A.M. No.

22-09-01-SC
NOTES ON THE PROPOSED CODE OF
PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY AND
ACCOUNTABILITY

GENERAL PROVISIONS
SECTION 1. Retroactive effect. — This Code shall be applied to all cases filed after its
effectivity on and also retroactively to all pending cases, except to the extent that in the
opinion of the Court, its application would not be feasible or would work injustice, in
which case the procedure under which the cases were filed shall govern. (n)

SECTION 2. Repealing clause. — Any resolution, circular, bar matter, or administrative

order issued by, or principles established in the decisions of the Supreme Court
inconsistent with this Code is deemed modified or repealed.213 (n)

SECTION 3. Effectivity clause. — This Code shall take effect on following its
publication in the Official Gazette or in two newspapers of national circulation.214 (n)

● Section 1 of the CPRA provides that the Code applies to all cases filed after its
effectivity, as well as retroactively to all pending cases, except in situations where
its application would be impractical or unjust. In such cases, the procedure under
which the cases were filed will apply.

● Section 2 of the Code contains the repealing clause, which provides that any
previous resolution, circular, bar matter, or administrative order issued by the
Supreme Court or principles established in its decisions that are inconsistent with
the Code are deemed modified or repealed.

● Finally, Section 3 states that the Code takes effect following its publication in the
Official Gazette or in two newspapers of national circulation.

PREAMBLE
Ethics is the experiential manifestation of moral standards. The observance of these
standards of conduct is both a function of personal choice and formal compulsion. A
lawyer is ideally ethical by personal choice. A code of ethics expressly adopted
represents society’s consensus and dictate to conform to a chosen norm of behavior
that sustains the community’s survival and growth. Non-compliance merits sanctions.

The Code of Professional Responsibility and Accountability, as an institutional

imperative, is meant to foster an environment where ethical conduct performs a
dedicated role in the administration of justice. In particular, the standards embodied in
the Code of Professional Responsibility and Accountability uniquely address the
characteristics of the Filipino lawyer as an amalgamation of influences and moorings,
i.e., familial, cultural, religious, academic, political, and philosophical. Inherently a social
being, the Filipino lawyer inevitably develops and cultivates relations, preferences and
biases. The conscious adoption of ethical standards that accounts for such relationships
and personal choices balanced against the demands of right and justice is envisioned to
govern and regulate these personal choices and make them consistent with the
institutional objectives.

The existence of a free and an independent society depends upon the recognition of the
concept that justice is based on the rule of law.

As a guardian of the rule of law, every lawyer, as a citizen, owes allegiance to the
Constitution and the laws of the land; as a member of the legal profession, is bound by
its ethical standards in both private and professional matters;

● Ethics is the manifestation of moral standards and is a combination of personal

choice and formal compulsion.

● A code of ethics adopted by society represents its consensus on a norm of

behavior for its survival and growth.

● The Code of Professional Responsibility and Accountability is meant to promote

ethical conduct in the administration of justice.

● The standards embodied in the Code are unique to the Filipino lawyer and take
into account their various influences and personal relationships.

● The recognition of the rule of law is essential for the existence of a free and
independent society.

● Every lawyer is a citizen, bound by ethical standards, an officer of the court and a
representative of their client.

● An ethical lawyer is one with integrity and embodies values such as

independence, propriety, fidelity, competence, diligence, equality, and
accountability.
 CANON I: INDEPENDENCE
The independence of a lawyer in the discharge of professional duties without any
improper influence, restriction, pressure or interference, direct or indirect, ensures
effective legal representation and is ultimately imperative for the rule of law. (n)

● The independence of a lawyer is crucial for the rule of law and effective legal
representation.

SECTION 1. Independent, accessible, efficient and effective legal service. — A lawyer

shall make legal services accessible in an efficient and effective manner. In performing
this duty, the lawyer shall maintain independence, act with integrity, and at all times
ensure the efficient and effective delivery of justice. (2a)1

● A lawyer must make their legal services available in an efficient and convenient
manner that is compatible with the independence, integrity and effectiveness of
the legal profession.

● This is based on Canon 2 of the CPR which provides, “A lawyer shall make his
legal services available in an efficient and convenient manner compatible with
the independence, integrity and effectiveness of the profession.”

● Lawyers are not allowed to reject cases for the defenseless and oppressed,
except for valid reasons.

● However, if they do not accept a case, they must still render legal advice to the
person concerned if necessary to protect their rights.

● Solicitation of legal business is highly unethical and lawyers must not engage in
any act that is primarily designed to solicit legal business.

● The best form of advertising for a lawyer is a well-merited reputation for

professional capacity and trustworthiness. This can be earned through their
character and conduct.

● Advertisements must be modest and dignified, and any advertisements in a

newspaper must not be self-praising or offer free legal services. The best form of
advertising is still considered to be a well-mannered reputation, and lawyers are
allowed to use simple professional cards.

● Permissible forms of advertising include biographical listings in reputable law

lists, announcements of specialization and availability of service, seeking public
office, offering free legal services to the indigent, and listing in the telephone
directory.
 ● Cut-throat competition, such as lowering legal fees to attract clients, is not
allowed.

SECTION 2. Merit-based practice. — A lawyer shall rely solely on the merits of a cause
and not exert, or give the appearance of, any influence on, nor undermine the authority
of the court, tribunal or other government agency, or its proceedings. (13a)2

● Lawyers should rely solely on the merits of a case and not exert any influence on
the proceedings.

● Based on Canon 13 of the CPR which provides, “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.”

● The sub judice rule restricts comments and disclosures about pending judicial
proceedings to avoid prejudging the issue, influencing the court, or obstructing
the administration of justice.

● This applies not only to litigants and witnesses but also to the public in general
and particularly to members of the bar and the bench.

● The sub judice rule finds support in the provision on indirect contempt under
Section 3, Rule 71 of the Rules of Court.

● Violations of the sub judice rule may result in contempt proceedings or

administrative actions, as lawyers are subject to greater regulation due to their
relationship to the judicial process and the dangers that their speech poses to the
trial process.

● This is why the court has the plenary power to discipline erring lawyers through
administrative actions in order to preserve the nobility and honor of the legal
profession.

● In the case of Atty. Harold writing in the Philippine Star that the decision of the
Supreme Court in a big land case is incorrect and should be re-examined, he is
in violation of the sub judice rule and can face a disbarment complaint for
violating Rule 13.02 and Canon 11 of the CPR, which requires lawyers to
observe and maintain the respect due to the courts.

● However, the principle of open justice refers to the right of the public to scrutinize
or criticize courts and court proceedings.
SECTION 3. Freedom from improper considerations and external influences. — A
lawyer shall not, in advocating a client’s cause, be influenced by dishonest or immoral
considerations, external influences or pressure. (n)

● Lawyers must not be influenced by dishonest or immoral considerations or

external pressures.

SECTION 4. Non-interference by a lawyer. — Unless authorized by law or a court, a

lawyer shall not assist or cause a branch, agency, office or officer of the government to
interfere in any matter before any court, tribunal, or other government agency. (13.03a)3

● Lawyers should not assist or cause government interference in matters before

any court, tribunal, or other government agency.

● Based on Rule 13.03 of the CPR which provides, “A lawyer shall not brook or
invite interference by another branch or agency of the government in the normal
course of proceedings.”

SECTION 5. Lawyer’s duty and discretion in procedure and strategy. — A lawyer shall
not allow the client to dictate or determine the procedure and strategy in handling the
case. (19.03a)4

● A lawyer has a duty and discretion in procedure and strategy in handling a case.

● Based on Rule 19.03 which proves, A lawyer shall not allow his client to dictate
the procedure in handling the case.

● A lawyer must not allow the client to dictate the procedure in handling the case.

● This is because the substantive aspects of the case are within the sole authority
of the client to decide, and the lawyer's authority is limited only to procedural
aspects of the case.

● However, it is the client who decides to appeal or not.

● If the lawyer believes that the appeal is frivolous, the lawyer's remedy is to
withdraw and not move to dismiss the appeal without the client's consent.

● It is worth noting that the old Lawyer's Oath requires the lawyer not to promote or
sue any groundless, false, or unlawful suit.

● If a lawyer goes against the client's decision, such as filing an appeal against the
client's wish, the lawyer may be held liable for its negative result, as per Rule
19.03 of the CPR. (Roldan v. Panganiban, 446 SCRA 32)
 ● General Rule: A lawyer must not allow the client to dictate the procedure in
handling the case. Exceptions: Substantive matters are solely the decision of
the client and not the lawyer. Ex. Compromise, Appeals (Roldan v. Panganiban,
446 SCRA 32)

Nevertheless, the lawyer shall respect the client’s decision to settle or compromise the
case after explaining its consequences to the client. (n)

● a lawyer shall not, without the full knowledge and consent of the client, accept
any settlement or compromise of the client's cause of action.

● However, if the client decides to settle or compromise the case despite the
lawyer's advice, the lawyer should still respect the client's decision and take
steps to protect the client's interests.

CANON II PROPRIETY
A lawyer shall, at all times, act with propriety and maintain the appearance of propriety
in personal and professional dealings, observe honesty, respect and courtesy, and
uphold the dignity of the profession consistent with the high standards of ethical
behavior. (n)

SECTION 1. Proper conduct. — A lawyer shall not engage in unlawful, dishonest,

immoral or deceitful conduct. (1.01)5

● A lawyer must maintain the highest standards of ethical behavior and

professional responsibility.

● This is based on Canon 1.01 of the CPR which provides, A lawyer shall not
engage in unlawful, dishonest, immoral or deceitful conduct. U-D-I-D.

● This includes avoiding unlawful, dishonest, immoral, and deceitful conduct, which
violates the Lawyer's Oath and the Code of Professional Responsibility.

● Dishonest behavior involves a disposition to lie, cheat, deceive, or betray, while

deceitful conduct involves fraudulent and deceptive misrepresentation.

● Deceitful conduct also involves moral turpitude and any act that is contrary to
justice, modesty, or good morals.

● It is important to note that a lawyer can be disciplined for acts committed in their
private capacity if they tend to bring reproach on the legal profession or injure its
favorable opinion in the public eye.
 ● This is because a lawyer may not divide their personality as an attorney at one
time and a mere citizen at another.

● In addition, under Rule 7.03 of the Code of Professional Responsibility, a lawyer

must not engage in conduct in public or private life that would discredit the legal
profession.

● Immorality is, in a long line of cases, not immediately punishable by disbarment.

Immorality must be gross - It must be corrupt, committed under scandalous
circumstances to shock common sense of decency.

SECTION 2. Dignified conduct. — A lawyer shall respect the law, the courts, tribunals,
and other government agencies, their officials, employees, and processes, and act with
courtesy, civility, fairness, and candor towards fellow members of the bar. (8a)6

● This is based on the Code of Professional Responsibility in CANON 8 which

provides, A LAWYER SHALL CONDUCT HIMSELF WITH COURTESY,
FAIRNESS AND CANDOR TOWARDS HIS PROFESSIONAL COLLEAGUES,
AND SHALL AVOID HARASSING TACTICS AGAINST OPPOSING COUNSEL.

● This includes the language used by a lawyer in their professional dealings, as

specified in Rule 8.01, which prohibits the use of language that is abusive,
offensive, or otherwise improper.

● Several cases have shown that lawyers who use offensive language, either in the
courtroom or in their professional dealings, violate these provisions in the code.

● For example, in Gimeno v. Atty. Zaide, the lawyer, was found guilty of using
derogatory statements against private and public prosecutors.

● In the case of Ruffina Luy Lim v. Atty. Manuel V. Mendoza, the respondent failed
to use temperate and respectful language in his pleadings, imputing derogatory
traits on the complainant that were damaging to her reputation.

● In Arlene O. Bautista v. Atty Zenaida M. Ferrer, the lawyer, was found guilty of
violating the code for uttering abusive and offensive remarks while holding a pair
of scissors in a threatening manner.

● Lawyers are expected to use language that is convincing, illuminating, and

respectful in their professional dealings and should avoid using offensive
language that may harm their reputation or the reputation of their clients.
A lawyer shall not engage in conduct that adversely reflects on one’s fitness to practice
law, nor behave in a scandalous manner, whether in public or private life, to the discredit
of the legal profession. (7.03a)7

● Rule 7.03 of the CPR provides: A lawyer shall not engage in conduct that
adversely reflects on his fitness to practice law, nor shall he, whether in public or
private life, behave in a scandalous manner to the discredit of the legal
profession.
● Any conduct that brings discredit to the legal profession or injures its reputation in
the eyes of the public is considered unacceptable and may result in disciplinary
action, including suspension or disbarment.

● The Supreme Court has emphasized that lawyers must adhere to high standards
of morality, honesty, and fair dealing in all aspects of their lives, both public and
private.

● The Court has consistently held that there is no distinction between a lawyer's
public and private life, and any behavior that reflects poorly on their character,
honesty, or good demeanor may result in disciplinary action, even if the behavior
occurs outside of a lawyer-client relationship.

● Additionally, judges and Justices are held to an even higher standard, as they
should embody competence, integrity, and independence and their conduct
should always be above reproach.

SECTION 3. Safe environment; avoid all forms of abuse or harassment. — A lawyer

shall not create or promote an unsafe environment, both in private and public settings,
whether online, in workplaces, educational or training institutions, or in recreational
areas.8 To this end, a lawyer shall not commit any form of physical, sexual,
psychological, or economic abuse or violence against another person.9 A lawyer is also
prohibited from engaging in any gender- based harassment or discrimination.10 (n)

● A lawyer is obligated to maintain a safe environment and to avoid any forms of

abuse or harassment in all settings, whether it be online, in the workplace,
educational or training institutions, or in recreational areas.

● This is based on the Safe Spaces Act (Republic Act No. 11313) which recognizes
the importance of equality, security, and safety for both men and women.

● Additionally, a lawyer must not commit any form of physical, sexual,

psychological, or economic abuse or violence against another person, nor
engage in any form of gender-based harassment or discrimination.
 ● This obligation is further reinforced by the Anti-Violence Against Women and
Their Children Act of 2004 (Republic Act No. 9262), which seeks to address the
issue of violence against women and their children in all its forms.

SECTION 4. Use of dignified, gender-fair, and child- and culturally-sensitive language.

