LEGAL ETHICS AND PRACTICAL EXERCISES

Legal Ethics

FABIE v. REAL A.C. No. 10574 | 20 September 2016

Practice of Law
DOCTRINE: When the integrity of a member of the bar is challenged, he must show proof that he still
maintains that degree of morality and integrity which at all times is expected of him.

"The Court has emphatically stated that when the integrity of a member of the bar is challenged, it is not
enough that [he] denies the charges against him; [he] must meet the issue and overcome the evidence
against [him]. [He] must show proof that [he] still maintains that degree of morality and integrity which
at all times is expected of [him]."

ANACTA v. RESURRECCION A.C. No. 9074 |14 August 2012

Practice of Law
DOCTRINE: One of the qualifications required of a candidate for admission to the bar is the possession of
good moral character.

One of the qualifications required of a candidate for admission to the bar is the possession of good
moral character, and, when one who has already been admitted to the bar clearly shows, by a series of
acts, that he does not follow such moral principles as should govern the conduct of an upright person,
and that, in his dealings with his clients and with the courts, he disregards the rule of professional ethics
required to be observed by every attorney, it is the duty of the court, as guardian of the interests of
society, as well as of the preservation of the ideal standard of professional conduct, to make use of its
powers to deprive him of his professional attributes which he so unworthily abused.
The court is vested with the authority to impose suspension in any of the following circumstances:
(1) deceit;
(2) malpractice;
(3) gross misconduct;
(4) grossly immoral conduct;
(5) conviction of a crime involving moral turpitude;
(6) violation of the lawyers oath;
(7) wilful disobedience of any lawful order of a superior court; or
(8) corruptly or wilfully appearing as an attorney for a party to a case without authority to do so.
Clear and convincing evidence presented by Anacta proves that her allegations were true- that he
committed deceitful and dishonest acts by misrepresenting having filed the petition for annulment,
ignoring communications send to him by his client, and ignoring notices sent by the IBP.

Rule 1.01 of the Code of Professional Responsibility states that "a lawyer shall not engage in unlawful,
dishonest, immoral or deceitful conduct." "The Code exacts from lawyers not only a firm respect for
law, legal processes but also mandates the utmost degree of fidelity and good faith in dealing with
clients and the moneys entrusted to them pursuant to their fiduciary relationship."

ANDRES V. NAMBI A.C. No. 7158 | 9 March 2015

Duties and Responsibilities of a Lawyer under the Code of Professional Responsibility
DOCTRINE: For there to be gross ignorance of the law, the error must be moved with malice, bad faith,
corruption, fraud and dishonesty.

As a rule, for one to be held administratively accountable for gross ignorance of the law, there must be a
showing that the error was gross and patent as to support a conclusion that the actor was so moved
with malice, bad faith, corruption, fraud, and dishonesty.

GABRIEL v. RAMOS A.M. No. P-06-2256| 10 April 2013

Duties and Responsibilities of a Lawyer under the Code of Professional Responsibility
DOCTRINE: We require nothing less than the highest standard of morality and decency for each and
every member, from the highest official to the lowest of the rank and file, to preserve the good name
and integrity of courts of justice.

Immorality has been defined to include not only sexual matters but also “conducts inconsistent with
rectitude, or indicative of corruption, indecency, depravity, and dissoluteness; or is willful, flagrant or
shameless conduct showing moral indifference to opinions of respectable members of the community,
and an inconsiderate attitude toward good order and public welfare.”

MAGSAYSAY MARITIME CORPORATION v. VIRGILIO L. MAZAREDO G.R. No. 201359 | 23 September

2015
Duties and Responsibilities of a Lawyer under the Code of Professional Responsibility
DOCTRINE: Lawyers should not willfully and intentionally resort to falsehood and deception in order to
misguide, obstruct and impede the proper administration of justice.

