Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
Membership in the bar is a privilege burdened with conditions. The law is indeed
a profession dedicated to the ideal of service and not a mere trade.
As a member of the bar and an officer of the Supreme Court, an attorney is duty
bound to uphold its dignity and authority and to defend its integrity, not only
because it has conferred upon him the high privilege, not a right, of being what
he now is: a priest of justice, but also because in so doing he neither creates nor
promotes distrust in the administration of justice, and he prevents anybody from
harboring and encouraging discontent, which in many cases, is the source of
disorder, thus undermining the foundation on which rests the bulwark called
judicial power to which those who are aggrieved turn for protection and relief.
It is right and plausible that an attorney, in defending the cause and rights of his
client, should do so with all the fervor and energy of which he is capable, but it is
not, and will never be so for him to exercise said right by resorting to intimidation
or proceeding without the propriety and respect which the dignity of the courts
require, by reason respect of the courts guarantees the stability of their
institution.
While one who has been admitted to the Sharia bar, and one who has been
admitted to the Philippine bar, may both be considered counselors, in the sense
that they give counsel or advice in a professional capacity, only the latter is an
attorney. The title of attorney is reserved to those who, having obtained the
necessary degree in the study of law and successfully taken the bar
examinations, have been admitted to the integrated bar of the Philippines and
remain members thereof in good standing; and it is they only who are authorized
to practice law in this jurisdiction.
The attorneys roll or register is the official record containing the names and
signatures of those who are authorized to practice law. A lawyer is not authorized
to use a name other than the one inscribed in the Roll of Attorneys in his practice
of law, otherwise, they are guilty of deception and demonstrate lack of candor in
dealing with the courts.
Practice of law in the Philippines includes such appearance before the Patent
Office, the representation of applicants, oppositors, and other persons, and the
prosecution of their applications for patent, their oppositions thereto or the
enforcement of their rights in patent cases. Members of the Philippine Bar
authorized by the Supreme Court to practice law, and in good standing, may
practice their profession before the Patent Office, for the reason that much of the
business in said office involves the interpretation and determination of the scope
and application of the patent law and other laws involved.
Ui vs. Bonifacio
333 SCRA 38; June 8, 2000
The practice of law is a privilege that can be revoked, subject to the mandate of
due process, once a lawyer violates his oath and the dictates of legal ethics.
An applicant must possess good moral character, which is a continuous
requirement to the enjoyment of the privilege of law practice; otherwise, the loss
thereof is a ground for the revocation of such privilege.
A lawyer has a more dynamic and positive role in the community than merely
complying with the minimal technicalities of the statute. As a man of law, he is
necessarily a leader of the community, looked up to as a model citizen; and his
conduct must, perforce, be par excellence, especially so when, as in this case,
he volunteers his professional services.
The deliberate failure to pay just debts and the issuance of worthless checks
constitute gross misconduct, for which a lawyer may be sanctioned with
suspension from the practice of law, because a lawyer is expected to maintain
not only legal proficiency but also a high standard of morality, honesty, integrity
and fair dealing so that the peoples faith and confidence in the judicial system is
ensured.
A lawyers failure to answer the complaint against him and his failure to appear at
the investigation are evidence of his flouting resistance to lawful orders of the
court and illustrate his despiciency for his oath of office in violation of Section 3,
Rule 138 of the Rules of Court.
In cases of Disbarment, The Court will take into consideration the applicants
character and standing prior to the disbarment, the nature and character of the
charge/s for which he was disbarred, his conduct subsequent to the disbarment
and the time that has elapsed in between the disbarment and the application for
reinstatement.
Petitioners act in copying the examination questions from Atty. Balgos computer
without the latters knowledge and consent, and which questions later turned out
to be the bar examinations questions in Mercantile Law in the 2003 Bar
Examinations, is not at all commendable, and should be sanctioned for unduly
compromising the integrity of the bar examinations as well as of the court.
Admission To Practice
In re: Lanuevo
66 SCRA 245; August 29, 1975
It should be stressed that once the bar examiner has submitted the corrected
notebooks to the Bar Confidant, the same cannot be withdrawn for any purpose
whatsoever without prior authority from the Court.
