CHAPTER 1: PRELIMINARY CONSIDERATIONS represent conflicting interests except by written

consent of all concerned after full disclosure

 Lawyers from a Layman’s Perspective
o Lawyers are portrayed negatively due to some who
o Overgaard vs Valdez
misinterpret the law to the point of distortion in a cunning
 Facts: Complainant entered into a Retainer
effort to achieve their purposes
Agreement with respondent for the respondent to
represent him in his 2 filed cases and 2 cases against
 The Legal Profession = public service = noble profession
him. Such agreement include that fees would cover
o Branch of the administration of justice
acceptance, attorney’s fees, litigation & other
o Refers to a group of men pursuing a learned art as a
expenses as well as appearance fees. Complainant
common calling in the spirit of public service
paid through telegraphic bank transfer. Four
o Primary purpose: public service
months later, complainant demanded for a report
o Law is also a noble profession and the privilege to practice is
of the cases; calls were unanswered and emails
bestowed only upon individuals who are competent
were ignored. Turned out, respondent did not file
intellectually, academically, morally.
any entry of appearance or did anything for the
o Paramount importance in the administration of justice is the
cases. Complainant then engages to another lawyer.
utmost trust and confidence between the atty-client
 Held: Violation of Canon 1, rule 1.01 that a lawyer
relationship through avoiding appearance of treachery,
shall not engage in unlawful, dishonest, immoral,
double-dealing, and conflict of interest
and deceitful conduct. His act of representing to the
 Conflict of interest: exists when the acceptance of
complainant that he would take care of the cases
new relation will prevent an attorney from the full
were manifestly deceitful and honest. Relationship
discharge of his duty of undivided fidelity and
of an attorney to his client is highly fiduciary (Canon
loyalty to his client
15). A lawyer owes fidelity to his client and shall be
 Illustrative cases:
mindful of the trust and confidence reposed on him.
o Pacana vs. Pascual Lopez
 Facts: Complainant sought advice from the
respondent after the failure of his investment CHAPTER 2: THE PRACTICE OF LAW
schemes. Complainant claimed that a lawyer-client
 Practice of Law
was established though no formal document was
o Any activity, in or out of court, which requires the
executed. Respondent asked money needed for the
application of law, legal procedure, knowledge, training,
said case and complainant gave huge sums but after
and experience (hence, not restricted merely on courts
such respondent was evading him for several
appearances)
months. Turned out, the respondent was also
o Why much is demanded from an attorney?
representing the group of investors of the company.
 Because the entrusted privilege to practice law
 Held: violation of Rule 15.03, Canon 15 of the
carries with it the correlative duties not only to the
Professional Responsibility—lawyer shall not
client but also to the court, to the bar, and to the
public
 Concept
o To practice law is to give or render any kind of service,
which device or service requires the use in any degree of
legal knowledge or skill.
o When is the practice of law present?
 Practice of law is present when the individual
customarily or habitually holds himself out to the
public as a lawyer and demands compensation for
the following services:
a) Opinions
b) Appearances
c) Preparation of pleadings and contracts
o Cayetano vs Monson: lawyers, when they teach law, are
considered engaged in the practice of law
o Justice Padilla’s dissenting opinion on the factors in
engaging in the practice of law: (limited view)
1. Habituality—there must be a habitual exercise of
one’s self out to the public as lawyer
2. Compensation—one’s professional services are
available to the public for compensation
3. Application of law, legal principle, practice or
procedure
4. Attorney-client relationship—emphasized herein
that teaching law or writing law books cannot be
considered in the practice of law
 Privilege
o The practice of law is a privilege accorded only to those who
measure up to certain rigid standards of mental and moral
fitness.
o For the admission of candidate to the bar, the rules of court
not only prescribe a test of academic preparation but
require satisfactorily testimonials of good moral character.
o Good moral character is an essential qualification for the
admission of an attorney and for the continuation of such
privilege.
