Tijam - Legal Ethics 2011 - New

ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : ChanRobles Professional Review, Inc.
5/13/2011
ar
JUSTICE NOEL G. TIJAM

Court of Appeals
The Code of Professional Responsibility does not

cease to apply to a lawyer simply because he has
joined the government service. In fact, by the
express provision of Canon 6 thereof, the rules
governing the conduct of lawyers shall
apply to lawyers in government in the
discharge of their official tasks. Thus,
where a lawyers misconduct as a
government official is of such nature as to
affect his qualification as a lawyer or to
show moral delinquency, then he may be
disciplined as a member of the bar on
such grounds.
4
es
an
bl
h
2
es
o
bl
an
Among the burdens of the relationship

nship is that
th
ondent in this case,
which enjoins the lawyer, respondent
nforma
to keep inviolate confidential information
ng legal co
acquired or revealed during
consultations.
he end of the day, not
The fact that one is, at the
inclined to handle thee clients ccase is hardly
tle mome
consequence. Of little
moment, too, is the fact that
sional en
no formal professional
engagement follows the
consultation. Nor will it make any difference that
ct whatsoev
no contract
whatsoever was executed by the
parties to memori
memorialize the relationship.
Rule 6.02 of the Code of Professional

Responsibility provides that a lawyer in the
government service shall not use his public
position to promote or advance his private
interests, nor allow the latter to interfere with
his public duties. Respondents conduct
manifestly undermined the peoples confidence
in the public office he used to occupy and cast
doubt on the integrity of the legal profession.
The ill- conceived use of his knowledge of the
intricacies of the law calls for nothing less than
the withdrawal of his privilege to practice law.
h
an
Ba
R
o
H
Hadjula
vs. Madianda, A.C. No. 6711; July 3,
2007
Held: Complainant went to respondent, a lawyer
who incidentally was also then a friend, to bare
what she considered personal secrets
and sensitive
sec
documents for the purpose off obtaining
legal
obtain
advice and assistance. The moment
momen the
complainant approached
hed the then
th receptive
respondent to seek legall advice,
advi a variable lawyerclient relationship evolved
evolv d between the two. Such
relationship imposes
poses upon
up the lawyer certain
restrictions circumscribed
by the ethics of the
ircumsc
profession.
Ba
The Supreme
eme Court
Cour held that the Respondents act
ng advant
of taking
advantage of his office as the Registry of
Deeds and em
employing his knowledge of the rules
governing land registration for the benefit of his
relatives has clearly demonstrated his unfitnesss
not only to perform the functions of a civil servant
rvant
but also to retain his membership in the bar.
bl
es
an
ar
R
o
bl
es
www.chanroblesbar.com : www.chanroblesbar.com.ph

5/13/2011
The High Court reiterated its ruling in Burbe vs.

Magulta ( 432 Phil. 840(2002), thus.A lawyer- client relationship was established from
the very first moment complainant asked
respondent for legal advise regarding the formers
business. To constitute professional employment,
it is not essential that the client employed the
attorney professionally on any previous occasion.
Ba
r
1). Where legal advice of any kind is sought

2). From a professional legal adviser in his capacity
as such.
3). The communications relating to that purpose
4). Made in confidence
5). By the client
6). Are at his instance permanently protected
7). From disclosure by himself or by legal advisor
8). Except the protection be waived
10
The Sup
Supreme Court, however, held that the
seri
seriousness of respondents offense
notwithstanding, there is room for compassion,
absent compelling evidence that respondent acted
with ill will. At the end of the day it appears that
respondent was actuated by the urge to retaliate
at, in the process of
without perhaps realizing that,
giving vent to a negative sentiment,
ntiment, she was
entiality.
violating rule of confidentiality.
bl
11
Ba
es
h
an
o
bl
Disposition: Respondent was

onished to be
reprimanded and admonished
circumspect in her handling
handlin of
ired as a result of a
information acquired
lawyer-client relationship.
relation
Respondentt was also
al sternly warned
repetit
against a repetition
of the same or
similar act.
ac
an
Likewise, a lawyer-client relationship exists

notwithstanding the close personal relationship
between the lawyer and the complainant or the
non-payment of the formers fees.
R
o
es
an
Ba
bl
es
an
It is not necessary that

hat any retainer be paid,
arged; nei
promised or charged;
neither is it material that the
attorney did not afterward
handle the case for
afterw
which his service w
was sought. If a person, in
respectt to busine
business affairs or troubles of any kind,
consults
with a view to obtaining
ts a lawyer
law
professional advice or assistance , and the
attorney voluntarily permits or aquiesces with the
consultation, then professional employment is
established.
Ba
r
R
o
bl
es
Citing Dean Wigmore, the Supreme Court listed the

following essential factors to establish the
existence of the attorney-client communication:
12

5/13/2011
` Competence,
Diligence
Fidelity to Clients Cause
and
Ba
r
Canon 17 A lawyer owes fidelity to the cause of

his client and he shall be mindful of the trust
and confidence reposed in him.
Canon 18 A lawyer shall serve his client with
competence and diligence.
He must serve the client with competence

and diligence and champion the latters
cause with wholehearted fidelity, care and
devotion. Else wise stated, he owed entire
devotion to the interest of the client, warm
zeal in the maintenance and defense of his
clients rights, and the exertion of his utmost
learning and ability to the end that nothing
be taken or withheld from his client, save by
the rules of law, legally applied. This simply
means that his client is entitled to the benefit
of any and every remedy and defense that is
authorized by the law of the land and he may
expect his lawyer to assert every such
remedy or defense.
16
Ba
r
`
es
an
bl
h
14
17
Ba
es
o
bl
Consolidated Farms, Inc.

c. vs. Alpon,
Alp
Jr.
A.C. No. 5525; March
h 4, 2005
This Court has always
the
ways reminded
rem
members of the legal
that
egal profession
pro
every case they
handle deserves full and
y hand
undivided attention,
ttention diligence, skill and
nce, rega
competence,
regardless of its importance,
ether they
th accept it for a fee or for
and whether
nd to constantly
c
free, and
keep in mind that
not only the property but also the life of
their clients may be at stake.
an
A.C. No. 5485; March 16, 2005

Lawyers who devote their professional
practice in representing litigants who could
ill afford legal services deserve
commendation. However, this mantle of
public service will not deliver the lawyer, no
matter how well-meaning, from the
consequences of negligent acts. It is not
enough to say that all pauper litigants should
be assured of legal representation. They
deserve quality representation as well.
Once he agrees to take up the cause of a
client, a lawyer owes fidelity to such cause
and must always be mindful of the trust and
confidence reposed in him.
h
an
Canoy vs. Ortiz
R
o
If much is demanded from an attorney, it

is because the entrusted privilege to
practice law carries with it the correlative
duties not only to the client but also to the
he public.
p
court, to the bar and to the
A
lawyer who performs his duty with
or not only
on protects the
diligence and candor
nt; he also
a
interest of his client;
serves the
ends of justice, do
does ho
honor to the bar and
in the respect
r
helps maintain
of the
y to the legal profession.
community
Ba
Rule 18.03 A lawyer

law
shall not neglect a
legal matter
to him and his
er entrusted
entru
negligence
ence in connection
co
therewith shall
er him liable.
l
render
Rule 18.04 A lawyer shall keep his client
informed of the status of his case and shall
e
respond within a reasonable time to the
clients request for information.
bl
es
h
an
R
o
bl
es
13
15
18

5/13/2011
Rollon vs. Naraval (A.C. No. 6424; March

4, 2005)
Ordinarily, lawyers are not obliged to act
either as advisers or as advocates of any
person who may wish to become their
client. They may decline employment and
refuse to accept representation, if they
are not in a position to carry it out
effectively or competently. But once they
agree to handle a case, attorneys are
required by the Canons of Professional
Responsibility to undertake the task with
h
zeal, care and utmost dedication.
Ba
r
Cheng vs. Agravante

A.C. No. 6183; March 23, 2004
In this case, respondents filing of the
Memorandum of Appeal four (4) days after
the deadline proves that his efforts fell short
of the diligence required of a lawyer. His
failure to perfect an appeal within the
prescribed period constitutes negligence and
malpractice proscribed by the Code of
Professional Responsibility, which provides
that a lawyer shall not neglect a legal matter
entrusted to him and his negligence in
connection therewith shall render him
liable.
22
an
Abiero vs. Juanin

Juanino
o. 5302; February 18, 2005
A.C. No.
awyer has the duty to exert his best
The lawyer
judgment in the prosecution or defense of
the case entrusted to him and to exercise
ence
reasonable and ordinary care and diligence
in the pursuit or defense of the case. x x
Ba
es
an
bl
h
20
23
es
o
bl
B.R. Sebastian Enterprises, Inc.

nc. vs. Court
C
of Appeals
ary 7, 199
G.R. No. 41862; February
1992
o the law firm
The confusion in the office of
h of one of its partners is
following the death
cation for failing to file the
not a valid justification
eceipt of the notice to file the
brief. Upon receipt
s
brief, the law firm should
have re-assigned
the case to anoth
another associate.
an
De Guzman vs. Basa

A.C. No. 5554; June 29, 2004
Rule 12.03, Code of Professional
Responsibility: A lawyer shall not, after
obtaining extensions of time to file
pleadings, memoranda or briefs, let the
period lapse without submitting the same
or offering an explanation for his failure to
do so.
h
an
Ba
R
o
Bar
Barbuco
vs. Beltran
A.C. No. 5092; August 11, 2004
The fact that respondent was involved in
a vehicular accident and suffered physical
injuries as a result thereof cannot serve
to excuse him from filing his
hi pleadings on
time considering that he
e was a member of
a law firm composed off not just
one
j
lawyer. X x respondent
could have asked
ndent co
any of his partners in the law office to file
the Appellants Brie
Brief for
fo him or, at least,
to file a Motion
on for Extension of Time to
file the said
pleading.
d plead
bl
es
Ba
r
R
o
bl
es
19
21
24

5/13/2011
Abay vs. Montesino (A.C. No. 5718;

December 4, 2003)
x x Even if respondent was honestly and
sincerely protecting the interests of
complainant, the former still had no right
to waive the appeal without the latters
knowledge and consent. If indeed,
respondent felt unable or unwilling to
continue his retainership, he should have
properly withdrawn his appearance and
allowed the client to appoint another
lawyer.
Ba
r
28
De Juan vs. Baria III (A.C. No. 5817; May

27, 2004)
x x (A)n attorney who undertakes an
action impliedly stipulates to carry it to its
termination, that is, until the case becomes
wyer is
i not at
final and executory. A lawyer
liberty to abandon his client a
and withdraw
reasona
his services withoutt reasonable
cause and
propr
only upon notice appropriate
in the
circumstances. x x
bl
26
29
Ba
o
bl
Perea vs. Almadro

( A.C. Case No. 5246; March 20, 2003)
2003
Respondent lawyers negligence
gligence was
w
compounded by his attempt
the tribunal
empt to have
h
believe the story of how
stored in a
ow his draft,
d
magnetic diskette, mysteriously
disappeared and
myste
how the absencee of such file in his diskette led
eve that th
him to believe
the same was already filed in
court. It was, said the High Court, a very
ous story
st
preposterous
and avoids the simple fact
that respondent lawyer failed to submit the
demurrer.
an
es
h
an
Bergonia vs. Merrera (A.C. No. 5024;

February 20, 2003)
Lawyers should fully familiarize themselves
with the causes of their clients before
advising the latter on the soundness of
litigating. If they find that the intended suit
is devoid of merit or that the pending action
is defenseless they should promptly inform
and dissuade their clients accordingly.
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 period granted.
R
o
es
an
Ba
Ba
r
Edquibal vs. Ferrer

errer
87; February
Febru
A.C. No. 5687;
3, 2005
- Section 2, Rule 44, Rules of Court of
ls:
Appeals:
The counse
counsel x x of the parties in the court
gin shall
sh
of origin
be respectively considered as
their counsel x x in the Court of Appeals.
- The practice of law does not require
extraordinary diligence (exactissima
diligentia) or that extreme measure of care
and caution which persons of unusuall
prudence and circumspection use for
or
securing and preserving their rights.
hts. All that
t
is required is ordinary diligence (diligentia)
(dilig
g
or that degree of vigilance expected
xpected of a
bonus pater familias.
bl
es
an
R
o
es
25
Amaya vs. Tecson, A.C. No. 5996; February 7,