The right to appeal from decisions or final orders of the BOI under E.O. 226
remains and continues to be respected. Circular 1-91 simply transferred the
venue of appeals from decisions of this agency to respondent Court of Appeals
and provided a different period of appeal, i.e., fifteen (15) days from notice.
In re: Cunanan
94 Phil 534; 1954
The distinction between the functions of the legislative and the judicial
departments is that it is the province of the legislature to establish rules that shall
regulate and govern in matters of transactions occurring subsequent to the
legislative action, while the judiciary determines rights and obligations with
reference to transactions that are past or conditions that exist at the time of the
exercise of judicial power, and the distinction is a vital one and not subject to
alteration or change either by legislative action or by judicial decree.
The judiciary cannot consent that its province shall be invaded by either of the
other departments of the government.
The appointment of the two American attorneys is not violative of our national
sovereignty and tt is only fair and proper that the United States, which has
submitted the vindication of crimes against her government and her people to a
tribunal of our nation, should be allowed representation in the trial of those very
crimes.
It appearing that Attys. Hussey and Port are aliens and have not been authorized
by the Supreme Court to practice law, they cannot appear as prosecutors in a
case pending before the War Crimes Commission.
The rule disqualifying a municipal judge from engaging in the practice of law
seeks to avoid the evil of possible use of the power and influence of his office to
affect the outcome of litigation where he is retained as counsel. The practice of
law is not limited to the conduct of cases in court or participation in court
proceedings but also includes preparation of pleadings or papers in anticipation
of litigation, and giving of legal advice to clients or persons needing the same.
The practice of law is not limited to the conduct of cases or litigation in court; it
embraces the preparation of pleadings and other papers incident to actions and
special proceeding, the management of such actions and proceedings on behalf
of clients before judges and courts, and in addition, conveying. The contention
that Atty. Monsod does not posses the required qualification of having engaged
in the practice of law for at least ten years is incorrect since Atty. Monsods past
work experience as a lawyer-economist, a lawyer-manager, a lawyer-
entrepreneur of industry, a lawyer-negotiator of contracts, and a lawyer-legislator
of both rich and the poor verily more than satisfy the constitutional requirement
for the position of COMELEC chairman.
In re: Edillon
84 SCRA 554; 1978
In failing to inform his clients of the decision in the civil case handled by him, the
lawyer failed to exercise such skill, care, and diligence as men of the legal
profession commonly possess and exercise in such matters of professional
employment. The relationship of lawyer-client being one of confidence, there is
ever present the need for the clients being adequately and fully informed and
should not be left in the dark as to the mode and manner in which his interests
are being defended; It is only thus that their faith in counsel may remain
unimpaired.
Section 34, Rule 138 of the Rules of Court, clearly provides that in the municipal
court a party may conduct his litigation in person with the aid of an agent
appointed by him for the purpose. If a non-lawyer can appear as defense counsel
or as friend of the accused in a case before the municipal trial court, with more
reason should he be allowed to appear as private prosecutor under the
supervision and control of the trial fiscal.
Hydro Resources Contractors Corp. vs. Paglilauan
172 SCRA 199; 1989
A lawyer, like any other professional, may very well be an employee of a private
corporation or even of the government. It is not unusual for a big corporation to
hire a staff of lawyers as its in-house counsel, pay them regular salaries, rank
them in its table of organization, and otherwise treat them like its other officers
and employees.
Rada has violated the civil service rule prohibiting government employees from
engaging directly in a private business, vocation or profession or being
connected with any commercial, credit, agricultural or industrial undertaking
without a written permission from the head of the Department, but, indubitably,
his private business connection has not resulted in any prejudice to the
Government service. Thus, his violation of the rulethe lack of prior
permissionis a technical one, and he should be meted no more than the
minimum imposable penalty, which is reprimand.
Respondent Abad should know that the circumstances which he has narrated do
not constitute his admission to the Philippine Bar and the right to practice law
thereafter. He should know that two essential requisites for becoming a lawyer
still had to be performed, namely: his lawyers oath to be administered by this
Court and his signature in the Roll of Attorneys.