— A lawyer shall use only dignified, gender-fair, child- and culturally-sensitive language
in all personal and professional dealings. To this end, a lawyer shall not use language
which is abusive, intemperate, offensive or otherwise improper, whether oral or written,
made through mass media, whether traditional or electronic, including mainstream,
alternative, and social media. (8.01a,11 11.03a)12

● In accordance with SECTION 4 of CRPA, lawyers are expected to use dignified,

gender-fair, child- and culturally-sensitive language in both their personal and
professional interactions.

● This includes avoiding language that is abusive, intemperate, offensive, or

otherwise improper, whether spoken or written and through any form of mass
media, including traditional and electronic sources.

● This requirement is based on two rules, Rule 8.01 and Rule 11.03, which state
that lawyers must not use abusive or offensive language in their professional
dealings, and must abstain from using scandalous, offensive, or menacing
language or behavior before courts, respectively.

● The Supreme Court has ruled that a practicing lawyer's state of mind should be
broad-minded, and that an attorney owes respect to the courts.

● This was demonstrated in the case of Monetecillo vs. Gica, where a lawyer was
found to have made threats to the justices of the Supreme Court and was
reminded of their duty to respect the courts.

● A lawyer is entitled to represent his case with courage. Sometimes the lawyers
get carried away by emotions during trial. Language abounds with countless
possibilities for one to be emphatic but respectful, convincing but not derogatory,
and illuminating but not offensive. (Gimeno vs. Atty. Zaide, A.C. No. 10303, April
22, 2015)

SECTION 5. Observance of fairness and obedience. — A lawyer shall, in every

personal and professional engagement, insist on the observance of the principles of
fairness and obedience to the law. (15.07a)13

● SECTION 5 requires that lawyers must promote the observance of fairness and
obedience in every aspect of their personal and professional life.
 ● This is based on two rules of the old CPR, Rule 15.07, which requires lawyers to
impress upon their clients the importance of complying with laws and principles
of fairness, and Rule 1.02, which prohibits lawyers from counseling or aiding
activities that defy the law or undermine confidence in the legal system.

● This is exemplified by the case of Chua vs. Masina (A.C. No. 4904, August 12,
2004), where a lawyer was found to have advised his client to execute another
deed of sale to evade paying Capital Gains Tax, which goes against the
principles of obedience and fairness in the legal system.

SECTION 6. Harassing or threatening conduct. - A lawyer shall not harass or threaten a

fellow lawyer, the latter’s client or principal, a witness, or any official or employee of a
court, tribunal, or other government agency. (n)

● This section prohibits a lawyer from engaging in harassing or threatening

behavior towards other lawyers, their clients, witnesses, and officials or
employees of a court, tribunal, or government agency.

SECTION 7. Formal decorum and appearance. A lawyer shall observe formal decorum
and appearance before all courts, tribunals, and other government agencies. (11.01a)14

● SECTION 7 of the CPRA states that lawyers must observe formal decorum and
appearance when appearing before courts, tribunals, and other government
agencies.
● This requirement is outlined in Rule 11.01 of the CPR, which specifies that
lawyers must appear in court properly attired. Failure to observe this requirement
can result in the lawyer being held in contempt by the court.

SECTION 8. Prohibition against misleading the court, tribunal, or other government

agency. A lawyer shall not misquote, misrepresent, or mislead the court as to the
existence or the contents of any document, argument, evidence, law, or other legal
authority, or pass off as one’s own the ideas or words of another, or assert as a fact that
which has not been proven. (10.02a)15

● SECTION 8 of the CPRA prohibits misleading the court, tribunal, or other

government agency.

● A lawyer is prohibited from misquoting, misrepresenting, or misleading the court

as to the existence or contents of any document, argument, evidence, law, or
other legal authority, or from passing off someone else's ideas or words as their
own, or from asserting a fact that has not been proven.
 ● This is based on Rule 10.02 of the CPR, which states that a lawyer shall not
knowingly misquote or misrepresent the contents of a paper, the language or
argument of opposing counsel, or the text of a decision or authority.

● The code requires that when a lawyer quotes a decision in their pleadings, they
should quote it verbatim, and citing an inoperative provision of law is considered
contemptuous.

● The case of Tolentino v. Atty. Millado and Atyy. Sibayan, A.C. No. 10737,
November 09, 2015, highlights the importance of verbatim reproductions of court
decisions, down to the last word and punctuation mark, as indicated in the Insular
Life Assurance Co., Ltd., G.R. No. L-25291, January 30, 1971 case.

● Mere restating the ruling without altering its substance. This, the Court finds as
permissible. (Tolentino v. Atty. Millado and Atty. Sibayan, A.C. No. 10737,
November 09, 2015)

SECTION 9. Obstructing access to evidence or altering, destroying, or concealing

evidence. — A lawyer shall not obstruct another lawyer’s access to evidence, including
testimonial evidence, or alter, destroy, or conceal evidence. (n)

● A lawyer is not allowed to obstruct another lawyer's access to evidence or tamper

with evidence, which includes both testimonial evidence and physical evidence.

SECTION 10. Conduct in the presentation of a witness. — A lawyer shall avoid all forms
of impropriety when presenting or confronting a witness. (12.05a)16 A lawyer shall not
coach, abuse, discriminate against, or harass any witness, in or out of the court,
tribunal, or other government agency. Neither shall a lawyer direct, assist, or abet any
misrepresentation or falsehood by a witness. (12.07a,17 12.06a)18

● SECTION 10 of the CPRA deals with the conduct of a lawyer in the presentation
of a witness.

● This is based on multiple rules in the old CPR, Rule 12.05 - A lawyer shall refrain
from talking to his witness during a break or recess in the trial, while the witness
is still under examination; Rule 12.07 - A lawyer shall not abuse, browbeat or
harass a witness nor needlessly inconvenience him; and Rule 12.06 - A lawyer
shall not knowingly assist a witness to misrepresent himself or to impersonate
another.

● The lawyer must avoid any form of impropriety in the presentation or

confrontation of a witness and must refrain from coaching, abusing,
discriminating, or harassing the witness, both in and outside the court, tribunal, or
 government agency. The lawyer must also not direct, assist, or abet any
misrepresentation or falsehood by a witness.

● The lawyer is also prohibited from talking to the witness during a trial recess
while the witness is still under examination. 12.05

● The lawyer is also prohibited from knowingly assisting a witness in

misrepresenting himself or impersonating another. 12.06

● A lawyer must not harass, abuse, browbeat, or needlessly inconvenience a

witness. The lawyer must be familiar with the rights and obligations of a witness
under the Rule on Evidence (Rule 132, Sec. 3 of the Rules of Court), including
12.07:

○ The right of the witness not to answer questions that will tend to subject
him to a penalty,

○ The right to be protected from irrelevant, improper, or insulting questions,

○ The right to not be detained longer than the interest of justice requires,

○ The right to answer questions pertinent to the issue,

○ The right to not give an answer that will tend to degrade his reputation.
Unless, it be to the very fact at issue or a fact from which the fact in issue
would be presumed.

SECTION 11. False representations or statements; duty to correct. — A lawyer shall not
make false representations or statements.19 A lawyer shall be liable for any material
damage caused by such false representations or statements. A lawyer shall not, in
demand letters or other similar correspondence, make false representations or
statements, or impute civil, criminal, or administrative liability, without factual or legal
basis. A lawyer shall correct false or inaccurate statements and information made in
relation to an application for admission to the bar, any pleading, or any other document
as soon as its falsity or inaccuracy is discovered or made known to him or her. (n)

● Under Rule 7.01 of the old CPR, 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. And Rule 7.02 - A lawyer shall not support
the application for admission to the bar of any person known by him to be
unqualified in respect to character, education, or other relevant attributes.

● A lawyer may be held accountable for making a false statement or suppressing a

material fact in connection with their application for admission to the bar, and
shall not support the admission of any unqualified applicant.
SECTION 12. Duty to report dishonest, deceitful or misleading conduct. — A lawyer
shall immediately report any dishonest, deceitful or misleading conduct in relation to any
court, tribunal, or proceeding, to the affected court or tribunal, or to other proper
authorities. Any such report shall be treated with strict confidentiality. A baseless report
shall be subject to civil, criminal or administrative action. (n)

● Section 12 requires a lawyer to report any dishonest, deceitful, or misleading

conduct related to any court or proceeding to the affected court or proper
authorities immediately.

● The report must be kept confidential, and making a false report can result in legal
action.

SECTION 13. Imputation of misconduct, impropriety, or crime without basis. — A lawyer

shall not, directly or indirectly, impute to or accuse another lawyer of a misconduct,
impropriety or a crime, in the absence of factual or legal basis. Neither shall a lawyer,
directly or indirectly, file or cause to be filed, or assist in the filing of frivolous or baseless
administrative, civil or criminal complaints against another lawyer. (n)

● This section states that a lawyer is not allowed to make false accusations of
misconduct, impropriety, or a crime against another lawyer without any factual or
legal basis.
● A lawyer is also prohibited from filing or assisting in the filing of frivolous or
baseless complaints against another lawyer, whether in administrative, civil, or
criminal proceedings.

SECTION 14. Remedy for grievances; insinuation of improper motive. — A lawyer shall
submit grievances against any officer of a court, tribunal, or other government agency
only through the appropriate remedy and before the proper authorities. (11.04a,20
11.05a)21 Statements insinuating improper motive on the part of any such officer, which
are not supported by substantial evidence, shall be grounds for disciplinary action. (n)

● This section is based on Rule 11.04 which provides, “A lawyer shall not attribute
to a judge motives not supported by the record or have no materiality to the
case. A lawyer can demand that the misbehavior of a judge be placed on record.
Such an act is not contemptuous.” And Rule 11.05 which provides, "A lawyer
shall not criticize the personal or official conduct of the judge in an insulting and
intemperate language.”

● Kenneth R. Mariano v. Atty. Jose N. Laki - The SC found deplorable the act of
Atty. Laki in giving assurance to Mariano that he can secure a favorable decision
without the latter’s personal appearance because the petition will be filed in the
RTC of Tarlac, which was allegedly presided over by a “friendly” judge”. His
 deceitful assurances give the implication that a favorable decision can be
obtained by being in cahoots with a “friendly judge”. It gives the negative
impression that decisions of the courts can be decided merely on the basis of
close ties and not on the merits.

● This is to ensure that the criticism against the personal or official conduct of the
judge is constructive and not insulting or intemperate in nature.

● The purpose of this criticism is to correct any mistakes, not to be contemptuous.

● Two types of criticism:

○ (1) Constructive criticism - Purpose is to correct mistakes (NOT

contemptuous)

○ (2) Destructive criticism - Arrogantly presented with abusive or offensive

language coupled with malicious intention to offend the court
(Contemptuous)

● Lawyers have the right as an officer of the court and as a citizen, to criticize
expressed in properly respectful terms and through legitimate channels, as the
duty of the lawyer to his client's success is subordinate to the administration of
justice (Judge Pantanosas, Jr. v. Atty. Pamatong, A.C. No. 7830, 2016

● Ret. Judge Virgilio Alpajora v. Atty. Ronaldo Antonio V. Calayan - As officers of

the court, lawyers are to abstain from offensive language or behavior before the
court and must refrain from attributing to a judge motives that are not supported
by the record or have no materiality to the case.

○ The records also disclose that a news article detailing the events that
precipitated the bribery charge against complainant Pantanosas was
published on September 15, 2006 with the participation of respondent
Pamatong. At the outset, it bears stressing that lawyers should refrain
from attributing to a judge motives not supported by the record or have no
materiality to the case.49

○ Here, respondent Pamatong had no reason to divulge his grievances

before the public as he had already lodged a complaint against
complainant Pantanosas with the OCA on September 12, 2006.

● Ret. Judge Virgilio Alpajora v. Atty. Ronaldo Antonio V. Calayan - All lawyers are
bound to uphold the dignity and authority of the court, and to promote confidence
in the fair administration of justice; hence, no matter how passionate a lawyer is
 towards defending his client’s cause, he must not forget to display the
appropriate decorum expected of him being a member of the legal profession.

○ In light of the foregoing, the Court finds respondent guilty of attributing

unsupported ill-motives to complainant. It must be remembered that all
lawyers are bound to uphold the dignity and authority of the courts, and to
promote confidence in the fair administration of justice. It is the respect for
the courts that guarantees the stability of the judicial institution; elsewise,
the institution would be resting on a very shaky foundation.54

○ Hence, no matter how passionate a lawyer is towards defending his

client's cause, he must not forget to display the appropriate decorum
expected of him, being a member of the legal profession, and to continue
to afford proper and utmost respect due to the courts.

The lawyer must be cautious that the criticism does not exceed the bounds of
decency and propriety, as the discrediting of the justice system should not come
at the expense of its protection. (Judge Pantanosas, Jr. v. Atty. Pamatong, A.C.
No. 7830, 2016)

● In the event of a grievance against a judge, the lawyer is expected to submit it to

the proper authorities only. (Judge Pantanosas, Jr. v. Atty. Pamatong, A.C. No.
7830, 2016)

● Complaints against judges are filed to the Supreme Court Office of the Court
Administrator, as the Supreme Court has the jurisdiction over judges, according
to Article 8, Section 6 of the 1987 Constitution.

● If you want to file complaints against judicial officers, file it in the Judicial Integrity
Board. (JIB). If it is against a Supreme Court justice? You can file the complaint
before Congress because Justices are impeachable officers.

● Any action by the lawyer that resorts to the press instead of the proper authorities
is considered highly irresponsible and is against their duty.

● In the case of a criminal complaint against a judge or court employee arising from
their administrative duties, the Ombudsman must defer action and refer it to the
Supreme Court for determination of whether the judge or employee acted within
the scope of their administrative duties. (Maceda v. Ombudsman, G.R. No.
102781)

● The last paragraph means that if someone makes a statement that suggests an
improper motive on the part of a judge, and there is no significant proof to
support the statement, the person who made the statement may be subjected to
 disciplinary action. The statement emphasizes the importance of not making
baseless accusations against judges.

SECTION 15. Improper claim of influence or familiarity. — A lawyer shall observe

propriety in all dealings with officers and personnel of any court, tribunal, or other
government agency, whether personal or professional. Familiarity with such officers and
personnel that will give rise to an appearance of impropriety, influence or favor shall be
avoided. (13.01a)22 A lawyer shall not make claims of power, influence, or relationship
with any officer of a court, tribunal, or other government agency. (n)

● According to Canon 13 of the old CPR: 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.