 Profession, not a Business
o Practice of law is not a business. It is a profession in which
duty to public service, not money, is the primary
consideration.
o The duty to public service and to the administration of
justice should be the primary consideration of lawyers, who
must subordinate their personal interests or what they owe
to themselves.
o Elements that distinguished the legal profession from that
of business:
1. Duty of public service which the emolument
(payment or wage) is a by-product
2. Officer of the court with sincerity, integrity, and
reliability
3. Client relationship in the highest degree of fiduciary
4. Relationship to colleagues with candor and fairness
 Regulation of the Practice of Law
o SC has the exclusive and constitutional power (Sec 5 (5),
Article VIII) with respect to the admission to the practice of
law and any member of the Philippine Bar in good standing
may practice law anywhere and before any entity
o Public interest is the primary objective and the real question
for the determination whether or not the attorney is still a
fit person to be allowed the privileges
 Integrated Bar of the Philippines
o State-organized Bar to which every lawyer must belong
o To compel a lawyer to be a member of the IBP is not
violative of his constitutional freedom to associate.
o Integration does not make a lawyer a member of any group
of which he is not already a member. He becomes a
member of the Bar when he passed the Bar examinations.
o Free to attend or the meetings of IBP Chapter or vote or
refuse to vote in the elections
o Only compulsion: payment of annual dues
 Qualifications (Rule 138 of the Rules of Court)
o Section 1. Who may practice law.
 Qualification to the practice of law is not merely
based on one’s admittance as a member of the bar
but the person so admitted must remain in good
and regular standing to practice law.
o Section 2. Requirements for all applicants for admission to
the bar.
 Enumerates the basic requirements: citizen of the
Philippines, at least 21; possess good and moral
character, resident of the Philippines; and no
charges involving moral turpitude have been filed or
pending
o Section 5. Additional requirements for other applicants.
 Mandates that no person shall be admitted to the
bar examinations unless he has completed in a duly
recognized law school the following courses: civil
law, commercial law, remedial law, criminal law,
public and private international law, political law,
labor and social legislation, medical jurisprudence,
taxation, and legal ethics.
o Section 6. Pre-Law.
 Provides the pre-law educational requirements:
completion of 4-yr highschool course and bachelor’s
degree in arts or sciences with political science,
logic, English, Spanish, history, or economics.
 Bachelor’s degree not mentioned are allowed to
enter law school and take the bar upon completion
of 18 units of English, 6 units of Mathematics, and
18 units of Social Sciences.
o Section 7. Time for Filing proof of qualifications & Section
8. Notice of Applications
 Indicates the procedure for the filing of the
application to take the bar examinations.
 Details of the procedure are promulgated by SC
every year.
o Section 9. Examination; subjects
 Details the bar subjects: Civil Law; Labor and Social
Legislation; Mercantile Law; Criminal Law; Political
Law (Constitutional Law, Public Corporations, &
Public Officers); International Law (Public and
Private); Taxation; Remedial Law; Legal Ethics
o Section 10. Bar examination, by questions and answers,
and in writing.
 Outlines the procedure during the taking of the bar
examinations.
 Answers to the bar questions are handwritten but
the SC may allow the use of typewriter in
meritorious circumstances.
o Section 11. Annual examination.
 Take place annually in City of Manila
 Held in four days designation by the chairman of the
committee on bar examiners.
 Subject distribution: 1st day—Political &
International Law (morning), Labor and Social
Legislation (afternoon); 2nd day—Civil Law, Taxation;
3rd day—Mercantile Law, Criminal Law; 4th day—
Remedial Law, Legal Ethics
o Section 12. Committee of examiners.