2005
It is not enough that a practitioner is qualified to
handle a legal matter; he is also required to
prepare adequately and to give the appropriate
attention to his legal work.
Disbarment is the most severe form of
disciplinary sanction, and as such, the power to
disbar must always be exercised with great
caution for only the most imperative reasons
and in clear cases of misconduct affecting the
standing and moral character of the lawyer as an
officer of the court and a member of the bar.
Disbarment should not be decreed where
punishment less severe such as a reprimand,
suspension, or fine would accomplish the end
desired.
27
30

5/13/2011
Respondent lawyer claimed he had not met

complainants before, hence, could not ascertain
their identities during the signing of the
quitclaims. He claimed that he went to the labor
arbiters office on the request of his clients who
told him that complainants would be there to
submit their quitclaims. However, the minutes of
the proceedings in a related case, belied his claim
that he had not met the complainants before.
Anderson, Jr. vs. Cardeo

A.C. No. 3523; January 17, 2005
x x (I)t was incumbent upon respondent lawyer
to insist on his clients participation. x x As a
lawyer representing the cause of his client, he
should have taken more control over the
handling of the case. Knowing that his client was
based in the United States should, with more
reason, have moved him to secure all the legal
means available to him either to continue
representing his client effectively or to make the
necessary manifestation in court, with the
s
clients conformity, that he was withdrawing as
counsel of record. x x
Ba
r
34
bl
32
35
es
o
bl
an
Republic vs. Kenrick Development

ment Co
Corporation
06)
(G.R. No. 149576; Aug 8, 2006)
t sign a
A counsels authority and duty to
pleading are personal to him. He may not
ny person.
perso
delegate it to just any
onstitute an assurance that he
His signature constitutes
has read the pleading, that to the best of his
e, informa
knowledge,
information and belief, there is a
und to su
good ground
support it, and that it is not
d for delay. It is counsel alone, by
interposed
affixing his signature, who can certify to these
matters.
Complainants in this administrative case were

among the complainants in a labor case which
was decided in their favor. After the decision
became final and executory , individual
Release, Waiver and Quitclaims were
purportedly signed and sworn to buy the
complainants before the labor arbiter and in
the presence of respondent lawyer, who was
the opposing parties, in the labor case. The
complainants denied signing quitclaims under
oath before the labor arbiter, or having receive
the considerations therefore.
h
an
Ba
R
o
es
an
Ba
Furthe
Furthermore,
by his own information, the Labor
Arbiter
was entertaining doubts on the true
A
identity of those who executed the quitclaims.
The High Court said that as an officer of the
court, a lawyer must assist in the
administration of justice, and
any conduct on
nd a
his part that tends to obstruct,
or
truct, perverts
pe
impedes the administration
tration of justice
constitutes misconduct.
Respondent lawyer
uct. Res
was found guilty of n
negligence
and gross
lig
misconduct was
from the practice
as suspended
suspe
of Law for 6 months.
months
bl
es
` Fernandez
z
vs. Cabrera
C
II
A.C. No.
o. 5623;
5623 December 11,
3
2003
Acceptance
of money from a
epta
client establishes an attorneyclient relationship and gives rise
to the duty of fidelity to the
clients cause. x x
Ba
r
an
R
o
bl
es
31
33
36

5/13/2011
`
`
The preparation and signing of a

pleading constitute legal work
involving practice of law which is
reserved exclusively for the members
of the legal profession. Counsel may
delegate the signing of a pleading to
another lawyer but cannot do so in
favor of one who is not. A signature
by agents of a lawyer amounts to
signing by unqualified persons.
Ba
r
Court's Ruling:
Rule 15.03 of the Code of Professional Responsibility
provides:
A lawyer shall not represent conflicting
interests except by written consent of all
concerned given after a full disclosure of the
facts.
A lawyer may not, without being guilty of
professional misconduct, act as counsel for a person
whose interest conflicts with that of his present or
former client. The test is whether, on behalf of one client,
it is the lawyer's duty to contest for that which his duty to
another client requires him to oppose or when the
possibility of such situation will develop. The rule covers
not only cases in which confidential communications
have been confided, but also those in which no
confidence has been bestowed or will be used. In
addition, the rule holds even if the inconsistency is
remote or merely probable or the lawyer has acted in
good faith and with no intention to represent conflicting
interests.
40
Ba
r
R
o
bl
es
37
In relation to this, Canon 17 of the Code

C
of
Professional Responsibility provides
that a lawyer owes
ovides th
fidelity to the cause of his clientt and shall
be mindful of
s
the trust and confidence reposed
on him. His highest
p
and most unquestioned dutyy is to protect the client at all
hazards and costs even to himself.
imse The protection given
to the client is perpetual
does not cease with the
ua and d
termination of the litigation,
nor is it affected by the
litigatio
g
party's ceasing to
o employ
p
tthe attorney and retaining
another, or by anyy other change of relation between
them. It even survives
the death of the client.
surv
38
41
bl
Respondent was the former counsel of the late Lydio

Falame, complainants' father, in a forcible entry
case (first civil case) filed against the Lydio.
Consequently, the MTC ruled in favor of Lydio
Falame. Despite of the termination of the case,
Lydio engaged Respondent's service until his death.
Subsequently, Respondent became the counsel of
spouses Raleigh and Noemi Falame, who file a
complaint for declaration of nullity of deed of sale
and its TCT (2nd civil case) involving the property
subject in the first civil case against the
complainants and Sugni corporation before the
RTC.
The IBP Board of Governor dismissed the
disbarment complaint.
an
In the case at bar, respondent admitted

d having
jointly represented Lydio and Raleigh
gh as defendants
g
def
in the first civil case. Evidently, the
attorney-client
he attorne
relation between Lydio and respondent
was
pondent w
p
established despite the fact that it wa
was only Raleigh
who paid him. The case off Hilado vv. David tells us
that it is immaterial whether
ther such employment was
paid, promised or charged
rged for.
As defense counsel
sel in the first civil case,
respondent advocated
cated the sstance that Lydio solely
owned the property
subject of the case. In the
pertyy subj
p
second civil case involv
involving the same property,
respondent,
nt, as counsel
coun for Raleigh and his spouse,
has pursued
inconsistent position that Raleigh
ed the in
owned the same property in common with Lydio,
with complainants, who inherited the property,
committing acts which debase respondent's rights as
a co-owner.
es
h
an
Ba
R
o
an
`
`
The termination
term
of attorney-client relation provides no
justification for a lawyer to represent an interest adverse
jjustific
to or in conflict with that of the former client. The
client's
confidence once reposed should not be divested
lie
by mere expiration of professional employment. Even
after the severance of the relation, a lawyer should not
do anything which will injuriously affect his former
client in any matter in which he previously represented
him nor should he disclose or use any of the client's
confidences acquired in the previous relation.
an
bl
es
Conflict of Interests
Inter
Rule 15.03
5.03 A lawyer shall
repres
not represent
conflicting
rest except by written
interests
consent of all concerned
re
given after a full disclosure
of the facts.
39
42

5/13/2011
2. If the acceptance of the new retainer will

require the attorney to perform an act which will
injuriously affect his first client in any manner in
which he represents him, and also, whether he
will be called upon in his new relation to use
against his first client any knowledge acquired
through their connection.
3. Whether the acceptance of a new relation will
prevent an attorney from the full discharge of
his duty of undivided fidelity and loyalty to his
client or invite suspicion of unfaithfulness or
double dealing in the performance thereof.
43
46
Ba
r
Quiambao vs. Bamba

ba
gust 25,
25 2005
A.C. No. 6708; August
an
Ba
es
an
Santos, Sr. vs. Beltran

A.C. 5858; December 11, 2003
y
There is conflict of interest when a lawyer
represents inconsistent interests of two or more
opposing parties. x x
bl
44
47
Ba
es
h
an
bl
A lawyer may not, without being guilty

uiltyy of
professional misconduct, act as counsel for a
ts with that
t
person whose interest conflicts
of his
n also
present or former client. He mayy not
undertake to discharge conflicting duties
represen
p
anymore than he may represent
antagonistic
fo
interests. This stern rule is founded
on the
policyy in good taste. It springs
principle of public p
n of attor
from the relation
attorney and client which is
nd confidence.
confi
one of trust and
Lawyers are
expected not onlyy to keep inviolate the clients
ce, but also
al to avoid the appearance of
confidence,
treachery and d
double- dealing for only then can
litigants be encouraged to entrust their secrets to
their lawyers, which is of paramount importance
in the administration of justice.
an
Quiambao vs. Bamba, A.C. No. 6708;

August 25, 2005
Santos, Sr. vs. Beltran, A.C. 5858;
December 11, 2003
Northwestern University, Inc. vs.
Arquillo, A.C. No. 6632; August 2, 2005
Tests:
1. Whether or not in behalf of one client,
it is the lawyers duty to fight for an issue
or claim, but it is his duty to oppose it for
the other client.
R
o
Termination
r
of the attorney-client relationship
precludes an attorney from representing a new
client whose interest is adverse to his former
client.
Rule 15.03, Canon 15 of the Code of Professional
all n
Responsibility- A lawyer shall
not represent
conflicting interests except byy wri
written consent
er a full
ful disclosure of
of all concerned given after
facts.
Profe
Canon 21 of the Code off Professional
er shall preserve the
Responsibility- A law
lawyer
d secre
confidences and
secrets of his client even after
the attorney-- client p
privilege is terminated.
bl
es
ion again
The prohibition
against representing conflicting
interests is founde
founded on principles of public
nd good taste.
ta
policy and
ooves lawyers
law
It behooves
not only to keep inviolate the
s confid
clients
confidence, but also to avoid the
rance of treachery and double dealing for
appearance
only then can litigants be encouraged to entrust
their secrets to their lawyers, which is of
paramount importance in the administration
n of
justice.
R
o
bl
es
The fact that the attorney-client relation had ceased by

reason of Lydio's death or through the completion of the
specific task for which respondent was employed is not
reason for respondent to advocate a position opposed to
that of Lydio. Precedents tell us that even after the
termination of his employment, an attorney may not act as
counsel against his client in the same general matter, even
though, while acting for his former client, he acquired no
knowledge which could operate to his client's disadvantage
in the subsequent adverse employment. And while
complainants have never been respondent's clients, they
derive their rights to the property from Lydio's ownership
of it which respondent maintained in the first civil case.
For representing Raleigh's cause which is adverse to
that of his former client Raleigh's supposed coownership of the subject property respondent is guilty of
representing conflicting interests. Having previously
undertaken joint representation of Lydio and Raleigh,
respondent should have diligently studied and anticipated
the potential conflict of interest.
Respondent was found guilty of representing
mand.
conflicting interest and meted the penalty of reprimand.
Ba
r
45
48

5/13/2011
Quiambao vs. Bamba, A.C. No. 6708; August 25, 2005

The proscription against representation of
conflicting interests applies to a situation where the
opposing parties are present clients in the same
action or in an unrelated action. It is of no moment
that the lawyer would not be called upon to contend
for one client that which the lawyer has to oppose for
the other client, or that there would be no occasion to
use confidential information acquired from one to
the disadvantage of the other as the two actions are
wholly unrelated. It is enough that the opposing
parties in one case, one of whom would lose the suit,
are present clients and the nature or conditions of
the lawyers respective retainers with each of them
would affect the performance of the duty of
undivided fidelity to both clients.
When the case involves matters in which a

lawyer intervened while in government
service
Rule 6.03 A lawyer shall not, after leaving
government service, accept engagement or
employment in connection with any matter
in which he had intervened while in said
service.
Ba
r
52
Ba
r
`
bl
es
an
The representation
on of conflicting
c
interests made
nd with honest intention on the
in good faith and
awyer does
do not make the prohibition
part of the lawyer
inoperative.
ve.
It must
noted that the proscription against
ust be note
representation
sentatio of conflicting interests finds
application
ation where the conflicting interests arise
with respect to the same general matter however
slight the adverse interest may be. It applies
even if the conflict pertains to the lawyers
private activity or in the performance of a
function in a non-professional capacity. In the
process of determining whether there is a
conflict of interest, an important criterion
iterion is
probability, not certainty, of conflict.
flict.
PCG vs. Sandiganbayan, et al.