● Section 15 is based on Rule 13.01 of the old CPR which proves, A lawyer shall
not extend extraordinary attention or hospitality to, nor seek opportunity for
cultivating familiarity with Judges. Giving gifts to judges is discouraged since it
tends to give an appearance of influencing. Lawyers should avoid discussing
cases with judges privately.

● Section 15 of the CPRA requires lawyers to observe propriety in their dealings

with officers and personnel of any court, tribunal, or government agency, both
personally and professionally.

● Lawyers must avoid any familiarity with these officers and personnel that may
give rise to an appearance of impropriety, influence, or favor. One explicitly given
by the law as an example is the giving of gifts, which is discouraged for its
tendency to give the appearance of influencing.

● Moreover, lawyers are prohibited from making claims of power, influence, or

relationship with any officer of the court, tribunal, or government agency.

● Influence peddling - An act showing in any that you have connection and that you
can influence a tribunal or official. The purpose is to enhance your standing, so
that the client will have confidence in your assurance of victory.

SECTION 16. Duty to report life-threatening situations. — A lawyer who has reasonable
ground to believe that a life-threatening situation is likely to develop in relation to any
proceeding in any court, tribunal, or other government agency shall immediately report
the same to the proper authorities. (n)

● Section 16 requires a lawyer to report to the proper authorities if they have

reasonable grounds to believe that a life-threatening situation is likely to develop
in relation to any proceeding in any court, tribunal, or other government agency.
 ● This is a duty that a lawyer must fulfill promptly to prevent any harm that could
arise from such situations.

SECTION 17. Non-solicitation and impermissible advertisement. — A lawyer shall not,

directly or indirectly, solicit, or appear to solicit, legal business. (2.03a)23 A lawyer shall
not, directly or indirectly, advertise legal services on any platform or media except with
the use of dignified, verifiable, and factual information, including biographical data,
contact details, fields of practice, services offered, and the like, so as to allow a potential
client to make an informed choice. In no case shall the permissible advertisement be
self-laudatory. (n)24 A lawyer, law firm, or any of their representatives shall not pay or
give any benefit or consideration to any media practitioner or personality in anticipation
of, or in return for, publicity, in mass media, whether traditional or electronic, including
mainstream, alternative, and social media, to attract legal representation, service or
retainership. (3.04a)25

● SECTION 17 of the CPRA prohibits lawyers from directly or indirectly soliciting

legal business.

● This is based on Rule 2.03 of the old CPR which provides, A lawyer shall not do
or permit to be done any act designed primarily to solicit legal business.

● It is considered highly unethical for a lawyer to promote their legal services like a
merchant because the practice of law is a profession that holds a high level of
respect, rather than a commercial enterprise. If a lawyer wishes to advertise their
services, they must do so in a manner that reflects their professionalism. They
are not allowed to actively seek out clients for the purpose of making a profit,
either by themselves or through paid intermediaries.

● When is solicitation of legal business permissible?

○ If made in a modest or moderate and decorous manner

○ If made by use of simple signs, stating name, office and address

● When is advertisement in the newspaper permissible?

○ If it is not self-praising

○ If it does not have “free legal advice” in promoting the business

● Advertisement in radio programs is not permitted. UNLESS, if it is for public

service.

● In Re: Sycip, 92 SCRA 1 - What are the primary characteristics which distinguish
the legal profession from a business?
 ○ A duty of public service which emolument is a by-product, and in which
one may attain the highest eminence without making much money

○ A relation as officer of the court to the administration of justice involving

thorough sincerity, integrity, and reliability

○ A relation to client in the highest degree fiduciary

○ A relation to the colleagues characterized by candor, fairness and

unwillingness to resort to current business methods of advertising and
encroachment on their practice, or dealing directly with their clients.

● Lawyers are prohibited from advertising their legal services on any platform or
media except with the use of dignified, verifiable, and factual information.
Lawyers, law firms, or any of their representatives shall not pay or give any
benefit or consideration to any media practitioner or personality to attract legal
representation, service or retainership.

● Ulep v. Legal Clinic Inc. - There are certain permissible forms of advertising by
lawyers, including:

○ Publication in reputable law lists, use of ordinary professional business

cards,

○ Announcements of specialization and availability of service in a legal

journal for lawyers,

○ Seeking appointment to a public office requiring lawyers,

○ Offering free legal service to indigents through radio broadcasts or printed

matter, announcement of opening of a law firm,

○ Changes of personnel, firm name or office address, and

○ Listings in a telephone directory.

● The best form of advertising for a lawyer is a well-merited reputation for

professional capacity and fidelity to trust, which must be earned as an
outcome of character and conduct.

● In a Bar 2017 question, No. 16, a calling card, 2 inches x 2 inches in size,
bearing the attorney's name in bold print, office, residence and email addresses,
telephone and facsimile numbers, is ethical. A business card, 3 inches x 4 inches
in size, indicating the aforementioned data with the lawyer's 1 inch x 1 inch
photograph, is unethical. The same press release made in a tabloid by the
 attorney's client is ethical, unless it was permitted by the lawyer. A small
announcement that the attorney is giving free legal advice on a specific date
published in a tabloid is unethical.

● SECTION 17 of the CPRA contains rules for lawyers on non-solicitation and

permissible advertising. Under Section 17, a lawyer cannot directly or indirectly
solicit legal business or use self-laudatory information to advertise their services.

● This is based on Rule 3.01 of the old CPR which prohibits the use of false,
fraudulent, misleading, or undignified claims regarding a lawyer's qualifications or
legal services.

● A lawyer shall not use or permit the use of any self-laudatory statement or claim
regarding his qualifications. However, certain information may be disseminated,
such as election to a public office, scholastic honors and achievements, and legal
authorship. But they cannot announce the successful results they have obtained.

● In addition, Rule 3.04 states that a lawyer cannot give anything of value to
representatives of the mass media in anticipation of, or in return for, publicity to
attract legal business.

● In a hypothetical scenario involving Atty. Katarungan and media personality Gosh

Gavel Kush, Atty. Katarungan did not violate the Code of Professional
Responsibility when he gave Gosh Gavel Kush a box of expensive wine as a
sign of gratitude because it was not given in anticipation of, or in return for,
publicity to attract legal business.

SECTION 18. Sub-judice rule. — A lawyer shall not use any forum or medium to
comment or publicize opinion pertaining to a pending proceeding before any court,
tribunal, or other government agency that may:

1. Cause a pre-judgment, or sway public perception so as to impede, obstruct, or

influence the decision of such court, tribunal, or other government agency, or
which tends to tarnish the court’s or tribunal’s integrity, or

2. Impute improper motives against any of its members, or

3. Commit any act that would create a widespread perception of guilt or innocence
before a final decision is rendered. (13.02a)26

● SECTION 18 discusses the sub judice rule which is a principle that restricts
comments and disclosures regarding pending judicial proceedings.
● This section is based on Rule 13.02 of the CPR which provides, A lawyer shall
not make public statements in the media regarding a pending case tending to
arouse public opinion for or against a party.

● It aims to prevent:

○ pre-judging the issue

○ influencing the court

○ obstructing the administration of justice (Calida v. Sereno, A.M.

18-06-01-SC, 2018)

● Elements:

○ Utterances IN PUBLIC

○ About the pending case

○ Tends to arouse public perception for or against one of the parties

● The rule applies to litigants and witnesses, the public in general, and most
especially to members of the Bar and the Bench. (Calida v. Sereno, A.M.
18-06-01-SC, 2018)

● It finds support in the provision on indirect contempt under Section 3, Rule 71 of

the Rules of Court. (Calida v. Sereno, A.M. 18-06-01-SC, 2018)

● Actions in violation of the sub judice rule may be dealt with not only through
contempt proceedings but also through administrative actions. This is because a
lawyer’s speech is subject to greater regulation for two significant reasons:
(1) the lawyer’s relationship to the judicial process; (2) the significant
dangers that a lawyer’s speech poses to the trial process. (Calida v. Sereno,
A.M. 18-06-01-SC, 2018)

● The principle of open justice, referring to the right of the public to scrutinize or
criticize courts and court proceedings, must be balanced with the need to
maintain the independence and integrity of the Judiciary.

● Therefore, the sub judice rule must be strictly observed by lawyers to avoid
compromising the nobility and honor of the legal profession. The Supreme Court
has the plenary power to discipline erring lawyers through this kind of
proceeding, aimed to purge the law profession of unworthy members of the Bar
(Calida v. Sereno, A.M. 18-06-01-SC, 2018)
 ● A lawyer who violates the sub judice rule may face disbarment proceedings for
violation of the Code of Professional Responsibility (CPR) and the New Code of
Judicial Conduct for the Philippine Judiciary (NCJC). (Calida v. Sereno, A.M.
18-06-01-SC, 2018)

SECTION 19. Prohibition against self-promotion. - A lawyer shall not make public
appearances and statements on behalf of the client for the purpose of self-promotion,
self-aggrandizement, or to seek public sympathy. (n)

● Section 19 of the CPRA prohibits lawyers from making public appearances and
statements on behalf of their clients for the purpose of self-promotion,
self-aggrandizement, or seeking public sympathy.

● The purpose of this rule is to maintain the dignity of the legal profession and
prevent lawyers from engaging in conduct that could compromise their duty to act
in their client's best interests.

● Lawyers should avoid using their client's case as an opportunity to promote their
own interests, as this could undermine their client's interests and the integrity of
the legal system.

● Lawyers should always put their client's interests ahead of their own and avoid
any behavior that could be perceived as self-promoting.

● This provision helps ensure that the legal profession remains focused on the
pursuit of justice and the protection of individual rights, rather than personal gain
or self-promotion.

SECTION 20. Disclosure of relationship or connection. — A lawyer shall, at the first

available opportunity, formally disclose on record the lawyer’s relationship or connection
with the presiding officer of any court, tribunal, or other government agency, or any of its
personnel, or the lawyer’s partners, associates, or clients, that may serve as a ground
for mandatory or voluntary inhibition in any pending proceeding before such court,
tribunal, or other government agency. (n)

● Section 20 of the CPRA states that a lawyer must disclose on record the lawyer's
relationship or connection with the presiding officer of any court, tribunal, or other
government agency, or any of its personnel, or the lawyer's partners, associates,
or clients, that may serve as a ground for mandatory or voluntary inhibition in any
pending proceeding before such court, tribunal, or other government agency.

● This disclosure must be made at the first available opportunity. The purpose of
this rule is to ensure transparency and fairness in the legal proceedings and to
avoid any appearance of impropriety or bias.
SECTION 21. Prohibition against gift-giving and donations. — A lawyer shall not directly
or indirectly give gifts, donations, contributions of any value or sort, on any occasion, to
any court, tribunal or government agency, or any of its officers and personnel. (n)

● Section 21 of the CPRA prohibits lawyers from directly or indirectly giving gifts,
donations, or contributions of any value or sort to any court, tribunal, or
government agency, or any of its officers and personnel.

● This is to prevent any appearance of impropriety or influence peddling that may

affect the impartiality of the court or government agency.

SECTION 22. No undue advantage of ignorance of the law. — A lawyer shall not take
advantage of a non-lawyer’s lack of education or knowledge of the law. (n)

● Section 22 of the CPRA provides that a lawyer shall not take advantage of a
non-lawyer's lack of education or knowledge of the law.

● This means that a lawyer must not use a non-lawyer's ignorance of the law to
gain an unfair advantage, such as by misleading or deceiving them or taking
advantage of their lack of legal knowledge in negotiations or transactions.

● A lawyer has a duty to act with integrity and honesty towards all persons,
whether they are lawyers or non-lawyers.

SECTION 23. Instituting multiple cases; forum shopping. — A lawyer shall not
knowingly engage in forum shopping, which offends against the administration of
justice, and is a falsehood foisted upon the court, tribunal, or other government agency.
(12.02a)27

● Section 23 of the CPRA sets forth the prohibition against forum shopping. Forum
shopping is the practice of filing multiple cases involving the same issues,
parties, and causes of action in different courts or agencies to increase the
chances of a favorable outcome or to obtain multiple awards of relief.

● Forum shopping is considered a form of misconduct and a violation of the

administration of justice because it unduly burdens the court system and wastes
the time, effort, and resources of the parties and the court.

● Lawyers are prohibited from engaging in forum shopping because it is a

falsehood foisted upon the court, tribunal, or other government agency. The
prohibition applies to both knowing and unknowing engagement in forum
shopping. Lawyers are also prohibited from instituting multiple cases to gain
leverage in a case, to harass a party, to delay the proceedings, or to increase the
cost of litigation.
● Lawyers who engage in forum shopping may be sanctioned by the court, tribunal,
or other government agency. Sanctions may include the dismissal of the case or
cases, the imposition of fines, the suspension or revocation of the lawyer's
license to practice law, and the imposition of administrative, civil, or criminal
liability. Therefore, lawyers should always exercise due diligence and prudence in
the filing of cases to avoid forum shopping and other forms of misconduct.

● This is based on Rule 12.02 of the old CPR which states that, “A lawyer shall not
file multiple actions arising from the same case”

● Forum shopping has the following elements, (1) the institution of 2 or more
actions, (2) with the same parties, (3) with the same cause of action, (4) on the
supposition that one or the other would make a favorable disposition.

● As established in the case of Puerto Azul Land, Inc. and Ternate Utilities, Inc. vs.
Export Industry Bank, Inc. on March 20, 2017, forum shopping refers to a
litigant's repetitive use of different judicial remedies in various courts, either
simultaneously or successively, all based on the same transactions, essential
facts, and circumstances, and all raising the same issues, to increase the
chances of obtaining a favorable decision in one court if not in another. The
following elements are needed to prove forum shopping: (a) the identity of parties
or parties that represent the same interests in both actions; (b) the identity of
rights asserted and relief requested, with the relief founded on the same facts; (c)
the identity of the preceding elements, such that any judgment made in the other
action will, regardless of the successful party, amount to res judicata in the action
under consideration.