 Composed of a Justice of the Supreme Court as
chairman and serve for 1 year and 8 members of
the bar
o Section 13. Disciplinary measures
 Violation shall be barred from the examination=fail
 Further disciplinary action may be taken in the
discretion of court like permanent disqualification
o Section 14. Passing Average
 General average of 75 percent in all subjects
without failing below 50% in any subject
o Section 15. Report of the committee; filing of examination
papers
 Not later than February 15th
 o Section 16. Failing candidates to take review course
 2004: 5-strike rule implemented; a bar candidate
shall be disqualified after failing thrice but may take
a fourth/fifth examination if he successfully
completes a 1yr refresher course for each
examination
 2013: 5-strike rule was eliminated
- Conditions: that candidate have enrolled in
and passed regular 4th year review classes;
- Attended a pre-bar review every time they
take the Bar examinations after failing for
the 3rd time;
- In accredited law schools
o Section 17. Admission and oath of successful applicants.
o Section 18. Certificate
o Section 19. Attorney’s roll
 Sections 17-19 provides those who successfully
hurdle the bar exams must still take the Lawyer’s
Oath, sign in the Roll of Attorney’s for them to be
considered a lawyer
 Certificate shall be issued=authority to practice
 Bar Matter 1153
o Refers to the letter of Atty. Estelito Mendoza Proposing
Reforms in the Bar Examinations through Amendments to
Rule 138 of Rules of Court, Section 5 & 6
o SC now allows Filipino graduates of foreign law schools to
take the Philippine Bar only upon submission to the SC of
certifications showing:
 Completion of all the prescribed courses for the
degree of Bachelor of Laws or its equivalent
 Recognition of accreditation of the law school by
proper authority
 Completion of all 4th yr subjects in a law school
officially recognized by the Philippine Government
 Appearance of Non-Lawyers
 Person not admitted to the bar may appear before the
courts subject to limitations:
 Law Student Practice
 Rule 138-A of Rules of Court provides for the Law Student
Rule, allowing student of law, under certain qualifications
and conditions to appear before the courts
o Section 1. Conditions for student practice.
a) Must have successfully completed his 3rd
year of the regular four-year prescribed law
curriculum
b) Is enrolled in a recognized law school’s
clinical legal education program approved
by SC
c) Appears without compensation
d) Represents indigent clients accepted by the
legal clinic of the school
o Section 2. Appearance.
- Appearance shall be under the direct
supervision and control of a member of the
Bar (physical appearance during the
hearing)
- Any and all pleadings, motions, briefs,
memoranda or other papers filed must be
signed by the supervising attorney for and
in behalf of the legal clinic
o Section 3. Privileged communications
- Rules on privileged communications
between the lawyer and his client shall
apply to similar communications made to or
received by the law student
o Section 4. Standards of conduct and supervision
- Law student shall comply with the
standards of professional conduct
governing the members of the Bar
 - Failure of the supervising attorney to
provide adequate supervision shall be a
ground for disciplinary action
 Non-Lawyers in Court and Administrative Tribunals
o Apart from law student, the following may also appear
before the courts and administrative tribunals:
1. A party to a litigation or through the aid of an
agent/friend by him
2. Party to the litigation before any other court
(Section 34, Rule 138)
3. In criminal case, Court may appoint any person of
god repute for probity and ability in the province to
defend the accused where a licensed member is not
available
4. Those who appear before the NLRC or any Labor
Arbiter provided that they:
a) Represent themselves
b) Represent legitimate labor organization that
is party to the case
c) Represent a member/s of said organization
existing within the employer’s
establishment, who are parties to the case
d) Duly-accredited members of any legal aid
office recognized by DOJ/IBP
e) Owner, president, or authorized person of a
corporation that is party to the case
5. Any person can represent himself or any claimant
before the Cadastral Court
6. Appointed to appear for the Government of the
Philippines
 Illustrative case:
o Cruz vs. Mijares
 Facts: Ferdinand, a fourth yr law student, sought
permission to enter his appearance for and on his
behalf, before the RTC as plaintiff in civil case.
 Judge required the petitioner to secure a written
permission from the Court Administrator before he
could be allowed to appear as counsel for himself.
 Ferdinand failed to present the document and was
denied.
 Held: Judge erred in applying Rule 138-A when the
basis of Ferdinand’s claim is Section 34 of Rule 138.
Rule 138-A provides for the conditions when a law
student may appear while the latter rule allows the
non-lawyer as a party representing himself. Thus,
Ferdinand, as plaintiff, at his own instance, can
personally conduct the litigation of the civil case.