PCGG
G
G.R.
Nos. 151809-12; April 12, 2005
Matter - any discrete, isolatable act
as well as identifiable transaction or
conduct involving a particular
situation and specific party, and not
ng, enf
merely an act of drafting,
enforcing or
ent or agency
interpreting government
lations or
o laws, or
procedures, regulations
rincip
briefing abstract principles
of law.
m t be substantial
Intervention-- must
and significant
ant
bl
50
53
r
Ba
es
o
bl
Withdrawal of Services
Canon 22. A lawyer shall
withdraw his
ll withd
services only for good cause and
upon
a
notice appropriate in
n the circumstances.
cir
Santeco vs. Avance

e (A.C.
(A.C No. 5834;
December 11, 2003)
While the right
ight of the client to terminate
the relation
i.e., with or
ion is absolute,
ab
without cause, the right of the attorney to
withdraw
w or terminate the relation other
than for sufficient cause is considerably
restricted.
h
an
Gamilla, et al. vs. Mario, Jr.

A.C. Case No. 4763; March 20, 2003
A lawyer cannot continue representing a
client, even with the clients consent, after the
lawyer brings suit in his own behalf against the
same defendant, if it is uncertain whether the
defendant will be able to satisfy both
judgments.
A lawyer is not authorized to have financial
stakes in the subject matter of the suit brought
in behalf of his client.
The objective of a disciplinary case is not so
much to punish the individual attorney as to
protect the dispensation of justice by
sheltering the judiciary and the public from
misconduct or inefficiency of officers of the
court. Restorative justice not retribution is the
goal in this type of proceedings.
h
an
R
o
es
an
Ba
R
o
bl
es
49
51
54

5/13/2011
Rule 22.01, Code of Professional

Responsibility:
A lawyer may withdraw his services in
any of the following cases:
a) When the client pursues an illegal or
immoral course of conduct;
b) When the client insists that the lawyer
pursue conduct violative of the canons
and rules;
c) When his inability to work with cocounsel will not promote the best interest
of his client;
`
`
Ba
r
Facts:
Complainant Wilfredo M. Catu is a co-owner of a lot and
the building erected thereon located at 959 San Andres
Street, Malate, Manila. His mother and brother, Regina
Catu and Antonio Catu, contested the possession of
Elizabeth C. Diaz-Catu and Antonio Pastor of one of the
units in the building. The latter ignored demands for
them to vacate the premises. Thus, a complaint was
initiated against them in the Lupong Tagapamayapa of
Barangay 723, Zone 79 of the 5th District of Manila
where the parties reside.
Respondent, as punong barangay of Barangay 723,
summoned the parties to conciliation meetings. When
the parties failed to arrive at an amicable settlement,
respondent issued a certification for the filing of the
appropriate action in court.
58
Ba
r
R
o
bl
es
55
Ba
an
56
59
Ba
Ruling:
While certain local elective officials (like
ike govern
governors,
mayors, provincial board memberss and councilors)
are
coun
expressly subjected to a total or partial
to
artial proscription
pro
practice their profession or engage in an
any occupation, no
such interdiction is made on
punong barangay and
n the puno
the members of the sangguniang
barangay. Expressio
uniang b
unius est exclusio alterius.
Since they are excluded from
us. Sinc
any prohibition, the presumption
is that they are allowed
presump
to practice their profession.
rofession. And this stands to reason
because they are not mandated
to serve full time. In fact,
man
the sangguniang
barangay is supposed to hold regular
niang baran
sessions only
nly twice a month.
Accordingly, as p
punong barangay, respondent was not
forbidden to practice his profession. However, he
should have procured prior permission or
authorization from the head of his Department,
as required by civil service regulations.
an
o
bl
es
h
an
Good Moral Character and the Lawyers

Private Affairs
Canon 1. A lawyer shall uphold the
constitution, obey the laws of the land
and promote respect for law and legal
processes.
Rule 1.01 A lawyer shall not engage in
unlawful, dishonest, immoral or deceitful
conduct.
Canon 7 A lawyer shall at all times
uphold the integrity and dignity of the
legal profession, and support the
activities of the Integrated Bar.
R
o
Therea
Thereafter,
Regina and Antonio filed a complaint for
ejectm
ejectment against Elizabeth and Antonio Pastor in the
Me
Metropolitan Trial Court of Manila, Branch 11.
Respondent entered his appearance as counsel for the
defendants in that case. In the course thereof, he
prepared and signed pleadings including the answer with
counterclaim, pre-trial brief, position paper and notice of
appeal.
Because of this, complainant filed
d the instant
ins
administrative complaint with the IBP, claiming
that
c
respondent committed an act off impr
impropriety as a lawyer
and as a public officer when
stood as counsel for the
hen he sto
defendants despite the factt that h
he presided over the
conciliation proceedings
between
the litigants as punong
ngs b
w
barangay.
Issue: Whether
er or not R
Respondent violated the Code of
Professional Resp
Responsibility when he acted as counsel for
Responsib
Elizabeth and Anto
Antonio
on Pastor.
le
bl
es
an
d) When the mental and

a
physical condition of
nders it difficult
d
the lawyer renders
for him to carry
ployment effectively;
out the employment
e) When
client deliberately fails to pay the
n the clien
r the serv
fees for
services or fails to comply with the
er agreement;
agree
retainer
f) When
n the lawyer is elected or appointed to
public office; and
g) Other similar cases.
or
Whether or not a lawyer has a valid cause for
e
withdrawing from a case, he may only retire
is
from a case either by written consent of his
er due
client or by permission of the court after
he lawyer
notice and hearing, in which event the
co
should see to it that the name of the new counsel
is recorded in the case.
57
60
10

5/13/2011
`
`
Rule 7.03 A lawyer shall not

engage in conduct that adversely
reflects on his fitness to practice
law, nor should he, whether in
public or private life, behave in a
scandalous manner to the discredit
of the legal profession.
61
64
ar
r
Ba
es
an
bl
62
65
Ba
es
h
an
o
bl
It is difficult to state with precisio

precision and
ard as tto what
to fix an inflexible standard
is grossly immoral conduct
onduct or
o to specify
the moral delinquency
ency and obliquity
which will renderr a lawyer
unworthy of
law
continuing ass a member
of the bar. The
mem
rule implies
what appears to be
lies that w
unconventional
entiona behavior to the
straight- laced
lace may not be the immoral
conduct that warrants disbarment.
an
Atty. Vicente G. Rellosa was, therefore,

found GUILTY of professional
misconduct for violating his oath as a
lawyer and Canons 1 and 7 and Rule
1.01 of the Code of Professional
Responsibility. He was suspended
from the practice of law for a period
of six months effective from his
receipt of the resolution.
R
o
As officers of the court, lawyers must not only in

A
fact be of good moral character but must also be
seen to be of good moral character and leading
lives in accordance with the highest moral
standards of the community.
Good moral character- what a person really is, as
distinguished from good reputation,
or from the
eputati
opinion generally entertained
ertained of
o him, or the
estimate in which he is held by
b the public in the
place where he is known.
know
Moral character is not a subjective term but one
which corresponds
sponds to
t objective reality.
bl
es
For not living up to hiss oath as

a well as for not
complying with the exacting ethical standards of the
ponde failed to comply with
p
legal profession, respondent
ode of Professional
P
Canon 7 of the Code
Responsibility:
CANON 7.
A lawyer
law
shall at all times
e integr
g
uphold the
integrity
and the dignity of the legal
sion and support
s
profession
the activities of the
ated Bar.
Bar
Integrated
Indeed,, a lawyer
lawy who disobeys the law disrespects it.
ing he disregards legal ethics and disgraces
In so doing,
the dignity of the legal profession.
conduct of a member of the bar. Every lawyer should
uld
es
act and comport himself in a manner that promotes
public confidence in the integrity of the legal
profession.
A member of the bar may be disbarred or suspended
pended
from his office as an attorney for violation of the
lawyer's oath 20 and/or for breach of thee ethics o
of the
ode of
legal profession as embodied in the Code
Professional Responsibility.
an
R
o
bl
es
Public confidence in the law and in lawyers may be eroded by the

irresponsible and improper In acting as counsel for a party
without first securing the required written permission,
respondent not only engaged in the unauthorized practice of law
but also violated civil service rules which is a breach of Rule 1.01
of the Code of Professional Responsibility:
Rule 1.01 A lawyer shall not engage in unlawful,
dishonest, immoral or deceitful conduct. In acting as
counsel for a party without first securing the required written
permission, respondent not only engaged in the unauthorized
practice of law but also violated civil service rules which is a
breach of Rule 1.01 of the Code of Professional Responsibility:
Rule 1.01 A lawyer shall not engage in unlawful,
dishonest, immoral or deceitful conduct.
For not living up to his oath as well as for not complying with the
exacting ethical standards of the legal profession, respondent
failed to comply with Canon 7 of the Code of Professional
Responsibility:
CANON 7. A lawyer shall at all times uphold the
integrity and the dignity of the legal profession and
support the activities of the Integrated Bar.
Indeed, a lawyer who disobeys the law disrespects it. In so doing,
ng,
he disregards legal ethics and disgraces the dignity of thee legal
leg
profession.
Ba
r
63
66
11

5/13/2011
Ba
r
Tolentino vs. Mendoza

A.C. No. 5151; October 19, 2004
The requirement of good moral character is
not only a condition precedent to membership
in the Philippine Bar but is also a continuing
requirement to maintain ones good standing
in the legal profession.
Aldovino vs. Pujalte
A.C. No. 5082; February 17, 2004
x x Membership in the legal profession is a
privilege. And whenever it is made to appear
that an attorney is no longer worthy of the
trust and confidence of the public, it becomes
not only the right but also the duty of this
Court, which made him one of its officers and
nd
gave him the privilege of ministering within
thin its
Bar, to withdraw the privilege.
Bustamante-Alejandro vs. Alejandro

A.C. No. 4256; February 13, 2004
No distinction has been made as to
whether the misconduct was committed in
the lawyers professional capacity or in his
private life. This is because a lawyer may
not divide his personality so as to be an
attorney at one time and a mere citizen at
another. He is expected to be competent,
honorable and reliable at all times since he
who cannot apply and abide by the laws of
private affairs, can hardly be expected to
do so in other relations.
70
Ba
r
C
Cojuangco,
Jr. vs. Palma
A
A.C. 2474 ; June 30, 2005
For the purpose of determining
whether a person is legally
free
leg
to
nd marriage,
marr
contract a second
a
tion that the first
judicial declaration
marriage was
as null
nu and void ab
initio is essential.
ssentia
bl
es
an
Ba
68
71
Ba
es
h
an
bl
The fact that respondent lawyer p

provided
rovided well
nt to show
sh
for his children is not sufficient
his
ing
g a me
moral fitness to continue being
member of
the noble profession of the law. It has always
been the duties of parents
support,
ts to sup
educate and instruct their
children
heir child
according to right precepts
and good
cepts
p an
example; and to give them llove,
companionship and
understanding, as well
d under
as moral and spiritual
guidance ( Article
ritual g
220, Family Code
But what respondent
de )). Bu
forgot is that he has a
also
duties to his
s wife. As a husband, he is obliged
to live with
mutual love, respect
th her;; observe
o
and fidelity;
ity;
y; and render help and support (
Article 68,
Code ). And most
8,, Family
Fam
important of all, he is obliged to remain
faithful to her until death.
an
Purposes of the requirement of good moral

character:
(a) to protect the public;
(b) to protect the public image of lawyers;
(c) to protect prospective clients; and
(d) to protect errant lawyers from themselves.
Lawyers are expected to abide by the tenets of

morality, not only upon admission to the Bar
but also throughout their legal career, in order
to maintain their good standing in this
exclusive and honored fraternity. They may be
suspended from the practice of law or
disbarred for any misconduct, even if it
pertains to his private activities, as long as it
shows him to be wanting in moral character,
honesty, probity or good demeanor.
R
o
bl
es
an
Dantes vs. Dantes

es
Sept
A.C. No. 6486;; September
22, 2004
nduct - conduct which is so
Immoral conduct
willful, flagrant,
agrant,
g
or shameless as to
show indifference
to the opinion of good
ndiffere
and respecta
respectable
members of the
p
community.
munity
To be
e the basis of disciplinary action,
the lawyers conduct must not only be
immoral, but grossly immoral. That is,
it must be so corrupt as to constitute
ea
criminal act or so unprincipled as to
o be
reprehensible to a high degree or
committed under such scandalous
ous or
revolting circumstances as to shock tthe
common sense of decency.
R
o
bl
es
67
69
72
12