One of the indispensable requisites for admission to the Philippine Bar is that the
applicant must be of good moral character. This requirement aims to maintain
and uphold the high moral standards and the dignity of the legal profession, and
one of the ways of achieving this end is to admit to the practice of this noble
profession only those persons who are known to be honest and to possess good
moral character.
Passing the bar examination is not the only qualification to become an attorney-
at-law, taking the prescribed legal courses in a regular manner is also essential.
In re: Argosino
270 SCRA 26; 1997
Every lawyer should at ALL TIMES weigh his actions according to the sworn
promises he makes when taking the lawyers oath. If all lawyers conducted
themselves strictly according to the lawyers oath and the Code of Professional
Responsibility, the administration of justice will undoubtedly be faster, fairer and
easier for everyone concerned.
The lawyers oath imposes upon every lawyer the duty to delay no man for
money or malice. The lawyers oath is a source of obligations and its violation is
a ground for his suspension, disbarment or other disciplinary action.
Lawyers Duties To Society
It is the duty of the lawyer to maintain towards the courts a respectful attitude. As
an officer of the court, it is his duty to uphold the dignity and authority of the court
to which he owes fidelity, according to the oath he has taken.
In re: Guttierrez
5 SCRA 661; 1962
For the admission of a candidate to the bar the Rules of Court not only prescribe
a test of academic preparation but require satisfactory testimonials of good moral
character. These standards are neither dispensed with nor lowered after
admission: the lawyer must continue to adhere to them or else incur the risk of
suspension or removal.
Be that as it may, what is disturbing to the Court is the conduct of her husband,
Eduardo Flaminiano, a lawyer whose actuations as an officer of the court should
be beyond reproach. Under the Code of Professional Responsibility, he is
prohibited from counseling or abetting activities aimed at defiance of the law or at
lessening confidence in the legal system.
Once again, we reiterate that the useful function of a lawyer is not only to
conduct litigation but to avoid it whenever possible by advising settlement or
withholding suit. He is often called upon less for dramatic forensic exploits than
for wise counsel in every phase of life. He should be a mediator for concord and
a conciliator for compromise, rather than a virtuoso of technicality in the conduct
of litigation.
It has been a commendable practice of some members of the bar under such
circumstances, to be designated as counsel de oficio. They manifest fidelity to
the concept that law is a profession and not a mere trade with those engaged in it
being motivated solely by the desire to make money.
It is the bounden duty of counsel as lawyer in active law practice to keep abreast
of decisions of the Supreme Court particularly where issues have been clarified,
consistently reiterated, and published in the advance reports of Supreme Court
decisions (G. R. s) and in such publications as the Supreme Court Reports
Annotated (SCRA) and law journals.
More specifically, a lawyer is obliged to observe the rules of procedure and not to
misuse them to defeat the ends of justice. It behooves a lawyer, therefore, to
exert every effort and consider it his duty to assist in the speedy and efficient
administration of justice
Private prosecutors may appear in criminal cases under the direction and control
of the fiscal and that the provincial fiscal shall represent the province in any
court.
Respondent, in his future actuations as a member of the bar, should refrain from
laying himself open to such doubts and misgivings as to his fitness not only for
the position occupied by him but also for membership in the bar. He is not worthy
of membership in an honorable profession who does not even take care that his
honor remains unsullied.
The Supreme Court stresses the importance of integrity and good moral
character as part of a lawyer's equipment in the practice of his profession. Thus,
acts of deceit and malpractice inexorably diminishes the respect of the litigants
for the profession.
Public confidence in law and lawyers may be eroded by the irresponsible and
improper conduct of a member of the Bar.
A lawyer may be disciplined or suspended for any misconduct, whether in his
professional or private capacity, which shows him to be wanting in moral
character, in honesty, in probity and good demeanor.
A successful Bar examinee, without having signed in the Roll of Attorneys and
had taken the Lawyer's Oath, is also subject to the Codes of Professional Ethics.
