LEGAL PROFESSION REVIEWER B.
THE PRACTICE OF LAW
Under Atty. Cuabo
A. LEGAL PROFESSION
Supervision and Control
I. 1987 Constitution, Article 8, Section 5(5)
Promulgate rules concerning the protection and
enforcement of constitutional rights, pleading, practice,
and procedure in all courts, the admission to the practice
of law, the Integrated Bar, and legal assistance to the
underprivileged. Such rules shall provide a simplified and
inexpensive procedure for the speedy disposition of cases,
shall be uniform for all courts of the same grade, and shall
not diminish, increase, or modify substantive rights. Rules of
procedure of special courts and quasi-judicial bodies shall
remain effective unless disapproved by the Supreme
Court.
II. 1987 Constitution, Article 12, Section 14
The sustained development of a reservoir of national
talents consisting of Filipino scientists, entrepreneurs,
professionals, managers, high-level technical manpower
and skilled workers and craftsmen in all fields shall be
promoted by the State. The State shall encourage
appropriate technology and regulate its transfer for the
national benefit.
The practice of all professions in the Philippines shall be
limited to Filipino citizens, save in cases prescribed by law.
III. Power to Integrate the Philippine Bar
Issue: Does the Court have the power to integrate the
Philippine law.
Ruling: Yes, the court have the power to integrate the
Philippine bar. The Court held that, it may integrate the
Bar in the exercise of its power “to promulgate rules
concerning pleading, practice, and procedure in all
courts, and the admission to the practice of law.”
• Integration of the Philippine Bar means the official
unification of the entire lawyer population of the
Philippines.
• Bar integration signifies the setting up by government
authority of a national organization of the legal
profession based on the recognition of the lawyer as an
officer of the court.
IV. In re Cunanan (1954)
Issue: Whether or not R.A. 972 is constitutional.
Ruling: Section 2 was declared unconstitutional because
there is a mere deflect to the Act. The Act should affect
only the bar flunkers of 1946 to 1955 Bar examinations.
Section 2 establishes a permanent system for an
indefinite time. Thus, failing to take account of the fact
that laws and jurisprudence are not stationary.
1
1. Cayetano vs. Monsod (1991)
Issue: Whether or not Atty. Monsod possess the
requirement of 10-year practice of law.
Ruling: Yes. Atty. Monsod’s past work experiences as a
lawyer-economist, a lawyer-manager, a lawyer-
manager, a lawyer-entrepreneur of industry, a lawyer-
negotiator of contracts, and a lawyer-legislator of both
the rich and the poor, verily more than satisfy the
constitutional requirement that one must be engaged in
the practice of law for at least 10 years.
• Practice – refers to the actual performance or
application of knowledge as distinguished from mere
possession of knowledge; it connotes an active,
habitual, repeated customary action. (Justice Padilla)
• One does not even have to be a lawyer to engaged in
the practice of law as long as his activities involve the
application of some law. (Justice Cruz)
2. Admission to the Practice of Law
1. He must also pass the bar examinations.
2. Take the lawyer’s oath before the Supreme Court en
banc.
3. Sign in the Roll of Attorneys and receive a certificate
from the Clerk of the Supreme Court of his license to
practice.
AGUIRRE vs. RANA
Issue: Whether or not Rana is allowed to appear as a
counsel.
Ruling: No, Rana had no authority to practice law, he
has shown moral unfitness to be a member of the
Philippine Bar. Even though Rana passed the 2000 Bar
Examination and took the lawyer’s oath. It is the signing
in the Roll of Attorneys that finally makes one a full-
fledge lawyer. The fact that Rana passed the bar
examinations is immaterial. Rana should know the two
essential requisites for becoming a lawyer still had to
perform: 1. Take the Lawyer’s oath to be administered
by the Supreme Court; and 2. Signature in the Roll of
Attorneys.
• Passing the bar is not the only qualification to become
an attorney-at-law.
3. Qualifications
1. He/she must be a citizen of the Philippines;
2. At least 21 years of age;
3. Of good moral character;
4. A resident of the Philippines; and
5. Must produce before the Supreme Court satisfactory
evidence of his good moral character and no
charges against him, involving moral turpitude, have
been filed or are pending in any court of the
Philippines.
