Representatives to
personally appear as counsel in any court of justice. If Attorney Cruz who is a Senator personally
appears, he may be disqualified.
b. I will deny the motion. The Constitution prohibits personal appearance by a member of Congress
before the Courts but does not totally prohibit law practice. As long as the Senator does not personally
or physically appear in court, there is no disqualification.
UST BAR OPERATIONS
Legal and Judicial Ethics
8
Lawyers who are authorized to represent government
Q: From the viewpoint of legal ethics, why should it be mandatory that the public prosecutor
be present at the trial of a criminal case despite the presence of a private prosecutor? (2001
Bar)
A: The public prosecutor must be present at the trial of the criminal case despite the presence of a
private prosecutor in order to see to it that the interest of the State is well-guarded and protected,
should the private prosecutor be found lacking in competence in prosecuting the case. Moreover, the
primary duty of a public prosecutor is not to convict but to see to it that justice is done (Rule 6.01,
Code of Professional Responsibility). A private prosecutor would be naturally interested only in the
conviction of the accused.
Q: Prosecutor Coronel entered his appearance on behalf of the State before a Family Court in a
case for declaration of nullity of marriage, but he failed to appear in all the subsequent
proceedings. When required by the Department of Justice to explain, he argued that the
parties in the case were ably represented by their respective counsels and that his time would
be better employed in more substantial prosecutorial functions, such as investigations,
inquests and appearances in court hearings. Is Atty. Coronel’s explanation tenable? (2017,
2006 Bar)
A:Atty. Coronel’s explanation is not tenable. The role of the State’s lawyer in nullification of marriage
cases is that of protector of the institution of marriage (Art 48, Family Code). “The task of protecting
marriage as an inviolable social institution requires vigilant and zealous participation and not mere pro
forma compliance" (Malcampo-Sin v. Sin, 355 SCRA 285 [2001]). This role could not be left to the-
private counsels who have been engaged to protect the private interests of the parties.
LAWYER’S OATH
Q: The Lawyer’s Oath is a source of obligation and its violation is a ground for suspension,
disbarment, or other disciplinary action. State in substance the Lawyer’s Oath. (2015, 2009
Bar)
Answer:
“I, ____________________________________________, having been permitted to continue in the
practice of law in the Philippines, do solemnly swear that I recognize the supreme authority of the
Republic of the Philippines; I will support its Constitution and obey the law as well as the legal orders
of the duly constituted authorities therein; I will do no falsehood, nor consent to the doing of any in
court; I will not wittingly or willingly promote or sue any groundless, false or unlawful suit, nor give aid
nor consent to the same; I will delay no man for money or malice, and will conduct myself as a lawyer
according to the best of my knowledge and discretion with all good fidelity as well to the courts as to
my clients; and I impose upon myself this voluntary obligation without any mental reservation or
purpose of evasion. So help me God.”
Q: What is the significance of lawyer's oath? (1996, 2003 Bar)
A: “The significance of the oath is that it not only impresses upon the attorney his responsibilities but it
also stamps him as an officer of the court with rights, powers and duties as important as those of the
judge themselves. The oath of a lawyer is a condensed code of legal ethics. It is a source of his
obligation and its violation is a ground for his suspension, disbarment or other disciplinary action"
(Agpalo, Legal Ethics, 5th ed., p.59).
Q: Section 20, Rule 138 of the Rules of Court enumerates nine (9) duties of attorneys. Give at
least three (3) of them. (2000, 2007 Bar)
A: Under Section 20, Rule 138, it is the duty of an attorney:
1. To maintain allegiance to the Republic of the Philippines;
2. To maintain the respect due to the courts of justice and judicial officers;
3. To counsel or maintain such actions or proceedings only as appear to him to be just, and such
defenses only as he believes to be honestly debatable under the law;
4. To employ, for the purpose of maintaining the causes confided to him such means only as are
consistent with truth and honor, and never seek to mislead the judge or any Judicial officer by an
artifice or false statement of fact or law;
5. To maintain inviolate the confidence, and at every peril to himself, to preserve the secret of his
client, and to accept no compensation in connection with his client’s business except from him with his
knowledge and approval;
6. To abstain from all offensive personality, and to advance no fact prejudicial to the honor or
reputation of a party or witness, unless required by the justice of the cause with which he is charged;
7. Not to encourage either the commencement or the continuance of an action or proceeding or delay
any man’s cause, from any corrupt motive or interest;
8. Never to reject, for any consideration personal to himself, the cause of the defenseless or
oppressed; and
QUAMTO (1987-2017)
9
9. In the defense of a person accused of crime, by all fair and honorable means, regardless of his
personal opinion as to the guilt of the accused, to present every defense that the law permits, to the
end that no person may be deprived of life or liberty, but by due process of law.

Q: State the duties of a lawyer imposed by the Lawyer’s oath (2016 Bar)
A: The following are the duties of a lawyer imposed by the lawyer’s oath:
1. To maintain allegiance to the Republic of the Philippines;
2. To support its Constitution;
3. To obey the laws as well as the legal orders of the duly constituted authorities;
4. To do no falsehood nor consent to the doing of the same in any court;
5. Not to wittingly or willingly promote or sue any groundless, false or unlawful suit nor to give nor to
consent to the doing of the same;
6. To delay no man for money or malice;
7. To conduct himself as a lawyer according to the best of his knowledge and discretion, with all good
fidelity to the courts as to his clients; and
8. To impose upon himself that voluntary obligation without any mental reservation or purpose of
evasion.

The Code of Professional Responsibility

TO SOCIETY (CANONS 1-6)
Respect for law and legal processes
Q: Atty. Doblar represents Eva in a contract suit against Olga. He is also defending Marla in a
substantially identical contract suit filed by Emma. In behalf of Eva, Atty. Doblar claims that
the statute of limitations runs from the time of the breach of the contract. In the action against
Marla, Atty. Doblar now argues the reverse position – i.e. that the statute of limitation does not
run until one year after discovery of the breach.
Both cases are assigned to Judge Elrey. Although not the sole issue in the two cases, the
statute of limitations issue is critical in both.
Is there an ethical/professional responsibility problem in this situation? If a problem exists,
what are its implications or potential consequences? (2013 Bar)
A: Yes. There is an ethical/professional responsibility problem that results from the actuation of Atty.
Doblar in arguing the reverse positions.
The signatures of Atty. Doblar on the pleadings for Eva and for Marla, constitute a certificate by him
that he has read the pleadings; that to the best of his knowledge, information and belief there is good
ground to support them; and that the pleadings were not interposed for delay (Rules of Court, Rule 7,
Sec. 3, 2nd par.). Atty. Doblar could not claim he has complied with the foregoing requirement
because he could not take a stand for Eva that is contrary to that taken for Marla. His theory for Eva
clearly contradicts his theory for Marla. He has violated his professional responsibility mandated under
the Rules of Court.
He has likewise violated the ethical responsibility that his appearance in court should be deemed
equivalent to an assertion on his honor that in his opinion his client’s case is one proper for judicial
determination (Canons of Professional Ethics, Canon 30, 2nd par., last sentence).
In counseling on the contradictory positions, Atty. Doblar has likewise counseled or abetted activities
aimed at defiance of the law or at lessening confidence in the legal system (Code of Professional
Responsibility, Canon 1, Rule 1.02) because conflicting opinions may result arising from an
interpretation of the same law.
Atty. Doblar could not seek refuge under the umbrella that what he has done was in protection of his
clients. This is so because a lawyer’s duty is not to his client but to the administration of justice. To
that end, his client’s success is wholly subordinate. His conduct ought to and must always be
scrupulously observant of the law and ethics (Ernesto Pineda, LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS, 211
[1999], citing Maglasang v. People, G.R. No. 90083, October 4, 1990).
Any means, not honorable, fair and honest, which is resorted to by the lawyer, even in the pursuit of
his devotion to his client’s cause, is condemnable and unethical (Ibid.).
Q: Atty. Asilo, a lawyer and a notary public, notarized a document already prepared by
spouses Roger and Luisa when they approached him. It is stated in the document to Roger
and Luisa formally agreed to live separately from each other and either one can have a live-in
partner with full consent of the other. What is the liability of Atty. Asilo, if any? (1998 Bar)
A: Atty. Asilo may be held administratively liable for violating Rule 1.02 of the Code of Professional
Responsibility - a lawyer shall not counsel or abet activities aimed defiance of the law or at lessening
confidence in the leg system. An agreement between two spouses to live separately from each other
and either one could have a live-in partner with full consent of the other, is contrary to law and morals.
The UST BAR OPERATIONS
Legal and Judicial Ethics
10
ratification by a notary public who is a lawyer of businessman friend indicates his law office and
in illegal or immoral contract or document his legal specialty, the law office is located in
constitutes malpractice or gross misconduct in his friend’s store. Decide. (2001 Bar)
office. He should at least refrain from its A: This appears to be a circumvention of the
consummation (In Re Santiago, 70 Phil. 661 prohibition on improper advertising. There is no
Panganiban v. Borromeo; 58 Phil. 367, In re valid reason why the lawyer’s businessman friend
Bucana, 72 SCRA 14). should be handling out calling cards which contains
Q: Atty. XX rented a house of his cousin JJ the lawyer’s law office and legal specialty, even if
on a month-to-months basis. He left for a 6- his office is located in his friend’s store. What
month study in Japan without paying his makes it more objectionable is the statement of his
rentals and electric bills while he was away supposed legal specialty. It is highly unethical for
despite JJ’s repeated demands. an attorney to advertise his talents or skill as a
Upon his return to the Philippines, Atty. XX merchant.
still failed to settle his rental arrearages and Q: A Justice of the Supreme Court, while
electric bills, drawing JJ to file an reading a newspaper one weekend, saw the
administrative complaint against Atty. XX. following advertisement:
Atty. XX contended that his non-payment The following session day, the Justice called
rentals and bills to his cousin is a personal the attention of his colleagues and the Bar
matter which has no bearing on his Confidant was directed to verify the
profession as a lawyer and, therefore, he advertisement. It turned out that the number
did not violate the Code of Professional belongs to Attorney X, who was then directed
Responsibility.Is Atty. XX’s contention in to explain to the court why he should not be
order? Explain. (2010 Bar) disciplinarily dealt with for the improper
ANNULMENT OF MARRIAGE advertisement. Attorney X, in his answer,
Competent Lawyer averred that (1) the advertisement was not
Reasonable Fee improper because his name was not mentioned
Call 221-2221 in the ad; and (2) he could not be subjected to
A: No. In a case involving the same facts, the disciplinary action because there was no
Supreme Court held that having incurred just complaint against him. Rule on Attorney X’s
debts, a lawyer has a moral duty and legal contention. (2017, 2003, 1998 Bar)
responsibility to settle them when they become A: The advertisement is improper because it is a
due. “Verily, lawyers must at all times faithfully solicitation of legal business and is tantamount to
perform their duties to society, to the bar, to the self-praise by claiming to be a “competent lawyer”.
court and to their clients. As part of their duties, The fact that his name is not mentioned does not
they must promptly pay their financial make the advertisement proper. His identity can be
obligations” (Wilson Cham v. Atty. Eva Pata- easily determined by calling the telephone number
Moya, 556 SCRA 1 [2008]). stated. In the case of Ulep v. Legal Clinic, Inc., 223
True, honest, fair, dignified and objective SCRA 378, the Supreme Court found a similar
information on legal services advertisement to be improper is spite of the fact
Q: A lone law practitioner Bartolome D. that the name of a lawyer was also not mentioned.
Carton, who inherited the law office from A complaint is not necessary to initiate disciplinary
his deceased father Antonio C. Carton, action against a lawyer. In Sec. 1, QUAMTO (1987-
carries these names:“Carton& Carton Law 2017)
Office.” Is that permissible or 11
objectionable? Explain. (2001, 1996, 1994
Bar)
A: Rule 3.02 of the Code of Professional
Responsibility provides as follows: “In the
choice of a firm name, no false, misleading or
assumed name shall be used; the continued
use of the name of deceased partner is
permissible provided that the firm indicates in
all its communications that the partner is
deceased.” Since Atty. Antonio C. Carton is a
solo practitioner, it is improper for him to use
the firm name “Carton & Carton Law Office”,
which indicates that he is and/or was in
partnership with his father. Even if he indicates
in all his communication that his father is
already dead, the use of the firm name is still
misleading because his father was never his
partner before. A lawyer is not authorized to
use in his practice of profession a name other
than the one inscribed in the Roll of Attorneys.
Q: Facing disciplinary charges for
advertising as a lawyer, Atty. A argues that
although the calling card of his
Rule 139-B of the Rules of Court, disciplinary action against a lawyer may be initiated by the Supreme
Court motu proprio.
Q: Determine whether the following advertisements by an attorney are ethical or unethical.
Write “Ethical” or “Unethical”, as the case may be, opposite each letter and explain.
a. A calling card, 2x2 in size, bearing his name in bold print, office, residence and e-mail
address, telephone and facsimile numbers.
b. A business card, 3’’x4’’ in size, indicating the aforementioned data with his photo, 1’’x1’’ in
size.
c. A pictorial press release in a broadsheet newspaper made by the attorney showing him
being congratulated by the president of a client corporation for winning a multi-million damage
suit against the company in the Supreme Court.
d. The same press release made in a tabloid by the attorney’s client.
e. A small announcement that the attorney is giving free legal advice on November 30, 2017
published in Balita, a tabloid in Filipino. (2017, 2002 Bar)

A:
a. Ethical – A lawyer, in making known his legal services shall use only true, honest, fair, dignified
and objective information or statement of facts (Code of Professional Responsibility, Canon 3). For
solicitation to be proper, it must be compatible with the dignity of the legal profession. If made in a
modest and decorous manner, it would bring no injury to the lawyer or to the bar (Warvelle, Legal
Ethics, p.55).
b. Unethical – The size of the card and the inclusion of the lawyer’s photo in it smacks of
commercialism. It is highly unethical for an attorney to advertise his talents or skill as a merchant.
c. Unethical – A lawyer shall not pay or give anything of value to representatives of the mass media
in anticipation of, or in return for, publicity to attract legal business (Code of Professional
Responsibility, Rule 3.04). A lawyer should not resort to indirect advertisements such as a pictorial
press release in a newspaper to attract legal business.
d. Ethical – A lawyer cannot be held liable for the action of his client, provided he had no knowledge
of the client’s act. However, it would be unethical if the lawyer knew of the client’s intention to publish
but nonetheless failed to prevent it.
e. Ethical– The proffer of free legal services to the indigent, even when broadcast over the radio or
tendered through circulation
of printed matter to the general public, offends no ethical rule. The rule prescribing advertising or
solicitation of business is aimed at commercialization of the profession and has to do with the effort to
obtain remunerative business. It was never aimed at a situation in which a group of lawyers announce
that they are willing to devote some of their time and energy to the interests of indigent citizens
(Agpalo, Legal and Judicial Ethics, 8th Ed., p. 123).

Q: A sign was posted at the building where the law office of Atty. RedentorWalang-Talo is
located. The sign reads:
Atty. Redentor A. Walang-Talo
Chairman, IBP Legal Aid Committee
Makati City IBP Chapter
Free conciliation, mediation and court representation
Suite 210, Galaxy Building, J.P. Rizal Street, Makati City
a. Does the posting constitute solicitation?

A: There is nothing wrong with the advertisement. The statement that he is the chairman of the IBP
Legal Aid Committee is factual and true. Canon 27 of the Code of Professional Ethics states that
“memberships and offices in bar associations and committees thereof” may be included in a lawyer’s
advertisement. The statement that he gives free consultation, mediation and court representation
services is for the purpose of promoting the IBP Legal Aid Committee.
b. Suppose the sign reads:

Atty. Redentor A. Walang-Talo

Attorney and Counsel-at-Law
General Practitioner
(Accepts pro bono cases pursuant to the IBP Legal Aid Program)
Does the posting constitute solicitation? (2016 Bar)
A: On the other hand, this advertisement is for the benefit of the lawyer alone and constitutes
solicitation.
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
This does not constitute solicitation. The lawyer does not claim to be a specialist, but only a “general
practitioner.” The statement that he accepts pro bono cases is not for the purpose of promoting his
“business’’, as ”pro bono” means “for free.”
INTEGRATED BAR OF THE PHILIPPINES (RULE 139-A)
Membership and dues UST BAR OPERATIONS
Legal and Judicial Ethics
12
Q: Not paying the annual IBP dues. (2008 Bar) the issuance of a bouncing check is an unlawful
A: It is the duty of every lawyer to support the act, a crime involving moral turpitude. (Co v.
activities of the Integrated Bar of the Philippines Bernardino, A.C. No. 3919, January 28, 1998)
(Canon 7, CPR). Default in payment of IBP dues b. No. The sole issue in an administrative case is
for six months shall warrant suspension of the determination of whether or not a lawyers is
membership to the Integrated Bar, and default to still fit to continue being a lawyer. The Supreme
make such payment for one year shall be a Court will not order the return of money which is
ground for the removal of the delinquent member not intimately related to a lawyer-client
from the Roll of Attorneys (In Re Atty. Marcial relationship (Wong v. Moya, A.C. 6972, October
Edillon, 84 SCRA 554 [1978]). 17, 2008; Sps. Concepcion v. Atty. De La Rosa,
Upholding the dignity and integrity of the A.C. No. 10681, Feb. 3, 2015).
profession
Q:Atty. Kuripot was one of Town Bank's Courtesy, fairness and candor towards
valued clients. In recognition of his loyalty to professional colleagues
the bank, he was issued a gold credit card Q: You are the counsel of K in his action for
with a credit limit of P250,000.00. After two specific performance against DEV. Inc., a
months, Atty. Kuripot exceeded his credit subdivision developer which is represented
limit, and refused to pay the monthly charges by Atty. L. Your client believes that the
as they fell due. Aside from a collection suit, president of DEV, Inc., would be willing to
Town Bank also filed a disbarment case consider an amicable settlement and your
against Atty. Kuripot. client urges you to discuss the matter with
In his comment on the disbarment case, Atty. DEV. Inc., without the presence of Atty. L
Kuripot insisted that he did not violate the whom he considered to be an impediment to
Code of Professional Responsibility, since an early compromise. Would it be all right for
his obligation to the bank was personal in you to negotiate the terms of the compromise
nature and had no relation to his being a as so suggested above by your client? (1997
lawyer.Is Atty. Kuripot correct? Explain your Bar)
answer. (2017, 2005 Bar) A:No. Rule 8.02, Canon 8 of the Code of
A: No. Atty. Kuripot is not correct. A lawyer Professional Responsibility provides that "a
should act according to the standards of the legal lawyer shall not directly or indirectly, encroach
profession even in his personal acts. A lawyer upon the professional employment of another
shall not engage in conduct that adversely affects lawyer." Canon 9 of the Code of Professional
his fitness to practice law, nor shall he, whether Ethics is more particular, "a lawyer should not in
in public or private life, behave in a scandalous any way communicate upon the subject of the
manner to the discredit of the legal profession controversy with a party represented by counsel,
(Code of Professional Responsibility, Rule 7.03). much less should he undertake to negotiate or
Q: Sonia, who is engaged in the lending compromise the matter with him but should deal
business, extended to Atty. Roberto a loan of only with his counsel." In the case of Likong vs.
P50, 000.00 with interest of P25, 000.00 to be Liin, 235 SCRA 414, a lawyer was suspended for
paid not later than May 20, 2016. To secure negotiating a compromise agreement directly
the loan, Atty. Roberto signed a promissory with the adverse party without the presence and
note and issued a postdated check. Before participation of her counsels.
the due date, Atty. Roberto requested Sonia Q: After the pre-trial Atty. Hans Hilado,
to defer the deposit of the check. When Atty. counsel for plaintiff Jennifer Ng, persuaded
Roberto still failed to pay, Sonia deposited defendant Doris Dy to enter into a
the check which was dishonored. Atty. compromise agreement with the plaintiff
Roberto ignored the notice of dishonor and without the knowledge and participation of
refused to pay. defendant’s counsel, Atty. Jess de Jose.
a. Did Roberto commit any violation of the Doris acceded and executed the agreement.
CPR? Explain. Therein Doris admitted her obligation in full
b. Can he be held civilly liable to Sonia in an and bound herself to pay her obligation to
administrative case for suspension or Jennifer at 40% interest per annum in ten (10)
disbarment? (2016 Bar) equal monthly installments. The compromise
agreement was approved by the court.
A: QUAMTO (1987-2017)
a. Atty. Roberto committed a violation of Canon 1 13
Rule 1.01, Canon 7 and Rule 7.03 in issuing a
bouncing check. He should very well know that
Realizing that she was prejudiced, Doris Dy lawyer shall conduct himself with fairness and
filed an administrative complaint against Atty. candor towards his professional colleagues and
Hilado alleging that the latter prevented her shall avoid harassing tactics against opposing
from consulting her lawyer Atty. de Jose counsel.
when she entered into the compromise No assistance in unauthorized practice of law
agreement, thereby violating the rules of Q: You had just taken your oath as a lawyer.
professional conduct. Atty. Hilado countered The secretary to the president of a big
that Doris Dy freely and voluntarily entered university offered to get you as the official
into the compromise agreement which in fact notary public of the school. She explained
was approved by the court. that a lot of students lose their Identification
Was it proper for the judge to approve the Cards and are required to secure an affidavit
compromise agreement since the terms of loss before they can be issued a new one.
thereof were just and fair even if counsel for She claimed that this would be very lucrative
one of the parties was not consulted or did for you, as more than 30 students lose their
not participate therein? Explain. (1995 Bar) Identification Cards every month. However,
A: It was not proper for the Judge to approve the the secretary wants you to give her one-half
compromise agreement without the participation of your earnings therefrom.Will you agree to
of the lawyer of one of the parties, even if the the arrangement? Explain. (2017, 2005 Bar)
agreement was Just and fair. Even if a client has A: No, I will not agree. Rule 9.02 of the Code of
exclusive control of the cause of action and may Professional Responsibility provides that “a
compromise the same, such right is not absolute. lawyer shall not divide or stipulate to divide a fee
He may not, for example, enter into a for legal service with persons not licensed to
compromise to defeat the lawyer’s right to a just practice law". The secretary, not being a lawyer,
compensation. Such right is entitled to protection is not licensed to practice law and not entitled to
from the court. a share of the fees for legal services rendered,
Q: Gretel’s residence in Makati village was particularly in notarizing affidavits.
foreclosed by Joli Bank. Armed with a writ of Q: Atty. Monica Santos-Cruz registered the
possession issued by the lower court, the firm name “Santos-Cruz Law Office” with the
sheriff and Joli Bank’s lawyers evicted Gretel Department of Trade and Industry as a single
and padlocked the house. A restraining order proprietorship. In her stationery, she printed
issued by the Court of Appeals which Gretel the names of her husband and a friend who
showed the sheriff was disregarded. Gretel are both non-lawyers as her senior partners
requested Hansel, an attorney who lives in in light of their investments in the firm. She
the same village, to assist her in explaining allowed her husband to give out calling cards
the restraining order, since Gretel’s counsel bearing his name as senior partner of the firm
of record was out of town. The discussion on and to appear in courts to move for
the restraining order was conducted on the postponements. Did Atty. Santos-Cruz
sidewalk along Gretel’s house. The village violated the Code of Professional
security guards were attracted by the Responsibility? Why? (2010 Bar)
commotion brought about by the discussion, A: Yes, she did. In the case of Cambaliza v.
so they called the Makati Police and the Cristobal-Tenorio (434 SCRA 288 [2004]), which
CAPCOM who responded immediately. The involves the same facts, the Supreme Court held
CAPCOM colonel, who arrived at the scene that a lawyer who allows a non-member of the
with his troop took it upon himself to open Bar to misrepresent himself as a lawyer and to
the house and declare Gretel as the rightful practice law, is guilty of violating Canon 9 and
possessor. The colonel invited Gretel and Rule 9.01 of the Code of Professional
Hansel to enter the house. Five days later, Responsibility which provide as follows: UST
Hansel was made a co-respondent (together BAR OPERATIONS
with Gretel) in a complaint for trespass to Legal and Judicial Ethics
dwelling filed by Joli Bank’s lawyers before 14
the Makati Fiscal’s office.
Discuss the propriety of the act of Joli Bank’s
lawyers, considering that all lawyers are
mandated to conduct themselves with
courtesy, fairness and candor toward their
professional colleagues and to avoid
harassing tactics against opposing counsel.
(1989 Bar)
A: Considering that there was a restraining order
issued by the Court of Appeals, it was proper for
Gretel to take steps to maintain possession of his
residence with the assistance of Hansel as
lawyer.
It was not proper for the Joli Bank’s lawyers to
file an action of trespass to dwelling against
Gretel and lawyer Hansel. Canon 8 of the Code
of Professional Responsibility provides that a
“Canon 9. A lawyer shall not directly or indirectly assist in the unauthorized practice of law.”
“Rule 9.01. A lawyer shall not delegate to any unauthorized person the performance of any task which
by law may only be performed by a member of the bar in good standing.”
TO THE COURTS
Candor, fairness and good faith towards the courts
Q: In a pending labor case, Atty. A filed a Position Paper on behalf of his client, citing a
Supreme Court case and quoting a portion of the decision therein which he stated reflected the
ratio decidendi. However, what he quoted was not actually the Supreme Court ruling but the
argument of one of the parties to the case. May Atty. A be faulted administratively? Explain.
(2000 Bar)
A: Yes, he may be faulted administratively. A lawyer owes candor, fairness and good faith to the court.
Rule 10.02 of the Code of Professional Conduct expressly provides that a lawyer shall not knowingly
misquote or misrepresent the contents of a paper, the language or the argument of opposing counsel,
or the text of a decision or authority, or knowingly cite as law a provision already rendered inoperative
by repeal or amendment, or assert as a fact that which has not has been proved. To cite an argument
of one of the parties as a ratio decidendiof a Supreme Court decision shows, at least, lack of diligence
on the part of Atty. A (Commission on Election v. Noynay, 292 SCRA 254).
Q: Atty. Billy, a young associate in a medium-sized law firm, was in a rush to meet the deadline
for filing his appellant’s brief. He used the internet for legal research by typing keywords on his
favorite search engine, which led him to many websites containing text of Philippine
jurisprudence. None of these sites was owned or maintained by the Supreme Court. He found a
case believed to be directly applicable to his client’s cause, so he copied the text of the
decision from the blog of another law firm, and pasted the text to the document he was working
on. The formatting of the text he had copied was lost when he pasted it to the document, and he
could not distinguish anymore, which portions were the actual findings or rulings of the
Supreme Court, and which were quoted portions from the other sources that were used in the
body of the decision. Since his deadline was fast approaching, he decided to just make it
appear as if every word he quoted was part of the ruling of the Court, thinking that it would not
be discovered.
Atty. Billy’s opponent, Atty. Ally, a very conscientious former editor of her school’s law journal,
noticed many discrepancies in Atty. Billy’s supposed quotations from the Supreme Court
decision when she read the text of the case from her copy of the Philippine Reports. Atty. Billy
failed to reproduce the punctuation marks and font sizes used by the Court. Worse, he quoted
the arguments of one party as presented in the case, which arguments happened to be
favorable to his position, and not the ruling or reasoning of the Court, but this distinction was
not apparent in his brief. Appalled, she filed a complaint against him.
a. Did Atty. Billy fail in his duty as a lawyer? What rules did he violate, if any?
b. How should lawyer quote a Supreme Court decision? (2015, 1994 Bar)