● Forum shopping can be done in three ways:

○ Filing multiple cases with the same cause of action and prayer, while the
previous case has not been resolved yet. This makes the cases
vulnerable to dismissal based on the principle of litis pendentia (a situation
where two actions are pending between the same parties for the same
cause of action, so that one of them becomes unnecessary and
vexatious).

○ Filing multiple cases with the same cause of action and prayer, but the
previous case has been finally resolved. This makes the subsequent case
vulnerable to dismissal based on the principle of res judicata (a matter
finally decided on its merits by a court having competent jurisdiction and
not subject to litigation again between the same parties).
 ○ Filing multiple cases with the same cause of action but with different
prayers, which is equivalent to splitting the causes of action. This makes
the cases susceptible to dismissal on the grounds of either litis pendentia
or res judicata. (De Karaan v. Atty. Aguinaldo, G.R. No. 182151, 2015)

■ There is a main relief. And then you will split it with your incidental
relief. Incidental reliefs are what happened because of the main
relief.

● Example: Main relief: Specific performance. Incidental relief:

Damages.

● The Certificate of Non-forum Shopping is:

○ I. Required in initiatory pleadings, which includes complaints and other

pleadings that assert a claim for relief. It also applies to cross-claims, third
party complaints, complaints-in-intervention, petitions, or any application
where a party asserts a claim. However, it does not apply to compulsory
counterclaims because it cannot be a subject of a separate adjudication.

○ II. The Certificate is a sworn statement certifying that

■ No claim involving the same issues has been filed in any court or
quasi-judicial agency,

■ To the best of his knowledge there is no action or claim pending in

any court tribunal or quasi-judicial agency; and

■ If the party learns of such an action, they must report it within five
days.

○ III. Effect of failure to comply with the certificate

■ Not curable by mere amendment. It shall cause for the dismissal of

the action WITHOUT prejudice unless otherwise provided.

■ Dismissal cannot be done by the court motu propio (without an

official request from another party).

■ It is not appealable, because an order dismissing it is without

prejudice.

○ IV. Effect of submission of a false certification or non-compliance with any

of the undertaking

■ It will constitute INDIRECT contempt of court

 ■ Without prejudice to corresponding administrative and criminal
actions.

○ V. Willful and deliberate forum shopping

■ A ground for summary dismissal

■ The dismissal is WITH prejudice and

■ Shall constitute direct contempt.

● Phil. Pharmawealth v. Pfizer, G.R. No. 167715, 2010 - if a party engages in forum
shopping, and it is not intentional or done with bad faith, the subsequent case will
be dismissed without prejudice, based on the principles of either litis pendentia or
res judicata. However, if the forum shopping is done willfully and deliberately, all
actions related to the matter will be dismissed with prejudice.

● IMPORTANT: There is a cause of action if:

○ The plaintiff has a legal right

○ The defendant has an legal obligation to the plaintiff

○ There must be a breach of the obligation

● REMEMBER: No demand, No delay. No demand, or delay, no cause of action.

SECTION 24. Encroaching or interfering in another lawyer’s engagement; exception. —

A lawyer shall not, directly or indirectly, encroach upon or interfere in the professional
engagement of another lawyer. This includes a lawyer’s attempt to communicate,
negotiate or deal with the person represented by another lawyer on any matter, whether
pending or not in any court, tribunal, body, or agency, except when initiated by the client
or with the knowledge of the original lawyer. A lawyer, however, may give proper advice
and assistance to anyone seeking relief against perceived unfaithful or neglectful
counsel based on the Code. (8.02a)28 If a person is represented by counsel in respect
of a matter, whether pending or not in any court, tribunal, body, or agency, a lawyer
must not attempt to communicate, or deal with the person on the matter, or attempt to
negotiate or compromise directly or indirectly with the person. (n)

● Section 24 of the CPRA prohibits lawyers from encroaching on or interfering with

the professional engagement of another lawyer. This means that a lawyer cannot
attempt to communicate, negotiate, or deal with the person represented by
another lawyer on any matter, whether it is pending or not in any court, tribunal,
body, or agency, except when initiated by the client or with the knowledge of the
original lawyer. However, a lawyer may give proper advice and assistance to
 anyone seeking relief against perceived unfaithful or neglectful counsel based on
the Code.

● The purpose of this rule is to maintain the integrity of the legal profession and to
prevent lawyers from engaging in unethical conduct that would undermine the
trust and confidence of the public in the legal system. Lawyers must act with
honesty and integrity at all times, and they should not engage in conduct that
could harm the interests of their clients or other parties involved in legal
proceedings.

● This section is based on Rule 8.02 of the old CPR which provides, “A lawyer
shall not, directly or indirectly, encroach upon the right of any lawyer, without fear
of favor, to give proper advice and assistance to those seeking relief against
unfaithful or neglectful counsel.”

● Angeli to Cabalida vs. Atty. Solomon A. Lobrido, Jr. and Atty. Danny Pondevilla,
A.C. No. 7972, October 3, 2018 - Atty. Pondevilla was found to have violated
Canon 8.02 of the Code of Professional Responsibility when he negotiated with a
client of another lawyer without consulting that lawyer. The canon states that
lawyers should not interfere with the professional employment of other lawyers,
but they have the right to give proper advice and assistance to clients seeking
relief against unfaithful or neglectful counsel. Atty. Pondevilla's actions were
deemed an inexcusable violation of professional ethics and disregard for his duty
to a colleague. As a result, he was suspended from practicing law for six months,
in accordance with established jurisprudence. This case serves as an example of
the consequences that lawyers may face for violating the ethical standards of
their profession.

SECTION 25. Responsibility of a solo practitioner. — A lawyer in solo practice shall

ensure that all matters requiring his or her professional skill and judgment are promptly
and competently addressed. (n)

● Section 25 of the CPRA sets out the responsibility of a solo practitioner.

● It requires a lawyer who practices alone to ensure that all matters requiring his or
her professional skill and judgment are promptly and competently addressed.

● This means that the lawyer must personally attend to all legal matters entrusted
to him or her and ensure that they are handled with the necessary skill and
competence.

● A solo practitioner should not take on more work than he or she can handle or
delegate tasks to others without proper supervision.
 ● This rule underscores the importance of a lawyer's duty to provide quality legal
services to clients regardless of the size of the law practice.

● By upholding this standard of competence, a solo practitioner can maintain the

public's trust in the legal profession and ensure that justice is served.

SECTION 26. Definition of a law firm; choice of firm name. — A law firm is any private
office, partnership, or association, exclusively composed of a lawyer or lawyers
engaged to practice law, and who hold themselves out as such to the public. In the
choice of a firm name, no false, misleading or assumed name shall be used. The
continued use of the name of a deceased, incapacitated, or retired partner is
permissible provided that the firm indicates in all its communications that said partner is
deceased, incapacitated, or retired. (3.02a)29

● Section 26 of the CPRA defines a law firm as a private office, partnership, or

association that is exclusively made up of lawyers who practice law and hold
themselves out as such to the public.

● When choosing a name for the firm, the use of false, misleading, or assumed
names is prohibited.

● The name of a deceased, incapacitated, or retired partner may be used in the

firm name as long as the firm makes it clear in all of its communications that the
partner is no longer active in the firm.

● This rule is meant to prevent misleading the public into thinking that the retired,
incapacitated, or deceased partner is still practicing law or a part of the firm. It is
a crucial aspect of maintaining professional and ethical standards in the practice
of law.

● Par. 2 of Section 26 is based Rule 3.02 which provides, “In choice of firm name,
no false, misleading or assumed name shall be used. The continued use of the
name of a deceased partner is permissible provided that the firm indicates in all
its communications that the said partner is deceased. Death of a partner does
not extinguish the client-lawyer relationship with the law firm”

SECTION 27. Partner who assumes public office. — Where a partner assumes public
office, such partner’s name shall be removed from the firm name. Such partner shall
withdraw from the firm, unless allowed by law to practice law concurrently. (3.03a)30

● Section 27 of the CPRA addresses the situation where a partner in a law firm
assumes public office. The provision requires that in such cases, the partner's
name shall be removed from the firm name. Additionally, the partner must
 withdraw from the firm unless allowed by law to practice law concurrently with
holding public office.

● The rationale behind this rule is to prevent the potential conflict of interest that
could arise when a lawyer holds public office and continues to be associated with
a law firm. It is essential to maintain the integrity and independence of the legal
profession and avoid any perception of impropriety or conflicts of interest.

● Therefore, if a lawyer in a law firm assumes public office, the law firm must
remove their name from the firm name, and the lawyer must withdraw from the
firm, unless they are allowed by law to practice law concurrently with holding
public office. This rule ensures that the lawyer's obligations to the public are not
compromised by their affiliation with a private law firm.

● This section is based on Rule 3.03 of the old CPR which provides, “Where a
partner accepts public office, he shall withdraw from the firm and his name shall
be dropped from the firm name unless the law allows him to practice law
currently.”

● Section 27 of the Code of Professional Responsibility states that if a partner

assumes a public office, their name shall be removed from the firm name, and
they shall withdraw from the firm, unless allowed by law to practice law
concurrently. In a given example, Atty. Thor has become a senator, Atty. Taylor a
councilor, and Atty. Fudge a judge. Atty. Taylor can represent the congressman in
the rape case as councilors are allowed to practice law, subject to certain
restrictions, but not in cases related to the government office. Atty. Thor cannot
personally appear in court to represent the congressman, as senators are not
allowed to do so. Atty. Fudge, being a judge, is absolutely prohibited from
practicing law during their incumbency and cannot represent the congressman.

● Regarding the firm name, the names of councilor Taylor and Senator Thor need
not be dropped from the law firm's name as they are allowed by law to practice
law concurrently, subject to restrictions. However, the name of Judge Fudge must
be removed from the law firm's name as judges are absolutely prohibited from
practicing law during their incumbency, and Rule 3.03 of the Code of
Professional Responsibility requires that the name of a partner who accepts
public office be dropped from the firm name, unless allowed to practice law
concurrently by law.

● Sanggunian members and senators are allowed by law to practice law

concurrently during their incumbency, with certain restrictions. Therefore, their
names need not be dropped from the law firm's name. However, judges and
officials or employees of superior courts are absolutely prohibited from practicing
 law during their incumbency. Hence, Judge Fudge's name should be dropped
from the law firm's name, as required by Rule 3.03 of the Code of Professional
Responsibility.

SECTION 28. Dignified government service. Lawyers in government service shall

observe the standard of conduct under this Code, the Code of Conduct and Ethical
Standards for Public Officials and Employees, and other related laws and issuances in
the performance of their duties. Any violation of the Code by lawyers in government
service shall be subject to disciplinary action, separate and distinct from liability under
pertinent laws or rules. (6a)31

● Section 28 of the CPRA sets the standard of conduct for lawyers who are serving
in the government. This provision requires lawyers in government service to
observe not only the standards of the Code of Professional Responsibility, but
also the Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards for Public Officials and
Employees, and other related laws and issuances in the performance of their
duties.

● It is essential for lawyers in government service to adhere to the ethical

standards set forth in the CPRA to maintain the integrity of the legal profession
and to ensure that they fulfill their duties and responsibilities as public servants.
This provision emphasizes that any violation of the Code by lawyers in
government service shall be subject to disciplinary action, separate and distinct
from liability under pertinent laws or rules.

● The provision promotes the importance of dignified government service and

ethical conduct of lawyers serving in the government. It ensures that the lawyers
maintain their professional conduct and uphold the rule of law in the performance
of their duties as public servants. It also reminds them of their accountability to
the public and the legal profession, especially when serving the government.

● This section is based on Canon 6 of the old CPR which provides, “These Canons
shall apply to lawyers in government service in discharger of their official task”

SECTION 29. No financial interest in transactions; no gifts. — A lawyer in government

shall not, directly or indirectly, have financial interest in any transaction requiring the
approval of his or her office. Neither shall such lawyer solicit gifts or receive anything of
value in relation to any matter pending in such office. (n)

● Section 29 of the CPRA prohibits lawyers in government from having any

financial interest, directly or indirectly, in any transaction that requires the
approval of their office. This means that government lawyers must not have any
 personal stake or interest in transactions that are related to their official duties,
and they should not benefit from such transactions.

● Furthermore, government lawyers are also prohibited from soliciting or receiving

gifts or anything of value in relation to any matter pending in their office. This is to
prevent any conflict of interest and to ensure that the decisions made by the
government lawyer are not influenced by personal considerations or favors.

● Violations of this section can result in disciplinary action against the government
lawyer, separate and distinct from any liability that may arise from other laws or
rules.

● Overall, this section aims to maintain the integrity and impartiality of lawyers in
government service, and to ensure that they perform their duties with utmost
professionalism and independence.

SECTION 30. Lawyers formerly in government service. — A lawyer who has left
government service shall not engage in private practice pertaining to any matter before
the office where he or she used to be connected within a period of one (1) year from his
or her separation from such office. Such lawyer shall not appear before any court,
tribunal, or other government agency within the territorial jurisdiction or station where he
or she previously served. (n) After leaving government service, a lawyer shall not accept
an engagement to use knowledge or information acquired during such service or to
otherwise influence the outcome of the proceedings which the lawyer handled or
intervened in, or over which the lawyer previously exercised authority, while in said
service. (6.03a)32

● Section 30 of the CPRA sets forth the rules that lawyers who have previously
served in government must follow. Specifically, a lawyer who has left government
service may not engage in private practice with respect to any matter that was
pending in the office to which the lawyer was connected for a period of one year
following his or her separation from the office. In addition, such a lawyer may not
appear before any court, tribunal, or government agency within the territorial
jurisdiction where he or she previously served.

● Moreover, the lawyer who has left government service is prohibited from using
knowledge or information acquired during the course of his or her employment or
to influence the outcome of proceedings in which the lawyer previously handled
or intervened, or over which the lawyer previously exercised authority while in
government service. This rule ensures that the lawyer does not use his or her
previous position to gain an unfair advantage or to compromise the integrity of
the legal profession.
● The restriction on engaging in private practice and appearing before certain
courts and agencies is intended to prevent any appearance of impropriety or
conflict of interest that may arise from the lawyer's previous position in
government. These restrictions also serve to protect the confidentiality of
information that the lawyer may have acquired while in government service.

● This section is based on Rule 6.03 of the old CPR which states, “A lawyer shall
not, after leaving government service, accept engagement or employment in
connection with any matter in which he had intervened while in said service.”