5/13/2011
Estrada vs. Escritor

A.M. No. P-02-1651;June 22,2006
Ba
r
The Supreme Court resolved to apply the

compelling state interest test and directed the
Office of the Solicitor General to intervene to:
(a)
Examine the sincerity and centrality of respondents
claimed religious belief and practice;
(b)
Present the evidence on the states compelling
interest to override respondents religious belief
and practice; and
(c)
Show that the means that the state adopts in
pursuing its interest is the least restrictive to
respondents religious freedom.
In this particular case and under these distinct

circumstances, respondents conjugal
arrangement cannot be penalized as she made
out a case for exemption from the law based on
her fundamental right to freedom of religion.
State interest must be upheld in order that
freedoms including religious freedom- may be
enjoyed. In the area of religious exercise as
preferred freedom , however man stands
accountable to an authority higher that the state,
and so the state interest sought to be upheld
must be so compelling that its violation will
erode the very fabric of the state that will also
protect the freedom. In the absence of a showing
that such state interest exists, man must be
allowed to subscribe to the Infinite.
76
Ba
r
R
o
bl
es
73
Spou
Spouses
Olbes vs. Deciembre
A.C.
A.C No. 5365; April 27, 2005
A high standard of excellence and ethics
is expected and required of members of
the bar. Such conduct of nobility and
uprightness should remain with them,
r in their private
whether in their public or
lives. As officers of the courts and
keepers of the publics
ics faith, they are
burdened with the
e highest
highes degree of
social responsibility
and are thus
y an
mandated to behave
hav at all times in a
manner consistent
sistent with truth and honor.
bl
74
77
Ba
o
bl
es
h
an
x x Good moral character includes

nclude at
mo
least common honesty. No moral
r membership
membe
qualification for bar
is
an truth
more important than
truthfulness and
rous ethics
et
candor. The rigorous
of the
ces a premium
p
profession places
on honesty
ns duplicitous
dupl
and condemns
behavior.
m
Lawyers must be ministers
of truth.
mu not mislead the court
Hence, they must
w it to be misled by any artifice.
or allow
i dealings, they are expected to
In all their
act in good faith.
an
It is not enough to contend that the states

interest is important, because our Constitution
itself holds the right to religious freedom sacred.
The state must articulate in specific terms the
state interest involved in preventing the
exemption, which must be compelling, for only
the gravest abuses, endangering paramount
interest can limit the fundamental right to
religious freedom. To rule otherwise would be to
emasculate the Free Exercise Clause as a source
of right by itself. The government must do more
than assert the objectives at risk if exemption is
given; it must precisely show how and to what
extent those objectives will be undermined if
exemptions are granted.
R
o
es
an
Ba
bl
es
an
The Solicitor General

ral conceded
conc
that the sincerity
resp
p
and centrality of respondents
claimed
lief and practice
p
religious belief
were beyond
oubt. Th
serious doubt.
Thus, the burden shifted to the
nment to demonstrate
d
government
that the law or
ce justif
jjustified a compelling secular objective
practice
at it is
i the least restrictive means of
and that
achieving that objective. The Solicitor General,
however failed to show the gravest abuses,,
ould
endangering paramount interest which could
ntal
limit or override respondents fundamental
d the
right to religious freedom. Neither did
w that the
th
government exert any effort to show
itimate state
s
means it sought to achieve its legitimate
objective is the least intrusive means.
75
78
13

5/13/2011
Ba
r
Facts: Complainant filed a complaint for

disbarment against respondent lawyer for
carrying on an illicit relationship with his wife.
Respondent denied complainants allegation that
he and complainants wife were flaunting their
adulterous relationship, arguing that their
relationship was low profile and known only to
the immediate members of their respective
families. Respondent likewise disputed
complainants allegation that his acts constituted
gross moral depravity, arguing that his
relationship with complainants wife was not
under scandalous circumstances.
The High Court noted that respondent did not

deny his adulterous relationship with
complainants wife; what he merely denied was
having flaunted such relationship. This, said the
Supreme Court, constituted a negative pregnant
where the qualifying circumstances alone are
denied while the facts itself are admitted.
The High Court also considered as a negative
pregnant, respondents denial of having personal
knowledge of the birth certificate of the child
born by complainants wife, noting that
respondent never denied being the father of the
child.
82
Ba
es
an
bl
h
80
83
Ba
es
h
an
o
bl
According to the High Court, this case involved

invol
a
relationship between a married
d lawyer and a
married woman who is not his
is wife; it
i is
immaterial whether the affair was carried out
discreetly. The Court reiterated
eiterated that even if not
all forms of extra-marital
relations are
tal rela
punishable under penal law , sexual relations
outside marriage
and immoral as it
ge is disgraceful
disgr
manifest deliberate
of the sanctity of
berate disregard
d
marriage and the marital
vows protected by the
m
Constitution
(Vitug vs. Rongcal A.C. No. 6313;
ion (Vit
Septemberr 7
7, 2
2006). The Court further
reiterated that carrying on an illicit affair with a
married woman constitutes grossly immoral
conduct
an
While the administrative case was being

investigated, respondent manifested that
complainants petition for the nullity of his
marriage was granted by the RTC, and the
criminal for adultery was withdrawn by
complainant.
Held: The Supreme Court held that the adulterous
relationship between respondent and
complainants wife was proven by more than
clearly preponderant evidence.
R
o
Further
Furthermore,
the Court noted that the affidavit of
he records custodian of the hospital where the
the
child was born stated that it was complainants
wife who supplied the information on the childs
paternity. The Court also observed that the
signature of complainant on her marriage
hat appearing
app
certificate was the same as that
on the
birth certificate.
ected respondents
resp
The Supreme Court rejected
n constitute gross
assertion that his acts did not
ct beca
immoral conduct
because they were supposedly
ndalous circumstances.
not under scandalous
bl
es
an
Later , complainantss wife gav

gave birth to a baby girl,
ate of Live
L Birth bearing the
and the Certificate
signature of complainants
wife, showed
complain
ent as the father.
f
respondent
Respondent denied
persona knowledge of the birth certificate.
having personal
Respondent
ndent also
a moved to dismiss the complaint
due to the pendency of a civil case filed by
complainant for the annulment of his marriage,
e,
and a criminal complaint for adultery against
respondent and complainants wife.
Ba
r
R
o
bl
es
79
81
84
14

5/13/2011
and is indicative of an extremely low regard for

the fundamental ethics of the legal profession.
Said the Supreme Court that the marriage
between complainant his wife was subsequently
declared void ab initio was immaterial. The acts
complained of took place before the marriage
was declared null and void. As a lawyer,
respondent should be aware that a man and a
woman deporting themselves as husband and
wife are presumed, unless proven otherwise, to
have entered into a lawful contract of marriage.
In carrying on an extra-marital affair with
complainants wife prior to the judicial
p nant
declaration that her marriage with complainant
Clients Money/Property to be Held in Trust
Ba
r
Canon 15 A lawyer shall observe candor, fairness,

loyalty in all his dealings and transactions with his
client.
Canon 16 A lawyer shall hold in trust all moneys and
properties of his client that may come into his
possession.
Rule 16.01 A lawyer shall account for all money or
property collected or received for or from the client.
Rule 16.02 A lawyer shall keep the funds of each
client separate and apart from his own and those of
others kept by him.
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.
88
bl
es
Ba
es
an
bl
h
86
89
Ba
o
bl
Hernandez vs. Go
A.C. No. 1526; January 31,, 2005
(Respondents) acts off acquiring
for
acquir
himself complainants
to
ts lots entrusted
e
him are, by any standard,
ndard, acts
constituting gross
misconduct, a
s misc
grievous wrong,
act, a
ng, a forbidden
for
dereliction in duty, willful in character,
and implies
intent and not
ies a wrongful
wro
mere error
judgment. Such conduct
ror in ju
on the part
art of the respondent degrades
not only himself but also the name and
honor of the legal profession. x x
an
es
h
an
C
Adultery being a private offense , the DOJ had no

choice but to grant complainants motion to
withdraw. But even if the Information for adultery
was filed in court and respondent and
complainants wife were to be acquitted of
adultery after trial, the same would not have been
a bar to the administrative complaint against
respondent since administrative cases against
lawyers belong to a class of their own and may
proceed independently of civil and criminal cases.
Disposition: Respondent was disbarred
R
o
Although a lawyers lien over a clients

property and satisfaction of his lawful
fees and disbursement is recognized,
xercis
the same cannot be exercised
attorney
haphazardly. The attorney-client
fiducia relationship
relationship is a fiduciary
es a high
h g degree of
which requires
d good faith.
fidelity and
an
Was null and void, and despite

despi respondent himself
showe disrespect for an
being married , he showed
eld sacred by the law, and he betrayed
institution held
ss to be a lawyer.
his unfitness
mplainant withdrawal of his petition for
As for complainants
ci prosecutor dismissal of his
review of the city
al com
criminal
complaint for adultery, the High Court
noted that before complainant filed his motion to
ssal
withdraw, the DOJ already reversed the dismissal
of the complaint for adultery by the city
prosecutor.
Ba
r
R
o
bl
es
85
87
90
15

5/13/2011
Almendarez Jr. vs. Langit

(A.C. No. 7057; July 25, 2006)
Respondent lawyer committed a
flagrant violation of his oath when he
received the monthly rentals intended
for his client, without accounting for
and returning such sum to its rightful
owner.
Villanueva vs. Ishiwata

A.C. No. 5041; November 23, 2004
The relationship between an attorney and his
client is highly fiduciary in nature. Under his
oath, a lawyer pledges himself not to delay any
man for money and he is bound to conduct
himself with good fidelity to his clients. A lawyer
should thus refrain from any action whereby for
his personal benefit or gain, he abuses or takes
advantage of the confidence reposed in him by
his client. Accordingly, any money collected for
the client or other trust property coming into the
lawyer's possession should promptly be reported
by him. A lawyer must at all times conduct
himself, especially in his dealings with his clients
and the public at large, with honesty and
integrity in a manner beyond reproach. x x
Ba
r
94
bl
es
an
92
95
r
Ba
es
bl
Lemoine vs. Balon