 Proceedings Where Lawyers are Prohibited from Appearing
1. Katarungang Pambarangay Proceedings
o All parties must appear in person without the assistance
of counsel /representative
o Exceptions: minors and incompetents assisted by next-
of-kin who are not lawyers
2. Small Claims Cases
- No attorney shall appear UNLESS the attorney is the
plaintiff or defendant
 Sanctions for Persons not Lawyers and Lawyers without
Authority
1) Indirect Contempt
o Liable are those who assumed to be an
attorney/officer of court and acting without
authority
2) Estafa
o Liable are those who assumed to be an attorney
and caused damage to a party
3) Violation of RA 6713 (Code of Conduct and Ethical
Standards for Public Officials & Employees)
o Those who engaged in the private practice of
law despite being lawyers in the gov’t service
4) Administrative Liability
 o Those lawyers who knowingly engage in
unauthorized practice of law
 Public Officials and Practice of Law
o General rule: Public officials and employees are prohibited
from engaging in the private practice of their profession
unless:
a) Authorized by Constitution, law, or regulation
b) Under the condition that such practice will not conflict
with their official functions
c) Subject to compliance and conditions set forth therein
o Basis: to preserve public trust, avoid conflict of interest, or
possibility thereof & assure people of impartiality in the
performance of public functions
 Public Officials who Cannot Practice Law or with Restrictions
1) Judges and other official and employees of court
2) Solicitor-General, officials and employees
3) President, VP, and members of the cabinet and their
deputies and assistants
4) Members of the Constitutional Commission
5) Ombudsman & deputies
6) Governors, city, & municipal mayors
7) Government Prosecutors
8) Civil service officers
9) Prohibited by special laws
 Conditionally allowed (& the attached restrictions)
1) Members of the legislature
- Prohibited from appearing as counsel before any
Electoral Tribunals or other administrative bodies
2) Members of the Sanggunian, except:
a) shall not appear as counsel before any court in
civil case wherein a local government unit or
office is the adverse party
b) shall not appear as counsel in criminal case
wherein an officer or employee of government
is accused of an offence committed in relation
to his office
c) shall not collect any fee for their appearance in
admin proceedings involving the local
government which he’s an official
d) shall not use the property and personnel of the
Government
3) Civil Service Officers/employees whose duties do not
require their entire time to be at the government
provided that he secures written permit from his Head
 Illustrative Case: Catu vs Rellosa
 Members of the Sangguniang Barangay are allowed to
engage in the private sector of law since they are not
mandated to serve full-time and only with the written
permission of the head of the department concerned.
Must obtain prior written permission from the secretary
of Interior and Local Government.
 Prohibition/ Disqualification of Former Government Attorneys
a) Retire judge/justice receiving pension from the
government—cannot act as counsel in civil wherein the
government or any of its agencies is the adverse party;
likewise, in criminal case wherein an officer/employee is the
accused of an offense in relation to his office
b) Former government attorney—cannot accept
engagement/employment in connection with any matter
which he had previously intervened
 Lawyers Authorized to Represent the Government
1) Office of the Solicitor General
2) Deputized provincial/city fiscal
3) Deputized legal officers of government departments
4) Legal officer of the LGU
5) Any official or other person appointed/designated
 Lawyer’s Oath
o Source of obligations and duties for every lawyer and any
violation thereof constitutes a ground for disbarment,
suspension, and other disciplinary action
o Lawyer’s oath to uphold the cause of justice is superior to
his duty to his client
o Placing of an attorney’s private and personal interests over
and above those of his clients constitutes a breach of the
lawyer’s oath deserving admonition
Illustrative Cases:
o Chavez-Blanco vs. Limasag
 Facts: Respondent was authorized by complainant,
resident abroad, to sell 2 of their properties in
Philippines. Respondent reported that he sold only one
lot but later on was discovered that 2 lots were sold and
for a much higher price.