● PNB v. Cedo, Adm. Case No. 3710, 1995 - In this case, it is stated that a lawyer
who holds a government position such as a congressman or an assistant
vice-president in a GOCC bank cannot accept any position or represent any
party in a matter related to the same office or government agency after their term
or resignation. This is to ensure that lawyers do not use their previous positions
and information acquired from such positions to gain an unfair advantage or
influence the outcome of the proceedings in their favor.

● People of the Philippines vs. Aurora Tatac, et al., A.C. No. 8911, July 8, 2019 -
Rule 6.03 prohibits lawyers from accepting employment in connection with any
matter in which they had intervened while in government service. The reason for
this prohibition is that lawyers who have previously held a government position
with power to influence the outcome of a proceeding are at an undue advantage
over other private lawyers due to their access to confidential information and
government resources related to the matter. This rule is in place to prevent these
lawyers from exploiting their previous position for their own benefit when they
move to private practice. In the case of Olazo v. Tinga, the court held that the rule
applies to lawyers who have exercised their power to influence the outcome of
proceedings while in government service and have subsequently accepted
employment in a matter related to their previous position. The rationale behind
the rule is to prevent any temptation of exploitation of the information, contacts,
and influence garnered while in service.

● People of the Philippines vs. Aurora Tatac, et al., A.C. No. 8911, July 8, 2019 - In
the context of Rule 6.03 of the Code of Professional Responsibility (CPR), the
word "intervened" means that a person has performed an act that gives them the
power to influence the outcome of a legal proceeding. The act of intervention
must be significant and not insubstantial, and it must be related to the matter in
which the person seeks to engage or be employed. Merely participating in a
proceeding, even if the intervention is irrelevant or has little to no influence, does
not fall within the scope of the term "intervened." The prohibition under Rule 6.03
is intended to prevent lawyers who have held positions in government service
 from exploiting their access to confidential information, contacts, and influence
acquired while in public office for their private gain once they leave government
service.

● Wilfredo Catu v. Atty. Vicente G. Rellosa, A.C. No.5738, 2008 - In this case, it
was held that Rule 6.03 of the Code of Professional Responsibility only applies to
lawyers who have left government service and pertains to their engagement in
matters in which they had intervened while in said service. Therefore, the
respondent, who was an incumbent punong barangay at the time he committed
the act complained of, cannot be held liable for violating the said rule. The ruling
was based on the interpretation of the Supreme Court in PCGG vs.
Sandiganbayan, which clarified that the provision only applies to former
government lawyers.

● Section 7 of R.A. No. 6713 sets forth the prohibited acts and transactions of
public officials and employees in the Philippines. Specifically, Section 7(b)(2)
prohibits public officials from engaging in the private practice of their profession
during their incumbency, except in cases where it is authorized by law or the
Constitution and does not conflict with their official functions. The prohibition
continues for one year after the official's resignation, retirement, or separation
from public office, but can be lifted for private practice within that year provided
that it does not involve a matter before the official's previous office. For court
employees, Section 5, Canon 3 of the Code of Conduct for Court Personnel also
sets guidelines on outside employment. The Section 7 prohibitions aim to uphold
public trust and prevent impropriety in government transactions, as well as
promote efficient use of office hours for public service. (Query of Atty. Karen M.
Silverio-Buffe, former Clerk of Court, Branch 1, Romblon, Romblon, A.M.
08-6-352-RTC, 2009)

● An incumbent court official or court employee may undertake outside

employment, subject to certain requirements. These requirements include
obtaining permission from the head of the office, ensuring that the outside
employment does not conflict with the personnel's official duties, is performed
outside of normal working hours, and does not involve practicing law or
disclosing confidential information. Additionally, the outside employment must not
be with a person or entity that practices law before the courts or conducts
business with the Judiciary, or with the legislative or executive branch of
government unless specifically authorized by the Supreme Court. However, court
personnel may provide services as a professor, lecturer, or resource person in
law schools, review or continuing education centers, or similar institutions.
(Query of Atty. Karen M. Silverio-Buffe, former Clerk of Court, Branch 1,
Romblon, Romblon, A.M. 08-6-352-RTC, 2009)
 ● Query of Atty. Karen M. Silverio-Buffe, former Clerk of Court, Branch 1, Romblon,
Romblon, A.M. 08-6-352-RTC, 2009 - When a conflict of interest exists or may
appear to exist or when the outside employment may reflect adversely on the
integrity of the Judiciary, the court personnel cannot accept outside employment.
Both RA No. 6713 and Canon 3 of the Code of Conduct for Court Personnel
covers the practice of law, which includes any activity that requires the
application of law, legal procedure, knowledge, training, and experience. The
provisions aim to prevent conflicts of interest by employees who may use
confidential information acquired from their employment or their familiarity with
court personnel still with the previous office. After separation from service,
Section 5, Canon 3 of the Code of Conduct for Court Personnel ceases to apply
specifically to incumbents, but Section 7 and its subsection (b)(2) of R.A. No.
6713 continues to apply to the extent discussed. Atty. Buffe's situation, as a
former Clerk of Court in Romblon, Romblon, falls under Section 7.

● The practice of the profession of elective local government officials is governed

by Section 90 of R.A. No. 7160, and not by Section 7(b)(2) of R.A. No. 6713
which applies to all public officials and employees. Section 90 of R.A. No. 7160
prohibits governors, city and municipal mayors from practicing their profession or
engaging in any occupation other than the exercise of their functions as local
chief executives. Sanggunian members may practice their professions, engage in
any occupation, or teach in schools except during session hours, subject to
certain limitations. Doctors of medicine may practice their profession only on
occasions of emergency, and the officials concerned should not derive monetary
compensation therefrom. (Wilfredo Catu v. Atty. Vicente G. Rellosa, A.C.
No.5738, 2008)

SECTION 31. Non-disclosure of legal consultation. — A lawyer shall not reveal that he
or she has been consulted about a particular case except to avoid possible conflict of
interest. (21.07a)73

● Based on Rule 21.07 - A lawyer shall not reveal that he has been consulted
about a particular case except to avoid possible conflict of interest.
● This provision states that a lawyer is prohibited from disclosing that he or she has
been consulted about a particular case, unless it is necessary to do so in order to
avoid a possible conflict of interest. This means that a lawyer has a duty to keep
confidential any information that a client may share with him or her during a legal
consultation.
● The reason for this rule is to protect the privacy and confidentiality of the client,
which is an essential part of the lawyer-client relationship. Clients must be able to
trust their lawyers with their personal and sensitive information, and this trust is
vital to the success of the legal representation.
 ● Furthermore, this provision serves to prevent lawyers from using the information
they obtain from consultations to gain an unfair advantage over their clients or
opposing parties. By keeping consultations confidential, lawyers can ensure that
they are not inadvertently disclosing sensitive information to unauthorized
individuals.
● It is important to note that this rule applies not only to the lawyer but also to the
lawyer's staff, associates, and other individuals working with the lawyer. Any
unauthorized disclosure of information obtained during a consultation can result
in disciplinary action for the lawyer.
● This is an important ethical rule that promotes the privacy and confidentiality of
clients, helps prevent conflicts of interest, and ensures the integrity of the
lawyer-client relationship.

SECTION 32. Foreign lawyers. — Foreign lawyers can not, directly or indirectly, practice
law in the Philippines. (n)

SECTION 33. Active participation in the development of the legal profession. — A

lawyer shall participate in the development of the legal system by initiating or supporting
efforts in law reform, the improvement of the administration of justice, strengthening the
judicial and legal system, and advocacies in areas of special concern like the
environment, indigenous peoples’ rights, human rights, and access to justice. (4a)74

● This provision highlights the duty of lawyers to actively participate in the

development of the legal profession and the legal system in general. The
provision encourages lawyers to initiate or support efforts in law reform, the
improvement of the administration of justice, and the strengthening of the judicial
and legal system.

● The provision also recognizes the importance of advocacy in areas of special

concern, such as the environment, indigenous peoples' rights, human rights, and
access to justice. This means that lawyers have a responsibility to use their legal
expertise to advocate for and support causes that are important to them and to
society.

● The provision is based on Canon 4 of the old CPR, which provides that "a lawyer
shall participate in the development of the legal system by initiating or supporting
efforts in law reform and in the improvement of the administration of justice."

● However, the current provision expands on this duty and recognizes the
importance of advocacy in specific areas of concern.

● By actively participating in the development of the legal profession and the legal
system, lawyers can help ensure that the law is just, equitable, and accessible to
 all. This duty reflects the broader role that lawyers play in society as advocates,
leaders, and agents of change.

● This is an important ethical rule that highlights the duty of lawyers to participate in
the development of the legal profession and the legal system, and to advocate
for causes that are important to them and to society.

SECTION 34. Limited Legal Services. — Limited Legal Services means advice or
appearance before a court, tribunal, or other government agency for a specific incident
in a proceeding with the expectation by the lawyer and the client that the lawyer will not
provide continuing legal services in the matter. This includes being appointed as
counsel de officio only for arraignment purposes or special appearances to make any
court submission, to give advice, to draft legal documents, to provide legal assistance
before administrative bodies, and the like.

● This is based on the Federation of Law Societies of Canada, Model of

Professional Conduct (hereafter, “Canada Rules”), Rule 3.4-2A. In rules 3.4-2B to
3.4-2D “Short- term summary legal services” means advice or representation to a
client under the auspices of a pro bono or not-for-profit legal services provider
with the expectation by the lawyer and the client that the lawyer will not provide
continuing legal services in the matter.

● This provision defines what is meant by "Limited Legal Services," which refers to
the provision of legal advice or representation before a court, tribunal, or
government agency for a specific incident in a proceeding. The lawyer and the
client both expect that the lawyer will not provide continuing legal services in the
matter.

● The provision provides examples of limited legal services, which include being
appointed as counsel de officio only for arraignment purposes or special
appearances to make any court submission, to give advice, to draft legal
documents, and to provide legal assistance before administrative bodies.

● This provision is based on the Federation of Law Societies of Canada, Model of

Professional Conduct, which also recognizes the concept of "Short-term
summary legal services." These services refer to advice or representation
provided to a client under the auspices of a pro bono or not-for-profit legal
services provider. The lawyer and the client both expect that the lawyer will not
provide continuing legal services in the matter.

● The provision is important because it recognizes that not all legal services
require ongoing representation or a long-term commitment from a lawyer. It also
acknowledges that lawyers can provide valuable services to clients even in
 limited circumstances, such as by providing advice or representation for a
specific incident in a proceeding.

● Moreover, the provision recognizes the importance of providing legal assistance

to those who may not otherwise have access to legal representation, including
through pro bono or not-for-profit legal services providers. This helps to ensure
that everyone has access to legal services, regardless of their financial means.

● This provision is an important ethical rule that recognizes the concept of limited
legal services and the value that lawyers can provide in these circumstances. It
also acknowledges the importance of providing legal assistance to those who
may not have access to legal representation, including through pro bono or
not-for-profit legal services providers.

SECTION 35. Pro bono Limited Legal Services. — A lawyer appointed by the court as
counsel de officio shall not refuse to render Limited Legal Services pro bono on the
ground of conflict of interest. Instead, the lawyer shall disclose to all affected parties
such conflict of interest. (n) If either party objects by reason of the conflict of interest
disclosed by the lawyer, or in any other instance where pro bono Limited Legal Services
are sought of a lawyer, the lawyer may not refuse to render pro bono legal services to
the person concerned if only to the extent necessary to safeguard the latter’s
fundamental rights and not to deprive such person of remedies available under the law
or rules. (2.02a)76 A government lawyer currently serving in the government shall not
be exempt from pro bono service and may be appointed by any court, tribunal, or other
government agency as counsel de officio, unless prohibited by law or applicable Civil
Service rules and regulations. (n)

● Paragraph 2 of this section is based on Rule 2.02 which proves, “In such cases,
even if the lawyer does not accept a case. He shall not refuse to render legal
service to the person concerned if only to the extent necessary to safeguard the
latter’s right.” And the RULES OF COURT, rule 138, sec. 31. Attorneys for
destitute litigants. — A court may assign an attorney to render professional aid
free of charge to any party in a case, if upon investigation it appears that the
party is destitute and unable to employ an attorney, and that the services of
counsel are necessary to secure the ends of justice and to protect the rights of
the party. It shall be the duty of the attorney so assigned to render the required
service, unless he is excused therefrom by the court for sufficient cause shown.

● This section provides that a lawyer appointed by the court as counsel de officio
must not refuse to render limited legal services pro bono (i.e., for free) on the
ground of conflict of interest. Instead, the lawyer must disclose such conflict of
interest to all affected parties. If either party objects to the conflict of interest
 disclosed by the lawyer, or in any other instance where pro bono limited legal
services are sought of a lawyer, the lawyer may not refuse to render pro bono
legal services to the person concerned if only to the extent necessary to
safeguard the latter's fundamental rights and not to deprive such person of
remedies available under the law or rules.

● This section also provides that a government lawyer currently serving in the
government shall not be exempt from pro bono service and may be appointed by
any court, tribunal, or other government agency as counsel de officio, unless
prohibited by law or applicable Civil Service rules and regulations.

● The provision in Paragraph 2 of this section is based on Rule 2.02 of the Code of
Professional Responsibility, which provides that even if a lawyer does not accept
a case, he or she shall not refuse to render legal service to the person concerned
if only to the extent necessary to safeguard the latter's right.

● This provision is also consistent with the Rules of Court, Rule 138, Section 31,
which allows a court to assign an attorney to render professional aid free of
charge to any party in a case, if upon investigation it appears that the party is
destitute and unable to employ an attorney, and that the services of counsel are
necessary to secure the ends of justice and to protect the rights of the party. It
shall be the duty of the attorney so assigned to render the required service,
unless he or she is excused therefrom by the court for sufficient cause shown.

● Overall, this provision in the Code of Professional Responsibility highlights the

importance of pro bono legal service and the duty of lawyers to provide such
services, especially in situations where the parties involved may not have access
to legal representation. The provision also ensures that government lawyers are
not exempt from pro bono service and can be appointed as counsel de officio in
cases where necessary.