3
A.C. 5829; October 28, 2003
That respondent had a lien on
r his atto
complainants funds for
attorneys fees
did not relieve him of his duty
du to account for
it. The lawyers continuing
tinuing exercise of his
retaining lien presupposes
that the client
suppos
pp
agrees with the amount of attorneys fees to
be charged. In
of disagreement or when
n case o
the client contests
that amount for being
ontests th
unconscionable,
the lawyer must
onable, however,
h
not arbitrarily
the funds in his
arily
y apply
a
possession
payment of his fees. He
n to the
t
can file, if he deems it desirable, the
necessary action or proper motion with the
proper court to fix the amount of such fees.
Sec. 25. Unlawful retention of

clients funds; contempt- When
an attorney unjustly retains in his
hands money of his client after it has
been demanded he may be punished
for contempt as an Officer of the
Court who has misbehaved in his
official transactions; but proceedings
under this section shall not be a bar to
a criminal prosecution
h
an
R
o
Shulz vs.
v Flores
A.C. No.
N 4219; December 8, 2003
Where
a client gives money to his lawyer for a specific
Wh
purpose, such as to file an action, appeal an adverse
judgment, consummate a settlement, or pay the
purchase price of a parcel of land, the lawyer should,
upon a failure to take such step and spend the money
for it, immediately return the money to his client. The
fact that a lawyer has a lien for his attorneys fees on the
money in his hands collected for his client does not
relieve him from the obligation to make a prompt
ntitl to unilaterally
accounting. Neither is a lawyer entitled
or himse
appropriate his clients money for
himself by the mere
atto
fact alone that the client owes him attorneys
fees.
The failure of an attorney to return tthe clients money
o the p
presu
upon demand gives rise to
presumption that he has
is own us
misappropriated it for his
use to the prejudice and
ed in him by the client. It is
violation of the trust reposed
on of the
he general
g
not only gross violation
morality as well
hics;; it
i also impairs public
as of professional ethics;
egal
g p
pro
confidence in the legal
profession and deserves
punishment. In short,, x x the unjustified withholding
ging
g
g to h
of money belonging
his client, as in this case,
mpositio
mp
warrants the imposition
of disciplinary action.
ar
an
Respondent lawyers
ers failure
failu to turn over the
plainti despite demand gives
money to the plaintiff
presump
rise to the presumption
that he had
ted the money
m
converted
for his personal use and
it. This, is a gross violation of general
benefit.
ity as well as of professional ethics,
morality
impairing public confidence in the legal
profession. More specifically, it renders
respondent lawyer liable not only for
violating the Code of Professional
pt, as
Responsibility but also for contempt,
stated in Section 25, Rule 138 off the Rules
Rule of
Court:
Ba
r
R
o
bl
es
91
93
96
16

5/13/2011
Ong vs. Grijaldo

A.C. No. 4724; April 30, 2003
A lawyer, under his oath, pledges himself not to
delay any man for money or malice and is bound
to conduct himself with all good fidelity to his
clients. He is obliged to report promptly the
money of his client that has come into his
possession. He should not commingle it with his
private property or use it for his personal
purposes without his clients consent.
Respondent, by converting the money of his
client to his own personal use without her
consent, was guilty of deceit, malpractice and
gross misconduct. Not only did he degrade
himself but as an unfaithful lawyer he
besmirched the fair name of an honorable
profession.
Ba
r
Ramos vs, Pallugna

A.C. No. 5908; October 25, 2004
The lawyers office does not permit violation of
the law or any manner of fraud or chicanery.
A lawyers responsibility to protect and
advance the interests of his client does not
warrant a course of action propelled by ill
motives and malicious intentions against the
other party. Mandated to maintain the dignity
of the legal profession, they must conduct
themselves honorably and fairly. They
advance the honor of their profession and the
best interests of their clients when they render
service or give advice that meets the strictest
principles of moral law.
10
0
an
bl
es
Candor, Fairness
rness and Respect to Court,
es and Opposing
O
Colleagues
Party
n 10 - A llawyer owes candor,
Canon
ess and good faith to the court.
fairness
10 1 - A lawyer shall not do any
Rule 10.1
o
falsehood, nor consent to the doing of
r
any in court; nor shall he mislead or
y
allow the court to be misled by any
artifice.
Rule 1.01 - A lawyer shall not engage in
ral or
unlawful, dishonest, immoral
deceitful conduct.
Ba
bl
e
an
98
10
1
Ba
o
bl
Vda. De Fajardo vs. Bugaring

04
A.C. No. 5113; October 7, 2004
t the
To be sure, a lawyer is entitled to
s against any attempt
protection of the courts
on the part of a client to escap
escape payment of
s fees. However, such
legitimate attorneys
protection must not be sought at the expense
plete can
of truth. Complete
candor or honesty is
m lawye
expected from
lawyers, particularly when
ar and pl
they appear
plead before the courts for
n causes against former clients, as in
their own
this case. With his armada of legal
knowledge and skills, respondent clearly
enjoyed the upper hand. x x
an
es
h
an
Heirs of the late Herman Rey Romero vs. Reyes,

Jr.
A.C. No. 6192; June 23, 2005
When they appear before a tribunal, lawyers act
not merely as representatives of a party but, first
and foremost, as officers of the court. Thus,
their duty to protect their clients interests is
secondary to their obligation to assist in the
speedy and efficient administration of justice.
While they are obliged to present every available
legal remedy or defense, their fidelity to their
clients must always be made within the
parameters of law and ethics, never at the
expense of truth, the law, and the fair
administration of justice.
R
o
Youn vs. Batuegas, et al.

Young
A.
A.C. No. 5379; May 9, 2003
A lawyer must be a disciple of truth.
He should bear in mind that as an officer of
the court his high vocation is to correctly
inform the court upon the law and the facts
of the case and to aid it in doing justice and
arriving at the correct conclusion.
The
clus
courts, on the other hand, are entitled
to
en
expect only complete honesty
nesty
y ffrom lawyers
appearing and pleading
ding before
befo them.
While a lawyer has
duty to
s the solemn
so
defend his clients
s rights
hts and is expected to
display the utmost
zeal in defense of his
most ze
clients cause,, his conduct
must never be at
con
the expense
e of truth.
trut
Ba
r
R
o
bl
es
97
99
10
2
17

5/13/2011
In Re Almacen
31 SCRA 562 [1970]
x x [D]isciplinary proceedings x x are sui
generis. Neither purely civil nor purely
criminal, this proceeding is not and does not
involve a trial of an action or a suit, but is
rather an investigation by the Court into the
conduct of its officers. Not being intended to
inflict punishment, it is in no sense a criminal
prosecution. Accordingly, there is neither a
plaintiff nor a prosecutor therein. It may be
initiated by the Court motu proprio. Public
interest is its primary objective, and the real
question for determination is whether or not the
attorney is still a fit person to be allowed the
privileges as such. x x
Ba
r
Hueysuwan-Florido vs. Florido

A.C. No. 5624; January 20, 2004
Candor and fairness are demanded of every
lawyer. The burden cast on the judiciary would be
intolerable if it could not take at face value what is
asserted by counsel. The time that will have to be
devoted just to the task of verification of
allegations submitted could easily be imagined.
Even with due recognition then that counsel is
expected to display the utmost zeal in the defense
of a clients cause, it must never be at the expense
of the truth. x x
A lawyers language should be forceful but
dignified, emphatic but respectful as befitting an
advocate and in keeping with the dignity of the
legal profession. The lawyers arguments, whether
written or oral, should be gracious to both court
and opposing counsel and should be of such words
as may be properly addressed by one gentleman to
another.
10
6
Ba
r
an
R
o
bl
es
10
3
Can
Canon
8 A lawyer shall conduct himself
with courtesy, fairness, and candor toward
his professional colleagues, and shall avoid
harassing tactics against opposing counsel.
Rule 8.01 A lawyer shall not, in his
e language
langu
professional dealings, use
which
otherwi
is abusive, offensive or otherwise
improper.
bl
10
4
10
7
Ba
le
s
h
an
In an answer to a petition forr cancellatio

cancellation of registration
Sugigaono
gg
and franchise filed against Sugigaonon
Rural Banking
ngko Sentral
Sen
Corporation before the Bangko
ng Pilipinas, Atty.
in-hous counsel, stated, inter
Larong, the Rural Bankss in-house
alia:
That this is another
er in the sseries of blackmail suits
filed by plaintiff [herein ccomplainant Jose C. Saberon]
and his wife to coerce th
the Bank and Mr. Bonpin for
ain.
financial gain.
Atty. Larong
ng
g made the
t same statement of the same tenor
nder to
t complainant's reply.
in his Rejoinder
Finding the aforementioned statements to be
totally malicious, vicious and bereft of any factual and
legal basis, complainant filed a complaint against Atty.
Larong with the IBP.
`
`
an
Allied Banking Corporation vs. Court of Appeals

G.R. No. 144412; November 18, 2003
The syllabus of cases in official or unofficial
reports of Supreme Court decisions or
resolutions is not the work of the Court, nor
does it state this Courts decision. The syllabus is
simply the work of the reporter who gives his
understanding of the decision. The reporter
writes the syllabus for the convenience of
lawyers in reading the reports. A syllabus is not
a part of the courts decision. A counsel should
not cite a syllabus in place of the carefully
considered text in the decision of the Court.
x x It is the duty of all officers of the court to
cite the rulings and decisions of the Supreme
Court accurately.
R
o
es
an
Ba
bl
es
Rule 10.02 - A lawyer shall not knowingly

misr
misquote or misrepresent
the contents of a
paper,, the language
or the argument of
lang
sing counsel,
cou
opposing
or the text of a decision
thorit or knowingly cite as law a
or authority,
provision already rendered inoperative by
ct
repeal or amendment, or assert as a fact
that which has not been proved.
10
5
10
8
18

5/13/2011
`
`
Ba
r
Ruling:
While a lawyer is entitled to present his case
with vigor and courage, such enthusiasm does not justify
the use of offensive and abusive language. Language
abounds with countless possibilities for one to be emphatic
but respectful, convincing but not derogatory, illuminating
but not offensive.
On many occasions, the Supreme Court has reminded
members of the Bar to abstain from all offensive
personality and top advance no fact prejudicial to the
honor or reputation of a party or witness, unless required
by the justice of the cause with which he is charged. In
keeping with the dignity of the legal profession, a lawyer's
language even in his pleadings must be dignified.
It is of no consequence that the allegedly malicious
statements of respondent were made not before a court but
before the BSP.
Utterances, petitions and motions in the course of
judicial proceedings have consistently been considered as
ayy
absolutely privileged, however false or malicious they may
be, but only for so long as they as pertinent and relevant to
the subject inquiry.
Estrada vs. Sandiganbayan

G.R. No. 159486-88; November 25, 2003
Criticism or comment made in good faith on the
correctness or wrongness, soundness or unsoundness,
of a decision of the Court would be welcome, if wellfounded, such reaction can enlighten the court and
contribute to the correction of an error if committed.
The Supreme Court does not claim infallibility; it will
not denounce criticism made by anyone against the
Court for, if well-founded, (it) can truly have
constructive effects in the task of the Court, but it will
not countenance any wrongdoing nor allow the erosion
of our peoples faith in the judicial system, let alone, by
those who have been privileged by it to practice law in
the Philippines.
x x In liberally imputing sinister and devious motives
and questioning the impartiality, integrity and
authority of the members of the Court, (the lawyer) has
only succeeded in seeking to impede, obstruct and
pervert the dispensation of justice.
11
2
Ba
r
Ba
an
bl
11
0
11
3
Ba
o
bl
es
h
an
Sadness as counsel, to come to the

st instit
realization that the highest
institution of
which I am an officer has sunk to such a
low. Indignation as a citizen , that the
o are su
public officers who
supposed to serve
him and help him
m find justice, should
udgeme
instead give judgements
that so insult the
intelligence
glare with iniquity
ce and gla
Rule 11.05: A lawyer shall submit

grievances against a judge to the
proper authorities only.
R
o
Re : L
Letter dated February 21, 2005 of Atty. Noel
S. Sorreda (A.M. No. 05 3 04- SC ; July 22,
2005)
Mr. Chief Justice, I believe the manner the Court
comported itself in the aforesaid case is totally
execrable and atrocious, entirely unworthy of
the majesty and office of the highest tribunal of
m
the land. It is the action not off men
of reason or
e of law
those who believe in the rule
law, but rather of
m
bullies and tyrants from whom might
is right .
gh Court, for
g
f shoving
I say, shame on the High
r s throat a ruling which,
down a hapless suitor
coul not justify.
from all appearances, it could
no only unjust; that is
Mr. Chief Justice, th
that is not
ce, to d
craven cowardice,
deal with an adversary like
somethin I would have expected
that . It is not something
preme judges
ju
from the supreme
of the land.
bl
es
Canon 11 - A lawye
lawyer shall observe and
resp
maintain the respect
due to the courts
o judicial officers and should insist
and to
milar conduct
c
on similar
by others.
Rule 11
11.0303 A lawyer shall refrain from
scandalous, offensive and menacing
ts.
language or behavior before the courts.
Rule 11.04- Lawyers shall not attribute
bute to
y the
a judge motives not supported by
ty to the
record or having no materiality
case.
an
R
o
bl
es
10
9
an
Canon 13
Rule 13.02: A lawyer shall not make
public statements in the media
regarding a pending case tending to
arouse public opinion for and against
a party.
11
1
11
4
19