A:
A. Atty. Billy has violated Canon 10, Rules 10.01 and 10.02 of the Code of Professional Responsibility
(CPR) which provide as follows:
CANON 10. A LAWYER OWES CANDOR, FAIRNESS AND GOOD FAITH TO THE COURT.
Rule 10.01. A lawyer shall not do any falsehood, nor consent to the doing of any in court; nor shall he
mislead or allow the Court to be misled by any artifice.
Rule 10.02. A lawyer shall not knowingly misquote or misrepresent the contents of a paper, the
language or the argument of the opposing counsel, or the text of a decision or authority, or knowingly
cite a law a provision already rendered inoperative by repeal or amendment, or assert as a fact that
which has not been proved.
B.They should be verbatim reproductions of the Supreme Court’s decisions, down to the last word and
punctuation mark (Insular Life Assurance Co., Ltd., Employees Association v. Insular Life Assurance
Co., Ltd., G.R. No. L-25291, January 30, 1971, 37 SCRA 244).
Q: Atty. X was retained by E in a case for violation of BP 22 filed by B before the scheduled
hearing, Atty. X assured B that E would pay the value of the dishonored check. Elated at the
prospect of being paid, B wined and dined Atty. X several times. Atty. X convinced B not to
appear at the scheduled hearings. Due to non-appearance of B, the estafa case was dismissed
for failure to prosecute. B, however, was never paid. Thus, she filed a case for disbarment
against Atty. X. Does the conduct of Atty. X constitute malpractice? Explain. (1996 Bar)

A: Yes, the conduct of Atty. S constitutes QUAMTO (1987-2017)

15
malpractice. A lawyer owes candor, fairness questioned Decision. He insulted the
and good faith to the court. He shall not do any Commissioners for their ineptness in
falsehood or shall be mislead or allow the court appreciating the facts as borne by the evidence
to be misled by any artifice. He owes loyalty to presented.
his client. In a case involving similar facts, the Atty. X files an administrative complaint against
Supreme Court found that the lawyer Atty. Y for using abusive language.
concerned obstructed the administration of Atty. Y posits that as lawyer for the down-
justice and suspended him for two years trodden laborers, he is entitled to express his
(Cantome v. Ducusin, 57 Phil. 20) righteous anger against the Commissioners for
Respect for the courts and judicial officers having cheated them; that his allegations in the
Q: Atty. Luna Tek maintains an account in Motion for Reconsideration are absolutely
the social media network called Twitter and privileged; and that proscription against the use
has 1,000 followers there, including fellow of abusive language does not cover pleadings
lawyers and some clients. Her Twitter filed with the NLRC, as it is not a court, nor are
account is public so even her non-followers any of its Commissioners Justice or Judges.
could see and read her posts, which are Is Atty. Y administratively liable under the Code
called tweets. She oftentimes takes to of Professional Responsibility? Explain. (2010
Twitter to vent about her daily sources of Bar)
stress like traffic or to comment about A: Atty. Y “has clearly violated Canons 8 and 11 of
current events. She also tweets her the Code of Professional Responsibility and is
disagreement and disgust with the administratively liable. A lawyer shall not in his
decisions of the Supreme Court by insulting professional dealings, use language which is
and blatantly cursing the individual Justices abusive, offense or otherwise improper” (Rule 8.01,
and the Court as an institution. CPR). A lawyer shall abstain from scandalous,
a. Does Atty. Luna Tek act in a manner offensive or menacing language or behavior before
consistent with the Code of Professional the courts (Rule 11.03, CPR).
Responsibility? Explain the reasons for In the case of Johnny Ng v. Atty. Benjamin C. Alar
your answer. (507 SCRA 465 [2006]), which involves the same
b. Describe the relationship between a facts, the Supreme Court held that the argument
lawyer and the courts. (2015 Bar) that the NLRC is not a court, is unavailing. The
lawyers remains a member of the Bar, an “oath-
A: bound servant of the law, whose first duty is not to
a. Atty. Luna did not act in a manner consistent his client but to the administration of justice and
with the Code of Professional Responsibility whose conduct ought to be and must be
(CPR). Canon 11 of the Code provides that “a scrupulously observant of the law and ethics.”
lawyer shall observe and maintain the respect The Supreme Court also held that the argument
due to the courts and to judicial officers and that labor practitioners are entitled to some latitude
should insist on similar conduct with others.” As of righteous anger is unavailing. It does not deter
an officer of the court, a lawyer should set the the Court from exercising its supervisory authority
example in maintaining a respectful attitude over lawyers who misbehave or fail to live up to that
towards the court. Moreover, he should abstain standard expected of them as members of the bar.
from offensive language in criticizing the courts. Q: Having lost in the Regional Trial Court and
Atty. Luna Tek violated this rule in insulting and then in the Court of Appeals, Atty. Mercado
blatantly cursing the individual Justices and the appealed to the Supreme Court. In a minute
Supreme Court in her tweets. Lawyers are resolution, the Supreme Court denied his
expected to carry their ethical responsibilities petition for review for lack of merit. He filed a
with them in cyberspace (Lorenzana v. Judge motion for reconsideration which was also
Ma. Cecilia L. Austria, A.M. No. RTJ-09-2200, denied. After the judgment had become final
April 2, 2014). and executory, Atty. UST BAR OPERATIONS
b. A lawyer is an officer of the court. As such, Legal and Judicial Ethics
he is much a part of the machinery of justice as 16
a judge is. The judge depends on the lawyer for
the proper performance of his judicial duties.
Thus, Canon 10 enjoins a lawyer to be candid
with the courts; Canon 11 requires him to show
respect to judicial officers; and Canon 12 urges
him to exert every effort and consider it his duty
to assist in the speedy and efficient
administration of justice.

Q: Atty. Y, in his Motion for Reconsideration

of the Decision rendered by the National
Labor Relations Commission (NLRC),
alleged that there was connivance of the
NLRC Commissioners with Atty. X for
monetary considerations in arriving at the
Mercado publicly criticized the Supreme Court for having rendered what he called an unjust
judgment, even as he ridiculed the members of the Court by direct insults and vituperative
innuendoes. Asked to explain why he should not be punished for his clearly contemptuous
statements, Atty. Mercado sets up the defense that his statements were uttered after the
litigation had been finally terminated and that he is entitled to criticize Judicial actuations. Is
Atty. Mercado's contention tenable? Explain. (1993 Bar)
A: Atty. Mercado’s contention is not tenable. While he is free to criticize the decision itself, he is not at
liberty to call said judgment an unjust judgment and to ridicule the members of the court. It is one thing
to analyze and criticize the decision itself, which is proper, and it is another thing to ridicule the
members of the court, which is wrong. The right of a lawyer to comment on or criticize the decision of a
judge or his actuations is not unlimited. It is the cardinal condition of all such criticism that it shall be
bona fide, and shall not spill over the walls of decency and propriety. A wide chasm exists between fair
criticism, on the one hand, and abuse and slander of courts and judges on the other. A publication in or
outside the court tending to impede, obstruct, embarrass or influence the courts in administering
Justice in a pending suit, or to degrade the courts, destroy public confidence in them or bring them in
any way into disrepute, whether or not there is a pending litigation, transcends the limits of fair
comment. Such publication or intemperate and unfair criticism is a gross violation of the lawyer’s duty
to respect the courts. It is a misconduct that subjects him to disciplinary action.
Q: Atty. Harold wrote in the Philippine Star his view that the decision of the Supreme Court in a
big land case is incorrect and should be re-examined. The decision is not yet final. Atty.
Alfonso, the counsel for the winning party in that case, filed a complaint for disbarment against
Atty. Harold for violation of sub judice rule and Canon 11 of the CPR that a lawyer shall observe
and maintain respect due to the courts. Explain the sub judice rule and rule on the disbarment
case. (2016 Bar)
A: The sub judice rule restricts comments and disclosures pertaining to pending judicial proceedings,
not only by participants in the pending case, members of the bar and bench, litigants and witnesses,
but also to the public in general, which necessarily includes the media, in order to avoid prejudging the
issue, influencing the court, or obstructing the administration of justice. A violation of this rule may
render one liable for indirect contempt under Sec. 3(d), Rule 71 of the Rules of Court. The specific
rationale for the sub judice rule is that courts, in the decision of issues of fact and law should be
immune from every extraneous influence; that facts should be decided upon evidence produced in
court; and that the determination of such facts should be uninfluenced by bias, prejudice or
sympathies. (Marantan v. Diokno, 716 SCRA 164, Feb. 12, 2014) After a case is decided, however, the
decision is open to criticism, subject only to the condition that all such criticism shall be bona fide, and
shall not spill over the walls of decency and propriety.
A wide chasm exists between fair criticism, on the one hand, and abuse and slander of courts and the
judges thereof, on the other. Intemperate and unfair criticism is a gross violation of the duty of respect
to courts. It is such a misconduct that subjects a lawyer to disciplinary action (In Re Almace, G.R. L-
27654, February 18, 1970).
In this case, the published comment of Atty. Harold was made after the decision of the Supreme Court
was rendered, but the same was not yet final. The case was still pending. Hence, the publication of
such comment was inappropriate, and Atty. Harold may be penalized for indirect contempt of court.

ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
Although the comment of Atty. Harold was made while the case was technically pending, it was made
after a decision was rendered, and the comment made is within the grounds of decency and propriety.
Hence, the lawyer does not deserve punishment for the same.
Q: The Code of Professional Responsibility is to lawyers, as the Code of Judicial Conduct is to
members of the bench. How would you characterize the relationship between the Judge and a
lawyer? Explain. (1996 Bar)
A: The Code of Professional Responsibility requires lawyers to observe and maintain respect for
judicial officers (Canon 11). On the other hand, the Code of JudicialConduct requires judge to be
patient, attentive and courteous to lawyers (Rule 3). In a word, lawyers and judges owe each other
mutual respect and courtesy.
ALTERNATIVE ANSWERS:
a. The relationship between a judge and a lawyer must be based on independence and self-respect.
He must neither be a mindless fawning slave of the judge, nor must he take an attitude of hostility
towards the Judge. The lawyer must maintain toward the court a respectful attitude and to uphold and
protect the dignity of the court.
QUAMTO (1987-2017)
17
b. Being an officer of the court, the first and foremost duty of the lawyer is to the court. He is bound to
obey lawful orders and decisions of the court. Like the court itself, the lawyer is an instrument to
advance the ends of justice. Should there be a conflict between the duty to his client and that of the
court, he should resolve the conflict against his client and obey the lawful orders of the court. On the
other hand, judges should be courteous and impartial to counsel. To maintain impartiality, the judge
should not associate too much with lawyers.

Assistance in the speedy and efficient administration of justice

Q: The Supreme Court issued a resolution in a case pending before it, requiring the petitioner to
file, within ten (10) days from notice, a reply to the respondent's comment. Attorney A,
representing the petitioner, failed to file the reply despite the lapse of thirty (30) days from
receipt of the Court’s resolution. The Supreme Court dismissed the petition for non-compliance
with its resolution. Attorney A timely moved for the reconsideration of the dismissal of the
petition, claiming that his secretary, who was quite new in the office, failed to remind him of the
deadline within which to file a reply. Resolve Attorney A's motion. (2003 Bar)
A: Attorney A’s motion is not meritorious. He has violated Rule 12.03 of the Code of Professional
Responsibility which provides that “a lawyer shall not, after obtaining extensions of time to file
pleadings, memoranda or briefs, let the period lapse without submitting the same or offering an
explanation for his failure to do so”. His claim that it was the fault of his secretary is not sufficient. He
cannot take refuge behind the inefficiency of his secretary because the latter is not a guardian of the
lawyer’s responsibilities (Nidua v. Lazaro, 174 SCRA 581 [1989]).
Q: Atty. Cua wins a case involving a donation mortis causa. Afterwards, she discovers, and is
convinced, that the Deed of Donation was falsified, and that it was her client who did the
falsification. If you were Atty. Cuawhat would you do? Explain. (1993 Bar)
A: If I were Atty. Cua., I would resign as his lawyer. The question as to whether the attorney should
disclose the falsification to the court or to the prosecuting attorney involves a balancing of loyalties.
One ethical rule states that “counsel upon the trial of a cause in which perjury has been committed
owes it to the profession and the public to bring the matter to the knowledge of the prosecuting
authorities". Another ethical rule provides that when “a lawyer discovers that some fraud or deception
has been practiced, which is unjustly imposed upon the court or a party, he should endeavor to rectify
it; at first by advising his client, and if his client refuses to forego the advantage thus unjustly gained,he
should promptly inform the injured person or his counsel, so that they may take appropriate steps". A
literal application of these ethical injunctions requires the disclosure of the falsification. On the other
hand, the attorney’s duty to keep inviolate the client's confidence demands that he refrain from
revealing the client’s wrong-doing, the same being a past offense. Resigning as a lawyer will enable
the lawyer to observe such loyalties. If the decision is already final, as a lawyer, I would advise my
client to withdraw any claim on the donation mortis causa and have the property be given to the rightful
owner of the property the subject matter of the donation.
This action is in compliance with my duty as a lawyer to assist in the administration of justice and in
compliance of my oath: “I will do no falsehood, nor consent to the doing of any in court; that I will not
wittingly or willingly promote or sue any groundless, false and or unlawful suit, nor give aid nor consent
to the same”.
Reliance on merits of his cause and avoidance of any impropriety which tends to influence or
gives the appearance of influence upon the courts
Q: Atty. Hermano requested his fraternity brother, Judge Patron, to introduce him to Judge
Apestado, before whom he has a case that had been pending for sometime.
Judge Patron, a close friend of Judge Apestado, acceded to the request, telling the latter that
Atty. Hermano is his fraternity “brod” and that Atty. Hermano simply wanted to ask for advice
on how to expedite the resolution of his case. They met, as arranged, in the fine dining
restaurant of a five-star hotel. Atty. Hermano hosted the dinner.
Did Atty. Hermano, Judge Patron and Judge Apestado commit any ethical/administrative
violation for which they can be held liable? (2013 Bar)
A: Yes, the three (3) of them committed ethical/administrative violations for which they can be held
liable.
For hosting the dinner, Atty. Hermano acted in contravention of ethical standards. A lawyer should
refrain from any impropriety which tends to influence or give the appearance of influencing the court
(Code of Professional Responsibility, Canon 13, Rule 13.01). A lawyer UST BAR OPERATIONS
Legal and Judicial Ethics
18
shall not extend extraordinary attention or hospitality to, nor seek opportunity for cultivating familiarity
with judges (Ibid., Canon 13, Rule 13.01). Marked attention and unusual hospitality on the part of a
lawyer to a judge, uncalled for by the personal relations on the parties, subject both the judge and the
lawyer to misconstruction of motive and should be avoided (Canons of Professional Ethics, canon 3,
2nd par., 1st sentence). Even if the purpose of the meeting was merely to “ask advice on how to
expedite the resolution of his case,” Atty. Hermano still acted outside of the bounds of ethical conduct.
This is so because a lawyer deserves rebuke and denunciation for any device or attempt to gain from a
judge a special personal consideration or favor (Ibid., Canon 3, 2nd par., 2nd sentence).
Both judge patron and Judge Apestado may be held liable for having the dinner meeting with Atty.
Hermano. Judges shall ensure that not only is their conduct above reproach, but that it is perceived to
be so in the view of a reasonable observer (New Code of Conduct for the Philippine Judiciary, Canon
2, Sec.1). Judges shall avoid impropriety and the appearance of impropriety in all of their activities
(Ibid., Canon 4, Sec. 1). Their having dinner with Atty. Hermano, a practicing lawyer, could be
construed as appearance of impropriety.
Judge Patron for having allowed himself to be used as a “bridge” by Atty. Hermano, his fraternity
“brod”, to meet with Judge Apestado exhibited judicial misconduct in the following manner: Judges
shall refrain from influencing in any manner the outcome of litigation or dispute pending before another
court (Ibid., Canon 1, Sec. 3). Furthermore, in allowing Atty. Hermano to take advantage of his
fraternity bond, Judge Patron allowed the prestige of judicial office to advance the private interests of
others, conveyed or permitted hos fraternity “brod” to convey the impression that he is in a special
position to influence the judge (Ibid., Canon 1, Sec 4, 2nd sentence).
The specific violations of Judge Apestado were committed when he allowed himself to be convinced by
Judge Patron to have the dinner meeting with Atty. Hermano to discuss how the case may be
expedited. In performing judicial duties, judges shall be independent form judicial colleagues in respect
of decisions which the judge is obliged to make independently (Ibid., Canon 1, Sec. 2). Finally, in
having dinner meeting with Atty. Hermano who has a pending case with his sala, Judge Apestado has
exhibited an appearance of impropriety in his activities (Ibid., Canon 4, Sec 1).
Q: Atty. J requested Judge K to be a principal sponsor at the wedding of his son. Atty. J met
Judge K a month before during the IBP-sponsored reception to welcome Judge K into the
community, and having learned that Judge K takes his breakfast at a coffee shop near his
(Judge K's) boarding house, Atty. J made it a point to be at the coffee shop at about the time
that Judge K takes his breakfast. Comment on Atty. J's acts. Do they violate the Code of
Professional Responsibility? (2000 Bar)
A: Yes, his actions violate the Code of Professional Responsibility. Canon 13 of the said Code
provides that a lawyer shall rely upon the merits of his cause and refrain from any impropriety which
tends to influence, or gives the appearance of influencing the court. Rule 13.01 of the same Code
provides that a lawyer shall not extend extraordinary attention or hospitality to, nor seek opportunity for,
cultivating familiarity with Judges. Atty. J obviously sought opportunity for cultivating familiarity with
Judge K by being at the coffee shop where the latter takes his breakfast, and is extending
extraordinary attention to the judge by inviting him to be a principal sponsor at the wedding of his son.
Q: After a study of the records and deciding that plaintiff was entitled to a favorable Judgment,
Judge Reyes requested Atty. Sta. Ana, counsel for the plaintiff, to prepare the draft of the
decision. Judge Reyes then reviewed the draft prepared by Atty. Sta. Ana and adopted it as his
decision for plaintiff. Judge Reyes saw nothing unethical in this procedure as he would ask the
other party to do the same if it were the prevailing party.
Please comment on whether Judge Reyes' approach to decision-writing is ethical and proper.
(1994 Bar)
A:This procedure of Judge Reyes is unethical because the judge is duty bound to study the case
himself; he must personally and directly prepare his decisions and not delegate it to another person
especially a lawyer in the case (Section 1. Rule 36, Rules of Court).
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
In the case of Lantoria vs. Bunyi, 209 SCRA 528, a lawyer was suspended for preparing drafts of
decisions for a judge. The Supreme Court held that this violated Canon No. 13 and Rule 13.01 of the
Code of Professional Responsibility which provide that:
“CANON 13. – A lawyer shall rely upon the merits of his case and refrain from any impropriety which
tends to influence, or gives the appearance of influencing the court."
“Rule 13.01 – A lawyer should not extend extraordinary attention or hospitality to nor seek opportunity
for cultivating familiarity with the judge." QUAMTO (1987-2017)
19
Conversely, therefore, a judge should not ask lawyers of parties to a case before him to draft his
decisions. “A judge should so behave at all times as to promote public confidence in the integrity and
impartiality of the judiciary." (Rule 2.01, Code of Judicial Conduct)
Q: Atty. A is offered professional engagement to appear before Judge B who is A’s relative,
compadre and former office colleague. Is A ethically compelled to refuse the engagement?
Why? (2001 Bar)
A: There is no ethical constraint against a lawyer appearing before a judge who is a relative, compadre
or former office colleague as long as the lawyer avoids giving the impression that he can influence the
judge. On the other hand, the judge is required by the Code of Judicial Conductnot to take part in any
proceeding where his impartiality may be reasonably questioned (Code of Judicial Conduct, Rule 3.12).
Among the grounds for mandatory disqualification of the judge is if any of the lawyers is a relative by
consanguinity or affinity within the fourth degree.
Q: Rico, an amiable, sociable lawyer, owns a share in Marina Golf Club, easily one of the more
posh golf courses. He relishes hosting parties for government officials and members of the
bench.
One day, he had a chance meeting with a judge in the Intramuros golf course. The two readily
got along well and had since been regularly playing golf together at the Marina Golf Club.
a. If Atty. Rico does not discuss cases with members of the bench during parties and golf
games, is he violating the Code of Professional Responsibility? Explain.
b. How about the members of the bench who grace the parties of Rico, are they violating the
Code of Judicial Conduct? Explain. (2010 Bar)

A:
a. Yes. A lawyer shall not extend extraordinary attention or hospitality to, nor seek opportunity for
cultivating familiarity with judges (Code of Professional Responsibility, Rule 13.01). Moreover, he
should refrain from any impropriety which gives the appearance of influencing the court (CPR, Canon
13). In regularly playing golf with judges, Atty. Rico will certainly raise the suspicion that they discuss
cases during the game, although they actually do not. However, if Rico is known to be a non-practicing
lawyer, there is not much of an ethical problem.
b. Members of the bench who grace the parties of Atty. Rico would be guilty of violating Sec. 3, Canon
4 of the New Code of Judicial Conduct for the Philippine Judiciary which provides that “judges shall, in
their personal relations with individual members of the legal profession who practice regularly in their
court, avoid situations which might reasonably give rise to the suspicion or appearance of favoritism or
partiality”. It has been held that “if a judge is seen eating and drinking in public places with a lawyer
who has cases pending in his or her sala, public suspicion may be aroused, thus tending to erode the
trust of litigants in the impartiality of the judge” (Padilla v. Zantua, 237 SCRA 670). But if Atty. Rico is
not a practicing lawyer, such suspicion may not be aroused.

TO THE CLIENTS
AVAILABILITY OF SERVICE WITHOUT DISCRIMINATION
Services regardless of a person’s status
Q: M was criminally charged with violation of a special law. He tried to engage the service of
Atty. N. Atty. N believed, however, that M is guilty on account of which he declined. Would it be
ethical for Atty. N to decline? Explain. (2000, 1996 Bar)
A: It would not be ethical for Atty. N to decline. Rule 14.01 of the Code of Professional Responsibility
provides that’ a lawyer shall not decline to represent a person solely on account of the latter’s race,
sex, creed or status of life, or because of his own opinion regarding the guilt of said person. It is for the
judge, not the lawyer, to decide the guilt of the accused, who is presumed to be innocent until his guilt
is proved beyond reasonable doubt by procedure recognized by law.
Q: Atty. DD’s services were engaged by Mr. BB as defense counsel in a lawsuit. In the course of
the proceedings, Atty. DD discovered that Mr. BB was an agnostic and a homosexual. By
reason thereof, Atty. DD filed a motion to withdraw as counsel without Mr. BB’s express
consent. Is Atty. DD’s motion legally tenable? Reason briefly. (2004 Bar)
A: No. Atty. DD’s motion is not legally tenable. He has no valid cause to terminate his services. His
client, Mr. BB, being an agnostic and homosexual, should not be deprived of his counsel’s
representation solely for that reason. A lawyer shall not decline to represent a person solely on account
of the latter’s race, sex, creed or status of life or because of his own opinion regarding the guilt of said
person (Code of Professional Responsibility, Canon 14, UST BAR OPERATIONS
Legal and Judicial Ethics
20
Rule 14.01).
Q: Your services as a lawyer are engaged by John Dizon to defend him from the charge of
malversation of public funds before the Sandiganbayan. John confessed to you that he actually
misappropriated the amount charged but he said it was out of extreme necessity to pay for the
emergency operation of his wife.
Will you agree to defend him? State your reason. (1990 Bar)
A:I will agree to defend him, notwithstanding his confession to me that he actually misappropriated the
amount. Rule 14.01 of the Code of Professional Responsibility provides that a lawyer shall not decline
to represent a person because of his own opinion regarding the guilt of the person. One of the duties of
an attorney is that he should, in the defense of a person accused of a crime, by all fair and honorable
means regardless of his personal opinion as to guilt of the accused, present every defense that the law
permits, to the end that no person may be deprived of life liberty but by due process of law. The burden
of proof lies with the prosecution and if the prosecution fails to discharge such burden, the lawyer can
always invoke the presumption of innocence for the acquittal of his client. If the prosecution proves the
guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt, the lawyer can strive to lower the penalty by presenting
mitigating circumstances, for he is not necessarily expected to sustain the client’s innocence. A lawyer
is an advocate, not a judge, and if he has rendered effective legal assistance to his client as allowed by
law, he can rightfully say that he has faithfully discharged his duties as a lawyer, even if the accused is
found guilty by the court.
Services as counsel de officio
Q: May a lawyer decline an appointment by the court as counsel de oficio for an accused
because he believes, and is fully convinced that the accused is guilty of the crime charged?
(1991 Bar)
A: A lawyer may not decline an appointment as counsel de oficio even if he is convinced that the
accused is guilty. It is his obligation to at least protect his rights. He might even have him acquitted or
at least reduce his penalty depending on the evidence presented during the trial.
Q: In a homicide case, Atty. M was appointed by the Court as counsel de oficio for F, the
accused. After trial, F was acquitted. Atty. M sent F a bill for attorney’s fees.
a. Can F be compelled to pay? Explain.
b. Can F employ a counsel de parte to collaborate with Atty. M, his counsel de oficio? Explain.
(1996 Bar)

A:
a. No, F may not be compelled to pay attorney’s fees. A counsel de officio is a lawyer appointed to
render professional services in favor of an indigent client. In the absence of a law allowing
compensation, he cannot charge the indigent litigant for his professional services. One of the
obligations which the lawyer assumed when he took his oath as a lawyer is to render free legal
services when required by the law to do so. The Rules of Court provides a token compensation for an
attorney de officio to be paid by the state.
b. He may do so, but if he can afford to employ a counsel de parte, then he is no longer indigent and
will not need a counsel de officio. The latter can withdraw as his counsel if he chooses to.