 Held: respondent deceitful conduct warrants
disciplinary sanction and a directive for the remittance
of the remaining proceeds. Respondent’s actions erode
the public perception of the legal profession.
o Cham vs. Paita—Moya
 Lawyer failed to pay her rentals and utility bills and
secretly vacated the leased premises.
 Held: any gross misconduct of a lawyer in his or her
professional/private capacity is ground for the
imposition of the penalty of suspension or disbarment
because good character is an essential qualification for
the admission and continuance of the practice of law.
Violation of Canon 1 Rule 1.01: Lawyer shall not engage
in unlawful, dishonest, immoral, and deceitful conduct.
o Manaois vs. Deciembre
 Respondent filled out the blank checks with different
amounts and made it appear that the complainant had
them exchanged for cash for use in her business
venture.
 Held: Violation of Canon 1, Rule 1.01 that provides
lawyer shall uphold the constitution, obey the law and
legal processes. Lawyer shall also not engage in
unlawful, dishonest or deceitful conduct. Lawyer also
violated Rule 7.03 that mandates lawyer to uphold at all
times the integrity and dignity of legal profession.
Lawyer committed act indicative of moral depravity.
o Saberon vs. Larong
 Issue on the language used by the lawyer; used of
“blackmail” to characterized the suit against his clients
 Held: High Court found him guilty for using intemperate
language in his pleadings. Canon 8 provides that lawyer
shall conduct himself with courtesy, fairness, and
candor towards his professional colleagues and shall
avoid harassing tactics against opposing counsel. Rule
8.01 also provides that lawyer shall not use language
which is abusive, offensive, or improper in his
professional pleadings.
o Fernandez vs. Ramos—Villalon
 Fernandez filed a complaint for disbarment
against respondent for failure to mention the
existence of Deed of Sale and for allegedly
inducing his witness to sign a false affidavit by
saying that it would only be for the purpose of
compelling the complainant to pay additional
sums to her client.
 Held: Lawyer has a duty to be truthful in all his
dealings. Such duty does not require that the
lawyer advance matters of defense on behalf of
his or her client’s opponent. A lawyer is his
 client’s advocate; while duty-bound to utter no
falsehood, ad advocate is not obliged to build the
case for his client’s opponents.
o Judge Cervante vs Sabio
 Atty. Sabio alleged that Judge Cervante was given a
house and lots putting into serious doubts his
impartiality, independence, and integrity.
 Judge then later filed a complaint for disbarment
against the respondent alleging that the complaint for
bribery filed by Sabio against him was unsubstantiated
and motivated by plain unfounded suspicion.
 Held: respondent by filing groundless bribery charge
violated the code against “wittingly or willingly
promotion or suing any groundless suit”. Respondent
ought to be aware that if a lawyer is to be disciplined,
the evidence against him should be substantial,
competent, and not on mere allegations.
 Held: No forum shopping committed. Court declared
that in determining whether forum shopping exists or
not is the vexation caused the courts and parties-
litigants by a party who asked different courts to rule on
the same causes or grant the same relief, which in the
process create the possibility of conflicting decisions
being rendered by the different fora upon the same
issues.
 In the 2nd complaint, the respondents called the
attention of the court that there was a pending case
between the parties, hence, the purpose is not to
obtain a favorable response but to have the issue
resolved. If indeed there was forum shopping, he would
not have alleged in the 2nd complaint the fact of filling of
the 1st complaint and attached a copy of the same.

o Manipud vs. Bautista

 Complainant as a mortgagee filed an application for
extrajudicial foreclosure wherein a notice of extra
judicial sale was issued.
 Respondent, as counsel of the mortgagor, filed Writ of
Preliminary Injunction which the trial court denied.
 Another Notice of Extra Judicial Sale was then issued
and respondent again filed another case for annulment.
 Complainant argued that the act of respondent of filing
two complaints (for annulment of real estate mortgage
contained the same allegations, involved the same
parties, the same subject matter, the same facts, the
same issues, and sought the same relief) constitutes a
clear case of forum shopping which is an improper
conduct that tends to degrade the administration of
justice and a violation of Rule 1.01, Canon 1 of Code of
Professional Responsibility