A successful Bar examinee, not yet being admitted in the Bar, who holds himself
out as a lawyer by appearing in courts, is engaged in the unauthorized practice of
law.
In re: Parazo
82 Phil 230; 1948
As the conduct of Bar Examinations and the Legal Profession is imbued with
General Interest and National Importance, it is but just that the immunity of
newspapermen be disregarded as to protecting its sources from investigation as
to any anomaly that may be alleged in the conduct of the Bar Examinations.
Being acquitted from a criminal charge will not necessarily result in the dismissal
of the immorality charge against a lawyer; also, the persistent use of another
name not appearing in the Roll of Attorneys suggests lack of candor and respect
for the Court.
A lawyer who fails to communicate with the counsel of the other party of his
intent to negotiate with them is an inexcusable violation of the canons of
professional ethics, whether by design or oversight.
The practice of soliciting cases at law for the purpose of gain, either personally or
through agents or brokers is tantamount to malpractice. It should be kept in mind
that lawyers, subject to the exceptions given by the law, are prohibited from
sharing his legal fees to those who are not in the legal profession.
Practice of law means any activity, in or out of court, which requires the
application of law, legal procedures, knowledge, training and experience. The
practice of giving out legal information constitutes practice of law, and therefore,
may not be done by mere "paralegals" but of lawyers.
Lawyers Duties To Courts
A lawyer is, first and foremost, an officer of the court. His duties to the court are
more significant than those which he owes to his client. His first duty is not to his
client but to the administration of justice; to that end, his client's success is wholly
subordinate; and his conduct ought to and must always be scrupulously
observant of the law and ethics of the profession.
The conduct of the lawyer before the court and with other lawyers should be
characterized by candor and fairness. It is neither candid nor fair for a lawyer to
knowingly make false allegations in a judicial pleading or to misquote the
contents of a document, the testimony of a witness, the argument of opposing
counsel or the contents of a decision.
A lawyer owes honesty and candor to the courts. Courts are entitled to expect
only complete candor and honesty from the lawyers appearing and pleading
before them.
The Court notes with regret that had the counsels, as officers of the courts, but
faithfully complied with their duty to deal with the courts in truth and candor, and
promptly manifested to the appellate court the above developments, all which
have made the principal issue at bar moot and academic, this case would then
have been disposed of and need not have been certified to this Court, and the
time needed by it to devote to the prompt disposition of meritorious cases need
not have been thus dissipated.
A lawyer must do his best to honor his oath, as there would be a great detriment
to, if not a failure of the administration of justice if courts could not rely on the
submissions and representations made by lawyers in the conduct of a case.
COMELEC vs. Noynay
292 SCRA 254; 1992
As an officer of the court, it is his sworn and moral duty to help build and not
destroy unnecessarily the high esteem and regard towards the court so essential
to the proper administration of justice. It is manifest that del Mar has scant
respect for the two highest Courts of the land when on the flimsy ground of
alleged error in deciding a case, he proceeded to challenge the integrity of both
Courts by claiming that they knowingly rendered unjust judgment.
A lawyer is an officer of the courts; he is, like the court itself, an instrument or
agency to advance the ends of justice. His duty is to uphold the dignity and
authority of the courts to which he owes fidelity, not to promote distrust in the
administration of justice.
There was a lapse in judicial propriety by counsel Salvador N. Beltran who did
not even take the trouble of appearing in Court on the very day his own petition
was reset for hearing, a lapse explicable, it may be assumed, by his comparative
inexperience and paucity of practice before this Tribunal. it suffices to call his
attention to such failing by way of guidance for his future actuations as a member
of the bar.
The language of a lawyer, both oral or written, must be respectful and restrained
in keeping with the dignity of the legal profession and with his behavioral attitude
toward his brethren in the profession. Besides, the use of impassioned language
in pleadings, more often than not, creates more heat than light.
Counsel should be reminded of his duty to observe and maintain respect due the
courts of justice and judicial officers. Arguments, written or oral, should be
gracious to both the court and opposing counsel and be of such words as may be
properly addressed by one gentleman to another.