The Code of Professional Responsibility provides that "[a] lawyer shall not engage in unlawful, dishonest,
immoral or deceitful conduct" (Rule 1.01); he "shall not, for any corrupt motive or interest, encourage
any suit or proceeding or delay any man's cause" (Rule 1.03); he "shall not do any falsehood, nor
consent to the doing of any in Court, nor shall he mislead, or allow the Court to be misled by any
artifice" (Rule 10.01); and he "shall not knowingly x x x assert as a fact that which has not been proved"
(Rule 10.02). Lawyers should not transcend the bounds of propriety and commit a travesty before the
Court by willfully, intentionally and deliberately resorting to falsehood and deception in handling their
client’s case in order to misguide, obstruct and impede the proper administration of justice.

PLAZA v. AMAMIO A.M. No. P-08-2559 | 19 March 2010

Duties and Responsibilities of a Lawyer under the Code of Professional Responsibility
DOCTRINE: The court and its premises shall be used exclusively for court or judicial functions and not for
any other purpose. As temples of justice, their dignity and sanctity must be preserved at all times.

Time and again, the Court has always stressed in pertinent issuances and decisions that courts are
temples of justice, the honor and dignity of which must be upheld and that their use shall not expose
judicial records to danger of loss or damage. So strict is the Court about this that it has declared that the
prohibition against the use of Halls of Justice for purposes other than that for which they have been
built extends to their immediate vicinity including their grounds.

DAVAO IMPORT DISTRIBUTORS v. LANDERO A.C. No. 5116 | 13 April 2015

Duties and Responsibilities of a Lawyer under the Code of Professional Responsibility
DOCTRINE: An attorney is bound to protect his client's interest to the best of his ability and with utmost
diligence.

A lawyer is first and foremost an officer of the court. While he owes his entire devotion to the interest
and causes of his client, he must ensure that he acts within the bounds of reason and common sense,
always aware that he is an instrument of truth and justice. As an officer of the court and its
indispensable partner in the sacred task of administering justice, graver responsibility is imposed upon a
lawyer than any other to uphold the integrity of the courts and to show respect to its processes. Any act
on his part which tends visibly to obstruct, pervert or impede and degrade the administration of justice
constitutes professional misconduct calling for the exercise of disciplinary action against him.

CAOILE v. MACARAEG AC No. 720 | 17 June 2015

Duties and Responsibilities of a Lawyer under the Code of Professional Responsibility
DOCTRINE: A motion for extension to file an appellant’s brief carries with it the presumption that the
applicant-lawyer will file the pleading within the requested extended period. Failure to do so without
any reasonable excuse violates the Code of Professional Responsibility.

The Code of Professional Responsibility allows a counsel to withdraw his services for a good cause,
including the client’s failure to comply with the retainer agreement.
● A motion for extension to file an appellant’s brief carries with it the presumption that the applicant
lawyer will file the pleading within the requested extended period. Failure to do so without any
reasonable excuse violates the Code of Professional Responsibility.

SALABAO v. VILLARUEL A.C. No. 8084 | 24 August 2015

Duties and Responsibilities of a Lawyer under the Code of Professional Responsibility
DOCTRINE: While it is true that lawyers owe "entire devotion" to the cause of their clients, it cannot be
emphasized enough that their first and primary duty is "not to the client but to the administration of
justice.

A lawyer’s first and primary duty is not to the client but to the administration of justice. Canon 12 of the
Code of Professional Responsibility states that "A lawyer shall exert every effort and consider it his duty
to assist in the speedy and efficient administration of justice." Thus, in the use of Court processes, the
lawyer's zeal to win must be tempered by the paramount consideration that justice be done to all
parties involved, and the lawyer for the losing party should not stand in the way of the execution of a
valid judgment. Because a lawyer is an officer of the court called upon to assist in the administration of
justice, any act of a lawyer that obstructs, perverts, or impedes the administration of justice constitutes
misconduct and justifies disciplinary action against him.