5/13/2011
Ba
r
Supreme Court :
Unfounded accusations or allegations
or words tending to embarrass the
court or to bring it into disrepute have
no place in a pleading. Their
employment serves no useful purpose.
On the contrary, they constitute direct
contempt of court or contempt in facie
curiae and a violation of the lawyers
oath and a transgression of the Code of
Professional Responsibility.
Submitting pleadings containing countless

insults and diatribes against the NLRC
and attacking both its moral and
intellectual integrity, hardly measures to
the sobriety of speech demanded of a
lawyer. It mattered not that the remarks
were address to Commissioners of the
NLRC, and not to members of the
judiciary, because in addressing the
NLRC, respondent lawyer nonetheless
remain a member of the Bar.
11
8
Ba
r
le
an
11
6
11
9
es
h
an
Ba
R
o
W recognized is the right of a lawyer, both

Well
as an officer of the court and as a citizen, to
criticize in properly respectful terms and
through legitimate channels, the acts of
h a lawyers
law
courts and judges. Though
em
language may be forcefull and emphatic
it
gnified and
an respectful,
should always be dignified
lega profession. The
befitting the dignity of legal
sary language
la
use of unnecessary
is proscribed if
mote high
hi esteem in the courts
we are to promote
n jud
judicia administration.
and trust in
judicial
Ba
While a lawyer owes abs

absolute fidelity to the
lient , ful
cause of his client
full devotion to his clients
erest and warm zeal in the
genuine interest
ance and defense of his clients rights, as
maintenance
well as the exert
exertion of his utmost learning and
ability,, he mus
must do so only within the bounds of
w. A lawyer
la
the law.
is entitled to voice his
criticism within the context of the constitutional
guarantee of freedom of speech which must be
exercised responsibly. After all, every right
carries with it the corresponding obligation..
y, but
Freedom is not freedom from responsibility,
freedom with responsibility. The lawyers fidelit
fidelity
e expen
p
to his client must not be pursued at the
expense
justice It
of truth and orderly administration of jjustice.
must be done with the confines of reason and
common sense.
bl
es
an
R
o
bl
es
11
5
The Supreme Court, citing the case of Uy vs.

Depasucat (455 Phil. 9 [2003]) held that a lawyer
shall abstain from scandalous, offensive or
menacing language or behavior before the courts.
The language vehicle does not run short of
expressions which are emphatic but respectful,
convincing but not derogatory, illuminating but
not offensive. A lawyers language should be
forceful but dignified, emphatic but respectful as
befitting an advocate and in keeping with the
dignity of the legal profession.
an
Held: The Supreme Court approved the

t
Ba Confidant.
recommendation of the office Bar
at respondent
resp
The High Court held that
violated Rule
11.05 of Canon 11 of the Co
Code of Professional
st
Responsibility which states
that a lawyer shall
vances against
ag
submit grievances
a judge to the proper
R
authorities only. Respondent
also violated Rule
13.02 of Canon 13 which stated that a lawyer shall
not make public statements in the media regarding
a pending case tending to arouse public opinion for
or against a party.
11
7
12
0
20

5/13/2011
Ba
r
Respondent also violated the Lawyers Oath as he

has sworn to conduct himself as a lawyer
according to the best of his knowledge and
discretion with all the good fidelity as well to the
courts as to his clients.
According to the Supreme Court, it is not against
lawyers raising grievances against erring judges
but the rules clearly provide for the proper venue
and procedure for doing so, precisely because
respect for the institution must always be
maintained.
m the
Disposition: Respondent was suspended from
practice of law for 1 year.
Rayos- Ombac vs. Rayos,

A.C. No. 2884; January 28, 1998
. . . A case of suspension or disbarment may
proceed regardless of interest or lack of interest of
the complainant. What matters is whether, on the
basis of the facts borne out by the record, the
charge of deceit and grossly immoral conduct has
been duly proven. This rule is premised on the
nature of disciplinary proceedings. A proceeding
for suspension or disbarment is not in any sense a
civil action where the complainant is a plaintiff
and the respondent lawyer is a defendant.
Disciplinary proceedings involve no private
interest and afford no redress for private
grievance. They are undertaken for the purpose of
preserving courts of justice from the official
ministration of persons unfit to practice in them.
The attorney is called to answer to the court for
his conduct as an officer of the court. X x
12
4
Ba
r
R
o
bl
es
12
1
an
When the lawyer has been criminally

charged
and convicted by final judgment.
ha
Ba
es
an
bl
h
12
2
12
5
Ba
es
h
an
Barrios vs. Martinez

A.C. No. 4585; November 12, 2004
Moral turpitude includes everything which
ich is done
don contrary
to justice, honesty, modesty, or good morals. It involves "an
act of baseness, vileness, or depravity
private duties
y in the pr
which a man owes his fellow men, or to soci
society in general,
tomary
y rule of right and duty
contrary to the accepted and customary
onduct con
between man and woman, or conduct
contrary to justice,
rals.
honesty, modesty, or good morals.
The act of a person in issuing a check knowing at the time of
h
the issuance that he or she does not have
sufficient funds in,
or credit with, the drawee bank for the check in full upon its
estation of moral turpitude.
presentment, is a manifestation
r suspension
suspensi
p
x x A proceeding for
or disbarment is not in any
sense a civil action where the complainant is plaintiff and the
r is a defendant.
defe
respondent lawyer
Disciplinary proceedings
ate interest and afford no redress for private
involve no private
ey
y are unde
grievance. They
undertaken and prosecuted solely for the
re,, and for the purpose of preserving courts of
public welfare,
justice from the offic
official ministrations of persons unfit to
m. x x
practice them.
an
o
bl
Who may file an administrative complaint?

Cojuangco , Jr. vs. Palma
A.C. No. 2474; June 30, 2005
Disbarment proceedings are undertaken
solely for public welfare. The only question
for determination is whether respondent is
fit to be a member of the bar. The
Complainant or the person who called the
attention of this Court to the lawyers alleged
misconduct is in no sense a party and
generally has no interest in the outcome
except as all good citizens may have in the
proper administration of justice. Thus, this
Court may investigate charges against
lawyers, regardless of complainants
standing. In fact, it can do so motu proprio.
X x
R
o
Nuez vs. Astorga

A.C. No. 6131; February 28, 2005
The mere existence of pending criminal
charges cannot be a ground
for
und fo
disbarment or suspension
ion of the lawyer.
However, in case the
he lawyer has been
convicted of a crime
involving moral
me invo
turpitude, suspension
ens n or
o disbarment may
atter of
o course, pursuant to
follow as a matter
Section 27 of Rule 138.
1
bl
es
Spouses Williams vs. Enriquez

o. 6353; F
A.C. No.
February 27, 2006
Cano
xx
Canon 5 of the Code of
essio
Professional
Responsibility requires
that a lawyer be updated in the latest
hen
laws and jurisprudence. Indeed, when
ow it
the law is so elementary, not to know
or to act as if one does not know it
constitutes gross ignorance of the la
law.
Xx
12
3
12
6
21

5/13/2011
Ba
r
Soriano vs. Dizon

A.C. No. 6792; January 25, 2006
x x x . Homicide may or may not involve
moral turpitude depending on the degree of
the crime. Moral turpitude is not involved in
every criminal act and is not shown by every
known and intentional violation of statute,
but whether any particular conviction
involves moral turpitude may be a question
of fact and frequently depends on all the
surrounding circumstances. X x x ( Citing
International Research Institute (IRRI) vs.
NLRC, 221 SCRA 760 (1993) )
Siy vs NLRC
G.R. No. 158971; August 25, 2005
A finding of contempt on the part of a lawyer does not
preclude the imposition of disciplinary sanctions
against him for his contravention of the ethics of
legal profession.
. . . The power to punish for contempt and the power
to disbar are separate and distinct, and that the
exercise of one does not exclude the exercise of the
other. A contempt proceeding for misbehavior in
court is designed to vindicate the authority of the
court ; on the other hand , the object of a disciplinary
proceeding is to deal with the fitness of the courts
officer to continue in that office, to preserve and
protect the court and the public from the official
ministrations of persons unfit or unworthy to hold
such office
13
0
Ba
r
R
o
bl
es
12
7
bl
12
8
13
1
es
an
o
bl
When the administrative

ive
awn.
complaint is withdrawn.
` Parias vs. Paguinto
into
A.C. No. 6297; July 13
13, 2004
A compromise
of
e or withdrawal
w
charges does
es not terminate an
trative complaint
administrative
againstt a lawyer
especially in
law
se where
w
this case
the lawyer
admitted his misconduct.
Jimenez vs. Jimenez

A.C. No. 6712; February 6, 2006
The long- settled rule is that the dismissal of a
criminal case on the ground of insufficiency of
evidence against an accused who is also a
respondent in an administrative case does not
necessarily foreclose the administrative
proceedings against him or with it the relief
from administrative liability. The Quantum of
evidence needed in a criminal case is different
from that required in an administrative case.
In the former, proof beyond reasonable doubt
is needed; while the latter , a substantial
evidence defined as such relevant evidence as
a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to
support a conclusion, is enough. X x
h
an
Ba
R
o
es
an
Ba
uld be em
It should
emphasized that a finding of
n the c
guilt in
criminal case will not
il result in a finding of liability in
necessarily
the administrative case. Conversely,
arily
respondents acquittal does not necessarily
exculpate him administratively.
The principal purpose of the exercise of the

T
power to cite for contempt is to safeguard
the functions of the court (while that) of
the exercise of disciplinary authority by
su respect for
the Supreme Court is to assure
the orders of such court by atto
attorneys who,
respon
as much as judges , are responsible
for the
orderly administration
.
tion of justice
j
bl
es
an
Po Cham vs. Pizarro

rro
A.C. No. 5499 ; Augus
August 16, 2005
12
9
13
2
22

5/13/2011
Tomlin II vs. Moya II

A.C. No. 6971; February 23, 2006
Ba
r
Forum- shopping applies only to

judicial cases or proceedings,
not to disbarment proceedings.
x x although the law does not

forbid lawyers from being
witnesses and at the same time
counsel for a cause, the
preference is for them to refrain
from testifying as witnesses,
unless they absolutely have to;
and should they do so, to
withdraw from active
management of the case.
13
6
Ba
r
R
o
bl
es
13
3
Privile
Privileged
Communication
Secti
Section 24(b), Rule 130, Rules of Court:
Sec. 24. Disqualification by reason of
privileged communication. The following
persons cannot testify as to matters learned in
confidence in the following cases:
(b) An attorney cannot, without the consent of
y communication
his client, be examined as to any
made by the client to him, or his ad
advice given
thereon in the course of, or
r with a view to,
professional employment,
nt, can an attorney's
secretary, stenographer,
clerk be examined,
her, or cl
without the consent off the cli
client and his
employer, concerning
n any
ny
y ffact the knowledge of
which has been acquired
in
quir
i such capacity;
bl
13
4
13
7
Ba
o
bl
es
h
an
Section 20, Rule 138:

Sec. 20. It is the duty of an attorney:
torney:
an
(e) To maintain inviolate

and at
e the confidence,
conf
every peril to himself, to preser
preserve the secrets of
his client, and to accept
in
ept no compensation
co
connection with his
is client's business except from
knowledg and approval;
him or with his knowledge
Pr
Canon 17, Code of Professional
Responsibility:
Santiago vs. Rafanan