Q: Atty. Aguirre, as counsel de oficio for Boy Batongbakal, was able to win an acquittal for Boy
who was charged with robbery in band. A year later, Atty. Aguirre discovered that Boy in fact
had a lot of money which he had been bragging was part of the loot in the crime for which he
was acquitted. Knowing that Boy could no longer be prosecuted on the ground of double
jeopardy, Atty. Aguirre sent him a bill for his services as his counsel de oficio.
Please give your reasoned comments on the ethical considerations involved, if any, in the
above case. (1994 Bar)
A:A counsel de oficio is a lawyer appointed by the court to defend an indigent defendant in a criminal
case. The lawyer designated as counsel de officio cannot charge the indigent litigant for his
professional services. In a sense, there is no contract for legal services between him and the
defendant. In the absence of an express or implied contract, there is no obligation to compensate.
Suing his client for attorney’s fees might also involve a violation of the confidential nature of a lawyer-
client relationship.
Q: Atty. Vidal, a semi-retired Metro Manila law practitioner, has a cattle ranch in the remote
municipality of Caranglan, Neuva Ecija. He attends to his law office in Manila on Mondays,
Tuesdays and Wednesdays, and spends the rest of the week in his cattle ranch riding horses
and castrating bulls. In a criminal case pending before the Municipal Trial Court of Caranglan,
the only other licensed member of the Bar is representing the private complainant. The accused
is a detention prisoner. The judge QUAMTO (1987-2017)
21
wants to expedite proceedings.
a. What must the judge do to expedite proceedings?
b. If Attorney Vidal is appointed to act as counsel de oficio for the accused, could he refuse by
saying that in the province, he does not want to do anything except ride horses and castrate
bulls? Explain. (1993 Bar)

A:
a. The judge may appoint Atty. Vidal as counsel de oficio in order to expedite the proceedings. This is
especially because the accused is a detention prisoner who is presumed to be indigent and cannot
retain a paid counsel.
b. Atty. Vidal cannot validly refuse the appointment as counsel de oficio. While it is true that he stays in
the province to rest during the latter part of the week as lawyer he must comply with his oath to assist
in the administration of justice. Precisely one of the objectives of the Integrated Bar is to compel all
lawyers in the active practice of law to comply with their obligation to assist the courts in the
administration of justice.

Valid grounds for refusal to serve

Q: When may refusal of a counsel to act as counsel de oficio be justified on grounds aside from
reasons of health, extensive travel abroad, or similar reasons of urgency? Support your
answer. (2001 Bar)
A: Other justified grounds for refusal to act as counsel de oficio are:
a. Too many de oficio cases assigned to the lawyer (People v. Daeng, 49 SCRA 222);
b. Conflict of interest (Rule 14.03, CPR);
c. Lawyer is not in a position to carry out the work effectively or competently (supra);
d. Lawyer is prohibited from practicing law by reason of his public office which prohibits appearances in
court; and
e. Lawyer is preoccupied with too many cases which will spell prejudice to the new clients.

Q: A is accused of robbery in a complaint filed by B. A sought free legal assistance from the
Public Attorney’s Office (PAO) and Atty. C was assigned to handle his case. After reviewing the
facts as stated in the complaint and as narrated by A, Atty. C is convinced that A is guilty.
a. May Atty. C refuse to handle the defense of A and ask to be relieved? Explain fully.
b. In problem (a), if the lawyer is counsel de parte for the accused and he learns
later after accepting the case and while trial is ongoing that his client was indeed the
perpetrator of the crime, may the lawyer withdraw his appearance from the case? Why or why
not? (2014 Bar)

A:
a. Rule 14.04 of the Code of Professional Responsibility provides that a lawyer shall not decline to
represent a person solely on account of his own opinion regarding the guilt of the said person. It is not
the duty of a lawyer to determine whether the accused is guilty or not, but the judge’s. Besides, in a
criminal case, the accused is presumed innocent, and he is entitled to an acquittal unless his guilt is
proven beyond reasonable doubt. The role of the lawyer is to see to it that his constitutional right to due
process is observed.
b. He may withdraw his appearance but in accordance with procedure in Sec. 26, Rule 138 of the
Rules of Court. Moreover, Rule 19.02 of the Code of Professional Responsibility provides that “a
lawyer who has received information that his client has, in the course of the representation,
perpetuated a fraud upon a person or tribunal, shall promptly call upon the client to rectify the same,
and failing which, he shall terminate the relationship with such client in accordance with the Rules of
Court.”

CANDOR, FAIRNESS AND LOYALTY TO CLIENTS

Privileged communications
Q: A, who is charged in Court with estafa for misappropriating funds entrusted to him by B,
consulted Atty. C about the case with the intention of engaging his services as defense
counsel. Because A could not afford to pay the fee that Atty. C was charging him, A engaged
the services of another counsel, Atty. D. At the trial of the case for the estafa against A, the
prosecutor announced in open court that his next witness was Atty. C, whom he was calling to
the witness stand. Counsel for A, Atty. D, vigorously opposed the prosecutor’s move on the
ground Atty. C may not be called as witness for the prosecution as he might disclose a would-
be client’s confidence and secret. Asked by the presiding Judge what would be the nature of
Atty. C’s testimony, the prosecutor said it has something to do with how A obtained from B the
funds that the latter received from the former but failed to account for. Thereupon, Atty. A
vigorously opposed the prosecutor’s motion. If you were the Judge, how would you rule on the
matter? (1999 Bar) UST BAR OPERATIONS
Legal and Judicial Ethics
22
A: If I were the judge, I will not allow Atty. C to take the witness stand. When A consulted Atty. C about
his case, a lawyer-client relationship was established between them. It does not matter that A did not
eventually engage his services because of his fees; such relationship has already been created
(Hilado v. David,84 Phil 569). A lawyer shall be bound by the rule on privileged communication in
respect to matters disclosed to him by a prospective client (Code of Professional Responsibility, Rule
15.02). The rule on privileged communication provides that an attorney cannot, without the consent of
his client, be examined as to any communication made by the client to him (Rules of Court, Rule 130,
Sec. 21 [b]). The prosecutor has announced that Atty. C will be asked about how A obtained from B the
funds that he failed to account for. Atty. C’s knowledge of such matter could have come only from A.
Q: In the course of a drinking spree with Atty. Holgado who has always been his counsel in
business deals, Simon bragged about his recent sexual adventures with socialites known for
their expensive tastes. When Atty. Holgado asked Simon how he manages to finance his
escapades, the latter answered that he has been using the bank deposits of rich clients of
Banco Filipino where he works as manager. Is Simon’s revelation to Atty. Holgado covered by
the Attorney-client privilege? (2006 Bar)
A: Simon’s revelation to Atty. Holgado is not covered by the lawyer-client privilege. In the first place, it
was not made on account of a lawyer-client relationship, that is, it was not made for the purpose of
seeking legal advice. In the second place, it was not made in confidence (Mercado v. Vitriolo, 459
SCRA 1). In the third place, the attorney-client privilege does not cover information concerning a crime
or a fraud being committed or proposed to be committed.
Q: Maria and Atty. Evangeline met each other and became good friends at zumba class. One
day, Maria approached Atty. Evangeline for legal advice. It turned out that Maria, a nurse,
previously worked in the Middle East. So she could more easily leave for work abroad, she
declared in all her documents that she was still single. However, Maria was already married with
two children. Maria again had plans to apply for work abroad but this time, wished to have all
her papers in order. Atty. Evangeline, claiming that she was already overloaded with other
cases, referred Maria’s case to another lawyer. Maria found it appalling that after Atty.
Evangeline had learned of her secrets, the latter refused to handle her case.
Maria’s friendship with Atty. Evangeline permanently turned sour after Maria filed an
administrative case against the latter for failing to return borrowed jewelry. Atty. Evangeline, on
the other hand, threatened to charge Maria with a criminal case for falsification of public
documents, based on the disclosures Maria had earlier made to Atty. Evangeline.
Was the consultation of Maria with Atty. Evangeline considered privilege? (2015 Bar)
A: The consultation of Maria with Atty. Evangeline is considered privileged. The moment the
complainant approached the then receptive respondent to seek legal advice, a veritable lawyer-client
relationship evolved between the two. Such relationship imposes upon the lawyer certain restrictions
circumscribed by the ethics of the profession. Among the burdens of the relationship is that which
enjoins the lawyer to keep inviolate confidential information acquired or revealed during legal
consultations. The fact that one is, at the end of the day not inclined to handle the client’s case is
hardly of consequence. Of little moment too, is the fact that no formal professional engagement follows
consultation. Nor will it make any difference, that no contract whatsoever was executed by the parties
to memorialize the relationship (Hadjula v. Madianda, A.C. No. 6711, July 3, 2007).
Conflict of Interest
Q: St. Ivan’s Hospital, Inc. (St. Ivan’s) and allied Construction Co. (Allied) separately retained
the legal services of Tomas and Benedicto Law Offices. St. Ivan’s engaged the service of Allied
for the construction of a new building but failed to pay the contract price after the completion of
the works. A complaint for sum of money was filed by Atty. Budoy, a former associate of Tomas
and Benedicto Law Offices, on behalf of Allied against St. Ivan’s. St. Ivans, lost the case and
was held liable to Allied.
Thereafter, St. Ivan’s filed a disbarment complaint against Atty. Budoy. It claimed that while
Atty. Budo has established his own law office, an arrangement was made whereby Tomas and
Benedicto Law Offices assign cases for him to handle, and that it can be assumed that Tomas
and Benedicto Law Offices collaborate with Atty. Budo in the cases referred to him, creating a
conflict of interest. Rule on the complaint with reasons. (2016 Bar)
A: I will rule in favor of St. Ivan’s and against Atty. Budoy. St. Ivan’s was a client of Tomas and
Benedicto Law Offices, of which Atty. Budoy was an associate attorney. As such, St. Ivan’s was also
his client, because of the QUAMTO (1987-2017)
23
principle that when a party hires a law firm, he hires all the lawyers therein. Moreover, Atty. Budoy was
in a position to know the information transmitted by St. Ivan’s to the firm. “There is conflict of interest if
the acceptance of a new retainer will require the lawyer to perform a act which will injuriously affect his
new client in any matter in which he represents him, and also whether he will be called upon in his new
relation to use against his first client any knowledge acquired during their relation” (Hornilla v. Salunat,
453 Phil. 108, July 01, 2003).
“As such, a lawyer is prohibited from representing new clients whose interests oppose those of a
former client in any manner, whether or not they are parties in the same action or on totally unrelated
cases. The prohibition is founded on the principles of public policy and good taste” (Anglo v. Atty.
Valencia, A.C. No. 10567, Feb. 25, 2015).
Q: Mrs. F, a young matron, was referred to you for legal advice by your good friend in
connection with the matron’s jewelry business. She related to you the facts regarding a sale on
consignment of pieces of jewelry to someone she did not name or identify. Since she was
referred to you by a close friend, you did not bill her for the consultation. Neither did she offer
to compensate you. Six months later, Mrs. G, the wife of the general manager of a client
company of your law firm, asked you to defend her in a criminal case for estafa filed by Mrs. F.
Would you agree to handle her case? (1997 Bar)
A: First, I will inquire if the case for estafa filed by Mrs. F against the wife of the general manager is the
same matter concerning which Mrs. F consulted me six months before. If it is a same matter, I will not
be able to handle the case for the general manager’s wife, because of a conflict of interests. When
Mrs. F consulted me and I give her professional advice, a lawyer-client relationship was created
between us, regardless of the fact that I was not compensated for it. It would involve a conflict of
interests if I will handle the case for the opposite party on the same matter (Hilado v. David, 84 Phil.
571).
Q: Explain your understanding of “Conflict of Interests” under the Code of professional
Responsibility. (2009, 1997, 1993 Bar)
A: A lawyer is prohibited from representing conflicting interests. There is conflict of interests within the
context of the rule when, on behalf of client, it is the lawyer’s duty to contend for that which his duty to
another client requires him to oppose. Another test is whether the acceptance of a new lawyer-client
relation will prevent a lawyer from discharging fully his duty of undivided fidelity and loyalty to another
client or invite suspicion of unfaithfulness or double-dealing in the performance thereof.
It is improper for a lawyer to appear as counsel for one party against his present client even in a totally
unrelated case. With regard to former client, the traditional rule is to distinguish between related and
unrelated cases. A lawyer may not represent a subsequent client against former client in a controversy
that is related, directly or indirectly, to the subject matter of the previous litigation in which he appeared
for the former client, otherwise, he may. However, in the case of Rosacia vs. Atty.B. Bulalacao, 248
SCRA 665, the Supreme Court ruled that a lawyer may not accept a case against a former client, even
on an unrelated matter.
The Court reiterates that an attorney owes loyalty to his client not in the case in which he has
represented him but also after the relation of attorney and client has terminated as it is not good
practice to permit afterwards to defend in another case other person against his former client under the
pretext that the other case. It behooves respondent not only to keep inviolate the client’s confidence
but also to avoid the appearance of treachery and double-dealing for only then can litigants be
encouraged to entrust their secrets to their attorneys which is of paramount importance in the
administration of justice.
Q: Atty. Belle Montes is a former partner in the Rosales Law Office which is representing
Corporation X before the Securities and Exchange Commission. Atty. Montes who is now
practicing on his own, entered her appearance as counsel for Corporation Y in a suit between
said corporation and Corporation X. Atty. Montes claims that since she did not personally
handle the case of Corporation X when she was still with the Rosales Law Office she will not be
representing conflicting interests. Is such argument valid? Explain. (1992 Bar)
A: Atty. Belle Montes will be deemed to be appearing for conflicting interests if she appears for
Corporation Y against Corporation X.
This question is similar to the case of Philippine Blooming Mills vs. Court of Appeals. In said case, the
Philippine Blooming Mills was the retainer of the ACCRA Law Office. Three lawyers of the ACCRA Law
Office separated from said law firm and established their own law office. The three lawyers were
disqualified from appearing for a corporation against the Philippine Blooming Mills.
The rule which prohibits appearing for conflicting interests applies to law firms. The UST BAR
OPERATIONS
Legal and Judicial Ethics
24
employment of one member of a law firm is considered as an employment of the law firm and that the
employment of a law firm is equivalent to a retainer of the members thereof.
Q: R is a retained counsel of ABC Bank-Ermita Branch. One day, his balik bayan compadre, B,
consulted him about his unclaimed deposits with the said branch of ABC Bank, which the bank
had refused to give to him claiming that the account had become dormant. R agreed to file a
case against the bank with the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Manila. B lost the case, but upon
the advice of R, he no longer appealed the decision. B later discovered that R was the retained
counsel of ABC Bank-Ermita Branch.
Does B have any remedy? Discuss the legal and ethical implications of the problem. (2014 Bar)
A: Atty. R clearly violated the rule against representing conflicting interests (Rule 15.03, Code of
Professional Responsibility). B may file an action to set aside the judgment on the theory that if a
lawyer is disqualified from appearing as counsel for a party on account of conflict of interests, he is
presumed to have impropriety and prejudicially advised and represented the party in the conduct of the
litigation from beginning to end. He may also file an action for damages against Atty. R, aside from an
administrative complaint due to his misconduct. He was prejudiced by the adverse decision against
him, which he no longer appealed upon the advice of Atty. R.
Q: You are the counsel for the estate of a deceased person. Your wife is a practicing Certified
Public Accountant. She was asked by her client to prepare and submit an itemized claim
against the estate you are representing. She asks for your advice on the legal propriety of her
client’s claim. What advice would you give her? Explain. (2003 Bar)
A: I would advise her that it will be improper for her to handle her client’s claim against the estate. As a
counsel for the estate, it is my duty to preserve the estate. Her client’s claim seeks to reduce the said
estate. If she will handle such claim, I can be suspected of representing conflicting interests. The
interests of the estate and of its creditors are adverse to each other (Nakpil v. Valdez, 288 SCRA 75).
Even if she is a different person, the fact that she is my wife will still give rise to the impression that we
are acting as one.
Q: You are the lawyer of Mr.”H”, the plaintiff, in a civil case for rescission of contract. The
prospects for an amicable settlement look bright. Impressed by your ability, Mr. “I”, the
defendant, would like very much to retain you as his defense counsel in a criminal case for
homicide through reckless imprudence. Mr. “I” wants you to forthwith enter your appearance,
the arraignment already having been scheduled. Would you accept the offer? (1997 Bar)
A: It depends. If the criminal case for homicide through reckless imprudence is against Mr. “H”, I
cannot accept the same for that will involve a conflict of interest, although it is an unrelated case.
But if it will not involve Mr. “H”, I can accept the same. However, to avoid suspicion and
misunderstanding, it would be better if I inform Mr. “H” about the offer and secure his conformity to my
handling the same.
Q: Atty. B acted as counsel for C in a civil case. He also acted as counsel for D against C in
another civil case. When D lost his case against C, he filed an administrative complaint against
Atty. B for conflict of interests. Decide. (1991 Bar)
A: If the case of C in the first case is entirely different and not related with the case of D against C,
there is no conflict of interests. If the two cases however are related wherein the attorney has
knowledge of the evidence of C then there is conflict of interests. Rule 15.01 provides that: A lawyer in
conferring with a prospective client shall ascertain as soon as practicable whether the matter would
involve a conflict with another client or his own interest, and if so, shall forthwith inform the prospective
client. Rule 15.03 further provides that: A lawyer shall not represent conflicting interests except by
written consent of all concerned given after a full disclosure of the facts.
Q: The law firm of Sale, Santiago and Aldeguer has an existing and current retainership
agreement with XYZ Corporation and ABC Company, both of which were pharmaceutical firms.
XYZ Corporation discovered that a number of its patented drugs had been duplicated and sold
in the market under ABC Company’s brand names. XYZ Corporation turned to the law firm and
asked it to bring suit against ABC Company for patent infringement on several counts. What are
the ethical considerations involved in this case and how are you going to resolve them? (1994
Bar)

A:A counsel de oficio is a lawyer appointed by the court to defend an indigent defendant in a criminal
case. The lawyer designated as counsel de officio cannot charge the indigent litigant for his
professional services. In a sense, there is no contract for legal services between him and the
defendant. In the absence of an express or implied contract, there is no obligation to compensate.
Suing his client for attorney’s fees might also involve a violation of the confidential nature of a lawyer-
client relationship.
Q: Atty. Vidal, a semi-retired Metro Manila law practitioner, has a cattle ranch in the remote
municipality of Caranglan, Neuva Ecija. He attends to his law office in Manila on Mondays,
Tuesdays and Wednesdays, and spends the rest of the week in his cattle ranch riding horses
and castrating bulls. In a criminal case pending before the Municipal Trial Court of Caranglan,
the only other licensed member of the Bar is representing the private complainant. The accused
is a detention prisoner. The judge wants to expedite proceedings.
a. What must the judge do to expedite proceedings?
b. If Attorney Vidal is appointed to act as counsel de oficio for the accused, could he refuse by
saying that in the province, he does not want to do anything except ride horses and castrate
bulls? Explain. (1993 Bar)

A:
a. The judge may appoint Atty. Vidal as counsel de oficio in order to expedite the proceedings. This is
especially because the accused is a detention prisoner who is presumed to be indigent and cannot
retain a paid counsel.
b. Atty. Vidal cannot validly refuse the appointment as counsel de oficio. While it is true that he stays in
the province to rest during the latter part of the week as lawyer he must comply with his oath to assist
in the administration of justice. Precisely one of the objectives of the Integrated Bar is to compel all
lawyers in the active practice of law to comply with their obligation to assist the courts in the
administration of justice.

Valid grounds for refusal to serve

Q: When may refusal of a counsel to act as counsel de oficio be justified on grounds aside from
reasons of health, extensive travel abroad, or similar reasons of urgency? Support your
answer. (2001 Bar)
A: Other justified grounds for refusal to act as counsel de oficio are:
a. Too many de oficio cases assigned to the lawyer (People v. Daeng, 49 SCRA 222);
b. Conflict of interest (Rule 14.03, CPR);
c. Lawyer is not in a position to carry out the work effectively or competently (supra);
d. Lawyer is prohibited from practicing law by reason of his public office which prohibits appearances in
court; and
e. Lawyer is preoccupied with too many cases which will spell prejudice to the new clients.

Q: A is accused of robbery in a complaint filed by B. A sought free legal assistance from the
Public Attorney’s Office (PAO) and Atty. C was assigned to handle his case. After reviewing the
facts as stated in the complaint and as narrated by A, Atty. C is convinced that A is guilty.
a. May Atty. C refuse to handle the defense of A and ask to be relieved? Explain fully.
b. In problem (a), if the lawyer is counsel de parte for the accused and he learns
later after accepting the case and while trial is ongoing that his client was indeed the
perpetrator of the crime, may the lawyer withdraw his appearance from the case? Why or why
not? (2014 Bar)

A:
a. Rule 14.04 of the Code of Professional Responsibility provides that a lawyer shall not decline to
represent a person solely on account of his own opinion regarding the guilt of the said person. It is not
the duty of a lawyer to determine whether the accused is guilty or not, but the judge’s. Besides, in a
criminal case, the accused is presumed innocent, and he is entitled to an acquittal unless his guilt is
proven beyond reasonable doubt. The role of the lawyer is to see to it that his constitutional right to due
process is observed.
b. He may withdraw his appearance but in accordance with procedure in Sec. 26, Rule 138 of the
Rules of Court. Moreover, Rule 19.02 of the Code of Professional Responsibility provides that “a
lawyer who has received information that his client has, in the course of the representation,
perpetuated a fraud upon a person or tribunal, shall promptly call upon the client to rectify the same,
and failing which, he shall terminate the relationship with such client in accordance with the Rules of
Court.”