SECTION 36. Duty of confidentiality in Limited Legal Services. — A lawyer who

provides Limited Legal Services must protect the client’s private confidences to the
same extent as if engaged under regular terms.77 (n)

● This is based on Canada Rules, Rule 3.4-2D. A lawyer who provides short-term
summary legal services must take reasonable measures to ensure that no
disclosure of the client’s confidential information is made to another lawyer in the
lawyer’s firm.
SECTION 37. Termination of Limited Legal Services. — A lawyer must cease to provide
limited legal services to a client when the lawyer becomes aware that there may be an
actual or potential conflict of interest, except with the written informed consent of the
client.78

● This is based on Canada Rules, Rule 3.4-2C. Except with consent of the clients
as provided in rule 3.4-2, a lawyer must not provide, or must cease providing
short- term summary legal services to a client where the lawyer knows or
becomes aware that there is a conflict of interest.

SECTION 38. Limited Legal Services of law student practitioners. — The Limited Legal
Services rendered by a law student practitioner under the Clinical Legal Education
Program shall be governed by this Code. (n)

● Eligibility Requirement of Law Student Practitioners

● Governed by the Revised Law Student Practice Rule (A.M. No. 19-03-24-SC)

○ Rule:

■ No law student shall be permitted to engage in any of the activities

under the Clinical Legal Education Program of a law school unless
the law student has applied for and secured the following
certifications:

● Level 1 certification, for law students who have successfully

completed their first-year law courses; and/or

● Level 2 certification, for law students currently enrolled for

the second semester for their third-year law courses.

■ Provided however, where a student fails to complete all their

third-year law courses, the Level 2 certification shall be deemed
automatically revoked.

■ The certification issued shall be valid until the student has

completed the required number of courses in the clinical legal
education program to complete the law degree, unless sooner
revoked for grounds stated herein (Sec 3)
 ■ The basic distinction between the two levels involves the minimum
academic requirements the law student has successfully
completed.

● Level 1 certification - first year law courses

● Level 2 certification - third year law courses.

○ Practice Areas of Law Student Practitioners

○ The practice area of the certified law student practitioners, subject to the
supervision and approval of a supervising lawyer, are:

■ For Level 1 Certification:

● Interview prospective clients

● Give legal advice to the client

● Negotiate for and behalf of the client

○ Draft legal documents such as affidavits, compromise

agreements, contracts, demand letter, position papers
and the like.

● Represent eligible parties before quasi-judicial or

administrative bodies

● Provide public legal orientations

● Assist in public interest advocacies for policy formulation and

implementation

■ For Level 2 Certification

● Perform all the activities under Level 1 Certification

● Assist in taking dispositions and/or preparing judicial

affidavits of witnesses

● Appear in behalf of the client at any stage of the proceedings

or trial, before any court, quasi-judicial or administrative
body;
 ● In criminal cases, subject to the provisions of Section 5, Rule
110 of the Rules of Court, to appear on behalf of a
government agency in the prosecution of criminal actions

● In appealed cases, to prepare the pleadings required in the

case (Sec 4)

○ Certification Application Requirements

■ Duly accomplished application form (under oath) in three (3) copies

■ Accompanied by proof of payment of the necessary legal and filing

fees

■ The law school, through the dean or authorized representative,

shall submit to the Office of the Executive Judge of the Regional
Trial Court (RTC) having jurisdiction over the territory where the law
school is located, the duly accomplished application form together
with an endorsement letter under oath.

○ Validity of the Certification

■ In level 1 certification, the Executive Judge of the RTC shall

evaluate, approve and issue their certification within ten (10) days
from receipt of the application. It shall be valid before all courts,
quasi judicial and administrative bodies within the judicial region
where the law school is located (Sec 5)

■ In level 2 certification, within 10 (days) from the receipt of the

application, the Executive Judge of the RTC shall:

● Evaluate the application

● Recommend to the Office of the Court Administrator (OCA)

the approval and issuance of the certification

■ If the Executive Judge finds the application to be incomplete. The

law school shall be notified and required to comply with the
requirements within five (5) days from receipt of the notice. It shall
be valid before all courts, quasi-judicial and administrative bodies
(Sec 5)
○ Duties of Law Student Practitioners and Supervising Lawyers

■ Duties of Law Student Practitioners:

● Observe the provision of Section 24(b), Rule 130 of the

Rules of Court
(b) An attorney cannot, without the consent of his client, be
examined as to any communication made by the client to
him, or his advice given thereon in the course of, or with a
view to, professional employment, nor can an attorney's
secretary, stenographer, or clerk be examined, without the
consent of the client and his employer, concerning any fact
the knowledge of which has been acquired in such capacity;

● Be prohibited from using information acquired in the one’s

capacity as a law student practitioner for personal or
commercial gain

● Perform duties and responsibilities to the best of one’s

abilities as a law student practitioner

● Strictly observe the Canons of the Code of Professional

Responsibility and Accountability

■ Duties of the Law School:

● Develop and adopt a Clinical Legal Education Program

● Develop and establish at least one law clinic in its school

● Endorse qualified students for certification as law student

practitioners under this Rule. Such endorsement shall
constitute a certification that the dean or authorized
representative knows that the applicant is enrolled in the
Clinical Legal Education course, possesses good moral
character and has met the requirements under Section 3

● Ensure compliance by law student practitioners and

supervising lawyers with the Code of Professional
Responsibility (Sec 9)
 ■ Duty of supervising lawyers

● Supervise such number of certified law student practitioners

as far as practicable

● Personally appear with the law student practitioner in all

cases pending before second-level courts and in all other
cases the supervising lawyer determines that his or her
presence is required.

● Assume personal professional responsibility for any work

performed by the certified law student practitioner while
under his or her supervision.

● Assist and advise the certified law student practitioner in the

activities authorized by these rules review such activities with
the certified law student practitioner, a;; to the extent
required for the proper practical training for the certified law
student practitioner and the protection of the client.

● Read, approve, and personally sign any pleadings, briefs, or

other similar documents, prepared by the certified law
student practitioner prior to the filing thereof, and read and
approve any documents which shall be prepared by the
certified law student practitioner for execution by the eligible
party.

● Provide the level of supervision to the certified law student

practitioner required by these rules.

○ Use of Law student practitioner’s name

■ A law student practitioner may sign briefs, pleadings, letters, and

other similar documents which the student has produced under the
direction of the supervising lawyer, indicating the law student
practitioner’s certificate number as required. (Sec. 7).

○ Law student practitioner’s Oath/Affirmation

 ■ A law student who has been issued a certificate, before performing
the activities allowed, must take an oath (Sec 8)

○ Acts considered as unauthorized practice of law

■ Engaging in any of the acts provided in Section 4 of this Rule

without the consent and supervision of the supervising lawyer

■ Making false representations in the application for certification

■ Using expired certification to engage in the limited practice of law

under this Rule

■ Rendering legal services outside the scope of the practice areas

allowed under Section 4 of this Rule.

■ Asking for or receiving payment or compensation for services

rendered under the Clinical Legal Education Program as provided
in this Rule

■ Such other analogous circumstances

■ Unauthorized practice of law shall be a ground for the revocation

of the law student practitioner’s certification and/or disqualification
for a law student in taking the bar examination for a period to be
determined by the Supreme Court. (Sec. 13)

SECTION 39. Accountability of legal clinic director and supervising lawyer. — A law
student clinic director and supervising lawyer, under Rule 138-A of the Rules of Court
shall provide meaningful training to law students. They shall assume responsibility for
any work performed by the law student while under their supervision and shall comply
with all the laws, rules and guidelines pertaining to Law Student Practice.79 (n)

● This is based on the Canada Model, 6.2-2.

SECTION 40. Fair and reasonable fees. — A lawyer shall charge only fair and
reasonable fees. (20)80 Attorney’s fees shall be deemed fair and reasonable if
determined based on the following factors:

1. the time spent and the extent of the service rendered or required;

2. the novelty and difficulty of the questions involved;

3. The skill or expertise of the lawyer, including the level of study and experience
required for the engagement;

4. The probability of losing other engagements

5. as a result of acceptance of the case;

6. The customary charges for similar services and the recommended schedule of
fees, which the IBP chapter shall provide;81

7. The quantitative or qualitative value of the client’s interest in the engagement, or

the benefits resulting to the client from the service;

8. The contingency or certainty of compensation; and

9. The character of the engagement, whether limited, seasonal, or otherwise.

(20.01a)82

● This is based on Canon 20 of the CPR which states that, “A lawyer shall charge
only fair and reasonable prices.” And Rule 20.1 of the CPR which states that A
lawyer shall be guided by the following factors in determining his fees:

○ the time spent and the extent of the service rendered or required;

○ the novelty and difficulty of the questions involved;

○ The importance of the subject matter;

○ The skill demanded;

○ The probability of losing other employment as a result of acceptance of

the proffered case;

○ The customary charges for similar services and the schedule of fees of the
IBP chapter to which he belongs;
● The section requires lawyers to charge only fair and reasonable fees for their
services, and provides a list of factors to consider when determining such fees.

● The factors listed include the time spent on the case, the complexity of the legal
issues involved, the skill and experience of the lawyer, the likelihood of losing
other clients or engagements as a result of taking on the case, the customary
charges for similar services, and the recommended schedule of fees provided by
the Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP) chapter to which the lawyer belongs.

● In addition, the value of the client's interest in the case and the contingency or
certainty of compensation are also relevant factors to consider. The character of
the engagement, such as whether it is limited or seasonal, should also be taken
into account.

● Overall, the goal of this provision is to ensure that lawyers charge fees that are
reasonable and commensurate with the services provided, while also taking into
account the specific circumstances of the case and the client's needs. By
following these guidelines, lawyers can maintain their professional integrity and
promote the public's trust in the legal profession.

● Rule 138, Section 24, of the Rules of Court - Outlines the general principle that
an attorney is entitled to receive only a reasonable compensation for the legal
services he has rendered to his client, taking into consideration several factors
such as the subject matter of the controversy, the extent of services rendered,
and the professional standing of the attorney. It also specifies that no court is
bound by the opinion of attorneys as expert witnesses as to the proper
compensation, but may use its own professional knowledge to make its
determination. Furthermore, the rule states that a written contract between the
attorney and the client will govern the amount to be paid for legal services,
unless the court finds it to be unconscionable or unreasonable. This means that a
written agreement, as long as it is not contrary to law, public policy, good morals,
or good customs, will be honored and given effect, and the attorney's fees will be
determined based on the terms of the agreement. If there is no written
agreement, the attorney's fees will be determined on the basis of quantum
meruit, which means "as much as he deserved."

● Factors in determining attorney’s fees:the court shall order the return of

the acceptance fees where the lawyer had been negligent in the handling of
his client’s case - Jocelyn Ignacio vs. Atty. Daniel T. Alviar, A.C. No. 11482, July
17, 2017 - Discusses the issue of determining attorney's fees when the lawyer
has been negligent in handling the client's case. The court may order the return
of acceptance fees in such cases, and the principle of quantum meruit (as much
 as he deserves) can be used to determine a reasonable amount of attorney's
fees. Other factors to consider include the time spent, the difficulty of the legal
issues involved, the importance of the subject matter, the skill required, the
probability of losing other clients, the customary charges for similar services, the
value of the client's interest in the case, the contingency or certainty of
compensation, the character of the engagement, and the lawyer's professional
standing. In a specific case mentioned, the lawyer was only allowed a reasonable
compensation of P3,000, and the remainder of the acceptance fee was ordered
to be returned to the client.

● The Two Concepts of Attorney’s Fees

○ Ordinary - Reasonable compensation paid to the lawyer for legal services

rendered.

○ Extraordinary - Indemnity for damages ordered by the court to be paid by

the losing party to the prevailing party.

● Concept of attorney’s fees: ordinary and extraordinary, distinguished -

Joselito A. Alva us. High Capacity Security Force, Inc. and Armando M.
Villanueva, G.R. No. 203328, November 8, 2017 - Discusses the two commonly
accepted concepts of attorney's fees: ordinary and extraordinary. In the ordinary
concept, attorney's fees refer to the reasonable compensation that a client pays
to their lawyer in exchange for the legal services rendered. The cost and results
of the legal services are usually agreed upon by the parties or assessed by the
courts. In the extraordinary concept, attorney's fees are treated as an indemnity
for damages and are ordered by the court to be paid by the losing party to the
winning party.

● Attorney’s fees; proper in labor cases where the employee was forced to
litigate to protect his rights and interests - Phil-Man Marine Agency, Inc., and
Doble [IOM) Limited vs. Aniano P. Dedace, G.R. No. 199162, July 4, 2018 -
Attorney's fees can be classified into two kinds: ordinary and extraordinary. The
ordinary kind refers to reasonable compensation paid by a client to their lawyer
for legal services rendered, while extraordinary attorney's fees refer to indemnity
for damages ordered by the court to be paid by the losing party to the winning
party in a litigation. Article 2208 of the Civil Code enumerates the instances
where extraordinary attorney's fees may be awarded, and it is payable to the
client unless they have agreed that the award shall pertain to the lawyer as
additional compensation or as part thereof. Article 111 of the Labor Code
specifically pertains to cases of unlawful withholding of wages, but the award of
attorney's fees in labor cases is not limited to those expressly covered by the
 said article. In labor cases, attorney's fees may also be awarded if the employee
was forced to litigate to protect their rights and interests.

● In labor cases, attorney’s fees partake of the nature of an extraordinary

award granted to the victorious party of an indemnity for damages; award
sanctioned in cases of unlawful withholding of wages - Joselito A. Alva vs.
High Capacity Security Force, Inc. and Armando M. Villanueva, G.R. No. 203328,
November 8, 2017 - In labor cases, attorney's fees are considered an
extraordinary award given to the successful party as indemnity for damages. As
a general rule, attorney's fees are payable to the client, not the lawyer, unless the
client has agreed to give the amount to the lawyer as additional compensation.
The Labor Code allows the award of attorney's fees in cases of unlawful
withholding of wages, with the culpable party being assessed attorney's fees
equal to 10% of the amount of wages recovered. Attorney's fees may also be
recovered in other instances, such as where the defendant's act or omission has
compelled the plaintiff to litigate, actions for the recovery of wages of household
helpers and skilled workers, indemnity under workmen's compensation and
employer's liability laws, and where the court deems it just and equitable that
attorney's fees and expenses of litigation should be recovered. In labor cases,
attorney's fees have been awarded to illegally dismissed employees who had to
file an action to recover their lawful wages, which were withheld by the employer
without any valid basis. The withholding of wages need not be coupled with
malice or bad faith to warrant the grant of attorney's fees under Article 111 of the
Labor Code; it is enough that the lawful wages were not paid without justification,
thereby compelling the employee to litigate.