A.C. No. 6252; October 5, 2004
. . . under the law, a lawyer is not disqualified from
being a witness, except only in certain cases
pertaining to privileged communication arising from
an attorney-client relationship. The reason behind
such rule is the difficulty posed upon lawyers by the
task of dissociating their relation to their clients as
witnesses from that as advocates. Witnesses are
expected to tell the facts as they recall them. In
contradistinction, advocates are partisans those
who actively plead and defend the cause of others. It
is difficult to distinguish the fairness and impartiality
of a disinterested witness from the zeal of an
advocate. The question is one of propriety rather
than of competency of the lawyers who testify for
their clients.
R
o
es
an
Ba
bl
es
an
Testifying for
r the clie
client
law
Rule 12.08 A lawyer
shall avoid
ng in beh
testifying
behalf of his client, except:
a) on formal matters, such as the
ng, authentication
au
mailing,
or custody of an
instrument and the like;
b) on substantial matters, in cases where
ere
his testimony is essential to the ends of
ring
justice, in which event he must, during
ca
his testimony, entrust the trial of the case
to another counsel.
Canon 17 - A law
lawyer owes fidelity to the cause of
his client and he shall be mindful of the trust and
confidence reposed in him.
13
5
13
8
23

5/13/2011
Considerations Favoring Confidentiality

Regala vs. Sandiganbayan
G.R. Nos. 105938 & 108113; Sept. 20, 1996
Encouraging full disclosure to a lawyer by one
seeking legal services opens the door to a whole
spectrum of legal options which would otherwise
be circumscribed by limited information
engendered by a fear of disclosure. An effective
lawyer-client relationship is largely dependent
upon the degree of confidence which exists
between lawyer and client which in turn
requires a situation which encourages a dynamic
and fruitful exchange and flow of information. It
necessarily follows that in order to attain
effective representation, the lawyer must invoke
voke
the privilege not as a matter of option but as a
matter of duty and professional responsibility.
ity.
The privilege in reference to consummated and

future offenses
`
Ba
r
People vs. Sandiganbayan

G.R. Nos. 115439-41; July 16, 1997
If the client seeks his lawyer's advice with
respect to a crime that the former has already
committed, he is given the protection of a virtual
confessional seal which the attorney-client
privilege declares cannot be broken by the
attorney without the client's consent. The same
privileged confidentiality, however, does not
attach with regard to a crime which a client
intends to commit thereafter or in the future and
for purposes of which he seeks the lawyer's
advice.
14
2
General rule: A lawyer may not invoke the privilege and

refuse to divulge the name or identity of his client.
Reasons:
hat the client whose
1. The court has a right to know that
privileged information is soughtt to be p
protected is flesh
and blood.
ya
2. The privilege begins to exist only
after the attorneyeen establi
client relationship has been
established. The attorneyun there is a client.
client privilege does not attach until
ral pertains
erta
3. The privilege generally
to the subject matter
of the relationship.
onsiderat
4. Due process considerations
require that the
hould, as
a a general rule, know his
opposing party should,
adversary.
bl
es
an
Ba
R
Regala
vs. Sandiganbayan
G.R. Nos. 105938 & 108113; Sept. 20, 1996
bl
es
an
Disclosure of Clients Identity

Disclosu
Mercado vs. Vitriolo

itriolo
08; May 26, 2005
A.C. No. 5108;
y such confidentiality
con
Only by
and protection
b encouraged to repose his
will a person be
ence in attorney.
confidence
Abstinence from seeking legal advice in a
good cause is an evil which is fatal to the
determination of justice.
14
3
Ba
o
bl
Mercado vs. Vitriolo

A.C. No. 5108; May 26, 2005
Factors to establish the existence of the privilege:
1. There exists an attorney-client relationship, or a
prospective attorney-client relationship, and it is by
reason of this relationship that the client made the
communication.
Matters disclosed by a prospective client to a lawyer are
protected by the rule on privileged communication even if
the prospective client does not thereafter retain the lawyer
or the latter declines the employment.
2. The client made the communication in confidence.
The mere relation of attorney and client does not raise a
presumption of confidentiality. The client must intend the
communication to be confidential.
3. The legal advice must be sought from the attorney in his
professional capacity.
The communication made by a client to his attorney must
not be intended for mere information, but for the purpose
of seeking legal advice from his attorney as to his rights or
obligations.
es
h
an
Exceptions:
an
1. Where a strong probability exists that revealing

revea
the
clients name would implicate that
hat client in the very
activity for which he sought the
advice.
e lawyers a
2. Where disclosure would open
client to civil liability.
en the clie
3. Where the governments lawyers
have
no case against an
awyers
y
h
attorneys client unless, by
revealing the client's name, the
y revealin
said name would furnish the
he only link that would form the
chain of testimony necessary
essary to convict an individual of a
crime.
4. If the content off any
y client
clien communication to a lawyer
lies is relevantt to the subj
subject matter of the legal problem
on which the
e client seeks
see legal assistance. And,
5. Where the nature o
of the attorney-client relationship has
been previously
disclosed and it is the identity which is
usly dis
intended to be confidential.
Summary: Information relating to the identity of a client
may fall within the ambit of the privilege when the clients
name itself has an independent significance, such that
disclosure would then reveal client confidences.
R
o
14
0
Ba
r
R
o
bl
es
13
9
14
1
14
4
24

5/13/2011
Prohibited Transactions between Attorney and Client
Taganas vs. NLRC

G.R. No. 118746; September 7, 1995
Contingent fee arrangement - an agreement laid down in
an express contract between a lawyer and a client in which
the lawyers professional fee, usually a fixed percentage of
what may be recovered in the action, is made to depend
upon the success of the litigation.
Section 24, Rule 138, Rules of Court - An attorney shall be
entitled to have and recover from his client no more than a
reasonable compensation for his services, with a view to
the importance of the subject matter of the controversy,
the extent of the services rendered, and the professional
standing of the attorney. x x A written contract for services
shall control the amount to be paid therefor unless found
by the court to be unconscionable or unreasonable.
When it comes, therefore, to the validity of contingent
fees, in large measure it depends on the reasonableness of
the stipulated fees under the circumstances of each case.
The reduction of unreasonable attorneys fees is within the
regulatory powers of the courts.
Article 1491(5), Civil Code - prohibits lawyers from

acquiring by purchase even at a public or judicial auction,
properties and rights which are the objects of litigation in
which they may take part by virtue of their profession.
(Fabillo vs. IAC, G.R. No. 68838; March 11, 1991)
Valencia vs. Cabanting
A.C. No. 1302; April 26, 1991
Public policy prohibits such transactions in view of the
fiduciary relationship involved. It is intended to curtail
any undue influence of the lawyer upon his client. Greed
may get the better of the sentiments of loyalty and
disinterestedness.
The prohibition, however, applies only while the litigation
is pending.
A thing is said to be in litigation not only if there is some
contest or litigation over it in court, but also from the
moment that it becomes subject to the judicial action
n of
o
the judge.
Ba
r
14
8
Ba
r
Factors to be considered (Rule 20.01, Canon 20 of the

Fact
o of Professional Responsibility):
Code
(a) the time spent and the extent of services rendered or
required;
(b) the novelty and difficulty of the questions involved;
(c) the importance of the subject matter;
(d) the skill demanded;
(e) the probability of losing other employment as a result of
acceptance of the proffered case;
ar services
servic and the
(f) the customary charges for similar
pter to which
w
schedule of fees of the IBP chapter
the lawyer
belongs;
(g) the amount involved in the controversy
and the benefits
contr
resulting to the client from the ser
services;
(h) the contingency or cer
certainty
y of
o compensation;
he employment,
empl
(i) the character of the
whether occasional or
established; and
(j) the professional
standing of the lawyer.
nal standi
bl
14
6
14
9
Ba
o
bl
es
h
an
Traders Royal Bank Employees

yees Uni
UnionIndependent vs. NLRC, G.R.
.R. No. 120592;
March 14, 1997
Quantum meruit (as
as much as he
deserves) - used as
s the basis
b
for
determining the lawyer's
awyer' professional
fees in the absence
nce of a contract, but
recoverable by him ffrom his client.
The doctrine
meruit is a
rine of quantum
qu
device to
prevent undue enrichment
o preven
based on
n the equitable postulate that it is
unjust for a person to retain benefit
without paying for it.
an
Traders Royal Bank Employees Union-Independent vs.

NLRC, G.R. No. 120592; March 14, 1997
General retainer, or retaining fee - the fee paid to a lawyer
to secure his future services as general counsel for any
ordinary legal problem that may arise in the routinary
business of the client and referred to him for legal action.
The future services of the lawyer are secured and
committed to the retaining client. The fees are paid
whether or not there are cases referred to the lawyer. The
reason for the remuneration is that the lawyer is deprived
of the opportunity of rendering services for a fee to the
opposing party or other parties.
Special retainer - fee for a specific case handled or special
service rendered by the lawyer for a client. A client may
have several cases demanding special or individual
attention. If for every case there is a separate and
independent contract for attorneys fees, each fee is
considered a special retainer.
Attorneys Fees
`
R
o
es
an
Ba
bl
es
an
Fabillo vs. IAC

G.R. No. 68838;
March 11, 1991
8; Marc
A contract between a lawyer and his client
g a contingent
conti
stipulating
fee is not covered by
rohibition under Article 1491 (5) of the
said prohibition
ode bec
Civil Code
because the payment of said fee is not
made during the pendency of the litigation but
only after judgment has been rendered in the
case handled by the lawyer.
Mananquil vs. Villegas
A.C. No. 2430; August 30, 1990
By virtue of Article 1646 of the new Civil Code,
the persons referred to in Article 1491 are
prohibited from leasing, either in person
erson or
through the mediation of another,
er, the properties
pro
or things mentioned in that article
1491).
rticle (Article
(Art
R
o
bl
es
14
5
14
7
15
0
25

5/13/2011
Lijauco vs. Terrado

( A.C. No. 6317; August 31,2006)
Ba
r
The lawyers claim that the attorneys fee

pertained only to the recovery of the savings
deposit cannot be sustained, because records
showed that he acted as complainants counsel
in the drafting of the compromise agreement.
The fee of P70,000.00 for the legal assistance
in the recovery of the savings deposit
amounting to P180,000.oo was unreasonable.
A lawyer, said the Supreme Court, shall charge
only fair and reasonable fees.
Ulep vs Legal Clinic, Inc.