CANDOR, FAIRNESS AND LOYALTY TO CLIENTS

Privileged communications
Q: A, who is charged in Court with estafa for misappropriating funds entrusted to him by B,
consulted Atty. C about the case with the intention of engaging his services as defense
counsel. Because A could not afford to pay the fee that Atty. C was charging him, A engaged
the services of another counsel, Atty. D. At the trial of the case for the estafa against A, the
prosecutor announced in open court that his next witness was Atty. C, whom he was calling to
the witness stand. Counsel for A, Atty. D, vigorously opposed the prosecutor’s move on the
ground Atty. C may not be called as witness for the prosecution as he might disclose a would-
be client’s confidence and secret. Asked by the presiding Judge what would be the nature of
Atty. C’s testimony, the prosecutor said it has something to do with how A obtained from B the
funds that the latter received from the former but failed to account for. Thereupon, Atty. A
vigorously opposed the prosecutor’s motion. If you were the Judge, how would you rule on the
matter? (1999 Bar) UST BAR OPERATIONS
Legal and Judicial Ethics
22
A: If I were the judge, I will not allow Atty. C to take the witness stand. When A consulted Atty. C about
his case, a lawyer-client relationship was established between them. It does not matter that A did not
eventually engage his services because of his fees; such relationship has already been created
(Hilado v. David,84 Phil 569). A lawyer shall be bound by the rule on privileged communication in
respect to matters disclosed to him by a prospective client (Code of Professional Responsibility, Rule
15.02). The rule on privileged communication provides that an attorney cannot, without the consent of
his client, be examined as to any communication made by the client to him (Rules of Court, Rule 130,
Sec. 21 [b]). The prosecutor has announced that Atty. C will be asked about how A obtained from B the
funds that he failed to account for. Atty. C’s knowledge of such matter could have come only from A.
Q: In the course of a drinking spree with Atty. Holgado who has always been his counsel in
business deals, Simon bragged about his recent sexual adventures with socialites known for
their expensive tastes. When Atty. Holgado asked Simon how he manages to finance his
escapades, the latter answered that he has been using the bank deposits of rich clients of
Banco Filipino where he works as manager. Is Simon’s revelation to Atty. Holgado covered by
the Attorney-client privilege? (2006 Bar)
A: Simon’s revelation to Atty. Holgado is not covered by the lawyer-client privilege. In the first place, it
was not made on account of a lawyer-client relationship, that is, it was not made for the purpose of
seeking legal advice. In the second place, it was not made in confidence (Mercado v. Vitriolo, 459
SCRA 1). In the third place, the attorney-client privilege does not cover information concerning a crime
or a fraud being committed or proposed to be committed.
Q: Maria and Atty. Evangeline met each other and became good friends at zumba class. One
day, Maria approached Atty. Evangeline for legal advice. It turned out that Maria, a nurse,
previously worked in the Middle East. So she could more easily leave for work abroad, she
declared in all her documents that she was still single. However, Maria was already married with
two children. Maria again had plans to apply for work abroad but this time, wished to have all
her papers in order. Atty. Evangeline, claiming that she was already overloaded with other
cases, referred Maria’s case to another lawyer. Maria found it appalling that after Atty.
Evangeline had learned of her secrets, the latter refused to handle her case.
Maria’s friendship with Atty. Evangeline permanently turned sour after Maria filed an
administrative case against the latter for failing to return borrowed jewelry. Atty. Evangeline, on
the other hand, threatened to charge Maria with a criminal case for falsification of public
documents, based on the disclosures Maria had earlier made to Atty. Evangeline.
Was the consultation of Maria with Atty. Evangeline considered privilege? (2015 Bar)
A: The consultation of Maria with Atty. Evangeline is considered privileged. The moment the
complainant approached the then receptive respondent to seek legal advice, a veritable lawyer-client
relationship evolved between the two. Such relationship imposes upon the lawyer certain restrictions
circumscribed by the ethics of the profession. Among the burdens of the relationship is that which
enjoins the lawyer to keep inviolate confidential information acquired or revealed during legal
consultations. The fact that one is, at the end of the day not inclined to handle the client’s case is
hardly of consequence. Of little moment too, is the fact that no formal professional engagement follows
consultation. Nor will it make any difference, that no contract whatsoever was executed by the parties
to memorialize the relationship (Hadjula v. Madianda, A.C. No. 6711, July 3, 2007).
Conflict of Interest
Q: St. Ivan’s Hospital, Inc. (St. Ivan’s) and allied Construction Co. (Allied) separately retained
the legal services of Tomas and Benedicto Law Offices. St. Ivan’s engaged the service of Allied
for the construction of a new building but failed to pay the contract price after the completion of
the works. A complaint for sum of money was filed by Atty. Budoy, a former associate of Tomas
and Benedicto Law Offices, on behalf of Allied against St. Ivan’s. St. Ivans, lost the case and
was held liable to Allied.
Thereafter, St. Ivan’s filed a disbarment complaint against Atty. Budoy. It claimed that while
Atty. Budo has established his own law office, an arrangement was made whereby Tomas and
Benedicto Law Offices assign cases for him to handle, and that it can be assumed that Tomas
and Benedicto Law Offices collaborate with Atty. Budo in the cases referred to him, creating a
conflict of interest. Rule on the complaint with reasons. (2016 Bar)
A: I will rule in favor of St. Ivan’s and against Atty. Budoy. St. Ivan’s was a client of Tomas and
Benedicto Law Offices, of which Atty. Budoy was an associate attorney. As such, St. Ivan’s was also
his client, because of the QUAMTO (1987-2017)
23
principle that when a party hires a law firm, he hires all the lawyers therein. Moreover, Atty. Budoy was
in a position to know the information transmitted by St. Ivan’s to the firm. “There is conflict of interest if
the acceptance of a new retainer will require the lawyer to perform a act which will injuriously affect his
new client in any matter in which he represents him, and also whether he will be called upon in his new
relation to use against his first client any knowledge acquired during their relation” (Hornilla v. Salunat,
453 Phil. 108, July 01, 2003).
“As such, a lawyer is prohibited from representing new clients whose interests oppose those of a
former client in any manner, whether or not they are parties in the same action or on totally unrelated
cases. The prohibition is founded on the principles of public policy and good taste” (Anglo v. Atty.
Valencia, A.C. No. 10567, Feb. 25, 2015).
Q: Mrs. F, a young matron, was referred to you for legal advice by your good friend in
connection with the matron’s jewelry business. She related to you the facts regarding a sale on
consignment of pieces of jewelry to someone she did not name or identify. Since she was
referred to you by a close friend, you did not bill her for the consultation. Neither did she offer
to compensate you. Six months later, Mrs. G, the wife of the general manager of a client
company of your law firm, asked you to defend her in a criminal case for estafa filed by Mrs. F.
Would you agree to handle her case? (1997 Bar)
A: First, I will inquire if the case for estafa filed by Mrs. F against the wife of the general manager is the
same matter concerning which Mrs. F consulted me six months before. If it is a same matter, I will not
be able to handle the case for the general manager’s wife, because of a conflict of interests. When
Mrs. F consulted me and I give her professional advice, a lawyer-client relationship was created
between us, regardless of the fact that I was not compensated for it. It would involve a conflict of
interests if I will handle the case for the opposite party on the same matter (Hilado v. David, 84 Phil.
571).
Q: Explain your understanding of “Conflict of Interests” under the Code of professional
Responsibility. (2009, 1997, 1993 Bar)
A: A lawyer is prohibited from representing conflicting interests. There is conflict of interests within the
context of the rule when, on behalf of client, it is the lawyer’s duty to contend for that which his duty to
another client requires him to oppose. Another test is whether the acceptance of a new lawyer-client
relation will prevent a lawyer from discharging fully his duty of undivided fidelity and loyalty to another
client or invite suspicion of unfaithfulness or double-dealing in the performance thereof.
It is improper for a lawyer to appear as counsel for one party against his present client even in a totally
unrelated case. With regard to former client, the traditional rule is to distinguish between related and
unrelated cases. A lawyer may not represent a subsequent client against former client in a controversy
that is related, directly or indirectly, to the subject matter of the previous litigation in which he appeared
for the former client, otherwise, he may. However, in the case of Rosacia vs. Atty.B. Bulalacao, 248
SCRA 665, the Supreme Court ruled that a lawyer may not accept a case against a former client, even
on an unrelated matter.
The Court reiterates that an attorney owes loyalty to his client not in the case in which he has
represented him but also after the relation of attorney and client has terminated as it is not good
practice to permit afterwards to defend in another case other person against his former client under the
pretext that the other case. It behooves respondent not only to keep inviolate the client’s confidence
but also to avoid the appearance of treachery and double-dealing for only then can litigants be
encouraged to entrust their secrets to their attorneys which is of paramount importance in the
administration of justice.
Q: Atty. Belle Montes is a former partner in the Rosales Law Office which is representing
Corporation X before the Securities and Exchange Commission. Atty. Montes who is now
practicing on his own, entered her appearance as counsel for Corporation Y in a suit between
said corporation and Corporation X. Atty. Montes claims that since she did not personally
handle the case of Corporation X when she was still with the Rosales Law Office she will not be
representing conflicting interests. Is such argument valid? Explain. (1992 Bar)
A: Atty. Belle Montes will be deemed to be appearing for conflicting interests if she appears for
Corporation Y against Corporation X.
This question is similar to the case of Philippine Blooming Mills vs. Court of Appeals. In said case, the
Philippine Blooming Mills was the retainer of the ACCRA Law Office. Three lawyers of the ACCRA Law
Office separated from said law firm and established their own law office. The three lawyers were
disqualified from appearing for a corporation against the Philippine Blooming Mills.
The rule which prohibits appearing for conflicting interests applies to law firms. The UST BAR
OPERATIONS
Legal and Judicial Ethics
24
employment of one member of a law firm is considered as an employment of the law firm and that the
employment of a law firm is equivalent to a retainer of the members thereof.
Q: R is a retained counsel of ABC Bank-Ermita Branch. One day, his balik bayan compadre, B,
consulted him about his unclaimed deposits with the said branch of ABC Bank, which the bank
had refused to give to him claiming that the account had become dormant. R agreed to file a
case against the bank with the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Manila. B lost the case, but upon
the advice of R, he no longer appealed the decision. B later discovered that R was the retained
counsel of ABC Bank-Ermita Branch.
Does B have any remedy? Discuss the legal and ethical implications of the problem. (2014 Bar)
A: Atty. R clearly violated the rule against representing conflicting interests (Rule 15.03, Code of
Professional Responsibility). B may file an action to set aside the judgment on the theory that if a
lawyer is disqualified from appearing as counsel for a party on account of conflict of interests, he is
presumed to have impropriety and prejudicially advised and represented the party in the conduct of the
litigation from beginning to end. He may also file an action for damages against Atty. R, aside from an
administrative complaint due to his misconduct. He was prejudiced by the adverse decision against
him, which he no longer appealed upon the advice of Atty. R.
Q: You are the counsel for the estate of a deceased person. Your wife is a practicing Certified
Public Accountant. She was asked by her client to prepare and submit an itemized claim
against the estate you are representing. She asks for your advice on the legal propriety of her
client’s claim. What advice would you give her? Explain. (2003 Bar)
A: I would advise her that it will be improper for her to handle her client’s claim against the estate. As a
counsel for the estate, it is my duty to preserve the estate. Her client’s claim seeks to reduce the said
estate. If she will handle such claim, I can be suspected of representing conflicting interests. The
interests of the estate and of its creditors are adverse to each other (Nakpil v. Valdez, 288 SCRA 75).
Even if she is a different person, the fact that she is my wife will still give rise to the impression that we
are acting as one.
Q: You are the lawyer of Mr.”H”, the plaintiff, in a civil case for rescission of contract. The
prospects for an amicable settlement look bright. Impressed by your ability, Mr. “I”, the
defendant, would like very much to retain you as his defense counsel in a criminal case for
homicide through reckless imprudence. Mr. “I” wants you to forthwith enter your appearance,
the arraignment already having been scheduled. Would you accept the offer? (1997 Bar)
A: It depends. If the criminal case for homicide through reckless imprudence is against Mr. “H”, I
cannot accept the same for that will involve a conflict of interest, although it is an unrelated case.
But if it will not involve Mr. “H”, I can accept the same. However, to avoid suspicion and
misunderstanding, it would be better if I inform Mr. “H” about the offer and secure his conformity to my
handling the same.
Q: Atty. B acted as counsel for C in a civil case. He also acted as counsel for D against C in
another civil case. When D lost his case against C, he filed an administrative complaint against
Atty. B for conflict of interests. Decide. (1991 Bar)
A: If the case of C in the first case is entirely different and not related with the case of D against C,
there is no conflict of interests. If the two cases however are related wherein the attorney has
knowledge of the evidence of C then there is conflict of interests. Rule 15.01 provides that: A lawyer in
conferring with a prospective client shall ascertain as soon as practicable whether the matter would
involve a conflict with another client or his own interest, and if so, shall forthwith inform the prospective
client. Rule 15.03 further provides that: A lawyer shall not represent conflicting interests except by
written consent of all concerned given after a full disclosure of the facts.
Q: The law firm of Sale, Santiago and Aldeguer has an existing and current retainership
agreement with XYZ Corporation and ABC Company, both of which were pharmaceutical firms.
XYZ Corporation discovered that a number of its patented drugs had been duplicated and sold
in the market under ABC Company’s brand names. XYZ Corporation turned to the law firm and
asked it to bring suit against ABC Company for patent infringement on several counts. What are
the ethical considerations involved in this case and how are you going to resolve them? (1994
Bar)
A: A lawyer may refuse to accept the representation of a client if he labors under conflict of interests
between him and the prospective client or between a present client and the prospective client (Code of
Professional Responsibility, Canon 14, Rule 14.03). It is QUAMTO (1987-2017)
25
unprofessional for a lawyer to represent conflicting interests, except by express consent of all
concerned given after full disclosure of the fact (Canons of Professional Ethics, Canon 6). A lawyer
cannot accept a case against a present client either in the same case or in a totally unrelated case.
Q: Atty. Juan Cruz, a practicing lawyer, was employed by Pilipinas Bank as its bank attorney
and notary public in three of its branches in Manila. While thus employed, Maria del Rio, who
was unaware of Atty. Cruz’s employment in the bank, engaged Atty. Cruz’s services as a lawyer
in a case that was filed by Pilipinas Bank for collection of sum of money involving one of its
branches in Quezon City which Atty. Cruz accepted. The Quezon City Regional Trial Court, after
due proceeding and hearing, rendered judgment in favor of Pilipinas Bank and against Maria
del Rio who wanted to appeal the adverse judgment. But upon advice of Atty. Cruz, the adverse
judgment was not appealed. Thereafter, Maria del Rio learned Atty. Cruz was employed by
Pilipinas Bank as one of its attorneys. She now consults with you and asks you to take legal
steps against Atty. Cruz for his apparent misconduct. What do you think of what Atty. Cruz did?
Is there a valid and legal basis to discipline him? (2006, 1999 Bar)
A: In agreeing to represent Maria del Rio in a case which Pilipinas Bank filed against her, Atty. Cruz
violated the rule against representing conflicting interests. Rule 15.03 of the Code of Professional
Responsibility provides that a lawyer shall not represent conflicting interests except by written consent
of all concerned after a full disclosure of the facts. It is improper for a lawyer to appear as counsel for a
person whose interest conflicts with that of his present or former client, even in an unrelated case
(Philippine National Bank v. Cedo, 243 SCRA 1). It does not matter that the Pilipinas Bank branch in
Quezon City is not one of the branches he services in Manila. The bank itself is his client. This
constitutes malpractice for which Atty. Cruz can be disciplined.
Q: Huey Company and Dewey Corporation are both retainer clients of Atty. Anama. He is the
Corporate Secretary of Huey Company. He represents Dewey Corporation in three pending
litigation cases. Dewey Corporation wants to file a civil case against Huey Company and has
requested Atty. Anama to handle the case. What are the options available to Atty. Anama?
Explain your answer. (1993 Bar)
A: The options available to Atty. Anama are:
1. To decline to accept the case because to do so will constitute representing conflicting
interests. It is unethical for a lawyer to represent a client in a case against another client in the said
case.
2. To accept to file the case against Huey Company, after full disclosure to both retained clients and
upon their express and written consent. The written consent may free him from the charge of
representing conflicting interests, because written consent amounts to a release by the clients of the
lawyer’s obligation not to represent conflicting interests.

Q: Atty. Japzon, a former partner of XXX law firm, is representing Kapuso Corporation in a civil
case against Kapamilya Corporation whose legal counsel is XXX law firm. Atty. Japzon claims
that she never handled the case of Kapamilya Corporation when she was still with XXX law firm.
Is there a conflict of interests? Explain. (2005 Bar)
A: There is a conflict of interests when a lawyer represents inconsistent interests. This rule covers not
only cases in which confidential communications have been confided, but also those in which no
confidence has been bestowed or will be used. Also, there is conflict of interests if the new retainer will
require the attorney to perform an act which will injuriously affect his first client in any matter in which
he represents him and also whether he will be called upon in his new relation to use against his first
client any knowledge acquired through their connection (Santos vs. Beltran, 418 SCRA 17). Since Atty.
Japzon was a partner of the XXX law firm which has Kapamilya Corporation as its client, she cannot
handle a case against it as such will involve conflict of interests. The employment of a law firm is
equivalent to the retainer of the memberstherof. It does not matter if Atty. Japzon never handled a case
of the Kapamilya Corporation when she was still with the XXX law firm.
Representation with zeal within legal bounds
Q: Winnie retained the services of Atty. Derecho to file a collection case against Carmen.
Winnie paid Atty. Derecho a sizeable retainer’s fee which the latter accepted. Later, in the
process of determining the amount of debt to be collected from Carmen, Atty. Derecho noticed
that of the total claim of 8.5 Million, certain invoices covering 3.5 Million appeared to be
irregular. Winnie while admitting the irregularity assures her lawyer that there would be no
problem as Carmen was by nature negligent in keeping her records and would not notice the
mistakes anyway. Atty. Derecho tried to convince Winnie to exclude the amount of 3.5 Million
but Winnie refused. As a UST BAR OPERATIONS
Legal and Judicial Ethics
26
consequence Atty. Derecho terminated their relationship and withdrew from the case. Was Atty.
Derecho right in terminating their relationship and withdrawing from the case? How about the
fact that he had already accepted a sizeable retainer’s fee from his client? Discuss fully. (1995
Bar)
A: Atty. Derecho was right in terminating the lawyer-client relationship and withdrawing from the case.
Rule 22.01 of the Code of Professional Responsibility provides that a lawyer may withdraw his services
when the client pursues an illegal or immoral course of conduct in connection with the matter he is
handling, or when the client insists that the lawyer pursue conduct violative of the canons and rules.
Rule 15.07 provides that a lawyer shall impress upon his client compliance with the laws and the
principles of fairness. While he owes his client warm zeal, it should always be within the bounds of the
law (Code of Professional Responsibility, Canon 19). The fact that Atty. Derecho had already accepted
a sizeable retainer’s fee should make no difference on his decision to withdraw. Moreover, he may
retain the fees he has already received, his withdrawal being justified (Pineda, Legal & Judicial Ethics,
1994 edition, p. 223), unless the same is unconscionable.
Q: What are the three (3) tests to determine conflict of interest for practicing lawyers? Explain
each briefly. (2009 Bar)
A:
1. When in representation of one client, a lawyer is required to fight for an issue or claim, but is also
duty bound to oppose it for another client;
2. When the acceptance of the new retainer will require an attorney to perform an act that may
injuriously affect the first client or when called upon in a new relation to use against the first client any
knowledge acquired through their professional connection;

When the acceptance of a new relation would prevent the full discharge of an attorney’s duty to give
undivided fidelity and loyalty to the client or would invite suspicion of unfaithfulness or double-dealing in
the performance of that duty (Northwestern University v. Arquillo, 415 SCRA 513 [2005]).
CLIENT’S MONEYS AND PROPERTIES
Fiduciary relationship
Q: A lawyer charged his client P10, 000.00 for filing fees pertaining to the complaint he filed in
court. He actually spent only P1, 000.00. He did not account the balance. May his client charge
him for misconduct as a member of the Philippine bar? Explain your answer. (1990 Bar)
A: The client may charge his lawyer with misconduct for not accounting for the balance on P9, 000.00.
It is well-settled that where the client gives his lawyer money for a specific purpose, such as to pay the
docket fees for the filing of an action in court, so much of the money not used for the purpose belongs
to the client and the lawyer holds in it trust for him. And it is the lawyer’s duty to promptly account for all
money received from his client. For this reason, the lawyer’s failure to account for the balance of the
money not spent for filing fees will render him liable for misappropriation, which is a ground for
disbarment.

Client’s moneys and properties; Fidelity to client’s cause

Q: C engaged the services of attorney D concerning various mortgage contracts entered into by
her husband from whom she is separated fearful that her real estate properties will be
foreclosed and of impending suits for sums of money against her. Attorney D advised C to give
him her land titles covering her lots so he could sell them to enable her to pay her creditors. He
then persuaded her to execute deeds of sale in his favor without any monetary or valuable
consideration, to which C agreed on condition that he would sell the lots and from the proceeds
pay her creditors. Later on, C came to know that attorney D did not sell her lots but instead paid
her creditors with his own funds and had her land titles registered in his name. Did attorney D
violate the Code of Professional Responsibility? Explain. (2009, 2007 Bar)
A: The decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Hernandez v. Go (450 SCRA 1) is squarely
applicable to this problem. Under the same set of facts, the Supreme Court held the lawyer to have
violated Canons 16 and 17 of the Code of Professional Responsibility, which provide as follows:
Canon 16. A lawyer shall hold in trust all moneys and properties of his client hat may come into his
possession.
Canon 17. A lawyer owes fidelity to the cause of his client and he shall be mindful of the trust and
confidence reposed in him.
The Supreme Court further held that the lawyer concerned has engaged in deceitful, dishonest,
unlawful and grossly immoral acts, which might lessen the trust and confidence reposed by the public
in the fidelity, honesty, and integrity of the legal profession, consequently, the Court disbarred him.
Delivery of Funds QUAMTO (1987-2017)
27
Q: D was charged with estafa by C before the barangay for misappropriating the proceeds of
sale of jewelry on commission. In settlement of the case, D turned over to the barangay captain,
a lawyer, the amount of P2,000.00 with the request that the barangay captain turn over the
money to C. Several months passed without C being advised of the status of her complaint. C
contacted D who informed her that she (D) had long before turned over the amount of P2,
000.00 to the barangay captain who undertook to give the money to her (C). C thus filed a case
against the barangay captain who at once remitted the amount of P2,000.00 to C. May the
barangay captain be faulted administratively? Explain. (2000 Bar)
A: Yes. The Code of Professional Responsibility applies to lawyers who are in the government service.
As a general rule, a lawyer who holds a government office may not be disciplined as a member of the
bar for misconduct in the discharge of his office as a government official. However, if that misconduct
as a government official is of such character as to affect his qualification as a lawyer or to show moral
delinquency, then he may be disciplined as a member of the bar on such ground (Dinsay v. Ctoco, 264
SCRA 703 [1996]). In the case of Penticostes v. Ibanez, 304 SCRA 281 [1999], a barangay captain
who failed to remit for several months the amount given to him for payment of an obligation, was found
to have violated the Code of Professional Conduct.
Q: Marlyn, a widow engaged the services of Atty. Romanito in order to avert the foreclosure of
several parcels of land mortgaged by her late husband to several creditors. Atty. Romanito
advised the widow to execute in his favor deeds of sale over the properties, so that he could
sell them and generate funds to pay her creditors. The widow agreed. Atty. Romanito did not
sell the properties, but paid the mortgage creditors with his own funds, and had the land titles
registered in his name. Atty. Romanito succeeds in averting the foreclosure. Is he
administratively liable? Reasons. (2009 Bar)
A: Yes, Atty. Romanito is administratively liable. The basic facts in this case are the same as the facts
in Hernandez v. Go (450 SCRA 1 [2005]), where the Supreme Court found the lawyer to have violated
Canons 16 and 17 of the Code of Professional Responsibility, and disbarred him. The Supreme Court
held that a lawyer’s acts of acquiring for himself the lots entrusted to him by his client are, by any
standard, acts constituting gross misconduct. The lawyer in that case was disbarred.
FIDELITY TO CLIENT’S CAUSE
Competence and diligence
a. Adequate protection

Q: X was indicted for murder. As he had no counsel on arraignment, the trial court appointed
Atty. A as his counsel de oficio. When Atty. A asked X what was his stand, X said he was guilty.
X thereupon pleaded guilty. Trial was thereafter conducted. When the turn of the defense to
present evidence came, Atty. A manifested that he was not presenting any and that he was
submitting the case for decision, praying that X’s plea be considered mitigating. Did Atty. A’s
assistance or conduct approximate the competence and diligence which the Code of
Professional Responsibility expected of him? Explain. (2000 Bar)
A: No. It is the duty of defense counsel when his client desires to enter a plea of guilty to fully acquaint
himself with the facts and surrounding circumstances of the case, advise his client of his constitutional
rights and the full import of a plea of guilty, see to it that the prescribed procedure is observed, present
evidence, including possible mitigating circumstances, so that the precise degree of his client's
culpability is established and the appropriate penalty is imposed, and thus leave no room for doubt that
there was a mistake or misunderstanding as to the nature of the charges to which his client has
pleaded guilty. Atty. A has fallen short of this required conduct.
b. Negligence

Q: Nene approached Atty. Nilo and asked him if it was alright to buy a piece of land which
Maneng was selling. What was shown by Maneng to Nene was an Original Certificate of Title
with many annotations and old patches, to which Nene expressed suspicion. However, Atty.
Nilo, desirous of pushing through with the transaction because of the high notarial fee
promised to him, told Nene that the title was alright and that she should not worry since he is
an attorney and that he knew Maneng well. He notarized the Deed of Sale and Nene paid
Maneng P 108,000.00. It turned out that Maneng had previously sold the same property to
another person. For the injustice done to Nene, may Atty. Nilo be disciplined? (1998 Bar)
A: Yes. Atty. Nilo is guilty of gross negligence in protecting the interests of his client. A lawyer shall not
neglect a legal matter entrusted to him and his negligence in connection therewith shall render him
liable (Rule 18.03, Code of Professional Responsibility). Worse, he was negligent because he placed
his own interest in receiving a high notarial fee over and above the UST BAR OPERATIONS
Legal and Judicial Ethics
28
Interest of his client. In the case of Nadayag v. Grageda, 237 SCRA 202, which involves similar facts,
the Supreme Court held that the lawyer "should have been conscientious in seeing to it that justice
permeated every aspect of a transaction for which his services had been engaged, in conformity with
the avowed duties of a worthy member of the Bar."
Q: May a lawyer be held liable for damages by his client for the lawyer’s failure to file the
necessary pleadings to prosecute the client’s case and as a result of which the client suffered
damages? (2014 Bar)
A: Yes, he may be held liable. Rule 18.03 of the Code of Professional Responsibility provides that “a
lawyer shall not neglect a legal matter entrusted to him, and his negligence in connection therewith
shall render him liable.” But attorney-client relationship, want of reasonable care and diligence, and
injury sustained by the client as the proximate result thereof, are the prerequisites to the maintenance
of an action for damages against a lawyer.
Q:
a. State the rule on whether a client is bound by the mistake of his counsel.
b. On account of his mistake, is counsel liable to his client for damages? Explain. (2002 Bar)

A:
a. A client is bound by the mistakes of his lawyer [Cabales v. fiery, 94 SCRA 374 (1979); Valerio v.
Secretary of Agriculture, 7 SCRA 719(1963)]. However, when the lawyer has practically sold his client
down the river or when the negligence is so gross that the client was deprived of due process, the
client is not bound by the negligence of the lawyer [PHHC v. Tiongco, 12 SCRA 471(1964); San Miguel
Corp. v. Laguesma, 236 SCRA 595(1994)].
b. A lawyer shall not neglect a legal matter entrusted to him and his negligence in connection therewith
shall make him liable (Rule 18.03, Code of Professional Responsibility). A client who suffers prejudice
by reason of his counsel’s inexcusable negligence in the discharge of his duty may file an action for
damages against him. However, there must be a showing that had the lawyer exercised due diligence,
the client under the facts and the law would have succeeded in recovering from the adverse party or in
resisting the claim of the latter.

c. Collaborating counsel

Q: May a client hire additional counsel as collaborating counsel over and above the objection of
the original counsel? (2014, 1989 Bar)
A: Yes, the client is entitled to have as many lawyers as he can afford. Professional courtesy, however,
demands that a lawyer retained as a collaborating counsel should at least communicate with the
original counsel and should at least communicate with the original counsel before entering his
appearance. On the part of the original counsel, he should not look at the employment of a
collaborating counsel as a loss of confidence in him.
Q: Atty. A objects to the collaboration of Atty. B as proposed by Client C in a pending case.
How would A, B and C handle the situation? (2001 Bar)
A: A, B, and C may handle the situation in the following manner:
a. "A" can offer to withdraw his services. Rule 22.01(c) of the Code of Professional Responsibility
allows a lawyer to withdraw his services if his inability to work with co-counsel will not promote the best
interest of his client. Here, by objecting to the collaboration of Atty. B, Atty. A foresees his inability to
work with the former. “A” may with withdraw to give his client a free hand in protecting his interest.
b. "B" should refuse to accept the case, otherwise, he may be encroaching on the professional
employment of another lawyer. A lawyer should decline association as colleague if it is objectionable to
the original counsel, but if the lawyer first retained is relieved, another may come into the case (Canon
7, Canons of Professional Ethics).
c. "C" the client must choose only one of the lawyers. If he wants Atty. B as his lawyer, he should
formally terminate the services of "A" so "B" can formally enter his appearance in the case.