● Bar 2016, No. 15

○ Atty. Alex entered into an agreement for his legal services with Johnny
where it is provided that the latter will pay him Pl00,000.00 as an
acceptance fee and Pl00,000.00 upon submission of the case for decision.
The court granted Johnny moral damages, exemplary damages and
attorney's fees of Pl00,000.00. After execution of judgment, Atty. Alex kept
the Pl00,000.00 as his attorney's fees. Johnny sued Atty. Alex for violation
of the CPR claiming that the attorney's fees awarded by the court belongs
to him. Decide the case with reasons.

● SUGGESTED ANSWER:

○ I will rule in favor of Johnny. The Pl00,000.00 awarded to him and moral
damages, exemplary damages and attorney's fees, are items of damages
which are due to him as plaintiff in the case. Attorney's fees awarded to a
 party pursuant to Article 2208 of the New Civil Code constitute
extraordinary attorney's fees which belong to the client, not to the lawyer.
It is not the ordinary attorney's fees which is the compensation due from a
client to his lawyer.

● The availment of legal services does not foreclose an award of attorneys

fees. Joselito A. Alva vs. High Capacity Security Force, Inc. and Armando M.
Villanueva, G.R. No. 203328, November 8, 2017 - In this case, the Court of
Appeals (CA) wrongly deleted the award of attorney's fees to the employee
represented by the Public Attorney's Office (PAO) because attorney's fees
partake of an indemnity for damages awarded to the employee, and there is
nothing that prevents the employee and the PAO from entering into an
agreement assigning attorney's fees in favor of the latter. In 2007, Congress
passed R.A. No. 9406, which allows the PAO to receive attorney's fees, which
shall constitute a trust fund to be used for the special allowances of their officials
and lawyers. In a previous case, the Supreme Court ruled that employees
represented by the PAO are entitled to attorney's fees, and the amount awarded
shall be given to the PAO as a token recompense for their provision of free legal
services to litigants who have no means of hiring a private lawyer.

● Attorney’s fee and acceptance fee; distinguished - Jocelyn Ignacio vs. Atty.
Daniel T. Alviar, A.C. No. 11482, July 17, 2017 - In this case, the issue is the
restitution of the acceptance fee and attorney's fee paid to the lawyer. The court
explained the difference between an attorney's fee and an acceptance fee, with
the former referring to reasonable compensation for legal services rendered and
the latter compensating the lawyer for the lost opportunity to handle cases of the
opposing party. The court noted that the complainant immediately paid the sums
of P20,000, P30,000, and P50,000, which undoubtedly pertained to the
respondent's acceptance fee. Therefore, the court ordered the respondent to
return the acceptance fee to the complainant.

● Retaining Fee - Fee to insure and secure the lawyer’s future services

● Kinds of retainer agreements on attorney’s fees

○ General Retainer - Paid to the lawyer as general counsel for any ordinary
legal problem

○ Special Retainer - Fee for a specific case

● Retainer or written agreement between attorney and the client; execution of

a written agreement on the scope of services offered by the lawyer to
his/her client is recommended to avoid baseless demands from the client -
 Celiana B. Buntag, Flora Arbilera, Vetaliano Bongo, Sebastian Bongo, Petronilo
Bongo, Leo Bongo, and Raul Iman us. Atty. Wilfredo S. Toledo, A.C. No. 12125,
February 11, 2019 - In this case where a lawyer was accused of demanding
money from indigent clients, it was noted that a written agreement or retainer
between a lawyer and a client is important to govern the relationship and list the
scope of services to be provided. This is because without a written agreement, it
would be difficult to ascertain what the parties committed to, which could lead to
misunderstandings and baseless demands. If a written agreement had been
executed, issues regarding the lawyer's fees and expenses incurred during the
trial would not have arisen, as both parties would have known their obligations
under the agreement. The lawyer was directed to henceforth execute written
agreements with all of his clients, including those whose cases he handles pro
bono, to prevent a similar predicament from happening in the future.

● Quantum Meruit - Attorney’s fees based on quantum meruit, meaning, as much

as he has deserved, allowed when:

○ No express contract for payment of attorney’s fees;

○ Although there is a contract, fees are unconscionable;

○ If the contract is void;

○ Due to justifiable cause, attorney cannot finish the case;

○ When the lawyer and the client disregard the contract.

● Absent an express agreement between an attorney and his client, quantum

meruit is used as basis for determining an attorney’s professional fees,
factors to consider - National Power Corporation vs. Fraulein Cabanban
Cabanag and Jesus T. Panal, G.R. No. 194529, August 6, 2019 - In the absence
of an express agreement between a lawyer and client, quantum meruit is used as
the basis for determining the lawyer's professional fees. To determine a
reasonable compensation for the services rendered, the court may consider
factors such as the time spent, extent of services rendered, novelty and difficulty
of questions involved, importance of subject matter, skill demanded, probability of
losing other employment, customary charges for similar services, amount
involved in controversy, benefits resulting to the client, certainty of compensation,
character of employment, and professional standing of the attorney. In this case,
Atty. Cornelio represented the respondents from the time when the case was in
the CSC until the filing of the petition for review on certiorari in the Supreme
Court. Based on the time and skill lent by him in defending Panal's cause, and
taking guidance from Article 111 of the Labor Code which limits the recovery of
 attorney's fees in illegal dismissal situations to 10% of the amounts recovered by
the client, the court deemed it proper to accord Atty. Cornelio a charging lien of
10% of the amounts that would be awarded in favor of Panal.

● Every attorney is entitled to receive reasonable compensation for services

performed pursuant to a valid agreement; in the absence of an agreement,
the compensation shall be based on quantum meruit; quantum meruit,
defined - Ramon R. Villarama vs. Atty. Clodualdo C. De Jesus, G.R. No. 217004,
April 17, 2017 - This is a case about attorney's fees where the court determined
that an attorney is entitled to just and reasonable compensation for services
performed at the request of the client. The attorney's compensation is determined
based on what the attorney and client agreed upon in a valid agreement. In the
absence of a written agreement, the attorney's fees shall be based on quantum
meruit, meaning "as much as he deserves." Quantum meruit is used as a basis
for determining an attorney's professional fees in the absence of an express
agreement. An attorney must show that he is entitled to reasonable
compensation for the effort in pursuing the client's cause, taking into account
certain factors in fixing the amount of legal fees. It also serves as a device that
prevents an unscrupulous client from running away with the fruits of the legal
services of counsel without paying for it and also avoids unjust enrichment on the
part of the attorney himself.

● In the absence of written agreement, the lawyer’s compensation shall be

based on quantum meruit; rationale - Nenita D. Sanchez vs. Atty. Romeo
Aguilos, A.C. No. 10543, March 16, 2016 - The attorney's fees shall be based on
the agreement between the client and the attorney, and the client must be given
reasonable notice of the arrangement on the fees. The rationale is that the
retainer's agreement between the client and the attorney outlines the
arrangement on the fees and gives the client reasonable notice of the agreed
compensation. Once the attorney has performed the task assigned to him in a
valid agreement, his compensation is determined on the basis of what he and the
client agreed. In cases where there is no written agreement between the attorney
and the client, the lawyer's compensation shall be based on quantum meruit,
which means "as much as he deserved." This refers to a reasonable fee for
services rendered that is determined by the court. The determination of attorney's
fees on the basis of quantum meruit is also authorized "when the counsel, for
justifiable cause, was not able to finish the case to its conclusion" or "where the
circumstances of the engagement indicate that it will be contrary to the parties'
expectation to deprive the attorney of all compensation." The court shall
determine in every case what is reasonable compensation based on the
obtaining circumstances, provided that the attorney does not receive more than
 what is reasonable, in keeping with Section 24 of Rule 138 of the Rules of Court.
The court's supervision of the lawyer's compensation for legal services rendered
is not only for the purpose of ensuring the reasonableness of the amount of
attorney's fees charged, but also for the purpose of preserving the dignity and
integrity of the legal profession.

● Bar 2016, No. 6

○ The collection suit filed by Atty. Juju claiming attorney's fees for services
rendered for two years will not prosper because the agreement between
him and Andrew was a contingent fee agreement. A contingent fee
agreement is one where the lawyer will be paid only when he is successful
in handling the case of the client. In this case, since Atty. Juju was not
successful in handling Andrew's case, he is not entitled to attorney's fees
under the terms of the contingent fee agreement.

○ Atty. Juju is entitled to attorney's fees based on quantum meruit.

■ Rule: Attorney's fee must be specifically:

● (1) Prayed for, and;

● (2) Proven nnd justified in the decision itself.

■ It is not deemed incorporated in the general prayer "such other

relief and remedy ns this court may deem just and equitable."

SECTION 41. Division of fees upon referral. — A lawyer shall, in case of referral of legal
services in favor of another lawyer with the written informed consent of the client, be
entitled to a division of fees in proportion to the work performed and responsibility
assumed. (20.02a)83 Where a lawyer undertakes to complete unfinished legal business
of a deceased lawyer, a division or sharing of fees is allowed with the deceased
lawyer’s legal heirs or estate. (9.02(b)a)84

● This is based on Rule 20.02 of the CPR which provides, A lawyer shall, in case
of referral, with the consent of the client, be entitled to a division of fees in
proportion to the work performed and responsibility assumed.

● Section 41 of the Code of Professional Responsibility (CPR) allows lawyers to

receive a portion of legal fees when a client is referred to them by another lawyer
with the written informed consent of the client. The division of fees must be in
proportion to the work performed and responsibility assumed. This means that
the referring lawyer and the receiving lawyer should agree on a fair and
 reasonable allocation of the legal fees. Rule 20.02 of the CPR also provides a
similar provision for fee division upon referral, requiring consent from the client
and proportionality of work performed and responsibility assumed. This provision
is aimed at ensuring that lawyers are fairly compensated for their work while also
upholding ethical standards and protecting the interests of clients.

● Underwood vs. Overstreet, 223 SW 152, 10 ALR 1352 - The general rule is when
lawyers represent a shared client and charge a single fee without an explicit
agreement on the distribution of the fee, they will divide the fee equally as they
are considered to be partners with a special purpose.

● Gualberto vs. Cruz, 8 SCRA 826; Pineda, Legal Ethics, 2009 Ed., p. 345 - In
cases where multiple lawyers were involved in a case and there is no clear
agreement on how to divide the fees, the lawyer who handled the majority of the
work and achieved a successful outcome is entitled to the full amount of their
fees, even if the client retained another lawyer as "exclusive" counsel who only
appeared after the favorable judgment was rendered.

● Pineda, Legal Ethics, 2009 Ed., p. 346 - In cases where two or more lawyers are
representing common clients and experience a professional breakup during the
case, the court will determine the amounts by which their attorney's fees will be
shared.

● Compensation to an attorney for merely recommending another lawyer;

improper - Pineda, Legal Ethics, 2009 Ed., p. 347 - The lawyer's fee is for the
legal services they render to their clients. Thus, it is inappropriate for a lawyer to
receive payment for recommending another lawyer to their client without
rendering any legal service. Allowing this practice would lead to the
commercialization of the legal profession and degrade it by recommending
lawyers act like agents for others.

● Attorney’s fees for legal services shared or divided to a non-lawyer;

prohibited - Amalgamated Laborer's Assn. vs. Court of Industrial Relations, 22
SCRA 1266 - Sharing attorney's fees with a non-lawyer, such as a union
president who is not acting as the attorney for the laborers, is considered
immoral and cannot be justified. The union president may seek compensation as
a union president, but not as a fee-sharing partner with the lawyer.

● In Bar 2017, No. 11 (h), Atty. Andy and Atty. Valeriano made an agreement to
refer clients to each other and receive a commission or portion of the attorney's
fees. Atty. Valeriano charged a client P100,000 as initial attorney's fees and sent
P15,000 to Atty. Andy as a referral fee. The agreement on the referral fee is
considered unethical because lawyers are only entitled to a division of fees in
 proportion to the work performed and responsibility assumed, not for simply
recommending another lawyer to a client. This practice is viewed as
commercialism and is discouraged by the Code of Professional Responsibility.

● The second paragraph of Section 41 is based on Rule 9.02 of the CPR which
provides, Rule 9.02 - A lawyer shall not divide or stipulate to divide a fee for legal
services with persons not licensed to practice law, except:

○ Where there is a pre-existing agreement with a partner or associate that,

upon the latter’s death, money shall be paid over a reasonable period of
time to his estate or to persons specified in the agreement; or

○ Where a lawyer undertakes to complete unfinished legal business of a

deceased lawyer; or

○ Where a lawyer or law firm includes non-lawyer employees in a retirement

plan even if the plan is based in whole or in part, on a profit sharing
agreement.

● Bar 2017, No. 7(a)

○ In this scenario, a new lawyer is offered a lucrative opportunity by the

secretary of a big university to serve as the university's notary public.
However, the secretary requests that the lawyer share half of their
earnings throughout the year. The suggested answer is that the lawyer
should not agree to the arrangement because it would violate Rule 9.02 of
the Code of Professional Responsibility, which prohibits lawyers from
dividing fees for legal services with individuals who are not licensed to
practice law. Since the secretary of the university is not licensed to
practice law, the lawyer cannot share their earnings as a notary public with
her.

● Bar 2015, No. 8

○ In this scenario, Engr. Gilbert was promised a commission equivalent to

15% of the attorney's fees that Atty. Jane would receive from the spouses
Maylupa for the institution of an action for partition of an estate. Atty. Jane
failed to pay Engr. Gilbert the promised commission despite receiving
attorney's fees of about P600,000.00. The suggested answer is that Atty.
Jane may not professionally or ethically promise a commission to Engr.
Gilbert. Rule 9.02 of the Code of Professional Responsibility (CPR)
prohibits lawyers from dividing or stipulating to divide a fee for legal
services with individuals who are not authorized to practice law. Engr.
 Gilbert is not authorized to practice law, and therefore, Atty. Jane cannot
validly promise to give him a commission.