223 SCRA 378 (1993)
Practice of law means any activity, in or
out of the court, which requires the
application of the law, legal procedures,
knowledge, training and experience. To
engage in the practice of law is to perform
those acts which are characteristic of the
profession. Generally, to practice law is to
give advice or render any kind of service
that involves legal knowledge or skill.
15
4
The
h practice of law is not limited to the conduct
of the cases in court. It includes legal advice and
counsel, and the preparation of legal
instruments and contracts by which legal rights
are secured, although such matter may or may
not be pending in court.
ofes
The standards of the legal profession
condemn
tal
the lawyers advertisement off his talents.
A
lating
g tthe ethics of his
lawyer cannot, without violating
lents or skills as in a
profession, advertise his talents
merchan advertising his
manner similar to a merchant
n agai
g
goods. The proscription
against
advertising legal
tio off le
services or solicitation
legal business rests on
postu
the fundamentall postulate
that the practice of
ion.
law is a profession.
bl
15
2
15
5
Ba
o
bl
es
h
an
an
Use of Judicial Titles

San Jose Homeowners Association,
iation, Inc.
In vs.
Romanillos
A.C. No. 5580; June 15, 2005
Justi
The use of titles such as Justice
is reserved to
ed mem
incumbent and retired
members of the Supreme
Court, the Court of Appea
Appeals and the
n, and m
Sandiganbayan,
may not be used by any
ial of the R
other official
Republic, including those
given the rank of
Justice. By analogy, the title
hould be reserved only to judges,
Judge should
incumbent and retired, and not to those who
were dishonorably discharged from the service.
(c)
(b)
Where There is a pre-existing agreement with a

partner or associate that, upon the latters
death, money shall be paid over a reasonable
period of time to his estate or to the persons
specified in the agreement; or
Where a lawyer undertakes to complete
unfinished legal business of a deceased lawyer;
or
Where a lawyer or law firm includes nonlawyer employees in a retirement plan , even if
the plan is based in whole or in part on a
profit- sharing agreement.
(a)
R
o
es
an
Ba
bl
es
an
Respondent lawyers
awyer admission that
d the le
he divided
legal fees with two
a referral fee did not
other people as
se him from liability. Rule 9.02
release
of the C
Code of Professional
yer
Responsibility provides that a lawyer
ide
shall not divide or stipulate to divide
rsons
a fee for legal services with persons
w except in
not licensed to practice law
certain cases, to wit:
Ba
r
R
o
bl
es
15
1
15
3
15
6
26

5/13/2011
IBP Dues
Letter of Atty. Cecilio Y. Arevalo, Jr.,
Requesting Exemption from Payment of
IBP Dues
B.M. No. 1370; May 9, 2005
x x Payment of dues is a necessary
consequence of membership in the IBP, of
which no one is exempt. This means that
the compulsory nature of payment of dues
subsists for as long as ones membership in
the IBP remains regardless of the lack of
practice of, or the type of practice, the
member is engaged in.
Ba
r
Saquing vs. Mora, A.C. No. 6678; October

9, 2006
Where the notarization of the document is done
by a member of the Philippine bar at a time
when he has no authorization to do so, the
offender may be subjected to disciplinary action.
For one, performing a notarial without such
commission is a violation of the lawyers oath to
obey the laws, more specifically, the notarial law.
The two, by making it appear that he is duly
commissioned when he is not, he is, for all legal
intents and purposes, indulging in deliberate
falsehood, which the lawyers oath similarly
proscribes. A lawyer shall not engage in
unlawful, dishonest, immoral or deceitful
conduct.
16
0
bl
es
an
In re Atty. Marcial
al Edillon
Edil
Augus 3, 1978
A.C. No. 1928; August
er the p
x x Whether
practice of law is a property
n the sens
right, in
sense of its being one that entitles
older of a license to practice a profession,
the holder
her pause to consider at length, as
we do not here
it [is] clear that under the police power of the
State, and under the necessary powers granted
to the Court to perpetuate its existence, the
respondents right to practice law before the
he
courts of this country should be and is a matter
subject to regulation and inquiry. And,, if the
power to impose the fee as a regulatory
measure is recognized, then a penalty
designed
y desig
to enforce its payments, which penalty
may be
nalty
y ma
avoided altogether by payment,
void as
t, is not vo
unreasonable or arbitrary.
es
an
bl
15
8
16
1
es
o
bl
Santuyo vs. Hidalgo

ry 17, 2005
20
A.C. No.5838; January
he respo
Considering that the
responsibility
ry public
pub is sensitive,
attached to a notary
ould ha
respondent should
have been more
discreet and cautious
cautiou in the execution
of his duties
such and should not
ies as su
have wholly
everything to
holly entrusted
en
the secretaries;
otherwise he should
etari
not have been commissioned as notary
public.
an
Heirs of the Late Spouses Lucas and Francisca

Villanueva vs. Beradio, A.C. No. 6270; Jan.
22, 2007
Where admittedly the notary public had personal
knowledge of a false statement or information
contained in the instrument to be notarized, yet
proceeds to affix his or her notarial seal on it, the
Court must not hesitate to discipline the notary
public accordingly as the circumstances of the case
may dictate. Otherwise, the integrity and sanctity of
the notarization process may be undermined and
public confidence on notarial documents may be
diminished
h
an
Ba
R
o
Cueto vs. Jimenez

A.C No. 5798; January 20, 2005
A.C.
Canon 20, Rule 20.4, Code of Professional
Responsibility - A lawyer shall avoid controversies
with clients concerning his compensation and shall
resort to judicial action only to prevent imposition,
injustice or fraud.
Canon 14 - Controversies with clients concerning
compensation are to be avoided by
y the lawyer so far
as shall be compatible with his self-res
self-respect and with
his right to receive reasonable
recompense for his
le recomp
service; and lawsuits with the
clients should be
e client
resorted to only to prevent
ent injustice,
injustic imposition or
fraud.
Although every lawyer
be paid what is due to
er must
st b
him, he must never resort
resor to judicial action to
recover his fees, in a man
manner that detracts from the
dignity of the profession.
ofession
Ba
Ba
r
R
o
bl
es
15
7
15
9
16
2
27

5/13/2011
Follosco vs. Mateo

A.C. No. 6186; February 3, 2004
The importance attached to the act of
notarization cannot be overemphasized.
Notarization is not an empty, meaningless,
routinary act. It is invested with substantive
public interest, such that only those who are
qualified or authorized may act as notaries
public. Notarization converts a private
document into a public document thus making
that document admissible in evidence without
further proof of its authenticity. A notarial
document is by law entitled to full faith and
credit upon its face. Courts, administrative
agencies and the public at large must be able to
rely upon the acknowledgment executed by a
notary public and appended to a private
instrument.
Ba
r
Ramientas vs. Reyala, A.C. No. 7055; July 31,2006

R
A motion for reconsideration from IBP resolutions
is no longer a prohibited pleading. The motion
may be filed within 15 days from the notice of the
reso the motion
IBP resolution. The IBP mustt resolve
tion to the
t Supreme
before elevating the resolution
Court.
bl
16
4
16
7
Ba
o
bl
The Lawyers Oath

I, _________________ of
___________________ do solemnly
/ that I
lemnly swear
s
will maintain allegiance/ to the Repub
Republic of the
Philippines/ I will supportt and defe
defend its
Constitution/ and obey the
he laws/
aws/ as well as the legal
orders/ of the duly constituted
therein/ I
nstituted authorities
a
will do no falsehood// nor con
consent to its commission/
I will not wittingly/
promote or sue any
y/ or willingly/
willin
groundless/ false/
suit/ nor give aid nor
e/ or unlawful
unla
consent to the
e same/ I will not delay any mans
cause/ for money or malice/
and will conduct myself/
m
as a lawyer/
to the best of my knowledge
r/ according
accord
and discretion/
all good fidelity/ as well to the
tion/ with
w
courts as to my clients/ and I impose upon myself/
this obligation voluntarily/ without any mental
reservation/ or purpose of evasion/. So help me God.
an
es
h
an
C
International Militia of People Against

Corruption and Terrorism, represented by
Atty. Elly Velez Pamatong vs. Chief Hilario
Davide, Jr. (Ret.) A.C. No. 7197; Jan 23, 2007
The petition was summary in form and
consisted, for the most part, of self-serving and
gratuitous conclusions and offensive
innuendos, when the Rules of Court requires
that a complaint for disbarment shall state
clearly and concisely the facts complained of
and shall be supported by affidavits of persons
having personal knowledge of the facts therein
alleged and or by such documents as may
substantiate facts.
R
o
es
an
Ba
Ba
r
Zoreta vs. Simpliciano

pliciano
92; Novem
A.C. No. 6492;
November 18, 2004
s act of notarizing
n
A lawyers
documents without
quisite commission
co
the requisite
is reprehensible,
ituting a
constituting
as it does not only malpractice but
also . . . the crime of falsification of public
documents. Performing a notarial act without
rs
such commission is a violation of the lawyers
e
oath to obey the laws, more specifically, the
Notarial Law. By making it appear that he is
duly commissioned when he is not, he is, for all
ng in
legal intents and purposes, indulging
awyers o
deliberate falsehood, which the lawyers
oath
similarly proscribes. x x
16
6
bl
es
an
R
o
es
16
3
Villanueva vs. Deloria A.C. No. 5018; Jan. 26, 2007

A formal investigation is a mandatory requirement
which may not be dispensed with except for valid and
compelling reasons.
Complaints against lawyers for misconduct are normally
addressed to the Supreme Court. If, at the outset, the
Supreme Court finds a complaint to be completely
wanting in merit. It outrightly dismisses the case. If,
however, the Court deems it necessary that further
inquiry should be made, such as when the matter
could not be resolved by merely evaluating the
pleadings submitted, a referral is made to the IBP for a
formal investigation of the case during which the
parties are accorded an opportunity to be heard. An
ex-parte investigation may only be conducted when
respondent fails to appear despite reasonable notice.
16
5
16
8
28

5/13/2011
Ba
r
Malecdan vs. Pekas, at al.

A.C. No. 5830; January 26, 2004
An attorneys only safe guide is high moral
principle, as the torch to light his way; his best
shield is a clear conscience and an unblemished
personal record; and his just reward is to find
the highest honor in a deserved reputation for
fidelity to private trust and to public duty, as an
honest man and as a patriotic and loyal citizen.
The fiduciary duty of a lawyer and advocate is
what places the law profession in a unique
position of trust and confidence, and
distinguishes it from any other calling. Once this
trust and confidence is betrayed, the faith of the
people not only on the individual lawyer but also
in the legal profession as a whole is eroded. To
this end, all members of the bar are strictly
hest
required to, at all times, maintain the highest
degree of public confidence in the fidelity,
on
honesty, and integrity of their profession.
Ba
R
o
bl
es
16
9
es
an
bl
bl
es
an
Ba
o
bl
es
an
Ba
17
0
an
29

Tijam - Legal Ethics 2011 - New

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originalbeschreibung:

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Tijam - Legal Ethics 2011 - New

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : ChanRobles Professional Review, Inc.

JUSTICE NOEL G. TIJAM

The Code of Professional Responsibility does not

Among the burdens of the relationship

Rule 6.02 of the Code of Professional

ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : ChanRobles Professional Review, Inc.

The High Court reiterated its ruling in Burbe vs.

1). Where legal advice of any kind is sought

Disposition: Respondent was

Likewise, a lawyer-client relationship exists

It is not necessary that

Citing Dean Wigmore, the Supreme Court listed the

ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : ChanRobles Professional Review, Inc.

Canon 17 A lawyer owes fidelity to the cause of

He must serve the client with competence

Consolidated Farms, Inc.

A.C. No. 5485; March 16, 2005

Canoy vs. Ortiz

If much is demanded from an attorney, it

Rule 18.03 A lawyer

ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : ChanRobles Professional Review, Inc.

Rollon vs. Naraval (A.C. No. 6424; March

Cheng vs. Agravante

Abiero vs. Juanin

B.R. Sebastian Enterprises, Inc.

De Guzman vs. Basa

ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : ChanRobles Professional Review, Inc.

Abay vs. Montesino (A.C. No. 5718;

De Juan vs. Baria III (A.C. No. 5817; May

Perea vs. Almadro

Bergonia vs. Merrera (A.C. No. 5024;

Edquibal vs. Ferrer

Amaya vs. Tecson, A.C. No. 5996; February 7,

ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : ChanRobles Professional Review, Inc.

Respondent lawyer claimed he had not met

Anderson, Jr. vs. Cardeo

Republic vs. Kenrick Development

Complainants in this administrative case were

ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : ChanRobles Professional Review, Inc.

The preparation and signing of a

In relation to this, Canon 17 of the Code

Respondent was the former counsel of the late Lydio

In the case at bar, respondent admitted

ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : ChanRobles Professional Review, Inc.

2. If the acceptance of the new retainer will

Quiambao vs. Bamba

Santos, Sr. vs. Beltran

A lawyer may not, without being guilty

Quiambao vs. Bamba, A.C. No. 6708;

The fact that the attorney-client relation had ceased by

ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : ChanRobles Professional Review, Inc.

Quiambao vs. Bamba, A.C. No. 6708; August 25, 2005

When the case involves matters in which a

PCG vs. Sandiganbayan, et al.

Santeco vs. Avance

Gamilla, et al. vs. Mario, Jr.

ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : ChanRobles Professional Review, Inc.

Rule 22.01, Code of Professional

Good Moral Character and the Lawyers

d) When the mental and

ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : ChanRobles Professional Review, Inc.

Rule 7.03 A lawyer shall not