DAGING v. DAVIS AC No. 9395 | 12 November 2014

Duties and Responsibilities of a Lawyer under the Code of Professional Responsibility
DOCTRINE: A lawyer cannot invoke, as a defense, good faith and/or non-use of information given by the
client in a disbarment case for conflicting interest.

based on the established facts

A lawyer may not act as counsel for a person whose interest conflicts with that of his present or former
client. The prohibition against representing conflicting interests is absolute and the rule applies even if
the lawyer has acted in good faith and with no intention to represent conflicting interests.

A lawyer may not act as counsel for a person whose interest conflicts with that of his present or former
client.

The prohibition against representing conflicting interests is absolute and the rule applies even if the
lawyer has acted in good faith and with no intention to represent conflicting interests. a lawyer who
takes up the cause of the adversary of the party who has engaged the services of his law firm brings the
law profession into public disrepute and suspicion and undermines the integrity of justice.

CAMPOS v. ESTEBAL AC No. 10443 | 8 August 2016

Duties and Responsibilities of a Lawyer under the Code of Professional Responsibility
DOCTRINE: Atty. Estebal’s act of receiving such substantial sums from complainants without in the least
intending to honor his word to secure the United States (U.S.) tourist visas that he promised to get for
them constitutes a breach of his professional responsibility.

SABITSANA v. MUERTEGUI G.R. No. 181359| 5 August 2013

Duties and Responsibilities of a Lawyer under the Code of Professional Responsibility
DOCTRINE: The termination of attorney-client relation provides no justification for a lawyer to represent
an interest adverse to or in conflict with that of the former client on a matter involving confidential
information which the lawyer acquired when he was counsel.

The termination of attorney-client relation provides no justification for a lawyer to represent an interest
adverse to or in conflict with that of the former client on a matter involving confidential information
which the lawyer acquired when he was counsel.

MALANGAS v. ZAIDE A.C. No. 10675 | 31 May 2016

Duties and Responsibilities of a Lawyer under the Code of Professional Responsibility
DOCTRINE: A lawyer shall account for all money or property collected or received for or from the client
and deliver the funds and property of his client when due or upon demand.

Rule 16.01 – A lawyer shall account for all money or property collected or received for or from the client.
Rule 16.03 – A lawyer shall deliver the funds and property of his client when due or upon demand.
However, he shall have a lien over the funds and may apply so much thereof as may be necessary to
satisfy his lawful fees and disbursements, giving notice promptly thereafter to his client. He shall also
have a lien to the same extent on all judgments and executions he has secured for his client as provided
for in the Rules of Court.

The Code of Professional Responsibility demands the utmost degree of fidelity and good faith in dealing
with the moneys entrusted to lawyers because of their fiduciary relationship. Any lawyer who does not
live up to this duty must be prepared to take the consequences of his waywardness. By his deliberate
failure to file a Comment on or Opposition and by his failure to appear at the hearings, he unduly
delayed the case. These failings are clearly offensive to Rules 18.0327 and 18.0428 of the CPR.
ANACTA v. RESURRECCION A.C. No. 9074 |14 August 2012
Duties and Responsibilities of a Lawyer under the Code of Professional Responsibility
DOCTRINE: : A lawyer shall deliver the funds and property of his client when due or upon demand.

Rule 16.01 of the CPR states: A lawyer shall account for all money or property collected or received for
or from the client.
Rule 16.03 states: A lawyer shall deliver the funds and property of his client when due or upon demand.

VIRAY v. SANICAS A.C. No. 7337 | 29 September 2014

Duties and Responsibilities of a Lawyer under the Code of Professional Responsibility
DOCTRINE: Refusal and failure to render an accounting and return the money after demand made by
the client raises the presumption that he converted it to his own use. The unjustified withholding of the
funds also warrants the imposition of disciplinary action against him.

The fiduciary nature of the relationship between counsel and client imposes on a lawyer the duty to
account for the money or the property received for or from the client. He is obliged to render a prompt
accounting of all the property and money he has collected for his client.

SPOUSES WARRINER v. ATTY. DUBLIN A.C. No. 5239 | 18 November 2013

Duties and Responsibilities of a Lawyer under the Code of Professional Responsibility
DOCTRINE: A lawyer shall not neglect a legal matter entrusted to him, and his negligence in connection
therewith shall render him liable.