Parilla Aritalia Yaplito
 WALTER WILKIE vs. ATTY. LIMOS
Issue: Whether or not Atty. Limos is guilty of gross
misconduct.
Ruling: Yes, the issuance of worthless checks constitute
gross misconduct. The issuance of worthless check
indicates a lawyer’s unfitness for the trust and
confidence respond on her. It shows lack of personal
honesty and good moral character as to render her
unworthy of public confidence. The issuance of a series
of worthless checks also shows the remorseless attitude
of respondent, unmindful to the deleterious effects of
such act to the public interest and public order.
• Membership in the legal profession is a privilege
demanding high degree of good moral character, not
only as a condition precedent to admission, but also as
a continuing requirement for the practice of law.
BURBE vs. ATTY. MAGULTA
Issue: Whether or not Atty. Magulta should be disbar?
Ruling: The failure of respondent to fulfill this obligation
due to his misuse of the filing fees deposited by
complainant, and his attempts to cover up this misuse of
funds of the client, which caused complainant
additional damage and prejudice, constitutes highly
dishonest conduct on his part, unbecoming a member
of the law profession.
NARAG vs. ATTY. NARAG
Issue: Whether or not Atty. Narag is guilty of immoral
conduct.
Ruling: Yes. The conduct of Atty. Narag warrants the
imposition of the penalty of disbarment, that he had
breached the high and exacting moral standards set for
members of the law profession.
• Good moral character is not only a condition
precedent to the practice of law but a continuing
qualification for all members of the bar.
• A lawyer may be disbarred for any misconduct, whether
in his professional or private capacity, which shows him
to be wanting in moral character, in honesty, probity
and good demeanor or unworthy to continue as an
officer of the court.
IN REGARDING APPLICATION FOR ADMISSION TO THE
PHILIPPINES BAR, VICENTE CHING
Issue: Whether or not Ching is allowed to take the
lawyer’s oath.
Ruling: No. Ching was already thirty-five (35) years old
when he complied with the requirements of CA No. 625
or fourteen years after he had reached the age of
majority. The age of majority commenced upon
reaching 21 years. It is not enough that he considered all
his life that he is a Filipino; that he is a professional and a
public officer was serving this country. The rules for
citizenship are in place. Further, Ching didn’t give any
explanation why he belatedly chose to elect Filipino
citizenship. The prescribed procedure in electing
2
Philippine citizenship is certainly not a tedious and
painstaking process. All that is required of the elector is
to execute an affidavit of election of Philippine
citizenship and, thereafter, file the same with the nearest
civil registry. Ching’s unreasonable and unexplained
delay in making his election cannot be simply glossed
over.
PETITION FOR LEAVE TO RESUME PRACTICE OF LAW,
BENJAMIN M. DACANAY
Issue: Whether or not Benjamin M. Dacanay lost his
membership in the Philippine bar when he gave up his
Philippine citizenship.
Ruling: No. The loss of Filipino citizenship ipso jure
terminates the privilege to practice law in the Philippines.
The practice of law is a privilege denied to foreigners.
The exception is when Filipino citizenship is lost by reason
of naturalization as a citizen of another country but
subsequently reacquired pursuant to RA 9225. Therefore,
a Filipino lawyer who becomes a citizen of another
country is deemed never to have lost his Philippine
citizenship if he reacquires it in accordance with RA
9225. Although he is also deemed never to have
terminated his membership in the Philippine bar, no
automatic right to resume law practice accrues.
• “All Philippine citizens who become citizens of another
country shall be deemed not to have lost their Philippine
citizenship under the conditions of RA 9225.”
• Under RA 9225, if a person intends to practice the legal
profession in the Philippines and he reacquires his
Filipino citizenship pursuant to its provisions “(he) shall
apply with the proper authority for a license or permit to
engage in such practice.”
IN THE MATTER OF THE DISQUALIFICATION OF BAR
EXAMINEE HARON S. MELING IN THE 2002 BAR
EXAMINATIONS
Issue: Whether or not the non-disclosure of the three
pending criminal cases would bar Meling from taking his
lawyer’s oath and signing of the Roll of Attorneys.
