TABLE OF CONTENTS
LEGAL ETHICS
I. PRACTICE OF LAW (RULE 138)................ 2
A. CONCEPT ...................................................... 2
A.1. DEFINITION.....................................................2
A.2. PRIVILEGE, NOT RIGHT .................................2
A.3. PROFESSION, NOT BUSINESS .....................2
B. QUALIFICATIONS ......................................... 2
B.1. CITIZENSHIP ...................................................3
B.2. RESIDENCE ................................................... 4
B.3. AGE ................................................................ 4
B.4. GOOD MORAL CHARACTER ........................ 4
B.5. LEGAL EDUCATION ...................................... 4
B.6. BAR EXAMINATIONS .................................... 6
C. APPEARANCE OF NON-LAWYERS ...............7
C.1. LAW STUDENT PRACTICE ............................. 7
C.2. NON-LAWYERS IN COURTS......................... 8
C.3. NON-LAWYERS IN ADMINISTRATIVE
TRIBUNALS .......................................................... 8
C.4. PROCEEDINGS WHERE LAWYERS ARE
PROHIBITED FROM APPEARING ........................ 9
C.5. SELF-REPRESENTATION ............................. 9
C.6. AGENT OR FRIEND ....................................... 9
D. SANCTIONS FOR PRACTICE OR
APPEARANCE WITHOUT AUTHORITY ........... 10
D.1. LAWYERS WITHOUT AUTHORITY ............... 10
D.2. PERSONS NOT LAWYERS ........................... 10
E. PUBLIC OFFICIALS AND PRACTICE OF LAW
.......................................................................... 10
E.1. PROHIBITION OR DISQUALIFICATION OF
FORMER GOVERNMENT ATTORNEYS .............. 10
F. LAWYERS AUTHORIZED TO REPRESENT
THE GOVERNMENT .......................................... 11
G. LAWYER’S OATH .......................................... 11
II. DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF A
LAWYER ................................................... 12
A. TO SOCIETY (CANONS 1-6) ......................... 12
A.1. RESPECT FOR LAW AND LEGAL PROCESSES
............................................................................. 12
A.2. EFFICIENT, CONVENIENT LEGAL SERVICES
............................................................................. 15
A.3. TRUE, HONEST, FAIR, DIGNIFIED &
OBJECTIVE INFORMATION ON LEGAL SERVICES
............................................................................. 16
A.4 PARTICIPATION IN THE IMPROVEMENT AND
REFORMS IN THE LEGAL SYSTEM..................... 18
A.5. PARTICIPATION IN LEGAL EDUCATION
PROGRAM ........................................................... 18
A.6. APPLICABILITY TO GOVERNMENT
LAWYERS............................................................. 19
B. TO THE LEGAL PROFESSION (CANONS 7-9)
.......................................................................... 21
i
B.1. IBP ................................................................. 21
B.2. UPHOLDING THE DIGNITY & INTEGRITY OF
THE PROFESSION .............................................. 23
B.3. COURTESY, FAIRNESS & CANDOR
TOWARDS PROFESSIONAL COLLEAGUES ...... 24
B.4. NO ASSISTANCE IN UNAUTHORIZED
PRACTICE OF LAW ............................................. 25
C. TO THE COURTS (CANONS 10-13) .............. 27
C.1. CANDOR, FAIRNESS & GOOD FAITH
TOWARDS THE COURTS ................................... 27
C.2. RESPECT FOR COURTS & JUDICIAL
OFFICERS............................................................ 29
C.3. ASSISTANCE IN THE SPEEDY & EFFICIENT
ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE .......................... 31
C.4. RELIANCE ON MERITS OF HIS CAUSE &
AVOIDANCE OF ANY IMPROPRIETY WHICH
TENDS TO INFLUENCE OR GIVES THE
APPEARANCE OF INFLUENCE UPON THE
COURTS .............................................................. 35
D. TO THE CLIENTS (CANONS 14-22) ............ 36
D.1. AVAILABILITY OF SERVICE WITHOUT
DISCRIMINATION ............................................... 36
D.2. CANDOR, FAIRNESS AND LOYALTY TO
CLIENTS .............................................................. 40
D.3. CLIENT’S MONEYS AND PROPERTIES ...... 44
D.4. FIDELITY TO CLIENT’S CAUSE ................... 46
D.5. COMPETENCE AND DILIGENCE ................ 46
D.6. REPRESENTATION WITH ZEAL WITHIN
LEGAL BOUNDS ................................................. 48
D.7. ATTORNEY’S FEES ...................................... 49
D.8. PRESERVATION OF CLIENT’S
CONFIDENCES.................................................... 54
D.9. WITHDRAWAL OF SERVICES ..................... 56
III. SUSPENSION, DISBARMENT, AND
DISCIPLINE OF LAWYERS (RULE 139-B,
RULES OF COURT) ...................................58
A. NATURE AND CHARACTERISTICS OF
DISCIPLINARY ACTIONS AGAINST LAWYERS
......................................................................... 58
A.1. SUI GENERIS ................................................ 58
A.2. PRESCRIPTION ........................................... 58
A.3. OTHER CHARACTERISTICS ........................ 58
B. GROUNDS ................................................... 59
C. PROCEEDINGS ........................................... 60
D. DISCIPLINE OF FILIPINO LAWYERS
PRACTICING ABROAD .................................... 61
E. DISCIPLINE OF LAWYERS IN GOVERNMENT
.......................................................................... 61
F. QUANTUM OF PROOF ................................ 61
G. DISCIPLINARY MEASURES ....................... 62
H. EFFECT OF EXECUTIVE PARDON ............. 63
I. EFFECT OF COMPROMISE AGREEMENTS . 63
IV. READMISSION TO THE BAR ...............64
 A. LAWYERS WHO HAVE BEEN SUSPENDED A. SUPREME COURT ....................................... 81
......................................................................... 64 B. LOWER COURTS AND JUSTICES OF COURT
B. LAWYERS WHO HAVE BEEN DISBARRED 64 OF APPEALS, AND SANDIGANBAYAN, AND
C. LAWYERS WHO HAVE BEEN REPATRIATED COURT OF TAX APPEALS (RULE 140, ROC) .. 81
......................................................................... 64 C. GROUNDS AND SANCTIONS .................... 83
A. PURPOSE .................................................... 65
B. REQUIREMENTS ......................................... 65
C. COMPLIANCE .............................................. 66
D. EXEMPTIONS .............................................. 66
E. SANCTIONS ................................................. 67
F. BAR MATTER 2012: THE RULE ON
MANDATORY LEGAL AID SERVICE (2009) ... 68
VI. NOTARIAL PRACTICE (A.M. NO. 02-8-
13-SC, AS AMENDED) .............................. 69
A. QUALIFICATIONS OF NOTARY PUBLIC .... 69
B. TERM OF OFFICE OF NOTARY PUBLIC ..... 69
C. POWERS AND LIMITATIONS ..................... 69
C.1. POWERS....................................................... 70
C.2. LIMITATIONS................................................ 71
D. NOTARIAL REGISTER ................................ 72
D.1. ENTRIES........................................................ 72
D.2. CLOSING ...................................................... 73
D.3. SUBMISSION................................................ 73
E. JURISDICTION OF NOTARY PUBLIC AND
PLACE OF NOTARIZATION .............................73
F. REVOCATION OF COMMISSION ................ 74
G. COMPETENT EVIDENCE OF IDENTITY ...... 74
H. SANCTIONS ................................................ 75
H.2. CRIMINAL SANCTIONS ...............................75