REPRESENTATION WITH ZEAL WITHIN LEGAL BOUNDS

Use of fair and honest means
Q: Under Canon 19 of the Code of Professional Responsibility, "a lawyer shall represent his
client with zeal within the bounds of the law." How far, in general terms, may a lawyer go in
advocating, supporting and defending the cause of his client in a criminal case filed against the
latter? (2003, 1997 Bar)
A: The right to counsel must be more than just the presence of a lawyer in the courtroom or the mere
propounding of standard questions and objections. The right to counsel means that the accused is
simply accorded legal assistance extended by a counsel who commits himself to QUAMTO (1987-
2017)
29
the cause of the defense and acts accordingly. The right assumes an active involvement by the lawyer
in the proceedings, particularly at the trial of the case, his bearing constantly in mind the basic rights of
the accused, his being well-versed on the case, and his knowing the fundamental procedure, essential
laws and existing jurisprudence. The right of an accused to counsel finds substance in the performance
by the lawyer of his sworn duty of fidelity to his client. Tersely put, it means an efficient and truly
decisive legal assistance and not a simple perfunctory representation. (People v. Bemas, 306 SCRA
293 [1999], cited in People v. Sta. Teresa, 354 SCRA 697 [2001]). However, a lawyer shall employ
only honorable and honest means in the maintenance of his client’s cause. (Section 20, Rule 128).
Client’s fraud
Q: Atty. A discovered his client's fraud against the adverse party. What steps should he take so
that his client will secure only that which is legally and justly due him? (2001 Bar)
A: A lawyer who has received information that his client has, in the course of the representation,
perpetrated a fraud upon a person or tribunal, shall promptly call upon the client to rectify the same,
and failing which he shall terminate the relationship with such client in accordance with the Rules of
Court (Rule 19.02, Code of Professional Conduct).
Attorney’s Fees
a. Contingency fee arrangements

Q: For services to be rendered by Atty. Hamilton as counsel for Gener in a civil case involving
the recovery of the ownership and possession of a parcel of land with an area of 5,000 square
meters, the two of them agreed on a success fee for Atty. Hamilton of P50,000.00 plus 500
square meters of the land. The trial court ultimately rendered judgment in favor of Gener, and
the judgment became final and executory. After receiving P50,000.00, Atty. Hamilton demanded
the transfer to him of the promised 500 square meters of the land.
Instead of complying, Gener brought an administrative complaint charging Atty. Hamilton with
violation of the Code of Professional Responsibility and Art. 1491(5) of the Civil Code for
demanding the delivery of a portion of the land subject of the litigation.
Is Atty. Hamilton liable under the Code of Professional Responsibility and the Civil Code?
Explain your answer. (2017, 2010 Bar)
A: No. Atty. Hamilton is not liable for violation of the Code of Professional Responsibility and the Civil
Code. The agreement on a success fee of P50,000.00 and 500 sq. m. of the land involved in the case
is valid. The parties entered into a contingent fee contract that is allowed under Canon 20, Rules 20.01
of the Code of Professional Responsibility and Canon 13 of the Code of Professional Ethics.
A contract for a contingent fee is not covered by Article 1491 because the transfer or assignment of the
property in litigation takes effect only after the finality of a favorable judgment (Director of Lands v.
Ababa, G.R. No. L-26096 February 27, 1979).
Q: The spouses Manuel were the registered owners of a parcel of land measuring about 200,000
square meters. On May 4, 2008, the spouses Manuel sold the land for P3,500,000.00 to the
spouses Rivera who were issued a certificate of title for said land in their names. Because the
spouses Rivera failed to pay the balance of the purchase price for the land, the spouses
Manuel, through Atty. Enriquez, instituted an action on March 18, 2010 before the Regional Trial
Court (RTC) for sum of money and/or annulment of sale, docketed as Civil Case No. 1111. The
complaint in Civil Case No. 1111 specifically alleged that Atty. Enriquez would be paid
P200,000.00 as attorney’s fees on contingent basis. The RTC subsequently promulgated its
decision upholding the sale of the land to the spouses Rivera. Atty. Enriquez timely filed an
appeal on behalf of the spouses Manuel before the Court of Appeals. The appellate court found
for the spouses Manuel, declared the sale of the land to the spouses Rivera null and void, and
ordered the cancellation of the spouses Rivera’s certificate of title for the land. The Supreme
Court dismissed the spouses Rivera’s appeal for lack of merit. With the finality of judgment in
Civil Case No. 1111 on October 20, 2014, Atty. Enriquez filed a motion for the issuance of a writ
of execution.
Meanwhile, the spouses Rivera filed on November 10, 2014 before the RTC a case for quieting
of title against the spouses Manuel, docketed as Civil Case No. 2222. The spouses Manuel,
again through Atty. Enriquez, filed a motion to dismiss Civil Case No. 2222 on the ground of res
judicata given the final judgment in Civil Case No. 1111.
Pending the resolution of the motion to dismiss in Civil Case No. 2222, the RTC granted on
February 9, 2015 the motion for issuance of a writ of execution in Civil Case UST BAR
OPERATIONS
Legal and Judicial Ethics
30
No. 1111 and placed the spouses Manuel in possession of the land. Atty. Enriquez, based on a
purported oral agreement with the spouses Manuel, laid claim to ½ of the land, measuring
100,000.00 square meters with market value of P1,750,000.00, as his attorney’s fees.
Atty. Enriquez caused the subdivision of the land in two equal portions and entered into the half
he appropriated for himself. Based on the professional and ethical standards for lawyers, may
Atty. Enriquez claim ½ of the land as his contingency fee? Why? (2015 Bar)
A: Atty. Enriquez may not claim ½ of the land as his contingency fee. In the first place, a lawyer cannot
charge his client a contingent fee or a percentage of the amount recovered as his fees in the absence
of an express contract to that effect (Corpus v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. L-40424, June 30, 1980, 98
SCRA 424). There is no such contract in this case. As a matter of fact, the claim of a purported oral
agreement for a contingency fee of ½ of the land is contradicted by the allegation in the Complaint in
Civil Case No. 1111 for a contingency fee of P200,000.00 only.
Moreover, the amount claimed as contingent fee appears to be excessive and unreasonable. The
issue involved in the case was simple and did not require extensive skill, effort and research on the
part of Atty. Enriquez.
Furthermore, Atty. Enriquez caused the division of the land and appropriate one half thereof, pending
resolution of the motion to dismiss in Civil Case No. 2222. This constitutes a violation of Article 1491 of
the New Civil Code, because the case in which the property is involved has not yet been terminated
(The Conjugal Partnership of the Spouse Cadavedo v. Victorino T. Lacaya, G.R. No. 173188, January
15, 2014).
Q: Atty. CJ handled the case for plaintiff GE against defendant XY in an action for damages.
Judgment was rendered for plaintiff GE. When a writ of execution was issued, the sheriff levied
on a 400 square meter lot of defendant XY. Pursuant to their contingent fee contract, plaintiff
GE executed a deed of assignment in favor of Atty. CJ of one-half of the lot. Atty. CJ accepted
the assignment.
Is the contract for contingent fee valid? Explain. (2002 Bar)
A: Contract for contingent fee is a contract wherein the attorney’s fee, usually a percentage of what
may be recovered in the action, is made to depend upon the success of the lawyer in enforcing or
defending his client’s right. It is a valid contract, unlike a champertous contract which is invalid because
the lawyer undertakes to shoulder the expenses of the litigation. However, the amount of the fee
agreed upon may be reduced by the courts if it should be unconscionable. Fifty percent (50%) of what
the client might recover may or may not be unconscionable depending on the factors to be considered
in determining the reasonableness of an attorney's fee.
Q: Atty. A’s services as a lawyer were engaged by B to recover from C certain construction
materials and equipment. Because B did not have the means of defray the expenses of
litigation, he proposed to Atty. A that he (A) shoulders all expenses of the litigation and he (B)
would pay him (A) a portion of the construction materials and equipment to be recovered as
compensation for his professional services.
May Atty. A correctly agree to such arrangement? (1999 Bar)
A: No, Atty. A may not correctly agree to such an agreement.
Such an arrangement would constitute a champertous contract which is considered void due to public
policy, because it would make him acquire a stake in the outcome of the litigation which might lead him
to place his own interest above that of the client (Bautista v. Gonzales, 182 SCRA 151). A
champertous contract is one in which a lawyer undertakes to prosecute a case, and bear all the
expenses in connection therewith without right of reimbursement, and will be paid his fees by way of a
portion of the property or amount that may be recovered, contingent on the success of his efforts. It is
different from a contingent fee contract, which is valid, in which the lawyer will also be paid depending
on the success of his efforts, but he does not undertake to shoulder all the expenses in the case. He
may advance such expenses but always subject to reimbursement by his client.
Q: Chester asked Laarni to handle his claim to a sizeable parcel of land in Quezon City against a
well-known property developer on a contingent fee basis. Laarni asked for 15% of the land that
may be recovered or 15% of whatever monetary settlement that may be received from the
property developer as her only fee contingent upon securing a favorable final judgment or
compromise settlement. Chester signed the contingent fee agreement.
Assume the property developer settled the case after the case was decided by the Regional
Trial Court in favor of Chester for P1 Billion. Chester refused to pay Laarni PI50 Million on the
ground that it is excessive. Is the refusal justified?
Explain. (2008 Bar) Supreme Court has indicated that a contingent fee
A: The refusal of Chester to pay is unjustified. of 30% of the money or property that may be
A contingent fee is impliedly sanctioned by recovered is reasonable. Moreover, although the
Rule 20.01 (f) of the CPR. A much higher developer settled the case, it was after the case
compensation is allowed as contingent fees in was decided by the Regional Trial Court in favor of
consideration of the risk that the lawyer will get Chester, which shows that Atty. Laarni has already
nothing if the suit fails. In several cases, the rendered service to the client.
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: Is Atty. B legally and ethically correct in
Chester’s refusal to pay Atty. Laarni P150 refusing to turn over the documents and in filing
million as attorney’s fees on the ground that it is the motion? Explain. (1998 Bar)
excessive, is justified. In the case of Sesbreno A: Atty. B is legally and ethically correct in refusing
v. Court of Appeals (245 SCRA 30 [1995]), the to turn over the documents. He is entitled to a
Supreme Court held that “contingent fee retaining lien which gives him the right to retain the
contracts are under the supervision and close funds, documents and papers of his client which
scrutiny of the court in order that clients may be have lawfully come to his possession until his lawful
protected from unjust charges” and that “its fees and disbursement have been paid (Sec. 37,
validity depends on a large measure on the Rule 138. Rules of Court. Rule 16.03, Code of
reasonableness of the stipulated fees under the Professional Responsibility). Likewise, he is legally
circumstances of each case.” Also, “stipulated and ethically correct in filing a motion in court
attorney’s fees are unconscionable whenever relative to his fees. He is entitled to a charging lien
the amount is by far so disproportionate upon all judgments for the payment of money, and
compared to the value of the services rendered executions issued in pursuance of such judgments,
as to amount to fraud perpetuated against the which he has secured in a litigation of his client,
client.” Considering the circumstances that the from and after the time when the records of the
case was decided by settlement of the property court rendering such judgment or issuing such
developer, the attorney’s fee of P150 Million execution (ibid.)
would be unconscionable. Q: Harold secured the services of Atty. Jarencio
b. Attorney’s Liens to collect from various debtors. Accordingly.
Atty. Jarencio filed collection cases against the
Q: M engaged the services of Atty. D to debtors of Harold and in fact obtained favorable
prosecute his annulment of marriage case Judgments in some. Atty. Jarencio demanded
in the Regional Trial Court (RTC). After a from Harold his attorney’s fees pursuant to their
long-drawn trial, Atty. D was able to secure agreement but Harold refused. When one of the
a favourable judgment from the court. defendants paid his indebtedness of 20,000.00
Unfortunately, M failed to pay in full the through Atty. Jarencio, the latter refused to turn
stipulated attorney’s fees of Atty. D. How over the money to Harold; instead, Atty.
can Atty. D collect his fees from M? Discuss Jarencio applied the amount to his attorney’s
fully. (2014 Bar) fees having in mind the provisions of the Civil
A: He can allot his fees either by filing a motion Code on legal compensation or set-off to justify
in the annulment of marriage case that he his act.
handled, and to order M to pay the same, or he Was Atty. Jarencio correct in refusing to turn
can file a separate action for the recovery of his over to his client the amount he collected?
attorney’s fees. Of the two, the first is Discuss fully. (1995 Bar)
preferable because the judge in the annulment A: A lawyer has a retaining lien which entitled him
case will be in a better position to evaluate the to retain possession of a client’s document, UST
amount and value of his services. In the BAR OPERATIONS
meantime, he may avail of the retaining lien, Legal and Judicial Ethics
which is to retain the moneys and properties of 32
M in his possession until he is paid for his
services, or a charging lien, which is to charge
the money judgment in the case for the
payment of his fees.
Q:Define an attorney's retaining lien. (2000,
1998 Bar)
A: A retaining lien is the right of an attorney to
retain the funds, documents, and papers of his
client which have lawfully come into his
possession until his lawful fees and
disbursements have been paid, and to apply
such funds to the satisfaction thereof (Sec. 37,
Rule 138, Rules of Court).
Q: Upon being replaced by Justice C, Atty.
B, the former counsel of the parents of the
victims of the OZONE Disco tragedy, was
directed to forward all the documents in his
possession to Justice C. Atty. B refused,
demanding full compensation pursuant to
their written contract. Sensing that a
favorable Judgment was forthcoming, Atty.
B filed a motion in court relative to his
attorney’s fees, furnishing his former clients
with copies thereof.
money or other property which come into the hands of the attorney professionally, until the general
balance due him for professional services is paid. Under Rule 138, Section 37 of the Rules of Court,
the attorney cannot be compelled to surrender the documents in his possession without prior proof that
his fees have been duly satisfied.
However, Atty. Jarencio here cannot appropriate the sum of 20,000.00. If there is a dispute between
him and Harold as to the amount of the fees that he can collect, what he should do if Harold disputes
the amount of the fees he is entitled, he must file an action for the recovery of his fee or record a
charging lien so that the court can fix the amount to which he is entitled.
Q: The vendor filed a case against the vendee for the annulment of the sale of a piece of land.
Assume the vendee obtained a summary judgment against the vendor. Would the counsel for
the defendant vendee be entitled to enforce a charging lien? Explain. (2008 Bar)
A: A charging lien, to be enforceable as security for payment of attorney’s fees, requires as a condition
sine qua nona judgment for money and execution in pursuance of such judgment secured in the main
action by the attorney in favor of his client (Metropolitan Bankv. Court of Appeals,181 SCRA 367
[1990]). A summary judgment against the vendor in this case only means that his complaint was
dismissed. This is not a judgment for payment of money, hence, a charging lien cannot attach.
However, if the judgment should include a money judgment in favor of the vendee on his counterclaim,
a charging lien can properly be enforced.
Q: Differentiate “retaining lien” from “charging lien” (2016 Bar)
A: A retaining lien gives the lawyer the right to retain the funds, documents and papers of the client
which have lawfully come into his possession, until his lawful fees and disbursements have been paid.
A charging lien is a lien upon all judgments for payment of sum of money and executions thereof, to
ensure payment of his fees and disbursements in the said case.
A retaining lien is a passive lien; the lawyer is not required to perform any act except to hold on to the
client’s funds, documents and papers, until his fees and disbursements are paid. A charging lien is an
active lien; the lawyer is required to file a motion in court, with copy served on the adverse party, to
have a statement of his claim to such fees and disbursements charged or attached to the decision in
such case and executions thereof.
A retaining lien is general lien; it may be resorted to in order to secure payment of the lawyer’s fees in
all the cases he has handled and services he has rendered to the client. A charging lien is a special
lien; it can be utilized for the purpose of collecting only the unpaid fees and disbursements of the
lawyer in the case where the judgment for a sum of money may be secured.
c. Fees and controversies with clients (Quantum Meruit)

Q:
a. Explain the doctrine of quantum meruit in determining the amount of attorney’s fees.
b. Identify the factors to be considered in determining attorney’s fees on a quantum meruit
basis. (2015, 2014, 2007, 1998 Bar)

A:
a. Quantum meruit means as much as the services of a lawyer are worth. Recovery of attorney’s fees
on the basis of quantum meruit is authorized when (1) there is no express contract for the payment of
attorney’s fees; (2) although there is a contract for attorney’s fees, the fees stipulated are found
unconscionable by the court; (3) the contract for attorney’s fees is void due to formal defects of
execution; (4) the lawyer was not able to finish the case for justifiable cause; (5) the lawyer and the
client disregard the contract for attorney’s fees; and (6) the client dismissed his counsel or the latter
withdrew therefrom, for valid reasons.
b. The factors are those set in Rule 20.01 of the Code of Professional Responsibility (CPR), as follows:

i. the time spent and the extent of the services rendered or required;
ii. the novelty and difficulty of the questions involved;
iii. the importance of the subject matter;
iv. the skill demanded;
v. the probability of losing other employment as a result of acceptance of the proffered case;
vi. the customary charges for similar services and the schedule of fees of the IBP chapter to which he
belongs;
vii. the amount involved in the controversy and the benefits resulting to the client from the service;
viii. the contingency or certainty of compensation;
ix. the character of the employment, whether occasional or established; and
QUAMTO (1987-2017)
33
x. the professional standing of the lawyer.

Q: Define champerty. (2017, 2000 Bar)

A: Champerty is any agreement by a lawyer to conduct the litigation in his own account, to pay the
expenses thereof or to save his client therefrom and to receive as his fee a portion of the proceeds of
the judgment. It is contrary to public policy as it violates the fiduciary relationship between the lawyer
and his client (Spouses Cadavedo v. Lacaya, G.R. No. 173188, January 15, 2014).
Q: A inherited a parcel of land situated in Batasan Hills which is occupied by informal settlers.
He wants to eject the occupants, but he has no financial means to pursue the ejectment case.
He contracted the services of Atty. B, who agreed to defray all the expenses of the suit on the
condition that he will be paid one-half (1/2) of the property to be recovered as his
compensation.
What is the kind of attorney’s fees? Can Atty. B enforce this contract against A? What are the
respective remedies relative to the collection of attorney’s fees, if any, of A and Atty. B against
each other? (2014, 2010, 1988 Bar)
A: This is a champertous fee agreement because Atty. B agreed to defray all the expenses of the
action and will be paid only if he is successful in recovering A’s property. Atty. B cannot enforce it
because it is contrary to public policy and the ethics of the legal profession. The remedy of A is to file
an action to have the agreement declared null and void, or simply to refuse to pay attorney’s fees to
Atty. B on the basis of the said agreement. On the other hand, Atty. B will still be entitled to collect
attorney’s fees on a quantum meruit basis. He may bring an action to collect such fees.
Q: Discuss the propriety of a lawyer filing a suit against his client concerning his fees. (1998
Bar)
A: Rule 20.04 of the Code of Professional Responsibility provides that “a lawyer shall avoid
controversies with his clients concerning his compensation and shall resort to judicial action only to
prevent imposition, injustice or fraud.” The legal profession is not a money-making trade but a form of
public service. Lawyers should avoid giving the impression that they are mercenary (Perez v. Scottish
Union and National Insurance Co., 76 Phil. 325). It might even turn out to be unproductive for him for
potential clients are likely to avoid a lawyer with a reputation of suing his clients.
d. Concepts of Attorney’s fees

Extraordinary concept
Q: A real estate company, elated over the decision in a case regarding a dispute over a personal
matter between its top sales representative and his neighbor, gifted Atty. O, who represented
its sales representative in the litigation, with a 240-square-meter lot in its newly developed
subdivision. The case handled by Atty. O had nothing to do with the sales representative in the
litigation, with a 240 square-meter lot in its newly developed subdivision. The case handled by
Atty. O had nothing to do with the sales representative's work for the real estate company. The
latter's offer of the lot, which Atty. O accepted, was in consideration of its sales
representative’s being the firm's Number One salesman. Was there a breach of the Code of
Professional Responsibility by Atty. O when he accepts the 240 square-meter lot? (1997 Bar)
A: Rule 20.03 of the Code of Professional Responsibility provides that a lawyer shall not, without the
full knowledge and consent of the client, accept any fee, reward, costs, commission, interests, rebate
of forwarding allowance or other compensation whatsoever related to his professional employment
from anyone other than the client.
There should be no room for suspicion on the part of the client that his lawyer is receiving
compensation in connection with the case from third persons with hostile interests (Report of IBP
Committee, p. 112). Even if the secret compensation comes from a friendly person, if the act is
discovered, it is bound to create dissension in the client-lawyer relationship. Worse, the lawyer will be
able to enrich himself by receiving more than what is due him as attorney’s fees (Pineda. Legal &
Judicial Ethics, 1995 ed. p. 243).
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
The gift of the real estate company does not come from the adverse party, hence, there is no violation
of the lawyer is duty of loyalty to his clients. The property given was not his client's property involved in
the litigation. Hence, it does not violate Article 1491 of the Civil Code. The lawyer's acceptance of the
gift is proper. However, it would be better if he informs his client.
Q: Deciding a case for malicious prosecution, Judge Sales awarded attorney's fees and
expenses of litigation, in addition to exemplary damages, to the plaintiff.
a. Did the judge act within his discretion in awarding attorney's fees?
UST BAR OPERATIONS
Legal and Judicial Ethics
34
b. As counsel for the plaintiff, are you entitled to receive the attorney's fees thus awarded in
addition to your stipulated legal fees? (1994 Bar)

A:
a. A party may recover attorney's fees in cases of malicious prosecution against him in an action for
damages against the party responsible therefore (Art. 2208 (3), Civil Code). But he must prove not only
that he was acquitted in the criminal action, but that the person who charged him knowingly made a
false statement of facts to induce the prosecutor to prosecute or that the institution of the criminal
action was prompted by a sinister design to vex or humiliate him and to cast upon him dishonor and
disgrace.
b. No. Attorney’s fees in the concept or as an item of damages is an indemnity for damages sustained
by the client, and belongs to him.

Q: A, after taking his oath as a lawyer in 1985, was maliciously charged with the crime of
seduction by Amor, his former girlfriend. Her parents instigated the filing of the case. A
appeared for and defended himself. In the decision acquitting him, the court explicitly stated
that he was a victim of malicious prosecution. A then filed a complaint for damages and
attorney’s against Amor and her parents. A likewise appeared for himself in the case. Can her
recover attorney’s fees? (1991 Bar)
A:No. Attorney A is not entitled to attorney's fees. He may, however, be entitled to attorney’s fees in
the form of damages upon proof of bad faith of the defendant and a definite ruling be made by the
court on the claim.
PRESERVATION OF CLIENT’S CONFIDENCES
Prohibited disclosures and use
Q:
A. Brando & Luzon Law Office had a retainer agreement with Gregory, a businessman with
shady connections. Gregory was recently charged in the RTC in Manila with money laundering
in relation to an illegal drugs syndicate using Cable Co., his holding company, as its money-
laundering conduit. The members of the Brando & Luzon Law Office assigned to handle
Gregory's account, including yourself, were implicated in the money laundering case for their
role in the incorporation of Cable Co. and in the active management of its business affairs.

In a bid to fortify the case against Gregory and the others, the public prosecutor approaches
you (as the least guilty person who will qualify for a discharge as a state witness) and offers to
make you a state witness. Should you accept the offer? Explain your answer.
B. Under the facts of the preceding question, assume that you had resigned from the Brando &
Luzon Law Office prior to the filing of the money laundering case against Gregory and the
others, and that you were not implicated in the case. However, you had assisted in handling the
Cobra Co. account during your time with the law firm. Cobra Co. was largely owned by Cable
Co.

The public prosecutor handling the case against Gregory and the others asks you, as a former
member of the Brando & Luzon Law Office, to help strengthen the case for the Government,
and hints that you may be implicated in the case if you do not cooperate. What is your legal and
ethical course of action? Explain your answer. (2017, 2013 Bar)
A:
A. No. The information acquired involving the criminal case against Gregory is covered by the
privileged communications rule. Rule 15.02of the Code of Professional Responsibility provides that “A
lawyer shall be bound by the rule on privilege communication in respect of matters disclosed to him by
a prospective client.” There being a lawyer-client relationship between the parties, the lawyer cannot
serve as a state witness and disclose the information obtained from his client.

B. Decline to testify against the defendants and to provide evidence in the case as the attorney-client
privilege lasts even beyond the termination of the relationship.