Rule 18.03 provides that a lawyer shall not neglect a legal matter entrusted to him, and his negligence in
connection therewith shall render him liable.

CABAUATAN v. VENIDA G.R. No. 10043 | 20 November 2013

Duties and Responsibilities of a Lawyer under the Code of Professional Responsibility
DOCTRINE: Failure to exercise that degree of vigilance and attention expected of a good father of a
family makes the lawyer unworthy of the trust reposed on him by his client and makes him answerable
not just to his client but also to the legal profession, the courts and society.

When a lawyer takes a clients’ cause, he covenants that he will exercise due diligence in protecting the
latter’s rights. Failure to exercise that degree of vigilance and attention expected of a good father of a
family makes the lawyer unworthy of the trust reposed on him by his client and makes him answerable
not just to his client but also to the legal profession, the courts and society.

FAJ CONSTRUCTION & DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION v. SAULOG G.R. No. 200759 | 25 March 2015
Duties and Responsibilities of a Lawyer under the Code of Professional Responsibility
DOCTRINE: The mistakes of counsel bind the client, except in cases of gross or palpable negligence of
counsel.

CHUA v. JIMENEZ A.C. No. 9880 | 3 November 2016

Duties and Responsibilities of a Lawyer under the Code of Professional Responsibility
DOCTRINE: A lawyer does not have a right to hold on to his client’s documents due to nonpayment of his
fees; when a lawyer receives money from a client for a particular purpose, the lawyer is bound to render
an accounting to his client, showing that he spent the money for the purpose intended.

A lawyer’s negligence in the discharge of his obligations arising from the relationship of counsel and
client may cause delay in the administration of justice and prejudice the rights of a litigant particularly
his client.

CAMPOS v. ESTEBAL AC No. 10443 | 8 August 2016

Legal and Judicial Ethics and Practical Exercises – Legal Ethics - Duties and Responsibilities of a Lawyer
under the Code of Professional Responsibility
DOCTRINE: Atty. Estebal’s act of receiving such substantial sums from complainants without in the least
intending to honor his word in fulfilling his promise constitutes a breach of his professional
responsibility.

CHUA v. JIMENEZ A.C. No. 9880 | 8 November 2016

Duties and Responsibilities of a Lawyer under the Code of Professional Responsibility
DOCTRINE: A lawyer does not have a right to hold on to his client’s documents due to nonpayment of his
fees.

• Rule 22.02 of the Code of Professional Responsibility states that “A lawyer who withdraws or is
discharged shall, subject to a retainer lien, immediately turn over all papers and property to which the
client is entitled, and shall cooperate with his successor in the orderly transfer of the matter, including
all information necessary for the proper handling of the matter.”
• In this case, the court applied the En Banc case of Fabie v. Atty. Real, 803 SCRA 388 (2016), where the
Court suspended the errant lawyer from the practice of law for six (6) months for failing to return the
documents and money entrusted to him by his client. At the same time, he was ordered to return the
money with legal interest from the time he received the same until full payment thereof.

ANACTA v. RESURRECCION A.C. No. 9074 |14 August 2012

Suspension, Disbarment and Discipline of Lawyers
DOCTRINE: Violations of the lawyers oath and code of conduct falls within the Court disciplinary
authority.

If the matter involves violations of the lawyers oath and code of conduct, then it falls within the Court
disciplinary authority. However, if the matter arose from acts which carry civil or criminal liability, and
which do not directly require an inquiry into the moral fitness of the lawyer, then the matter would be a
proper subject of a judicial action which is understandably outside the purview of the Courts disciplinary
authority. Thus, we hold that when the matter subject of the inquiry pertains to the mental and moral
fitness of the respondent to remain as member of the legal fraternity, the issue of whether the
respondent be directed to return the amount received from his client shall be deemed within the Courts
disciplinary authority.