Ruling: Yes. The disclosure requirement imposed by the
Supreme Court to determine whether there is
satisfactory evidence of good moral character of the
applicant. The nature of whatever cases are pending
against Meling would aid the Court in determining
whether he is endowed with the moral fitness
demanded of a lawyer. By concealing the existence of
such cases, the applicant then flunks the test of fitness
even if the cases are ultimately proven to be
unwarranted or insufficient to impugn or affect the good
moral character of the applicant.
IN THE MATTER OF THE ADMISSION TO THE BAR AND OATH-
TAKING OF SUCCESSFUL BAR APPLICANT AL. C. ARGOSINO
Issue: Whether or not Argosino should be allowed to take
the oath of attorney and be admitted to the practice of
law.
Ruling: Yes, Argosino is allowed to take the lawyer’s oath
and be admitted to the practice of law because he
Parilla Aritalia Yaplito
 complies with the requirement of good moral character
imposed upon those who are seeking admission to the
bar. Argosino showed the Court that he tried to make up
to the family of the deceased and to the community at
large. Argosino showed that he is a different person and
the he has become morally fit for admission to the
profession of law.
4. Appearance of Non-Lawyers
a. Law Student Practice
CRUZ vs. MINA
Issue: Whether or not Ferdinand, a law student, may
appear before an inferior court as an agent or friend of
a party litigant.
Ruling: Yes, Ferdinand is allowed to appear before an
inferior court as an agent or friend of a party, provided
under Rule 138, Section 34.
• Sec. 34. By whom litigation is conducted. — In the court
of a justice of the peace, a party may conduct his
litigation in person, with the aid of an agent or friend
appointed by him for that purpose, or with the aid of an
attorney. In any other court, a party may conduct his
litigation personally or by aid of an attorney, and his
appearance must be either personal or by a duly
authorized member of the bar.
RULE 138-A
Law Student Practice Rule
Section 1. Conditions for student practice. — A law student
who has successfully completed his 3rd year of the regular
four-year prescribed law curriculum and is enrolled in a
recognized law school's clinical legal education program
approved by the Supreme Court, may appear without
compensation in any civil, criminal or administrative case
before any trial court, tribunal, board or officer, to represent
indigent clients accepted by the legal clinic of the law
school.
Section 2. Appearance. — The appearance of the law
student authorized by this rule, shall be under the direct
supervision and control of a member of the Integrated Bar
of the Philippines duly accredited by the law school. Any
and all pleadings, motions, briefs, memoranda or other
papers to be filed, must be signed by the supervising
attorney for and in behalf of the legal clinic.
Section 3. Privileged communications. — The Rules
safeguarding privileged communications between
attorney and client shall apply to similar communications
made to or received by the law student, acting for the
legal clinic.
Section 4. Standards of conduct and supervision. — The law
student shall comply with the standards of professional
conduct governing members of the Bar. Failure of an
attorney to provide adequate supervision of student
practice may be a ground for disciplinary action. (Circular
No. 19, dated December 19, 1986).
b. Non-Lawyers in Court and Administrative Bodies
1. Cases before the MTC: Party to the litigation, in
person OR through an agent or friend or appointed
by him for that purpose (Sec. 34, Rule 138, RRC)
3
2. Before any other court: Party to the litigation, in
person (Ibid.)
3. Criminal case before the MTC in a locality where a
duly licensed member of the Bar is not available:
the judge may appoint a non-lawyer who is:
1. resident of the province
2. of good repute for probity and ability to
aid the accused in his defense (Rule 116,
Sec. 7, RRC).
4. Legal Aid Program – A senior law student, who is
enrolled in a recognized law school’s clinical
education program approved by the supreme
Court may appear before any court without
compensation, to represent indigent clients,
accepted by the Legal Clinic of the law
school. The student shall be under the direct
supervision and control of an IBP member duly
accredited by the law school.
5. Under the Labor code, non-lawyers may appear
before the NLRC or any Labor Arbiter, if
1. they represent themselves, or if
2. they represent their organization or
members thereof (Art 222, PO 442, as
amended).