The duty of a lawyer to preserve his client’s secrets and confidence outlasts the termination of the
attorney-client relationship, and continues even after the client’s death (Mercado v. Vitriolo, A.C. No.
5108, May 26, 2005).
Q: A, who is charged in Court with estafa for misappropriating funds entrusted to him by B,
consulted Atty. C about the case with the intention of engaging his services as defense
counsel. Because A could not afford to pay the fee that Atty. C was charging him, A engaged
the services of another counsel, Atty. D. At the trial of the case for estafa against A the
prosecutor announced in open court that his next witness was Atty. C. whom he was calling to
the witness stand.
Counsel for A. Atty. D, vigorously opposed obliged, under his oath as lawyer, to inform the
the prosecutor's move on the ground that judge (a) that his client is guilty? (2009 Bar)
Atty. C may not be called as a witness for A: Atty. Romualdo cannot reveal to the judge that
the prosecution as he might disclose a Vicente is guilty. He is bound to keep what Vicente
would be client's confidence and secret. told him in confidence, because that is an
Asked by the presiding Judge what would admission of a crime already committed.
be the nature of Atty. C's testimony, the Disclosure, when allowed
prosecutor answered it has something to do Q: When Atty. Romualdo interviewed his client,
with how A obtained from B the funds that Vicente, who is accused of murder, the latter
the latter received from the former but failed confessed that he killed the victim in cold
to account for. Thereupon, Atty. A blood. Vicente also said that when he takes the
vigorously opposed the prosecutor's witness stand, he will deny having done so. Is
motion. Atty. Romualdo obliged, under his oath as
If you were the Judge, how would you rule lawyer, to inform the judge that (b) his client will
on the matter? (1999 Bar) commit perjury on the witness stand? Explain.
A: If I were the judge, I will not allow Atty. C to (2009 Bar)
take the witness stand. When A consulted Atty. A: Atty. Romualdo can reveal to the judge that
C about his case, a lawyer-client relationship Vicente will commit perjury on the witness stand.
was established between them. It does not This is already a revelation of a crime still to be
matter that A did not eventually engage his committed, and that lies outside the mantle of
services because of his fees; such relationship privileged communication.
has already been created (Hilado v. David, 84 Q: Atty. Serafin Roto is the Corporate Secretary
Phil 569). A lawyer shall be bound by the rule of a construction corporation that has secured
on privileged communication in respect to a multi-million infrastructure project from the
matters disclosed to him by a prospective client government. In the course of his duties as
(Rule 15.02 Code of Professional corporate secretary, he learned from the
Responsibility). The rule on privileged company president that the corporation had
communication provides that an attorney resorted to bribery to secure the project and
cannot, without the consent of his client, be had falsified records to cut implementing costs
examined as to any communication made by after the award of the project.
the client to him (Sec. 21 [b], Rule 130, Rules The government filed a civil action to annul the
of Court). The prosecutor has announced that infrastructure contract and has subpoenaed
Atty. C will be asked about how A obtained from Atty. Roto to testify against the company
B the funds that he failed to account for. Atty. president and the corporation regarding the
C's knowledge of such matter could have come bribery. Atty. Roto moved to quash the
only from A. subpoena, asserting that lawyer-client privilege
COMMENT:There seems to be a typographical prevents him from testifying against the
error in the last sentence which refers to Atty. president and the corporation.
A. Perhaps, the examiner intended to refer to Resolve the motion to quash. (2013 Bar)
simply A or to his counsel Atty.D. It is A: Motion denied. The motion should be denied
recommended that the use by the candidate of because Atty. Roto did not learn of the bribery and
Atty. A should not detract from the appreciation falsification in connection with a lawyer-client
of his answer. relation. Being a corporate secretary does not
Q: Christine was appointed counsel de create a lawyer-client relation because membership
oficio for Zuma, who was accused of raping to the Bar is not a requirement to perform the
his own daughter. Zuma pleaded not guilty functions of a corporate secretary. Consequently,
but thereafter privately admitted to Christine Atty. Roto does not owe any obligation of
that he did commit the crime charged. confidentiality to the corporation.
Can Christine disclose the admission of Atty. Roto may be compelled to testify. As an officer
Zuma to the court? Why or why not? (2008 of the court, a “lawyer shall exert every effort and
Bar) consider it his duty to assist in the UST BAR
A: Christine cannot disclose the admission of OPERATIONS
Zuma to the Court. If she does so, she will Legal and Judicial Ethics
violate her obligation to preserve confidences or 36
secrets of her client (Canon 21, Rule 21.02,
CPR). The privileged communication between
lawyer and client may be used as a shield to
defend crimes already committed.
Q: When Atty. Romualdo interviewed his
client, Vicente, who is accused of murder,
the latter confessed that he killed the
victim in cold blood. Vicente also said that
when he takes the witness stand, he will
deny having done so. Is Atty. Romualdo
speedy and efficient administration of justice” Q: In a prosecution for murder against a ranking
(Code of Professional Responsibility, Canon army officer, the latter engaged the services of
12). Furthermore, “a lawyer owes candor, Atty. Carlos Malilin, a well-known trial lawyer, to
fairness and good faith to the court” (Ibid., whom the officer in one of their conferences
Canon 10). disclosed a plan to “eliminate” or “salvage”—
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: i.e., kill or otherwise cause to disappear— the
Motion Granted.It is true that being a corporate only witness, a fellow military officer, through a
secretary does not necessarily constitute a contrived traffic or highway accident.
lawyer-client relationship. However, Atty. Roto a. What are the legal and moral obligations of
may be considered in the practice of law if part Atty. Carlos Malillin to his client and to the
of his duties as a corporate secretary is to give authorities, under the given circumstances?
legal advice to or prepares legal documents for b. Should the planned “accident” take place and
the corporation. Thus a lawyer-client the only witness for the prosecution be killed as
relationship may have been constituted a result, is Atty. Carlos Malillin under any
between Atty. Roto and the corporation. obligation to disclose to the authorities the plan
Consequently, it is his duty as an attorney “to that his client had mentioned to him as above
maintain inviolate the confidence, and at every mentioned? Reasons. (1988, 1987 Bar)
peril to himself, to preserve the secrets of his
client” (Rules of Court, Rule 138, Sec. 20, par. A:
E, paraphrasing and arrangement supplied). a. Attorney Malillin has the moral and legal
Atty. Roto learned from the company president obligation to advise the army officer not to execute
of the bribery and falsification, while Atty. Roto his plan. If the accused army officer does not abide
was in the course of his performance of his by his advise, Atty. Malillin should withdraw from
duties as corporate secretary. Thus, he could the case.
not be examined on that matter without the b. Atty. Malillin has the obligation to testify in said
consent of his client. [Ibid., Rule 130, Sec. case if he is called upon by the Court to do so. The
24(b)]. obligation of the lawyer to keep the secrets of his
Q: A mayor charged with Homicide engaged client obtained in the course of his employment
your services as his lawyer. Since there is covers only lawful purposes.
only one witness to the incident, the mayor
disclosed to you his plan to kill the lone Withdrawal of services
witness through a contrived vehicular Q: Give three instances when a lawyer is
accident. allowed to withdraw his/her services. (2015,
a. What are the moral and legal obligations 1997, 1988 Bar)
of an attorney to the mayor and to the A: (Any three of the following:)
authorities? 1. When the client pursues an illegal or immoral
b. Should the killing push through and are course of conduct in connection with the matter he
you certain that the mayor is the one is handling;
responsible, are you under obligation to 2. When the client insists that the lawyer pursue
disclose to the authorities what was conduct violative of these canons and rules;
confided to you? Is this not a privileged 3. When his inability to work with co-counsel will not
communication between client and promote the best interest of the client;
attorney? (1998 Bar) 4. When the mental or physical condition of the
lawyer renders it difficult for him to carry out the
A: employment effectively;
a. It is the duty of an attorney to divulge the 5. When the client deliberately fails to pay the fees
communication of his client as to his announced for the services or fails to comply with the retainer
intention to commit a crime to the proper agreement;
authorities to prevent the act or to protect the 6. When the lawyer is elected or appointed to
person against whom it is threatened. apublic office.
b. Public policy and the lawyer's duty to counsel QUAMTO (1987-2017)
obedience to the law forbid that an attorney 37
should assist in the commission of a crime or
permit the relation of attorney and client to
conceal a wrongdoing. He owes it to himself
and to the public to use his best efforts to
restrain his client from doing any unlawful act
and if, notwithstanding his advise, his client
proceeds to execute the illegal deed, he may
disclose it or be examined as to any
communication relating thereto. There is
privileged communication only as to crimes
already committed before its communication to
the lawyer.
 manifestation with the court attaching thereto the
7. Other similar cases. notice of termination as Limot’s counsel.
Q: On the eve of the initial hearing for the
Q: B hired Atty. Z to file a replevin case reception of evidence for the defense, the
against C for an agreed acceptance fee of defendant and his counsel had a conference
P30,000.00 which was evidenced by a where the client directed the lawyer to present
written contract. After the complaint was as principal defense witnesses two (2) persons
filed by Atty. Z, B terminated his services whose testimonies were personally known to
and hired a new lawyer for the same amount the lawyer to have been perjured. The lawyer
of attorney’s fees. How much attorney’s fees informed his client that he refused to go along
is Atty. Z entitled? (2014 Bar) with the unwarranted course of action proposed
A: Atty. Z is entitled to the entire amount of the by the defendant. But the client insisted on his
attorney’s fees agreed upon because his directive, or else he would not pay the agreed
services were terminated by the client without attorney’s fees.
just cause (Sec. 26, Rule 138, Rules of Court). When the case was called for hearing the next
Q: Atty. Bravo represents Carlos Negar (an morning, the lawyer forthwith moved in open
insurance agent for Dormir Insurance Co.) in court that he be relieved as counsel for the
a suit filed by insurance claimant Andy defendant. Both the defendant and the plaintiffs
Limot who also sued Dormir Insurance. The counsel objected to the motion.
insurance policy requires the Under the given facts, is the defense lawyer
insured/claimant to give a written notice to legally justified in seeking withdrawal from the
the insurance company or its agent within case? Why or why not? Reason briefly. (2004
60 days from the occurrence of the loss. Bar)
Limot testified during the trial that he had A: Yes, he is justified. Under Rule 22.01 of the
mailed the notice of the loss to the Code of Professional Responsibility, a lawyer may
insurance agent, but admitted that he lost withdraw his services "if the client insists that the
the registry receipt so that he did not have lawyer pursue conduct violative of these canons
any documentary evidence of the fact of and rules". The insistence of the client that the
mailing and of the timeliness of the mailed lawyer present witnesses whom he personally
notice. Dormir Insurance denied liability, knows to have been perjured, will expose him to
contending that the timely notice had not criminal and civil liability and violate his duty of
been given either to the company or its candor, fairness and good faith to the court.
agent. Atty. Bravo’s client, agent Negar, Q: Atty. X filed a notice of withdrawal of
testified and confirmed that he never appearance as counsel for the accused Y after
received any notice. the prosecution rested its case. The reason for
A few days after Negar testified, he admitted the withdrawal of Atty. X was the failure of
to Atty, Bravo that he had lied when he accused Y to affix his conformity to the demand
denied receipt of Limot’s notice, he did of Atty. X for increase in attorney’s fees. Is the
receive the notice by mail but immediately ground for withdrawal justified? Explain. (2000
shredded it to defeat Limot’s claim. Bar)
If you were Atty. Bravo, what would you do A: The ground for the withdrawal is not justified.
in light of your client’s disclosure that he Rule 22.01 (e) of the Code of Professional
perjured himself when he testified? (2013 responsibility provides that a lawyer may withdraw
Bar) his services when the client deliberately fails to pay
A: If I were Atty. Bravo I shall promptly call the fees for his services or fails to comply with the
upon Carlo Negar, my client, to rectify his retainer agreement. In this case, the client has not
perjured testimony by recanting the same failed to pay the lawyer’s fees or to comply with the
before the court. retainer agreement. He has only refused to agree
Should he refuse or fail to do so I shall then with the lawyer’s demand for an increase UST BAR
terminate my relationship with him (Code of OPERATIONS
Professional Responsibility, Canon 19, Rule Legal and Judicial Ethics
19.02) stating that with his having committed 38
perjury he pursued an illegal conduct in
connection with the case (Ibid., Canon 22, Rule
22.01).
Since my client Limot refuses to forego the
advantage thus unjustly gained as a result of
his perjury, I should promptly inform the injured
person or his counsel, so that they may take the
appropriate steps (Canons of Professional
Ethics, Canon 41).
Finally, as part of my duty to do no falsehood,
nor consent to the doing of any in court (Code
of Professional Responsibility, Canon 10, Rule
10.01, and the Attorney’s oath). I shall file a
in his fees. It is his right to refuse; that is part of
his freedom of contract.
Q:Atty. Jessa was the counsel for Mr. Nolan, a cantankerous millionaire, in the latter's personal
case. Soon after the case was submitted for decision, Mr. Nolan withdrew the files from Atty.
Jessa and informed her that he was engaging another lawyer. On that same day, a copy of the
decision in the case was received by Atty. Jessa but she did not do anything anymore with the
decision. She did not also file a withdrawal of her appearance. Mr. Nolan's new counsel did not
file any notice of his appearance. By the time Mr. Nolan found out about the adverse decision,
his period to appeal had lapsed. Was the service of the decision on Atty. Jessa still effective?
Explain your answer. (2017, 2012 bar)
A: Yes. The service of decision to Atty. Jessa is still effective. Atty. Jessa is still considered the
counsel of record until his withdrawal of appearance has been actually filed and granted.
Q: State the rule on (a) the right of the client to dismiss his lawyer and (b) the prerogative of a
lawyer to withdraw as counsel. (1998,1994, 1989 Bar)
A:
a. A client has the right to dismiss his lawyer at any time, with or without just cause. The existence or
non-existence of just cause is material only for determining the right of the lawyer to compensation for
services rendered. The client's right to terminate the lawyer's services springs from the strictly
personal and highly confidential nature of the relationship between the lawyer and the client. Once the
client loses confidence in his lawyer, he has the right to dismiss him.
b. On the other hand, the lawyer does not have an unqualified right to withdraw as counsel. As an
officer of the court, he may not withdraw or be permitted to withdraw as counsel if such withdrawal will
work injustice to a client or frustrate the ends of justice. A lawyer may withdraw at any time with his
client's written consent. Without such consent, he may withdraw his services only for good cause and
upon notice appropriate in the circumstances (Canon 22, Code of Professional Responsibility).
SUSPENSION, DISBARMENT AND DISCIPLINE OF LAWYERS (RULE 139-B, RULES OF COURT)
NATURE AND CHARACTERISTICS OF DISCIPLINARY ACTIONS AGAINST LAWYERS
Sui generis
Q: Is the defense of Atty. R in a disbarment complaint for immorality filed by his paramour P
that P is in pari delicto material or a ground for exoneration? Explain. (2010 Bar)
A: The defense of in pari delicto is immaterial in an administrative case which is sui generis. The
administrative case is about the lawyer’s conduct, not the woman’s (Mortel v. Aspiras, 100 Phil. 586
[1956]; Po Cham v. Pizarro, 467 SCRA 1 [2005]; Marjorie F. Samaniego v. Atty. Andrew V. Ferrer,
555 SCRA 1 [2008]).
Q: Arabella filed a complaint for disbarment against her estranged husband Atty. P on the
ground of immorality and use of illegal drugs.
After Arabella presented evidence and rested her case before the Investigating Commissioner
of the IBP Committee on Bar Discipline, she filed an Affidavit of Desistance and motion to
dismiss the complaint, she and her husband having reconciled for the sake of their children.
You are the Investigating Commissioner of the IBP. Bearing in mind that the family is a social
institution which the State is duty-bound to preserve, what will be your action on Arabella’s
motion to dismiss the complaint? (2010 Bar)
A: I would still deny the motion to dismiss. The general rule is that “no investigation shall be
interrupted or terminated by reason of the desistance, settlement, compromise, restitution, withdrawal
of the charges or failure of the complainant to prosecute the same unless the Supreme Court motu
proprio or upon recommendation of the IBP Board of Governors determines that there is no
compelling reason to continue with the proceedings. An administrative investigation of a lawyer is sui
generis, neither a civil nor criminal proceeding. An affidavit of desistance has no place in it.
Q: A proceeding for disbarment is considered sui generis, explain briefly, giving at least five
(5) reasons in support of your answer. (2002 Bar)
A: A disbarment proceeding is sui generis or a class by itself, because of the following reasons:
a. It Is neither a civil nor a criminal proceeding;
b. Double jeopardy cannot be availed of as a defense

c. It can be initiated motu proprio by the Supreme Court or by the IBP;

d. It can proceed regardless of interest or lack of interest of the complainant;
e. It is imprescriptible;
f. It is confidential;
g. It is in itself due process.
Q: Alleging that Atty. Malibu seduced her when she was only sixteen (16) years old, which
resulted in her pregnancy and the birth of a baby girl, Miss Magayon filed a complaint for his
disbarment seven years after the alleged seduction was committed.
Atty. Malibu contended that, considering the period of delay, the complaint filed against him
can no longer be entertained much less prosecuted because the alleged offense has already
prescribed.
Is Atty. Malibu’s contention tenable or not? Reason briefly. (2017, 2004 Bar)
A: No. Atty. Malibu’s contention is not tenable. The ordinary statute of limitations has no application to
disbarment proceedings (Calo v. Degamo, A.C. No. 516, June 27, 1967). Disciplinary proceedings
against lawyers are sui generis. They are neither civil nor criminal proceedings. Its purpose is not to
punish the individual lawyer but to safeguard the administration of justice by protecting the court and
the public from the misconduct of lawyers and to remove from the profession of law persons whose
disregard of their oath of office proves them unfit to continue discharging the trust reposed in them as
members of the bar. Unlike ordinary proceedings, it is not subject to the defense of prescription.
Q: C filed a verified administrative complaint against Atty. D. In the course of the investigation,
C presented an affidavit of desistance which she identified on the witness stand. What course
of action should the investigator take? Explain. (2000 Bar)
A: The investigator should continue with the investigation. A disbarment proceeding is sui generis,
neither a civil nor criminal action. As such, a desistance by the complainant is unimportant. The case
may proceed regardless of interest or lack of interest of the complainant (Rayos-Ombac v. Rayos, 285
SCRA 93 [1998]). If the evidence on record warrants, the respondent may be suspended or disbarred
regardless of the desistance of the complainant. Of course, if the complainant refuses to testify and
the charges cannot then be substantiated, the court will have no alternative but to dismiss the case.
Grounds
Q: What are the grounds for disbarment or suspension from office of an attorney? (2015 Bar)
A: Under Sec. 27, Rule 138, the grounds for suspension or disbarment of a lawyer are “any deceit,
malpractice, or other gross misconduct in such office, grossly immoral conduct, or by reason of
conviction of a crime involving moral turpitude, or for any violation of the oath which he is required to
take before admission to practice, or for a willful disobedience appearing as an attorney for a party or
to a cause without authority to do so.” The practice of soliciting cases for the purposes of gain, either
personally or through paid agents or brokers constitutes malpractice.
Q: Atty. Forma is a member of the Philippine Bar. He went to New York City, took the New York
State Bar, and passed the same. He then practiced in New York City. One of his American
clients filed a case for disbarment against him for pocketing the money which was entrusted to
him as payment for the filing fee and other incidental expenses of his damage suit. Atty. Forma
was later disbarred for dishonesty. Disheartened, Atty. Forma came back to the Philippines
and practiced as a lawyer.
Will his disbarment in New York be used against him for purposes of disbarment proceedings
here in the Philippines? (2014, 2006, 2002 Bar)
A: Atty. Forma may be disbarred in the Philippines if the ground for his disbarment in New York is also
a ground for disbarment in this country. But he is still entitled to due process of law, and the foreign
court’s judgment against him only constitutes prima facie evidence of unethical conduct as a lawyer.
He is entitled to be given an opportunity to defend himself in an investigation to be conducted in
accordance with Rule 139 of the Revised Rules of Court (In Re: Suspension from the Practice of Law
in the Territory of Guam of Atty. Leon Maquera, B.M. 793, July 30, 2004; Velez v. De Vera, A.C. No.
6697, July 25, 2006).
Q: Cliff and Greta were law school sweethearts. Cliff became a lawyer, but Greta dropped out.
One day, Cliff asked Greta to sign a marriage contract. The following day, Cliff showed Greta
the document already signed by an alleged solemnizing officer and two witnesses. Cliff then
told Greta that they were already married and Greta consented to go on a honeymoon.
Thereafter, the couple cohabited and begot a child. Two years later, Cliff left Greta and married
a Venezuelan beauty. Incensed, Greta filed a disbarment complaint against Cliff. Will the case
prosper? Explain. (2009 Bar) UST BAR OPERATIONS
Legal and Judicial Ethics
40
A: The disbarment case will prosper. In the notary public is to ascertain the identity of the
case of Cabrera v. Agustin (106 Phil. 256 parties and the voluntariness of the declaration, it is
[1959]), a lawyer who deceived a woman to nevertheless incumbent upon him to guard against
believe that they were already married after any illegal or immoral agreement.
they had signed an application for a marriage Proceedings
license, and afterwards took advantage of her Q: A disbarment complaint against a lawyer
belief to satisfy his lust, until she bore him a was referred by the Supreme Court to a Judge
child, was considered by the Supreme Court to of the Regional Trial Court for investigation,
be lacking in integrity and good moral report and recommendation. On the date set for
character to remain a member of the bar. the hearing of the complaint, the Judge had the
Q: Atty. Walasunto has been a member of case called for trial in open court and
the Philippine Bar for twenty (20) years but proceeded to receive evidence for the
has never plied his profession as a lawyer. complainant. What would you have done if you
His sole means of livelihood is selling and were the counsel for the respondent-lawyer?
buying real estate. In one of his Why? Reason briefly. (2004 Bar)
transactions as a real estate broker, he A: I would object to the holding of a trial in public.
issued a bouncing check. He was criminally Disciplinary proceedings against an attorney are
prosecuted and subsequently convicted for confidential in nature until its termination. The
violating B.P. Big. 22. In the disbarment professional success of a lawyer depends almost
proceedings filed against him, Atty. entirely on his good reputation. If that is tarnished,
Walasunto contended that his conviction it is difficult to restore the same (Ibanez v. Vina,
for violation of B.P. Big. 22 was not a valid 107 SCRA 607 [1981]). To avoid the unnecessary
ground for disciplinary action against a ruin of a lawyer’s name, disbarment proceedings
member of the bar. He further argued that are directed to be confidential until their final
his act in issuing the check was done in determination (Sec. 18, Rule 139-B, Rules of
relation to his calling as a real estate broker Court).
and not in relation to the exercise of the Q: Atty. D was required by Judge H of the
profession of a lawyer. Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Manila to show
Are the contentions of Atty. Walasunto cause why he should not be punished for
meritorious or not? Reason. (2004, 1992 contempt of court for shouting invectives at the
Bar) opposing counsel and harassing his witness.
A: No. His contentions are not meritorious. In Assuming that there was sufficient cause or
the first place, a ground for disbarment is ground, may Judge H suspend Atty. D from the
conviction of a crime involving moral turpitude practice of law? If Judge H finds that the
(Sec. 27, Rule 138, Rules of Court), and the actuations of Atty. D are grossly unethical and
violation of B.P. 22 is considered to be a crime unbecoming of a member of the bar, may Judge
involving moral turpitude (People v. Tuanda, H disbar Atty. D instead?
181 SCRA 692 [1990]). In the second place, Explain your answer. (2014 Bar)
Rule 7.03 of the Code of Professional A: Under Section 28, Rule 138 of the Rules of
Responsibility provides that “a lawyer shall not Court, a Regional Trial Court may suspend a
engage in conduct that adversely reflects on lawyer from the practice of law for any of the
his fitness to practice law, nor shall he, whether causes provided in Section 27, until further action
in public or private life, behave in a scandalous of the Supreme Court. But it may not disbar him, for
manner to the discredit of the legal profession.” only the Supreme Court can disbar a lawyer
Additionally, Rule 1.01 of the same Code pursuant to its constitutional power to admit
provides that “a lawyer shall not engage in persons to the practice of law.
unlawful, dishonest, immoral or deceitful Q: Atty. Hyde, a bachelor, practices law in the
conduct." Philippines. On long weekend, he dates
Q: The agreement between the estranged beautiful actresses in Hong Kong. Kristine, a
husband and wife provided for, among QUAMTO (1987-2017)
others, the liquidation of the conjugal 41
partnership of gains, custody of the
children, and support for the children. In
the same agreement, the couple waived the
right to prosecute each other for bigamy,
adultery, concubinage and whatever acts of
infidelity. There was also a condonation
provision. The agreement was prepared and
notarized by a lawyer who was the best
man at the wedding. What are the liabilities,
if any, of this lawyer? Explain your answer.
(1989 Bar)
A: The document executed by the spouses is
immoral and contrary to law. The lawyer who
drafted and notarized all said documents
committed malpractice and can be disbarred or
suspended. Although the principal duty of the
neighbor in the Philippines, filed with the (However, it may be noted that the IBP Board of
Supreme Court an administrative complaint Governors is not authorized to impose the penalty
against the lawyer because of sex videos of suspension).
uploaded through the internet showing Q: A engaged the services of Atty. B to defend
Atty. Hyde’s sordid dalliance with the him in a case for collection of sum of money
actresses in Hong Kong. that was brought against him in the Municipal
In his answer, Atty. Hyde (1) questions the Trial Court by D. Despite notice of the
legal personality and interest of Kristine to scheduled dates of hearing, Atty. B failed to
institute the complaint and (2) insists that appear much less to inform A about it. The case
he is a bachelor and the sex videos relate to was decided against A. It was only when the
his private life which is outside public adverse judgment was being executed against
scrutiny and have nothing to do with his him that A learned he had lost the case. When
law practice. he went to see counsel, Atty. B put up the
Rule on the validity of Atty. Hyde’s excuse that he was busy attending to his cases
defenses. (2009 Bar) which were more important than A's.
A: Before whom can A seek redress against Atty.
a. The legal personality and interest of Kristine B who apparently was negligent in attending
to initiate the complaint for disbarment is his case? (1999 Bar)
immaterial. A disbarment proceedings is sue A: He may file a verified complaint against Atty. B,
generis, neither a civil nor a criminal asking that he be administratively disciplined, with
proceeding. Its sole purpose is to determine either the Supreme Court, the Board of Governors
whether or not a lawyer is still deserving to be of the Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP), or the
a member of the bar. In a real sense, Kristine EBP Chapter to which Atty. B belongs (Sec. 1,
is not a plaintiff; hence, interest on her part is Rule 139-B).
not required. ADDITIONAL ANSWER:
He may also file a complaint against Atty. B before
b. Atty. Hyde’s second defense is untenable. a Regional Trial Court or Municipal Trial Court,
His duty not to engage in unlawful, dishonest, depending on the amount involved, for damages he
immoral and deceitful conduct under Rule 1.01 may have sustained due to the latter's negligence.
of the CPR, as well as his duty not to engage Q: When Atty. Aldrin received copy of the
in scandalous conduct to the discredit of the decision of the Court of Appeals, he filed a
legal profession under Rule 7.03, is applicable motion for reconsideration using intemperate
to his private as well as to his professional life. and disrespectful language with a subtle threat
that “knowingly rendering an unjust judgment
Q: Y hired Attorney X to represent him in a is punishable under the Revised Penal Code."
collection case he filed against Z. The The Court of Appeals ordered him to explain
parties later on agreed to settle the case why he should not be cited in contempt of
and Z turned over to Attorney X the amount court. Instead of complying, he submitted to the
of P25,000.00 as partial settlement of his Court of Appeals his Petition to Retire from the
obligation. Attorney X kept the money. Y, practice of law which he immediately filed with
upon learning of Attorney X’s action, filed a the Supreme Court after receiving the citation
disbarment case against the latter before for contempt. May he be allowed to retire from
the Supreme Court, which in turn, referred the practice of law? (1998 Bar)
the case to the Integrated Bar of the A: No.A practicing lawyer and officer of the court
Philippines for investigation, report and facing contempt proceedings cannot just be
recommendation. allowed to voluntarily retire from the practice of law
The IBP Commissioner tasked to which would negate the inherent power of the court
investigate the case reviewed all the to punish him for contempt (Montecillo v. Gica, 60
pleadings submitted by Y and Attorney X SCRA 234). UST BAR OPERATIONS
and their respective witnesses, and Legal and Judicial Ethics
promptly made a report recommending that 42
Attorney X be suspended for six months.
The IBP Board of Governors adopted the
recommendation of the Investigating
Commissioner. Attorney X assailed his
suspension on the ground of an
impingement on his right to due process. Is
Attorney X's contention sustainable?
Explain. (2003 Bar)
A: There is no impingement on Attorney X’s
right to due process. The IBP Commissioner
tasked to investigate the case reviewed all the
pleadings of the parties and their respective
witnesses. This implies that Atty. A was given
an opportunity to present his side. Due process
has been satisfied. This is especially true if the
principle of res ipsa loquitur is applicable.
Q: Ben filed proceedings for disbarment complaint shall state clearly and concisely the facts
against his lawyer, Atty. Co, following the complained of and shall be supported by affidavits
latter’s conviction for estafa for of person or persons having personal knowledge of
misappropriating funds belonging to his the facts therein alleged and/or by such documents
client (Ben). While the proceedings for as may substantiate said facts. The client may file
disbarment was pending, the President the complaint directly with the Supreme Court, in
granted absolute pardon in favor of Atty. which case at least 18 copies thereof shall be filed,
Co. Atty. Co. then, moved for the dismissal and the Supreme Court may refer the complaint to
of the disbarment case. the IBP Board of Governors for appropriate action,
Should the motion be granted? (1998 Bar) such as assigning the complaint to an investigator,
A: An absolute pardon by the President is one or to the Solicitor General or court officer or judge
that operates to wipe out the conviction as well for investigation when the interest of justice
as the offense itself. The grant thereof to a requires. The client may, however, file his
lawyer is a bar to a proceeding for disbarment complaint, in six copies, with the IBP Board of
against him, if such proceeding is based solely Governors, which will then assign the case to an
on the fact of such conviction (In Re: investigator for investigation, or with the Secretary
Parcasion, 69 SCRA 336). But where the of a local chapter of the IBP, which will in turn
proceeding to disbar is founded on the transmit the same to the IBP Board of Governors
professional misconduct involved in the for assignment to an investigator (Rule 139-B of
transaction which culminated in his conviction, the Rules of Court).
the effect of the pardon is only to relieve him of Q: How may a proceeding for disbarment,
the penal consequences of his act and does suspension or discipline of attorneys be
not operate as a bar to the disbarment instituted? (1989 Bar)
proceeding, inasmuch as the criminal acts may A: A proceeding for disbarment, or suspension or
nevertheless constitute proof that the attorney discipline of attorneys may be taken by the
does not possess good moral character (In Re: Supreme Court, the Court of Appeals or the
Lontoc, 43 Phil. 293). Regional Trial Court, on its own motion, or upon
Q: A verified complaint for disbarment was complaint under oath of another in writing. The
filed against Atty. Cruz who was accused of Integrated Bar of the Philippines may investigate
misappropriating funds belonging to the the matter and recommend to the Supreme Court
complainant. The matter was referred to the the disbarment and suspension from the practice of
IBP which forthwith conducted an law of the erring lawyer.
investigation through its local chapter. DISCIPLINE OF FILIPINO LAWYERS
During the pendency of the investigation, PRACTICING ABROAD
the complainant filed an Affidavit of Q: Atty. Perez was admitted as a member of the
Desistance claiming that Atty. Cruz had New York Bar. While in Manhattan, he was
already reimbursed him for the funds which convicted of estafa and was disbarred.
he had accused him of unlawfully spending Does his disbarment in New York a ground for
for his own use. Atty. Cruz moved for the his automatic disbarment in the Philippines?
dismissal of the complaint. (2006 Bar)
As the hearing officer, how will you act on A: The disbarment or suspension of a member of
the motion of Atty. Cruz? (1994 Bar) the Philippine Bar by a competent court or other
A: The desistance of a complaint in a disciplinary agency in a foreign jurisdiction where
disbarment proceedings or his withdrawal of he has also been admitted as an attorney is a
the charges against a lawyer does not deprive ground for his disbarment or suspension if the
the court of the authority to proceed to basis of such action includes any of the acts
determine the matter. Nor does it necessary hereinabove enumerated. QUAMTO (1987-2017)
result in the dismissal of the complaint, except 43
when, as a consequence of withdrawal or
desistance, no evidence is adduced to prove
the charges. Since a disbarment proceeding is
neither a civil nor a criminal action but one
presented solely for public interest, the fact that
the complainant and the respondent have
considered the case closed, is unimportant.
As hearing officer, I will deny the motion of
Atty. Cruz and continue the hearings.
Q: A lawyer charged his client P 10,000.00
for filing fees pertaining to the complaint he
filed in court. He actually spent only
P1,000,00. He did not account for the
balance.
Suppose that the lawyer should be charged,
how and where should the complaint be
filed? Explain your answer. (1990 Bar)
A: The client may file a verified complaint for
disbarment against his lawyer. His verified
The judgment, resolution or order of the foreign court or disciplinary agency shall be primafacie
evidence of the ground for disbarment or suspension (pars. 2 & 3, Section 27, Rule 138, as amended
by Supreme Court Resolution, dated February 13,1992).
Thus, the disbarment of Atty. Perez in New York for estafa is a ground for his disbarment in the
Philippines. However, such disbarment in the Philippines is not automatic. Atty. Perez is still entitled to
due notice and hearing (In Re Suspension from the Practice of Law in the Territory of Guam of Atty.
Leon G. Maquera, 435 SCRA 417 (2004]).
Q: Atty. LA is a member of the Philippine Bar and the California Bar in the United States. For
willful disobedience of a lawful order of a Superior Court in Los Angeles, Atty. LA was
suspended from the practice of law in California for one (1) year.
May his suspension abroad be considered a ground for disciplinary action against Atty. LA in
the Philippines? Why? (2002 Bar)
A: The suspension of Atty. LA from the practice of law abroad may be considered as a ground for
disciplinary action here if such suspension was based on one of the grounds for disbarment in the
Philippines or shows a loss of his good moral character, a qualification he has to maintain in order to
remain a member of the Philippine Bar.