DALMACIO-JOAQUIN v. DE LA CRUZ A.M. No. P-06-2241 | 10 July 2012

Suspension, Disbarment and Discipline of Lawyers
DOCTRINE: Dishonesty is not simply bad judgment or negligence. Dishonesty is a question of intention.

Court has defined dishonesty as the disposition to lie, cheat, deceive, or defraud. Dishonesty is not
simply bad judgment or negligence.

ANACTA v. RESURRECCIONA.C. No. 9074 |14 August 2012

Suspension, Disbarment and Discipline of Lawyers
DOCTRINE: The appropriate penalty for an errant lawyer depends on the exercise of sound judicial
discretion based on the surrounding facts. The Court is not mandated to automatically impose the
extreme penalty of disbarment upon a finding of deceit or gross misconduct.

In any of the following circumstances, to wit:

(1) deceit;
(2) malpractice;
(3) gross misconduct;
(4) grossly immoral conduct;
(5) conviction of a crime involving moral turpitude;
(6) violation of the lawyers oath;
(7) wilful disobedience of any lawful order of a superior court; or
(8) corruptly or wilfully appearing as an attorney for a party to a case without authority to do so; the
Court is vested with the authority and discretion to impose either the extreme penalty of disbarment or
mere suspension. The Court either disbars or suspends them based on its collective appreciation of
attendant circumstances and in the exercise of its sound discretion.

The Court is not mandated to automatically impose the extreme penalty of disbarment upon a finding of
deceit or gross misconduct.

The supreme penalty of disbarment is meted out only in clear cases of misconduct that seriously affect
the standing and character of the lawyer as an officer of the court and member of the bar.

FELIPE v. MACAPAGAL A.C. No. 4549 | 2 December 2013

Suspension, Disbarment and Discipline of Lawyers
DOCTRINE: The unjustified disregard of the lawful orders of the SC and IBP constitutes utter disrespect
for the judiciary; such is also unbecoming of a lawyer, for lawyers are particularly called upon to obey
court orders and processes and are expected to stand foremost in complying with court directives being
themselves officers of the court.

The unjustified disregard of the lawful orders of this Court and the IBP is not only irresponsible, but also
constitutes utter disrespect for the judiciary and his fellow lawyers. His conduct is unbecoming of a
lawyer, for lawyers are particularly called upon to obey court orders and processes and are expected to
stand foremost in complying with court directives being themselves officers of the court.

RODICA v. LAZARO A.C. No. 9259 | 23 August 2012

Suspension, Disbarment and Discipline of Lawyers
DOCTRINE: In suspension or disbarment proceedings, lawyers enjoy the presumption of innocence, and
the burden of proof rests upon the complainant to clearly prove her allegations by preponderant
evidence.

Preponderance of evidence means that the evidence adduced by one side is, as a whole, superior to or
has greater weight than that of the other. It means evidence which is more convincing to the court as
worthy of belief that that which is offered in opposition thereto.

AGADAN v. KILAAN A.C. No. 9385 | 11 November 2013

Notarial Practice
DOCTRINE: Failure to make the proper entries in the notarial register is a ground for revocation of the
notarial commission. A notary public cannot escape his dereliction of duty by putting the blame on his
secretary.

Notarization is not an empty , meaningless, or routinary act but one invested with substantive public
interest such that only those who are qualified or authorized to do so may act as notaries public. The
protection of that interest necessarily requires that those not qualified or authorized to act must be
prevented form inflicting themselves upon the public the courts and the administrative offices in
general.
• The inaccuracies in his Notarial register and his failure to enter the documents he admittedly notarized
constitute dereliction of duty as a notary public. He cannot escape liability by putting the blame on his
secretary. The lawyer himself, not merely his secretary, should be held accountable for these misdeeds.

Judicial Ethics

GARINGAN-FERRERAS v. UMBLAS A.M. No. P-11-2989 | 10 January 2017

Judicial Ethics
DOCTRINE: Court employees, from the presiding judge to the lowliest clerk, being public servants in an
office dispensing justice, should always act with a high degree of professionalism and responsibility.