6. Under the Cadastral Act, a non-lawyer can
represent a claimant before the Cadastral Court
(Act no. 2259, Sec. 9).
PAFLU vs. MUNING
Issue: Whether or not a non-lawyer cannot be awarded
with Attorney’s fee.
Ruling: No, Muning cannot recover Attorney’s fee
because Rule 138, Section 24 provided that,
“Compensation of Attorney’s agreement as to fees. An
Attorney shall be entitled to have and recover from his
client no more than a reasonable compensation for his
service.” The existence of an attorney-client relationship
as a condition for the recovery of attorney’s fee did not
exist, unless the client’s representative in court be a
lawyer.
5. Rules Regarding Practice of Law of Certain Public
Officials
a. Public Officials Who Cannot Practice Law
1. Judges and other officials as employees of the
Supreme Court (Rule 148, Sec. 35, RRC).
2. Officials and employees of the OSG (Ibid.)
3. Government prosecutors (People v. Villanueva, 14
SCRA 109).
4. President, Vice-President, members of the cabinet,
their deputies and assistants (Art. VIII Sec. 15, 1987
Constitution).
5. Members of the Constitutional Commission (Art IX-
A, Sec. 2, 1987 Constitution)
6. Ombudsman and his deputies (Art. IX, Sec. 8 (2nd
par), 1987 Constitution)
7. All governors, city and municipal mayors (R.A. No.
7160, Sec. 90).
8. Those prohibited by special law
Parilla Aritalia Yaplito
b. Public Officials with Restrictions in the Practice of Law a. Importance of Lawyer’s Oath
Public Officials with Restrictions in the Practice of Law: He lawyer’s oath is not a mere ceremony or formality for
1. No Senator as member of the House of practicing law. Every lawyer should at all times weigh his
Representative may personally appear as counsel actions according to the sworn promises he makes when
before any court of justice as before the Electoral taking the lawyer’s oath. If all lawyers conducted
Tribunals, as quasi-judicial and other administration themselves strictly according to the lawyer’s oath and the
bodies (Art. VI, Sec. 14, 1987 Constitution). Code of Professional responsibility, the administration
2. Under the Local Government Code (RA 7160, Sec. of justice will undoubtedly fairer, faster and easier for
91) Sanggunian members may practice their everyone concerned. (In Re: Argosino, 1997)
professions provided that if they are members of the
Bar, they shall not:
1. Appear as counsel before any court in
any civil case wherein a local government
unit or any office, agency, or
instrumentality of the government is the
adverse party;
2. Appear as counsel in any criminal case
wherein an officer or employee of the
national or local government is accused
of an offense committed in relation to his
office;
3. Collect any fee for their appearance in
administrative proceedings involving the
local government unit of which he is an
official;
4. Use property and personnel of the
government except when the
Sanggunian member concerned is
defending the interest of the government.
3. Under RA 910, Sec. 1, as amended, a retired justice
or judge receiving pension from the government,
cannot act as counsel in any civil case in which the
Government, or any of its subdivision or agencies is
the adverse party or in a criminal case wherein an
officer or employee of the Government is accused
of an offense in relation to his office.

6. Remedies Against Unauthorized Practice of Law

1. Petition for Injunction
2. Declaratory relief
3. Contempt of Court
4. Disqualifications and complaints for disbarment
5. Criminal complaint for estafa against the person
who falsely represented himself as a lawyer to the
damage of another

7. Lawyer’s Oath
“I, __________________, do solemnly swear that I will
maintain allegiance to the Republic of the Philippines; I will
support its constitution and obey the laws as well as the
legal orders of the duly constituted authorities therein; I will
do no falsehood, nor consent to the doing of any in court;
I will not willingly nor wittingly promote or sue any
groundless, false or unlawful suit, or give aid nor consent to
the same; I will delay no man for money or malice, and will
conduct myself as a lawyer according to the best of my
knowledge and discretion, with all good fidelity as well to
the court as to my clients; and I impose upon myself this
voluntary obligations without any mental reservation or
purpose of evasion. So help me God.”

4
Parilla Aritalia Yaplito