READMISSION TO THE BAR

LAWYERS WHO HAVE BEEN DISBARRED
Q: Atty. Queliza was convicted of qualified seduction. He was subsequently disbarred at the
initiative of the IBP. Before he could complete the service of his sentence, he was given an
absolute pardon by the President. He thereupon petitioned the Supreme Court for
reinstatement to the practice oflaw as a legal and logical consequence of the absolute pardon.
Is he entitled to reinstatement? (1994 Bar)
A:An absolute pardon granted to a lawyer who has been previously disbarred for conviction of a crime
involving moral turpitude does not automatically entitle him to reinstatement. The matter of his
reinstatement is still subject to the discretion of the Supreme Court. He should still show by evidence
aside from the absolute pardon that he is now a person of good moral character, a fit and proper
person to practice law (In Re Rovero, 101 SCRA 797).
Q: The Faculty of the College of Law of the University of the Philippines pleaded for
compassion on behalf of Atty. Juan Santos. The Supreme Court had earlier found Atty. Santos
guilty of grave professional misconduct and imposed upon him “an indefinite suspension,
leaving it to him to prove at some future and opportune time that he shall have once again
regained the fitness to be allowed to resume the practice of law as an officer of the court."
Is the plea of the Faculty for Atty. Juan Santos well taken? Explain. (1993 Bar)
A: The plea of the Faculty of Law of the University of the Philippines asking compassion on behalf of
Atty. Juan Santos is not well taken.
In order that a lawyer who was disbarred can be reinstated, he must show with convincing proof that
he has good moral character acquired through positive efforts, honorable dealings and moral
reformation as to be fit to practice law again. Mere allegation of compassion for a lawyer is not
sufficient. In one decision of the Supreme Court, in order that a disbarred lawyer can be reinstated, he
must prove his good moral character as if he is applying for admission to the bar.
LAWYERS WHO HAVE BEEN REPATRIATED
Q: Atty. Repatriar, a law school classmate, approached you on your 25th Class Reunion, with
questions on how he can resume the practice of law in the Philippines. He left the country in
1977 after two (2) years of initial law practice, and migrated to the United States where he was
admitted to the practice of law in the State of New York. He asks that you give him a formal
legal opinion on his query.
Outline briefly the steps and the supporting legal reasons you would state in your legal
opinion on what Atty. Repatriar should do to resume his Philippine practice. (2013 Bar)
A: Atty. Repatriar must prepare a sworn petition to reacquire the privilege to practice law in the
Philippines. He should manifest in his petition his desire to resume his law practice in the Philippines,
and he is not disqualified to practice law. The “right to resume the practice of law” is not automatic.
R.A. No. 9225 provides that a person who intends to practice his profession in the Philippines must
apply with the proper authority for a license or permit to engage in such practice. It cannot be
overstressed that the practice of law is a privilege burdened with conditions. It is so delicately affected
with public interest that it is both the power and duty of the State (through this Court) to control and
regulate it in order to protect and promote the public welfare. UST BAR OPERATIONS
Legal and Judicial Ethics
44
Adherence to rigid standards of mental fitness, 5. A certificate of good moral character attested to
maintenance of the highest degree of morality, by at least three (3) members of the bar; and
faithful observance of the legal profession, 6. A certification from the State Bar of New York
compliance with the mandatory continuing that Atty. Repatriar does not have any previous or
legal education requirement and payment of pending disciplinary action filed against him before
membership fees to the Integrated Bar of the that body.
Philippines (IBP) are the conditions required for
membership in good standing in the bar and for Q: After passing the Philippine Bar in 1986,
enjoying the privilege to practice of law. Any Richards practiced law until 1996 when he
breach by a lawyer of any of these conditions migrated to Australia where he subsequently
makes him unworthy of the trust and became an Australian citizen in 2000. As he
confidence which the courts and clients repose kept abreast of legal developments, petitioner
in him for the continued exercise of his learned about the Citizenship Retention and Re-
professional privilege” (In Re: Petition to re- Acquisition Act of 2003 (Republic Act No. 9225),
acquire the privilege to practice law in the pursuant to which he reacquired his Philippine
Philippines, Epifanio B. Muneses, B.M. No. citizenship in 2006. He took his oath of
2112, July 24, 2012). allegiance as a Filipino citizen at the Philippine
He should file the petition with the Supreme Embassy in Canberra, Australia. Jaded by the
Court, through the Bar Confidant accompanied laid back life in the outback, he returned to the
by the original or certified copies of the Philippines in December 2008. After the
following documents: holidays, he established his own law office and
1. Showing that he is still a Filipino citizen. resumed his practice of law.
”The Court reiterates that Filipino citizenship is Months later, a concerned woman who had
a requirement for admission to the bar and is, secured copies of Atty. Richards’ naturalization
in fact, a continuing requirement for the papers with consular authentication, filed with
practice of law” (In Re: Petition to Re-acquire the Supreme Court an anonymous complaint
the Privilege to Practice Law in the Philippines, against him for illegal practice of law.
B.M. No. 2112, supra). Having retained Is respondent entitled to resume the practice of
Philippine citizenship could be evidenced by Law? Explain. (2010 Bar)
the Philippine passport, the U.S. Green card A: Yes, as long as he observes the procedure laid
showing Philippine citizenship and U.S. down in Petition for Leave to Resume Practice of
residency or other authentic documents which Law of Benjamin M. Dacanay (B.M. No. 1678,
the Supreme Court may require. December 17, 2007, 540 SCRA 424), to wit:
a. Updating and payment in full of the annual
On the other hand, if Atty. Repatriar has lost membership dues in the IBP;
his Philippine citizenship, he must submit the b. Payment of the professional tax;
following: c. Completion of at least 36 credit hours of
a. Petition for Re-Acquisition of Philippine mandatory continuing legal education; and,
Citizenship; d. Pre-taking of the lawyer’s oath.
b. Order (for Re-Acquisition of Philippine
citizenship); NOTARIAL PRACTICE (A.M. NO. 02-8-13-SC, AS
c. Oath of Allegiance to the Republic of the AMENDED)
Philippines; POWERS AND LIMITATIONS
d. Identification Certificate (IC) issued by the Q: Enumerate the instances when a Notary
Bureau of Immigration. Public may authenticate documents without
QUAMTO (1987-2017)
The loss of Filipino citizenship means 45
termination of Atty. Repatriar’s membership in
the bar; ipso jure the privilege to engage in the
practice of law. Under R.A. No. 9225, natural-
born citizens who have lost their Philippine
citizenship by reason of their naturalization as
citizens of a foreign country are deemed to
have re-acquired their Philippine citizenship
upon taking the oath of allegiance to the
Republic. Thus, a Filipino lawyer who becomes
a citizen of another country and later re-
acquires his Philippine citizenship under R.A.
No. 9225, remains to be a member of the
Philippine Bar (B.M. No. 2112, In re: Petition to
re-acquire the privilege to practice law in the
Philippines, supra).
2. Certification from the IBP indicating updated
payments of annual membership dues;
3. Proof of payment of professional tax; and
4. Certificate of compliance issued by the
MCLE Office. (Ibid.)
requiring the physical presence of the signatories. (2010 Bar)
A:
1. If the signatory is old or sick or otherwise unable to appear, his presence may be dispensed with if
one credible witness not privy to the instrument and who is known to the notary public, certifies under
oath or affirmation the identity of the signatory.
2. If two credible witnesses neither of whom is privy to the instrument, not known to the notary public
but can present their own competent evidence of identity, certify under oath or affirmation to the
identity of the signatory.
3. In case of copy certification and issuance of certified true copies.

Q: What are the powers and duties of a notary public? (1995 Bar)
A: Every notary public shall have power to administer all oaths and affirmations provided for by law, in
all matters incidents to his notarial office, and in the execution of affidavits, depositions, and other
documents requiring an oath; to receive the proof or acknowledgment of all writings relating to
commerce or navigation, such as bills of exchange, bottomries, mortgages, and hypothecations of
ships, vessels, or boats, charter parties or affreightments, letters of attorney, deeds, mortgages,
transfers and assignments of land or buildings, or an interest therein, and such other writings as are
commonly proved or acknowledged before notaries; to act as a magistrate in the writing of affidavits or
depositions, and to make declarations and certify the truth thereof under his seal of office, concerning
all matters done by him by virtue of his office (Sec. 241, Notarial Law).
The duties of a notary public are the following:
1. To keep a notarial register;
2. To make the proper entry or entries in the notarial register touching his notarial acts in the manner
required by the law;
3. To send the copy of the entries to the proper clerk of court within the first 10 days of the month next
following;
4. To affix to acknowledgments the date of expiration of his commission, as required by law;
5. To forward his notarial register, when filled, to the proper clerk of court;
6. To make report, within a reasonable time, to the proper judge concerning the performance of his
duties, as may be required by such judge;
7. To make the proper notation regarding residence certificates (Sec. 247, Rev. Adm. Code).

Q: Comment on the propriety of the acts of the municipal judge who prepared and notarized
the following documents:
a. a deed of absolute sale executed by two of his friends;
b. an extrajudicial settlement of estate of his cousins;
c. a memorandum of agreement between a building contractor and a neighboring municipality;
d. a memorandum of agreement between another private contractor and the municipality
where he sits as judge. (1995 Bar)

A: Municipal Judges may not engage in notarial work except as notaries public ex-officio. As notaries
public ex-officio, they may engage only in notarization of documents connected with the exercise of
their judicial functions. They may not as such notaries public ex-officio, undertake the preparation and
acknowledgment of private documents, contracts and other acts of conveyance, which bear no
relation to the performance of their functions as judges.
However, taking judicial notice of the fact that there are still municipalities which have neither lawyers
nor notaries public, the Supreme Court ruled that MTC and MCTC Judges assigned to municipalities
or circuits with no lawyers or notaries public may, in their capacity as notaries public ex-officio,
perform any act within the competency of a regular notary public, provided that: (1) all notarial fees
charged be for the account of the Government and turned to the municipal treasurer and (2)
certification be made in the notarized documents attesting to the lack of any lawyer or notary public of
such municipality or circuit (Balayon, Jr. vs. Ocampo, 218 SCRA 13).
On the basis of the foregoing, I would say that the propriety of the actuations of the municipal judge in
this problem depends on whether or not there are notaries public available in his community. If there
are notaries available, his acts are improper. Otherwise they are proper, provided that the two
conditions mentioned above are complied with.
JURISDICTION OF NOTARY PUBLIC AND PLACE OF NOTARIZATION
Q: Atty. Sabungero obtained a notarial commission. One Sunday, while he was at the cockpit,
a person approached him with an affidavit that needed to be notarized. Atty. Sabungero
immediately pulled out from his pocket his small notarial seal, and notarized the document.
Was the affidavit validly notarized? Explain. (2009 Bar)
A: Section 2, Rule IV of the 2004 Rules on UST BAR OPERATIONS
Legal and Judicial Ethics
46
Notarial Practice provides that a Notary Public shall not perform a notarial act outside his regular
place of work, except in few exceptional occasions or situations, at the request of the parties.
Notarizing in a cockpit is not one of such exceptions. The prohibition is aimed to eliminate the practice
of ambulatory notarization. However, assuming that the cockpit is within his notarial jurisdiction, the
notarization may be valid but the notary public should be disciplined.
Q: What is the extent of the jurisdiction of a notary public? (1995 Bar)
A: The Jurisdiction of a notary public in a province shall be co-extensive with the province. The
jurisdiction of a notary public in the City of Manila shall be co-extensive with said city. No notary shall
possess authority to do any notarial act beyond the limits of his jurisdiction (Sec. 240, Rev. Adm.
Code).
Q: Atty. Z, a notary public commissioned in Quezon City, attended a wedding at Makati. B
requested Z to notarize a deed of sale executed between X and Y who were both in Baguio
City. Atty. Z who has a portable notarial seal, notarized the document. Subsequently, X
assailed the document alleging that his signature thereon was falsified. X filed a case for
disbarment against Atty. Z.
Will the complaint prosper? Explain. (1996 Bar)
A: Atty. Z may be held criminally liable for violating Article 171 (Falsification by Public Officer) of the
Revised Penal Code, by making it appear that X and Y appeared and acknowledged having executed
the deed of sale before him, when in fact they did not so appear or acknowledged. He may also be
administratively liable for not obeying the laws of the land (Canon 1, Code of Professional
Responsibility). Moreover, his jurisdiction as notary is only in Quezon City.
Q: Jojo, a resident of Cavite, agreed to purchase the lot owned by Tristan, a resident of
Bulacan. Atty. Agaton, Jojo’s lawyer who is also a notary public, prepared the Deed of Sale
and Jojo signed the document in Cavite. Atty. Agaton then went to Bulacan to get the
signature of Tristan. Thereafter, Atty. Agaton went back to his office in Cavite where he
notarized the Deed of Sale. Is the notarization legal and valid? Explain. (2016 Bar)
A: The Notarization is not legal and valid. Rule IV, Section 2(b) of the 2004 Rules on Notarial Practice
provides that a person shall not perform a notarial act if the person involved as signatory to the
instrument or document is not personally in the notary’s presence at the time of notarization. Tristan
was not in Atty. Agaton’s presence when the latter notarized the deed of sale in his office in Cavite;
moreover, Tristan signed in Bulacan which is outside the Atty. Agaton’s territorial jurisdiction.
CANONS OF PROFESSIONAL ETHICS
Q: Under the Code of Professional Responsibility, what is the principal obligation of a lawyer
towards:
a. The legal professional and the Integrated Bar?
b. His professional colleagues?
c. The development of the legal system?
d. The administration of justice?
e. His client? (2004 Bar)

A:
a. A lawyer shall at all times uphold the integrity and dignity of the legal profession, and support the
activities of the integrated bar (Canon 7, Code of Professional Responsibility).
b. A lawyer shall conduct himself with courtesy, fairness and candor towards his professional
colleagues, and shall avoid harassing tactics against opposing counsel (Canon 8, Code of
Professional Responsibility).
c. A lawyer shall participate in the improvement of the legal system by initiating or supporting efforts in
law reform and in the administration of justice (Canon 4, Code of Professional Responsibility).

ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
a. A lawyer shall keep abreast of legal developments, participate in continuing legal education
programs, support efforts to achieve high standards in law schools as well as in the practical training
of law students and assist in disseminating information regarding the law and jurisprudence (Canon 5,
Code of Professional Responsibility).
b. A lawyer shall exert every effort and consider his duty to assist in the speedy and efficient
administration of justice (Canon 12, Code of Professional Responsibility).

ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
a. A lawyer shall participate in the improvement of the legal system by initiating or supporting efforts in
law reform and in the administration of justice (Canon 4, Code of Professional Responsibility).
QUAMTO (1987-2017)
47
b. A lawyer shall observe candor, fairness and loyalty in all his dealings and transactions with his
client (Canon 15, Code of Professional Responsibility).

JUDICIAL ETHICS
Disqualification of Justices and Judges (Rule 137)
Q: In a land registration case before Judge Lucio, the petitioner is represented by the second
cousin of Judge Lucio’s wife.
a. Differentiate between compulsory and voluntary disqualification and determine if Judge
Lucio should disqualify himself under either circumstances.
b. If none of the parties move for his disqualification, may Judge Lucio proceed with the case?
(2015 Bar)

A:

a. In compulsory disqualification, the judge is compelled to inhibit himself from presiding over a case
when any of the ground provided by the law or the rules exist. Under Section 1, Rule 137 of the
Revised Rules of Court, no judge or judicial officer shall sit in any case (1) in which he, or his wife or
child, is pecuniarily interested as heir, legatee, creditor or otherwise, or (2) in which he is related to
either party within the sixth degree of consanguinity or affinity or to counsel within the fourth degree
computed according to the rules of the civil law, or (3) in which he has been executor, administrator,
trustee or counsel, or (4) in which he has presided in any inferior court when his ruling or decision is
the subject of review, without consent of all parties in interest and entered upon the record.
Section 5, Canon 3 of the New Code of Judicial Conduct for the Philippine Judiciary adds the following
grounds:
a. The judge has actual bias or prejudice concerning a party or personal knowledge of disputed
evidentiary facts concerning the proceedings;
b. The judge has previously served as a lawyer or was a material witness in the matter under
controversy.

In voluntary disqualification, a judge may inhibit himself in the exercise of his discretion. Paragraph 2,
Rule 137 of the Revised Rules of Court provides that “a judge may, in the exercise of his sound
discretion, disqualify himself from sitting in a case, for just and valid reasons other than those
mentioned above”. The New Code of Professional Conduct for the Philippine Judiciary adds that
“judges shall disqualify themselves from participating in any proceedings in which they are unable to
decide the matter impartially or in which it may appear to a reasonable observer that they are unable
to decide the matter impartially.”
There is no mandatory ground for Judge Lucio to disqualify himself. The second cousin of his wife, a
sixth degree relative, is appearing not as a party but as counsel.
b. If none of the parties moves for his disqualification, Judge Lucio may proceed with the case. All the
more so if, without the participation of the Judge, the parties and their lawyers execute a written
agreement that Judge Lucio may proceed with the same, and such agreement Is signed by them and
made a part of the records of the case.

Q: Rebecca’s complaint was raffled to the sala of Judge A. Rebecca is a daughter of Judge A’s
wife by a previous marriage. This is known to the defendant who does not, however, file a
motion to inhibit the Judge.
Is the Judge justified in not inhibiting himself from the case? (2010 Bar)
A: The judge is not justified in not inhibiting himself. It is mandatory for him to inhibit if he is related to
any of the parties by consanguinity or affiant within the sixth civil degree (Sec. 3 [f] Canon 3, New
Code of Judicial Conduct for the Philippine Judiciary). Judge A, being the stepfather of Rebecca, is
related to her by affinity by just one degree. “Judges shall disqualify themselves from participating in
any proceeding in which they are unable to decide the matter impartially or in which it may appear to a
reasonable observer that they are unable to decide the matter impartially” (Id., Sec. 5, Canon 3). The
fact that Rebecca is a daughter of Judge A’s wife is liable to make a reasonable observer doubt his
impartially.
Q: RTC Judge Q is a deacon in the IglesianiKristo church in San Francisco del Monte, Quezon
City. R, a member of the same religious sect belonging to the same INK community in San
Francisco del Monte, filed a case against S who belongs to the El Shaddai charismatic group.
The case was raffled to Judge Q's sala. The lawyer of S filed a motion to disqualify Judge Q on
the ground that since he and the plaintiff belonged to the same religious sect and community
in San Francisco del Monte, Judge Q would not possess the cold neutrality of an impartial
judge. Judge Q denied the motion on the ground that the, reason invoked for his
disqualification was not among the grounds for disqualification under the Rules of Court and
the Code of Judicial Conduct. Was Judge Q’s denial of UST BAR OPERATIONS
Legal and Judicial Ethics
48
the motion for inhibition well founded? (1997 Bar)
A: The fact that Judge Q and Litigant R both belong to the Iglesia Ni Kristo while Litigant S belongs to
the El Shaddai group, is not a mandatory ground for disqualifying Judge Q from presiding over the
case. The motion for his inhibition is addressed to his sound discretion and he should exercise the
same in a way the people's faith in the courts of justice is not impaired. He should reflect on the
probability that a losing party might nurture at the back of his mind the thought that the Judge had
unmeritoriously tilted the scales of Justice against him (Dimacuha vs. Concepcion. 117 SCRA630).
Under the circumstances of this case, where the only ground given for his disqualification is that he
and one of the litigants are members of the same religious community, I believe that his denial of the
motion for his disqualification is proper. In Vda. de Ignacio v. BLTBus Co., 34 SCRA 618, the
Supreme Court held that the fact that one of the counsels in a case was a classmate of the trial judge
is not a legal ground for the disqualification of the judge.
Q: Lawyer W lost his ejectment case in the Municipal Trial Court. He appealed the decision to
the RTC which V, the judge thereof, affirmed through a memorandum decision. He filed a
motion for reconsideration praying that the RTC should state the facts and the law on which its
decision is based. Judge V denied his motion. Instead of filing a Petition for Review, lawyer W
filed an administrative complaint against Judge V for breach of the Code of Judicial Conduct.
What is the liability of Judge V, if any? (1991 Bar)
A: There is no breach of the Code of Judicial Conduct committed by the RTC Judge. The
memorandum decision rendered in an appeal from the Municipal Court in its original jurisdiction
carries with it the statement of facts found by the Municipal Court which are deemed affirmed by the
RTC judge. Memorandum decisions are allowed on appeal.
Q:
1. Discuss briefly the grounds for disqualification or inhibition of judges to try a case.
2. A judge rendered a decision in a criminal case finding the accused guilty of estafa. Counsel
for the accused filed a motion for reconsideration which was submitted without arguments.
Later, another lawyer entered his appearance for the accused. The judge issued an order
inhibiting himself from further sitting in the case because the latter lawyer had been among
those who recommended him to the Bench. Can
the judge's voluntary inhibition be sustained? (1989, 1988 Bar)

A:
1. Under Rule 137 Section 1 of the Rules of Court, a judge is disqualified to sit in every case in which
he, or his wife or child, is pecuniarily interested as heirs; legatee, creditor, or otherwise, or in which he
is related to either party within the sixth degree of consanguinity or affinity, or to counsel within the
fourth degree computed according to the rules of civil law or in which he has been executor,
administrator, guardian, trustee or counsel, or in which he has presided in any inferior court when his
ruling or decision is the subject of review, without the written consent of all parties in interest, signed
by them and entered upon the record. This rule enumerates the grounds under which a judge is
legally disqualified from sitting in a case, and excludes all other grounds not specified therein. The
judge may, however, in the exercise of his sound discretion, disqualify himself from sitting in a case,
for just or valid reasons other than those mentioned above.

Under said rule, the judge may voluntarily inhibit himself from sitting in a case, for just and valid
reasons other than those mentioned in the rule.
2. The judge may not voluntarily inhibit himself by the mere fact that a lawyer recommended him to
the Bench. In fact, the appearance of said lawyer is attest as to whether the judge can act
independently and courageously in deciding the case according to his conscience. Inhibition is not
allowed at every instance that a friend, classmate, associate or patron of a presiding judge appears
before him as counsel for one of the parties to a case. “Utang na loob”, per se, should not be a
hindrance to the administration of justice. Nor should recognition of such value in Philippine society
prevent the performance of one’s duties as judge, xxx (Masadao and Elizaga Re: Criminal Case No.
4954-M; 155 SCRA 78-79). However, in order to avoid any suspicion of partiality, it is better to the
judge to voluntarily inhibit himself.