A lawyer owes fidelity to the courts as well as to his clients and that the filing on
behalf of disgruntled litigants of unfounded or frivolous charges against inferior
court judges and the use of offensive and intemperate language as a means of
harassing
Uy vs. Gonzales
A.C. No. 5280; March 30, 2004
When a client employs the services of a law firm, he does not employ the
services of the lawyer who is assigned to personally handle the case, but rather,
he employs the entire law firm.
A lawyer has the right to be paid for the legal services he has extended to his
client, which compensation must be reasonable. A lawyer would be entitled to
receive what he merits for his services. Otherwise stated, the amount must be
determined on a quantum meruit basis.
A person who is made an attorney-in-fact, with the same power and authority to
deal with the property which the principals might or could have had if personally
present, may adopt the usual legal means to accomplish the object, including
acceptance of service and engaging of counsel to preserve the ownership and
possession of the principal's property.
Members of the bar owe fidelity to the courts as well as to their clients and they
must show faithful adherence to the provisions of Rule 7, section 5 that the
signature of an attorney constitutes a certificate by him that he has read the
pleading and that to the best of his knowledge, information and belief, there is
good ground to support it; and that it is not interposed for delay with the
admonition therein that for a willful violation of this rule an attorney may be
subjected to disciplinary action.
All courts are cautioned against the frequent appointment of the same attorney
as counsel de oficio for two basic reasons: first, it is unfair to the attorney
concerned, considering the burden of his regular practice, that he should be
saddled with too many de oficio cases; and, second, the compensation provided
for by section 32 of Rule 138 of the Rules of Court (a fixed fee of P500 in capital
offenses) might be considered by some lawyers as a regular source of income,
something which the Rule does not envision.
The Court clarified that even when "confronted with a situation where one
government office takes an adverse position against another government
agency, the Solicitor General should not refrain from performing his duty as the
lawyer of the government. It is incumbent upon him to present to the court what
he considers would legally uphold the best interest of the government although it
may run counter to a client's position.
Pressure and large volume of legal work provide no excuse for the respondent's
inability to exercise due diligence in the performance of his duty to file an answer.
Every case a lawyer accepts deserves his full attention, diligence, skill, and
competence, regardless of its importance and whether he accepts it for a fee or
for free.
Advocacy, within the bounds of the law, permits the attorney to use any arguable
construction of the law or rules which is favorable to his client.
It is unethical for a lawyer to abuse or wrongfully use the judicial process, like the
filing of dilatory motions, repetitious litigation and frivolous appeals for the sole
purpose of frustrating and delaying the execution of a judgment.
As a Member of the Philippine Bar he (the counsel) is bound: (1) by his oath, not
to, wittingly or willingly, promote or sue any groundless, false, or unlawful suit nor
give aid nor consent to the same; (2) by Section 20(c), Rule 138 of the Rules of
Court, to counsel or maintain such action or proceedings only as appear to him to
be just; and (3) to uphold the Code of Professional Responsibility. It was
incumbent upon him to give a candid and honest opinion on the merits and
probable results of the complainants case with the end in view of promoting
respect for the law and legal processes.
Cosmos Foundry Shop Workers Union vs. Lo Bu
63 SCRA 313; 1975
The conduct of denying the facts alleged in a petition is far from commendable. A
lawyer should not act like an errand boy at the beck and call of his client, ready
and eager to do his every bidding; failure to keep this in mind puts into serious
question his good standing in the bar.
A lawyer owes fidelity to the cause of his client and must be mindful of the trust
and confidence reposed in him. 13He shall serve his client with competence and
diligence, 14 and his duty of entire devotion to his client's cause not only
requires, but entitles him to employ every honorable means to secure for the
client what is justly due him or to present every defense provided by law to
enable the latter's cause to succeed.
The Rules further require in Rule 7 section 5 that "every pleading of a party
represented by an attorney shall be signed by at least one attorney of record in
his individual name" and that "the signature of an attorney constitutes a
certificate by him that he has read the pleading and that to the best of his
knowledge, information and belief, there is good ground to support it; and that it
is not interposed for delay" with the express admonition that "for a willful violation
of this rule, an attorney may be subjected to disciplinary action."