SECTION 42. Non-Sharing of fees with non- lawyers. — A lawyer shall not share, split,
or divide or stipulate to divide, directly or indirectly, a fee for legal services with persons
or organizations not licensed or authorized to practice law. (9.02a)85

● Section 42 is also based on Rule 9.02 of the CPR which provides, Rule 9.02 - A
lawyer shall not divide or stipulate to divide a fee for legal services with persons
not licensed to practice law, except:
○ Where there is a pre-existing agreement with a partner or associate that,
upon the latter’s death, money shall be paid over a reasonable period of
time to his estate or to persons specified in the agreement; or
○ Where a lawyer undertakes to complete unfinished legal business of a
deceased lawyer; or
○ Where a lawyer or law firm includes non-lawyer employees in a retirement
plan even if the plan is based in whole or in part, on a profit sharing
agreement.

SECTION 43. Payment of compensation by third party. — A lawyer shall not receive
compensation from anyone other than the client, except upon the authority of such
client. (20.03a)86 Receipt of compensation from someone other than the client must not
interfere with the lawyer’s independence, professional judgment, or the lawyer- client
relationship. Neither should information relating to representation of a client be
disclosed in violation of the rule on privileged communication. (ABA Model Rules, Rule
1.8 - Comment)87

● Section 43 of the Code of Professional Responsibility prohibits lawyers from

receiving compensation from anyone other than the client, except with the client's
authority. This rule is based on Rule 20.03 of the same code, which similarly
prohibits lawyers from accepting any compensation related to their professional
employment from anyone other than the client without the client's full knowledge
and consent.

● The prohibition on receiving compensation from third parties is designed to

protect the lawyer's independence, professional judgment, and the lawyer-client
relationship. It ensures that the lawyer's loyalty and duty of confidentiality remain
with the client and that the lawyer is not influenced by any outside interests.

● The rule also aims to prevent conflicts of interest, as receiving compensation

from third parties may create an obligation or bias towards them that could
conflict with the lawyer's duty to act in the best interests of the client.
● However, the rule does not completely prohibit lawyers from receiving
compensation from third parties. If such compensation is necessary and
authorized by the client, the lawyer may accept it. Nevertheless, the lawyer must
ensure that their independence, professional judgment, and duty of confidentiality
are not compromised, and that the client's interests remain paramount.

● Overall, the rule on payment of compensation by third parties highlights the

importance of maintaining the lawyer's independence and professional judgment,
as well as the lawyer-client relationship, in the practice of law.

● This Section is also based on Rule 1.8 of the ABA Model Rules which
substantially provide:

○ Lawyers should not enter into a business transaction with a client or

acquire any interest that is adverse to the client unless certain conditions
are met, including that the terms are fair and reasonable, the client is
advised in writing of the transaction and given the opportunity to seek
independent legal advice, and the client gives informed consent.

○ Lawyers should not use information they obtain in the course of

representing a client to the disadvantage of that client, except as permitted
or required by the Model Rules.

○ Lawyers should not solicit any substantial gifts from clients or prepare
legal documents that give the lawyer or a related person a substantial gift,
except in certain limited circumstances.

○ Lawyers should not acquire literary or media rights to a portrayal or

account based on information relating to the representation of a client
before the conclusion of the representation.

○ Lawyers should not provide financial assistance to clients in connection

with pending or contemplated litigation, except in certain limited
circumstances.

○ Lawyers should not accept compensation for representing a client from

someone other than the client, unless the client gives informed consent
and there is no interference with the lawyer's independence or the
client-lawyer relationship.

○ Lawyers who represent multiple clients should not participate in making an

aggregate settlement of the clients' claims without each client's informed
consent.
 ○ Lawyers should not make agreements prospectively limiting their liability
to a client for malpractice, except under certain conditions.

○ Lawyers should not acquire a proprietary interest in the cause of action or

subject matter of litigation they are conducting for a client, except in
certain limited circumstances.

○ Lawyers should not have sexual relations with clients, except in certain
limited circumstances.

○ While lawyers are associated in a firm, any prohibitions under these

guidelines that apply to one lawyer apply to all lawyers in the firm.

SECTION 44. Prompt payment of legal fees. — A lawyer is entitled to prompt payment
from the client of attorney’s fees. Absent an express agreement as to professional fees,
a client is obliged to pay reasonable attorney’s fees in accordance with Canon III,
Section 41. (n)

SECTION 45. Controversy over legal fees. — A lawyer shall avoid any controversy with
a client concerning fees for legal services and shall resort to judicial action solely to
prevent imposition, injustice or fraud. (20.04a)88

● This section is based on Rule 20.04 of the CPR which provides, a lawyer shall
avoid controversies with clients concerning his compensation and shall resort to
judicial action only to prevent imposition, injustice or fraud.

● Rule - A lawyer should avoid the filing of any case against the client for
enforcement of his attorney’s fees.

● Except - To prevent imposition, injustice, or fraud.

● The legal profession is not a money-making trade. The rule will prevent the
impression that lawyers are mercenaries.

● Two Options of the Lawyer:

○ Lichauco v. CA 63 SCRA 123 - In the same case, he may enforce his

attorney’s fees by filing an appropriate motion or petition as an incident in
the main action where he rendered legal services.

○ NWSA cs. NWSA Consolidated Union, 164 SCRA 450; Pineda Legal
Ethics, 2009 Ed. p 351 - File a separate civil action.
SECTION 46. Enforcement of attorney’s lien. — In case of non-payment of attorney’s
fees, a lawyer may resort to the enforcement of the attorney’s lien under Canon III,
Section 50,89 by filing a Notice of Enforcement of Attorney’s Lien with the court,
tribunal, or other government agency of origin where the action or proceeding the
lawyer rendered service for is pending, without prejudice to other remedies under the
law or the Rules of Court. The Notice shall be accompanied by proof of the services
rendered, and served on the client. The court, tribunal, or other government agency,
after hearing, shall determine the lawyer’s entitlement to the claimed fees. The
enforcement of an attorney’s lien shall be treated as an independent claim and shall in
no instance delay the resolution of the main case. The resolution of the lawyer’s claim
may be included in the main judgment or in a separate partial judgment. In the case of a
partial judgment, the same shall be subject of appeal. An appeal in the main case shall
not stay the execution of the lawyer’s lien. In the execution of the judgment in the main
case, the court shall give due consideration to the pending claim of the lawyer. If a
decision has been rendered by the court, tribunal, or other government agency of origin
on the action or proceeding, the claim for the enforcement of the lien shall be by an
independent action. (n)

● Section 46 of the CPRA deals with the enforcement of an attorney's lien. An

attorney's lien is a right that an attorney has to retain possession of a client's
funds, documents, and papers until the attorney's fees and disbursements have
been paid.

● If a client fails to pay the attorney's fees, the lawyer may resort to the
enforcement of the attorney's lien by filing a Notice of Enforcement of Attorney's
Lien with the court, tribunal, or other government agency where the action or
proceeding the lawyer rendered services for is pending. The Notice should be
accompanied by proof of the services rendered and served on the client.

● The court, tribunal, or other government agency, after hearing, will determine the
lawyer's entitlement to the claimed fees. The enforcement of an attorney's lien
will be treated as an independent claim and will not delay the resolution of the
main case.

● The resolution of the lawyer's claim may be included in the main judgment or in a
separate partial judgment. If a partial judgment is issued, the same may be
subject to appeal. An appeal in the main case will not stay the execution of the
lawyer's lien.

● If a decision has been rendered by the court, tribunal, or other government

agency on the action or proceeding, the claim for the enforcement of the lien will
be by an independent action.
 ● Additionally, Rule 138, Section 37 of the Rules of Court provides that an attorney
shall have a lien upon the funds, documents, and papers of his client which have
lawfully come into his possession and may retain the same until his lawful fees
and disbursements have been paid. He shall also have a lien to the same extent
upon all judgments for the payment of money, and executions issued in
pursuance of such judgments, which he has secured in a litigation of his client.
This means that the attorney can apply such funds to the satisfaction of his fees
and may have the same right and power over the judgments and executions as
his client would have to enforce his lien and secure the payment of his fees and
disbursements.

SECTION 47. Compensation for counsel de officio. — Subject to availability of funds as

may be provided by the law, the court may, in its discretion, order a lawyer engaged as
counsel de officio to be compensated in such sum as the court may fix following Canon
III, Section 41, provided that it is not covered by the provision on Limited Legal
Services. (Rule 138.32a)90

● Section 47 discusses the compensation for a lawyer who is engaged as a

counsel de officio. A counsel de officio is a lawyer who is appointed by the court
to represent an indigent client who cannot afford to hire a private lawyer. The
court, in its discretion and subject to the availability of funds as provided by law,
may order the counsel de officio to be compensated in such sum as the court
may fix, following the guidelines set forth in Canon III, Section 41. However, this
compensation is not covered by the provision on Limited Legal Services.
● This provision is based on Section 32 of Rule 138 of The Rules of Court which
provides for the compensation for attorneys de officio. The compensation for a
counsel de officio may vary depending on the type of offense or case involved.
The compensation shall not be less than thirty pesos (P30) in any case, and the
maximum amounts are as follows: (1) Fifty pesos (P50) in light felonies; (2) One
hundred pesos (P100) in less grave felonies; (3) Two hundred pesos (P200) in
grave felonies other than capital offenses; and (4) Five Hundred pesos (P500) in
capital offenses.
● It is important to note that the compensation of a counsel de officio is subject to
the availability of funds as provided by law. This means that there may be cases
where the court may not be able to provide compensation to a counsel de officio
due to the lack of funds.
SECTION 48. Termination of engagement by the lawyer. — A lawyer shall withdraw
from the lawyer-client relationship engagement only for good cause and upon written
notice. (22a)91

● This section is based on Canon 22 of the CPR which provides, “CANON 22 - A

LAWYER SHALL WITHDRAW HIS SERVICES ONLY FOR GOOD CAUSE AND
UPON NOTICE APPROPRIATE IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES.”

● General Rule - A lawyer may withdraw from the case “only if it is with the consent
of the client”

● Exceptions

○ If with the approval of the court;

○ With a valid ground (Rule 22.01)

SECTION 49. Termination of engagement by the client. — The lawyer-client

engagement may be terminated by the client at any time upon loss of trust and
confidence. (n) The termination of the engagement shall not relieve the client from full
payment of all professional fees due to the lawyer. If the engagement has been reduced
to writing, the lawyer shall be entitled to recover from the client the full compensation
stipulated unless found by the court to be unconscionable or unreasonable under
Canon III, Section 41 of this Code. (R138.24a)92 For the payment of his compensation
the lawyer shall have a charging lien upon all judgments for the payment of money, and
executions issued in pursuance of such judgment, rendered in the case where the
lawyer’s services had been retained by the client. (R138.26a)93 (n)

● This section is based on Sec. 24, Rule 138 of the Rules of Court which provides,
Compensation of attorneys; agreement as to fees. — An attorney shall be
entitled to have and recover from his client no more than a reasonable
compensation for his services, with a view to the importance of the subject matter
of the controversy, the extent of the services rendered, and the professional
standing of the attorney. No court shall be bound by the opinion of attorneys as
expert witnesses as to the proper compensation but may disregard such
testimony and base its conclusion on its own professional knowledge. A written
contract for services shall control the amount to be paid therefor unless found by
the court to be unconscionable or unreasonable.
● This section is also based on Sec 26, Rule 138 of the Rules of Court which
provides, An attorney may retire at any time from any action or special
proceeding, by the written consent of his client filed in court. He may also retire at
any time from an action or special proceeding, without the consent of his client,
should the court, on notice to the client and attorney, and on hearing, determine
 that he ought to be allowed to retire. In case of substitution, the name of the
attorney newly employed shall be entered on the docket of the court in place of
the former one, and written notice of the change shall be given to the advance
party. A client may at any time dismiss his attorney or substitute another in his
place, but if the contract between client and attorney has been reduced to writing
and the dismissal of the attorney was without justifiable cause, he shall be
entitled to recover from the client the full compensation stipulated in the contract.
However, the attorney may, in the discretion of the court, intervene in the case to
protect his rights. For the payment of his compensation the attorney shall have a
lien upon all judgments for the payment of money, and executions issued in
pursuance of such judgment, rendered in the case wherein his services had been
retained by the client.

SECTION 50. Termination of engagement upon death. — The death of the lawyer or
client shall terminate the lawyer-client engagement. However, when the lawyer is a part
of a law firm, the death of such lawyer shall not extinguish the lawyer-client engagement
between the law firm and the client handled by such lawyer. (n)

RECITATION QUESTIONS:
● Pedro was accused of the crime of murder and was found guilty of homicide. His
counsel Atty. Nestor told him that he will file an appeal before the CA because he
believes that the claim of self-defense of Pedro will be given merit. However,
Pedro explains that he is amenable to the penalty imposed upon him. Despite
opposition, Atty. Nestor went on appeal. CA decided that conviction should be
murder. Pedro hires you to file a disbarment suit against Atty. Nestor. What
Canon will you use?

● A lawyer advertised in the newspaper the following: "Expert in annulment of

marriage. Fast and sure. Consult anytime.” Is the advertisement proper? Explain.

● 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.

● Pending resolution of a high-profile case against him, Justice K uttered, in a

public forum hosted by a local Integrated Bar of the Philippines chapter, his
comments on the perceived bias of the court against him, as well as on the
issues raised by the complainants, his defenses, and the commentaries
published by some local newsmen in relation to the case. This is only one
instance of his many appearances in different gatherings of such nature in order
to defend his public image. (a) Did Justice K, in his capacity as a lawyer, commit
 any violation of the Code of Professional Responsibility? If so, what rule did
Justice K violate? Explain

● Myrna, petitioner in case for custody of children against her husband, sought
advice from Atty. Mendoza whom she met at a party. She informed Atty.
Fernandez that her lawyer, Atty. Khan, has been charging her exorbitant
appearance fees when all he does move for postponements which have unduly
delayed the proceedings; and that recently, she learned that Atty. Khan
approached her husband asking for a huge amount in exchange for the
withdrawal of her Motion for issuance of Hold Departure Order so that he and his
children can leave for abroad. 1. Is it ethical for Atty. Mendoza to advise Myrna to
terminate the services of Atty. Khan and hire him instead for a reasonable
attorney's fees?