Q: Judge L is assigned in Turtle Province. His brother ran for Governor in Rabbit Province.
During the election period this year, judge L took a leave of absence to help his brother
conceptualize the campaign strategy. He even contributed a modest amount to the campaign
kitty and hosted lunches and dinners.
Did Judge L incur administrative and/or QUAMTO (1987-2017)
49
criminal liability? Explain. (2010 Bar)
A: Judge L incurred administrative liability. Rule 5.18 of the Code of Judicial Conduct (which is
applicable in a suppletory character to the New Code of Conduct for the Philippine Judiciary) provides
that “[A] Judge is entitled to entertain personal views on political questions, but to avoid suspicion of
political partisanship, a judge shall not make political speeches, contribute to party funds, publicly
endorse candidates for political office or participate in other partisan political activities.”
He may also be held criminally liable for violation of Section 26 (I) of the Omnibus Election Code,
which penalizes any officer or employee in the civil service who, directly or indirectly, intervenes, in
any election campaign or engages in any partisan political activity, except to vote or to preserve public
order.
Q: Judge C was appointed MTC Judge in 1993. Subsequently, the Judicial and Bar Council
received information that previously he had been dismissed as Assistant City Prosecutor of
Manila. It appeared that when he applied for appointment to the Judiciary, his answer to the
question in the personal Data Sheet - “Have you ever been retired, dismissed or forced to
resign from any employment?" was - “Optional under Republic Act No. 1145.” The truth is, he
was dismissed for gross misconduct as Assistant City prosecutor.
May he be dismissed as Judge? [1998 Bar]
A: Yes. By his concealment of his previous dismissal from the public service, which the Judicial and
Bar Council would have taken into consideration in acting on his application for appointment as a
judge, he (the judge) committed an act of dishonesty that rendered him unfit to be appointed, and to
remain, in the Judiciary he has tarnished with his falsehood (Re: Inquiry on the Appointment of Judge
Enrique A. Cube, 227 SCRA 193; Jose Estacion, 181 SCRA 33, EstanislaoBelan, August 6, 1998).
Compulsory
Q: State at least five (5) instances where judges should disqualify themselves from
participating in any proceedings where their impartiality might reasonably be questioned (2016
Bar)
A: Any five (5) of the following instances provided in Sec. 5, Canon 3 of the New Code of Conduct for
the Philippine Judiciary:
a. The judge has actual bias or prejudice concerning a party or personal knowledge of disputed
evidentiary facts concerning the proceedings;
b. The judge previously served as a lawyer or was a material witness in the matter in controversy;
c. The judge or a member of his or her family has an economic interest in the outcome of the matter in
controversy;
d. The judge served as executor, administrator, guardian, trustee or lawyer in the case or matter in
controversy, or a former associate of the judge served as counsel during their association, or the
judge or lawyer was a material witness therein;
e. The judge’s ruling in a lower court is the subject of review;
f. The judge is related by consanguinity or affinity to a party litigant within the sixth civil degree or to
counsel within the fourth civil degree; or
g. The judge knows that his or her spouse or child has a financial interest, as heir, legatee, creditor,
fiduciary, or otherwise, in the subject matter in controversy or in a party to the proceeding, or any
other interest that could be substantially affected by the outcome of the proceedings.

Section 1, Rue 137 of the Revised Rules of Court, provides for similar grounds.
Q:In a case for homicide filed before the Regional Trial Court (RTC), Presiding Judge Quintero
issued an order for the arrest of the accused, granted a motion for the reduction of bail, and
set the date for the arraignment of the accused. Subsequently, Judge Quintero inhibited
himself from the case, alleging that even before the case was raffled to his court, he already
had personal knowledge of the circumstances surrounding the case. Is Judge Quintero’s
inhibition justified? Explain. (2009, 2004 Bar)
A: Judge Quintero’s inhibition is justified. One of the grounds for inhibition under Section 5, Canon 3
of the New Code of Judicial Conduct for the Philippine Judiciary is “where the judge has actual bias or
prejudice concerning a party or personal knowledge of disputed evidentiary facts concerning the
proceedings.”
Q: In a case before him, it was the son of Municipal Trial Court Judge X who appeared as
counsel for the plaintiff. After the proceeding, judgment was rendered in favor of the plaintiff
and against the defendant, B. the defendant in the case, complained against Judge X for not
disqualifying himself in hearing and deciding the case. In his defense, Judge X alleged that he
did not disqualify himself in the case because the defendant never sought his disqualification.
UST BAR OPERATIONS
Legal and Judicial Ethics
50
Is Judge X liable for misconduct in office? (1999 Bar)
A: Judge X is liable for misconduct in office. Rule 3.12 of the Code of Judicial Conduct provides that a
judge should take no part in a proceeding where his impartiality might reasonably be questioned. In
fact, it is mandatory for him to inhibit or disqualify himself if he is related by consanguinity or affinity to
a party litigant within the sixth degree or to counsel within the fourth degree (Hurtado v. Jurdalena, 84
SCRA 41). He need not wait for a motion of the parties in order to disqualify himself.
Voluntary
Q: Judge Clint Braso is hearing a case between Mr. Timothy and Khristopher Company, a
company where his wife used to work as one of its Junior Executives for several years.
Doubting the impartiality of the Judge, Mr. Timothy filed a motion to inhibit Judge Clint Braso
refused on the ground that his wife has long resigned from the company. Decide. (2014 Bar)
A: The fact that Judge Braso’s wife used to work for Khristopher Company is not a mandatory ground
for his inhibition. However, Section 2, Canon 3 of the New Code of Judicial Conduct for the Philippine
Judiciary provides that judges should disqualify themselves from participating in any proceeding in
which “it may appear to a reasonable observer that they are unable to decide the matter in partially.”
The Supreme Court has advised that a judge “should exercise his decision in a way that the people’s
faith in the courts of justice is not impaired” (Pimentel v. Salanga, G.R. No. L-27934, September 18,
1967). While it may not be reasonable to believe that Judge Braso cannot be impartial because his
wife used to work as a Junior Executive for Khristopher Company, the better part of prudence would
dictate that he inhibit himself from the case involving the said company.
Q: Justice B of the Court of Appeals (CA) was a former Regional Trial Court (RTC) Judge. A
case which he heard as a trial judge was raffled off to him. The appellant sought his
disqualification from the case but he refused on the ground that he was not the judge who
decided the case as he was already promoted to the appellate court before he could decide the
case.
Was the refusal of Justice B to recuse from the case proper? Explain your answer. (2014 Bar)
A: The refusal of Justice B to recuse from the case is improper. In the case of Sandoval v. CA (G.R.
No. 106657, August 1, 1996, 260 SCRA 283), involving the same facts, the Supreme Court held that
the Court of Appeals Justice concerned was not legally bound to inhibit himself from the case.
However, he “should have been more prudent and circumspect and declined to take on the case,
owing to his earlier involvement in the case,” because “a judge should not handle a case in which he
might be perceived, rightly or wrongly, to be susceptible to bias and partiality.” This axiom is “intended
to preserve and promote public confidence in the integrity and respect for the judiciary.”
Q: The criminal case arising from the P10 Billion Peso pork barrel scandal was raffled to
Sandiganbayan Justice Marciano Cobarde. Afraid that he would antagonize the parties, his
political patrons and ultimately, his judicial career, he decided to inhibit from participating in
the case, giving “personal reasons” as his justification.
If you were to question the inhibition of SB Justice Cobarde, on what legal basis, and where
and how will you do this? (2013 Bar)
A: The grounds relied upon by Justice Cobarde for his inhibition conveys the impression that “the
parties” and “his political patrons” are in a special position improperly to influence him in the
performance of judicial duties (New Code of Conduct for the Philippine Judiciary, Canon 4, Sec. 8).
Furthermore, the Sandiganbayan sits in Divisions, so the fears of Justice Cobarde are unfounded.
Justice Cobarde should not shirk from the performance of his judicial duties.
I would file a motion with the Division of the Sandiganbayan in which Justice Cobarde is sitting for the
remittal of his voluntary inhibition. I would advance in motion the reasons why the “personal reasons”
set forth by the Justice are insubstantial and does not merit his inhibition. I would likewise set the
motion for hearing as appropriate.
Q4: Assume that your friend and colleague, Judge Peter X. Mahinay, a Regional Trial Court
judge stationed at KL City, would seek your advice regarding his intention to ask the
permission of the Supreme Court to act as counsel for and thus represent his wife in the trial
of a civil case for damages pending before the Regional Trial Court of Aparri, Cagayan.
What would be your advice to him? Discuss briefly. (2004 Bar)
A: I would advise him against it. Rule 5.07 of the Code of Judicial Conduct expressly and absolutely
prohibits judges from engaging in the private practice of law, because of the incompatible nature
between the duties of a judge and a lawyer. Moreover, as a Judge he can influence to a certain extent
the outcome of the case even if it is with another court. A Judge shall refrain from influencing in any
manner QUAMTO (1987-2017)
51
the outcome of litigation or dispute pending before another court or administrative agency (Rule 2.04,
Code of Judicial Conduct).
Q: On what grounds may a judge be disqualified, or asked to voluntarily inhibit himself from
hearing a case? Briefly explain each ground. (1988 Bar)
A: Rule 137, Section 1 of the Rules of Court provides that a judge is disqualified from sitting on any
case in which he or his wife or child is pecuniarily interested as heir, legatee, creditor or otherwise or
in which he is related to either party within sixth degree of consanguinity of affinity or to counsel within
the fourth civil degree.
Under the last sentence of Rule 137, Section 1 of the Rules of Court, a judge may voluntarily inhibit
himself from participating in a case for just and valid reasons.
The rule on voluntarily inhibition of judges was set by the Supreme Court in Pimentel v. Salonga, 21
SCRA160 as follows:
All the foregoing notwithstanding, this should be a good occasion as any to draw the attention of all
judges to appropriate guidelines in a situation where their capacity to try and decide fairly and
judiciously comes to the fore by way of challenge from any one of the parties. A judge may not be
legally prohibited from sitting in a litigation. But when the suggestion is made of record that he might
be induced to act in favor 'of one party or with bias or prejudice ‘against a litigant arising out of
circumstances reasonably capable of inciting such a state of mind, he should conduct a careful self-
examination.
He should exercise his discretion in a way that the people’s faith in the courts of justice is not
impaired.
INITIATION OF COMPLAINT AGAINST JUDGES AND JUSTICES
Q: An anonymous letter addressed to the Supreme Court was sent by one Malcolm X, a
concerned citizen, complaining against Judge Hambog, Presiding Judge of the RTC of
Mahangin City, Branch 7. Malcolm X reported that Judge Hambog is acting arrogantly in court;
using abusive and inappropriate language; and embarrassing and insulting parties, witnesses,
and even lawyers appearing before him. Attached to the letter were pages from transcripts of
records in several cases heard before Judge Hambog, with Judge Hambog’s arrogant,
abusive, inappropriate, embarrassing and/or insulting remarks or comments highlighted.
Describe briefly the procedure followed when giving due course to a complaint against an RTC
judge. (2015 Bar)
A: If the complaint is sufficient in form and substance, a copy thereof shall be sent to the respondent,
and he shall be required to comment within 10 days from date of service. Upon the filing of the
respondent’s comment, the Supreme Court shall refer the matter to the Office of the Court
Administrator for evaluation, report and recommendation, or assign the case to a Justice of the Court
of Appeals, for investigation, report and recommendation. The investigating Justice shall set a date for
the hearing and notify the parties thereof, and they may present evidence, oral or documentary, at
such hearing. The investigating Justice shall terminate the investigation within 90 days from its
commencement, and submit his report and recommendation to the Supreme Court within 30 days
from the termination of the investigation. The Supreme Court shall take action on the report as the
facts and the law may warrant (Rule 140).
Q: Judge A has an illicit relationship with B, his Branch Clerk of Court. C, the wife of Judge A,
discovered the illicit affair and consulted a lawyer to vindicate her violated marital rights. If you
were that lawyer, what would you advice C, and if she agrees and asks you to proceed to take
action, what is the legal procedure that you should follow? Discuss fully. (2014 Bar)
A: I will advice her to file an administrative case against Judge A with the Supreme Court. I can tell
her that she can also file civil or criminal actions against him. But an administrative case is confidential
in nature and will not unnecessarily drag the name and reputation of the court into the picture.
DISCIPLINE OF MEMBERS OF THE JUDICIARY
Lower court judges and justices of the Court of Appeals, Sandiganbayan and Court of Tax
Appeals (Rule 140)
Q: A complaint for rape against ZZ was filed by the father of Dulce, an 11-year old girl, with the
Municipal Trial Court of Bantayan, Cebu. After preliminary examination of the offended party
and the witnesses, Judge YY of said court issued an order finding probable cause and
ordering the arrest of ZZ without bail. ZZ was arrested and UST BAR OPERATIONS
Legal and Judicial Ethics
52
detained. He file: (1) a Waiver of Preliminary him, he is entitled to file his answer. If the answer
Investigation, and (2) an Ex- Parte Motion to merits a hearing, it is referred to a justice of the
Fix Bail Bond. Judge YY granted the waiver Court of Appeals for investigation, the report of
and forthwith elevated the records of the case the investigation is submitted to the Supreme
to the RTC, which forwarded the same to the Court for proper disposition.
Office of the Provincial Prosecutor. The danger in applying the res ipsa loquitur rule
Ten (10) days after the elevation of the is that the judge may have committed only an
records. YY, acting on the Motion To Fix Bail, error of judgment. His outright dismissal does
issued an order fixing the bail bond at P20, violence to the jurisprudence set In Re Horilleno,
000.00. The father of Dulce filed against YY an 43 Phil. 212.
administrative complaint for ignorance of law, The other view taken by the Supreme Court is
oppression, grave abuse of discretion and that the lawyer or a judge can be suspended or
partiality. If you were the executive judge of dismissed based in his activities or decision, as
the RTC designated to investigate the case long as he has been given an opportunity to
and to make a report and recommendation explain his side. No investigation is necessary.
thereon, what would be your Grounds
recommendation? (1991 Bar) Q: An Audit team from the Office of the Court
A: The facts narrated in this case is similar to the Administrator found that Judge Contaminada
decision of the Supreme Court in 1989. The committed serious infractions through the
judge was found guilty of ignorance of the law for indiscriminate grant of petitions for
granting bail despite the fact that he had already annulment of marriage and legal separation.
lost jurisdiction after elevating the records of the In one year, the judge granted 300 of such
case to the Regional Trial Court. petitions when the average number of
If I am the RTC Judge assigned to investigate the petitions of similar nature granted by an
case I would recommend the dismissal of the individual judge in his region was only 24
Judge for gross ignorance of the law. petitions per annum.
Q: Under the grievance procedures in Rule The audit revealed many different defects in
139-B of the Rules of Court, may judges be the granted petitions; many petitions had not
investigated by the Integrated Bar of the been verified; the required copies of some
Philippines? Explain. (1989 Bar) petitions were not furnished to the Office of
A: Judges may not be investigated under the the Solicitor General and the Office of the
grievance procedure in Rule 139-B of the Rules Provincial Prosecutor; docket fees had not
of Court. Complaints against judges are filed with been fully paid; the parties were not actual
the Supreme Court which has administrative residents within the territorial jurisdiction of
supervision over all courts. This was the ruling of the court; and, in some cases, there was no
the Supreme Court in a minute resolution in reply record of the cross-examinations conducted
to the letter of acting Presiding Justice of the by the pubic prosecutor or any documentary
Court of Appeals Rodolfo Nocon 03 January evidence marked and formally offered. All
1989. these, viewed in their totality, supported the
Q: In Administrative Circular No. 1 addressed improvident and indiscriminate grant that the
to all lower courts dated January 28, 1988, the OCA found. QUAMTO (1987-2017)
Supreme Court stressed: 53
All judges are reminded that the Supreme
Court has applied the “Res Ipsa Loquitur”
rule in the removal of judges even without
any formal investigation whenever a decision,
on its face, indicates gross incompetence or
gross ignorance of the law or gross
misconduct (See: People vs. Valenzuela, 135
SCRA 712; Cathay Pacific Airways vs.
Romillo, Jr., 142 SCRA 262).
The application of the “res ipsa loquitur” rule
in the removal of judges is assailed in various
quarters as inconsistent with due process
and fair play.
Is there basis for such a reaction? Explain.
(1988 Bar)
A: In one view, there is a basis for the reaction
against the res ipsa loquitur rule on removing
judges. According to the position taken by the
Philippine Bar Association. The res ipsa loquitur
rule might violate the principle of due process,
that is the right to be heard before one is
condemned
Moreover, Rule 140 of the Rules of Court
provides for the procedure for the removal of
judges. Upon service of the complaint against
If you were the counsel for Andy Malasuerte and other litigants whose marriages had been
improperly and finally annulled, discuss your options in administratively proceeding against
JudgeContaminada, and state where and how you would exercise these options. (2013 Bar)
A: As a counsel for Andy Malasuerte, I have the option of participating in the administrative
proceedings by filing a verified complaint in writing against Judge Contaminado, with the Office of the
Court Administrator, supported by affidavits of persons who have personal knowledge of the facts
alleged therein or by documents which may substantiate said allegations. The complaint shall state
clearly and concisely the acts and omissions constituting violations of standards of conduct prescribed
for judges by law, the Rules of Court, the Code of Judicial Conduct (Rules of Court, Rule 140, Sec. 1)
and the new Code of Conduct for the Philippine Judiciary.
Q: Judge Horacio would usually go to the When charged administratively, Judge J
cockpits on Saturdays for relaxation, as the invoked freedom of expression. Is his defense
owner of the cockpit is a friend of his. He tenable? Explain. (Bar)
also goes to the casino once a week to A: The Judge’s reliance on freedom of expression
accompany his wife who loves to play the is untenable. The judge's vicious writings
slot machines. Because of this, Judge compromise his duties as judge in the impartial
Horacio was administratively charged. administration ofjustice. His writings lack judicial
When asked to explain, he said that decorum which requires the use of temperate
although he goes to these places, he only language at all times. The judge should not instigate
watches and does not place any bets. litigation (Galang v. Santos, 307 SCRA 583 [1999],
Is his explanation tenable? Explain. (2005 Royeca v. Animas. 71 SCRA 1 [1976]).
Bar) Q: A judge, in order to ease his clogged docket,
A: The explanation of Judge Horacio is not would exert efforts to compel the accused in
tenable. In the case of City of Tagbilaran vs. criminal cases to plead guilty to a lesser offense
Hontanosas, Jr., 375 SCRA 1 [2002], the and advise party litigants in civil cases, whose
Supreme Court penalized a city court judge for positions appear weak, to accept the
going to gambling casinos and cockpits on compromise offered by the opposing party.
weekends. According to the Court, going to a Is the practice legally acceptable? (1998 Bar)
casino violates Circular No. 4, dated August 27, A: The practice is legally acceptable as long as the
1980, which enjoins judges of inferior courts judge does not exert pressure on the parties and
from playing or being present in gambling takes care that he does not appear to have
casinos. prejudged the case. Where a judge has told a party
The prohibition refers to both actual gambling that his case is weak before the latter was fully
and mere presence in gambling casinos. A heard, such was considered as a ground for his
judge’s personal behavior, not only in the disqualification (Castillo v. Juan, 62 SCRA 124).
performance of judicial duties, but also in his Q: A Judge of the Regional Trial Court,
everyday life, should be beyond reproach. notwithstanding the fact that he was facing
With regard to going to cockpits, the Supreme criminal charges at the time he obtained his
Court held that “verily, it is plainly despicable to appointment, did not disclose the pendency of
see a judge inside a cockpit and more so, to the cases either to the President or to the
see him bet therein. Mixing with the crowd of Supreme Court. He claims that: (a) he enjoys
cockfighting enthusiasts and bettors is presumption of innocence in the pending
unbecoming a judge and undoubtedly impairs criminal cases; (b) that the said cases even if
the respect due him. Ultimately, the Judiciary sustained after trial do not involve moral
suffers therefrom because a judge is a visible turpitude; and (3) before an administrative
representation of the Judiciary" (City of complaint based on a criminal prosecution can
Tagbilaran v. Hontanosas, Jr., ibid at p. 8). be given due course there must be a conviction
Q: Before he joined the bench, Judge J was by final Judgment.
a vice-mayor. Judge J resumed writing a May the Judge be considered as an undeserving
weekly column in a local newspaper. In his appointee and therefore be removed from his
column, Judge J wrote: office? (1996 Bar)
“It was wondering if the present vice-mayor A: He may be considered as undeserving and
can shed off his crocodile hide so that he removed from office. This problem falls squarely
can feel the clamor of the public for the under the decision of the Supreme UST BAR
resignation of hoodlum public officers of OPERATIONS
which he is one". Legal and Judicial Ethics
54
Court in the case of Court Administrator v. 1. Period of the Lease-
Estacion, 181 SCRA 33, wherein a complaint was
filed concerning the appointment of a Regional 2. Rentals to be Paid –
Trial Court judge notwithstanding the fact that he
was then facing criminal charges for homicide and 3. (Other terms and conditions)
attempted homicide. The Judge also claimed that
(a) he enjoys the presumption of innocence, (b) IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto
the said cases, even if sustained, do not involved have signed these presents, at
moral turpitude, and (c) before an administrative __________________, this
complaint based on a criminal prosecution is _________________day of _____________,
given due course, there must be a conviction by 1998.
final judgment. The Supreme Court held: A.B. C.D.
“The argument that he had not yet been convicted Lessor Lessee
and should be presumed innocent is beside the WITNESSES
point, and so is the contention that the crimes of (acknowledgment)
homicide and attempted homicide do not involve Q: Gerry Cruz is the owner of a 1,000-square
moral turpitude. The important consideration is meter lot covered by Transfer Certificate of
that he had a duty to inform appointing authority Title No. 12345 located in Sampaloc. Metro
and this Court of the pending criminal charges Manila. Gerry decided to sell the property but
against him to enable them to determine on the did not have the time to look for a buyer. He
basis of his record, eligibility for the position he then designated his brother, Jon, to look for a
was seeking. He did not discharge that duty. His buyer and negotiate the sale. Jon met Angelo
record did not contain the important information in Santos who expressed his interest to buy the
question because he deliberately withheld and lot. Angelo agreed to pay PI Million for the
thus effectively hid it. His lack of candor is as property on September 26. 2005.
obvious as his reason for suppression of such Draft the Deed of Sale of Real Property. (2005,
vital fact, which he knew would have been taken 1991, 1989)
into account against him if it had been disclosed. A:
As stressed in the report, it behooves every DEED OF ABSOLUTE SALE
prospective appointee to the judiciary to apprise KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS:
the appointing authority of every matter bearing This instrument, executed by and between:
on his fitness for judicial office, including such QUAMTO (1987-2017)
circumstances as may reflect on his integrity and 55
probity. These are qualifications specifically
required of appointees to the judiciary under
Article VIII, Sec. 7 (3) of the Constitution. The fact
alone of his concealment of the two criminal cases
against him is clear proof of his lack of the said
qualifications and renders him unworthy to sit as a
Judge."
The respondent Judge was accordingly removed
from office.
PRACTICAL EXERCISES
SIMPLE CONTRACTS – LEASE, SALE OF
REALTY
Q: Prepare a Contract of Lease of an
apartment unit, (1998, 1996, 1988, 1987)
A:
CONTRACT OF LEASE
KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS:
This contract of lease, entered into by and
between:
A.B., Filipino, of legal age, single, with residence
at _______________ and hereafter called the
LESSOR
- and-
B.D., Filipino, of legal age, single, with residence
at _________________and hereafter called the
LESSEE.
WITNESSETH:
THAT, for and in consideration of the rentals to be
paid, the LESSOR has hereby leased to the
LESSEE and the LESSEE hereby accepts the
same In lease, the * following described property:
(description of apartment)
subject to the following terms and conditions:
GERRY CRUZ, of legal age, single, and a IBP Membership No.
resident of _______________, herein represented PTR O.R. No. ________, Manila, 2005
by his Attorney-in-Fact, JON CRUZ, of legal age Doc. No.
and a resident of _____________ and Page No.
_____________ hereafter referred to as the Book No.
VENDOR, Series of 2005.
- and - PROMISSORY NOTE
Q: Prepare a negotiable promissory note.
ANGELO SANTOS, Filipino, of legal age, single, a (1994, 1991 Bar)
resident of _____________ and hereafter referred A:
to as the VENDEE, City of Manila, September 28, 1994
WITNESSETH: 6,000.00
THAT, for and in consideration of the sum of One Thirty (30) days after date, I, Arturo M. Padilla,
Million Pesos (P1,000,000.00), in hand paid by hereby promise to pay to the order of Milagros
the VENDEE to the VENDOR and receipt of which Concepcion, the sum of six thousand (6,000.00)
is herein acknowledged by the latter, the Pesos (Philippine Currency).
VENDOR has sold, transferred and conveyed, (Sgd.) Arturo M. Padilla
and by these presents does hereby sell, transfer VERIFICATION AND CERTIFICATE OF NON-
and convey, unto the VENDEE, that certain parcel FORUM SHOPPING
of land with an area of 1,000 square meters, more Q: Prepare a Verification and Certification
or less, located in Sampaloc, Manila, covered by against Forum Shopping. (2010, 2003)
Transfer Certificate of Title No. 12345 of the A:
Register of Deeds of Manila, and which is more VERIFICATION AND CERTIFICATION
particularly described as follows: AGAINST FORUM SHOPPING
(technical description) X, after being duly sworn, hereby deposes and
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have states:
signed these presents at Manila, this 26th day of That he is the plaintiff in the above-entitled case;
September, 2005. that he has caused the foregoing Complaint to be
GERRY CRUZ ANGELO SANTOS prepared; that he has read the same and that the
Vendor Vendee allegations of fact therein contained are true of
T.I.N. _________ T.I.N. _________ his personal knowledge or based on authentic
By: documents; UST BAR OPERATIONS
JON CRUZ Legal and Judicial Ethics
Attorney-in-Fact 56
WITNESSES:
___________________ _________________
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES)
CITY OF MANILA ) S.S.
IN THE CITY OF MANILA, Philippines, personally
appeared before me, Mr. JON CRUZ, with
Community Tax Certificate No.
____________issued at ____________ on
______________, 2005, in his capacity as
Attorney-in-Fact of Mr. GERRY CRUZ, with
Community Tax Certificate No.
____________issued at ____________ on
______________, 2005, both of whom are
personally known to me to be the same persons
who executed the foregoing instrument, and they
acknowledged to me that the same is their free
and voluntary act and deed, and the free and
voluntary act and deed of the principal whom Mr.
JON CRUZ represents.
I further certify that the foregoing instrument is a
deed of sale of a parcel of land located in
Sampaloc, Manila, and consists of ____ pages,
including this page, and is signed on each and
every page by the said parties and their
instrumental witnesses.
WITNESS MY HAND AND SEAL.
NOTARY PUBLIC
My Commission expires on December 31, 2005
(Address)
Commission No._______, Manila
Attorney’s Roll No.
That (a) he has not heretofore commenced any action of filed an claim involving the same issued in
any court, tribunal or quasi-judicial agency, and to the best of his knowledge, no such other action or
claim is pending therein; and (b) if he should thereafter learn that the same of similar action or claim
has been filed or is pending, he shall report that fact within five (5) days therefrom to this Honorable
Court.