Mere assumptions cannot be the basis of any finding against any member of the
bar who, as an officer of the court, is presumed to act with utmost decorum and
good faith in all his dealings. This presumption in favor of the lawyer cannot be
overcome by mere assumption or imputation without any evidence in support of
the same.
A lawyer has no right to presume that the court would grant his last hour motion
to withdraw as counsel. An attorney seeking to withdraw must make an
application to the court for the relation does not terminate formally until there is a
withdrawal of record.
Cuaresma vs. Daquis
63 SCRA 1157; 1975
An attorney must practice utmost care in the preparation of his pleadings to leave
the least doubt as to his intellectual honesty. Every member of the bar should
realize that candor in the dealings with the Courts is of the very essence of
honorable membership in the profession
The postponement of hearings does not depend upon agreement of the parties,
but upon the court's discretion.
It was the duty of Atty. Ruiz, or of the other lawyers of record, not excluding the
appellant himself, to appear before Judge Fernandez on the scheduled dates of
hearing Parties and their lawyers have no right to presume that their motions for
postponement will be granted.
A client is bound by the conduct, negligence and mistakes of his counsel. Thus,
failure of a lawyer to serve notice on the court and the adverse parties regarding
his client's death binds the heirs as much as the client himself could be so bound.
A lawyer is not justified in assuming that the extension of time sought will be
granted, or that it will be granted for the length of time suggested by him because
it is a familiar doctrine that no party has a right to an extension of time to comply
with an obligation within the period set therefore by law. Therefore, it is
incumbent upon a lawyer to exercise due diligence to inform himself as soon as
possible of the Court's action on his motion, by timely inquiry of the Clerk of
Court, and should he neglect to do so, he runs the risk of time running out on
him, for which he will have nobody but himself to blame.
Both client and counsel must appear for pre-trial. Failure to appear is a ground
for dismissal.
The counsel knows that the period for filing the brief was running, thus the Court
expects that the matter will be taken care of him as he was the counsel of record.
He should have informed the Court of the developments set forth in his
explanation and as that he be allowed to withdraw as counsel.
Only faithful performance by counsel of his duty towards his client can give
meaning and substance to the accused right to due process and to be presumed
innocent until proven otherwise.
The lawyer has the duty to defend his client and protect his rights, n matter how
guilty or evil he perceives him to be.
The attorney-client requires a high degree of fidelity and good faith, designed to
remove all temptation and to prevent everything of that kind from being done for
the clients protection.
Members of the bar are expected to always live up to the standards embodied in
the Code of Professional Responsibility as the relationship between an attorney
and his client is highly fiduciary in nature and demands utmost fidelity and good
faith.
The provision contained in the last paragraph of Article 1459 of the old Civil Code
is made to include lawyers, with respect to any property or rights involved in any
litigation in which they may take party by virtue of their profession and office. A
lawyer does not violate this provision when has not purchased property at a
public or judicial auction and his participation in the auction was in representation
of his client.
The lawyers failure to return money given to him for the filing of a writ of
injunction, gives rise to the presumption that he misappropriated it for his own
use to the prejudice of, and in violation of the trust reposed in him by his client. It
is a gross violation of general morality and of professional ethics and impairs
public confidence in the legal profession, which in this case, deserves
punishment of two years suspension from practice.
The failure of a prosecutor to immediately remit to the SSS the amount given by
the accused as unpaid remittances gives rise to the presumption that he has
misappropriated it for his own use, which a gross violation of general morality as
well as professional ethics. Though not a private lawyer, this rule applies to
lawyers in government service in the discharge of their official tasks, pursuant to
Canon 6 of the Code of Professional Responsibility.
The relation between an attorney and his client is highly fiduciary in nature. Thus,
lawyers are bound to promptly account for money or property received by them
on behalf of their clients and failure to do so constitutes professional misconduct.
Violation of Article 1459 of the Civil Code (a lawyer purchasing property subject
to litigation) constitutes a breach of professional conduct, which merits
suspended from the practice of law for a period of six months.