• Falsification of an official document such as court records is considered a grave offense. it also
amounts to dishonesty
• Court employees, from the presiding judge to the lowliest clerk, being public servants in an office
dispensing justice, should always act with a high degree of professionalism and responsibility.
• Their conduct must not only be characterized by propriety and decorum.

SOMBILON v. GARAY G.R. No. 179914 | 16 June 2014

Discipline of Members of the Judiciary
DOCTRINE: Blatant disregard of basic, elementary, and well-known rules of procedure and law is gross
ignorance of the law.

Blatant disregard of basic, elementary, and well-known rules of procedure and law is gross ignorance of
the law, which is classified as a serious charge punishable by either dismissal from service, suspension
for more than three months but not exceeding six months, or a fine of more than P20,000 but not
exceeding P40,000.
BENANCILLO v. AMILA A.M. No. RTJ-08-2149 | 09 March 2011
Discipline of Members of the Judiciary
DOCTRINE: Judges are held to higher standards of integrity and ethical conduct than attorneys and other
persons not vested with public trust.

• For derogatory and irreverent language. o It is reprehensible for a judge to humiliate a lawyer, litigant
or witness. The act betrays lack of patience, prudence and restraint. Thus, a judge must at all times be
temperate in his language. He must choose his words, written or spoken, with utmost care and sufficient
control. The wise and just man is esteemed for his discernment. Pleasing speech increases his
persuasiveness.
• The Code recognizes that even acts that are not per se improper can nevertheless be perceived by the
larger community as such. Be it stressed that judges are held to higher standards of integrity and ethical
conduct than attorneys and other persons not [vested] with public trust.

LAUREL v. VARDELEON G.R. No. 202967| 5 August 2015

Discipline of Members of the Judiciary
DOCTRINE: The unreasonable delay of a judge in resolving a pending incident is a violation of the norms
of judicial conduct and constitutes a ground for administrative sanction.

The trial court should be reminded that the unreasonable delay of a judge in resolving a pending
incident is a violation of the norms of judicial conduct and constitutes a ground for administrative
sanction against the defaulting magistrate.

OCA v. GUAN A.M. No. P-07-2293 | 15 July 2015

Discipline of Members of the Judiciary
DOCTRINE: Any shortages in the amounts to be remitted and the delay in the actual remittance thereof
constitute gross neglect of duty for which the clerk of court shall be held administratively liable.

In OCA v Acampado, the Court declared that any shortages in the amounts to be remitted and the delay
in the actual remittance thereof constitute gross neglect of duty for which the clerk of court shall be
held administratively liable.

Moreover, in OCA v. Melchor, Jr. it was held that delayed remittance of cash collections constitutes
gross neglect of duty because this omission deprives the court of interest that could have been earned if
the amounts were deposited in the authorized depository bank.

OCA v. ABARINTOS A.M. No. CA-12-26-P| 17 August 2015

Discipline of Members of the Judiciary
DOCTRINE: No position demands greater moral righteousness and uprightness from its holder than an
office in the judiciary.

Truly, public servants at times should share a part of their extra time and skills in order to facilitate swift
delivery of service to the public.

BALANAY v. ADALIM-WHITEA.M. No. RTJ-16-2443| 11 January 2016

Discipline of Members of the Judiciary
DOCTRINE: When the law is sufficiently basic, a judge who does not apply it is guilty of gross ignorance
of the law.

Gross Ignorance of the Law

It is basic that bail hearing is necessary even if the prosecution does not interpose any objection or
leaves the application for bail to the sound discretion of the court. Whether bail is a matter of right or
discretion, a hearing for a petition for bail is required.

It is also basic that litigious motions that do not contain a notice of hearing are nothing but a useless
piece of paper which the court should not act upon. These rules are so elementary that not to know
them constitutes gross ignorance of the law. When the law is sufficiently basic, a judge owes it to his
office to simply apply it; anything less than that would be gross ignorance of the law.

Serious Misconduct
A TSN is supposed to be a faithful and exact recording of all matters that transpired during a court
proceeding.