VI. CANONS OF PROFESSIONAL ETHICS. 75

A. ORIGIN ........................................................ 75
B. LEGAL STATUS ........................................... 75

JUDICIAL ETHICS
I. ADMINISTRATIVE JURISDICTION OVER
JUDGES AND JUSTICES ........................... 77
A. SUPREME COURT........................................... 77
B. ALL OTHER COURTS ...................................... 77

II. DISQUALIFICATIONS OF JUSTICES AND

JUDGES [RULE 137, ROC]......................... 78
A. COMPULSORY DISQUALIFICATION .......... 78
B. VOLUNTARY DISQUALIFICATION ............. 79
C. OBJECTION ................................................. 80

III. DISCIPLINE OF MEMBERS OF THE

JUDICIARY AND INITIATION OF
COMPLAINT AGAINST JUDGES AND
JUSTICES ................................................. 81
ii
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
LEGAL ETHICS

PAGE 1 OF 85
UP LAW BOC
I. Practice of Law (Rule
138)
A. CONCEPT
A.1. DEFINITION
The practice of law is any activity, in or out of
court, which requires the application of law,
legal procedure, knowledge, training and
experience. It is to give notice or render any
kind of service, which device or service requires
the use in any degree of legal knowledge or
skill [Cayetano v. Monsod, G.R. No. 100113
(1991)].
According to Justice Padilla, in his dissent in
Cayetano v. Monsod, the following factors are
considered in determining whether there is
practice of law:
(1) Habituality –implies customarily or
habitually holding one's self out to the
public as a lawyer.
(2) Application of law, legal principles,
practice or procedure –calls for legal
knowledge, training and experience.
(3) Compensation–implies that one must
have presented himself to be in the active
and continued practice of the legal
profession and that his professional
services are available to the public for
compensation, as a service for his
livelihood or in consideration of his said
services.
(4) Attorney-client relationship – Where a
lawyer undertakes an activity which
requires the knowledge of law but involves
no such relationship, such as teaching law
or writing law books or articles, he cannot
be said to be engaged in the practice of his
profession or a lawyer.
The test is the activity, NOT who/what he or
she is.
A.2. PRIVILEGE, NOT RIGHT
The right to practice law is not a natural or
constitutional right but is a privilege. It is
limited to persons of good moral character
with special qualifications duly ascertained
and certified. The exercise of this privilege
presupposes possession of integrity, legal
PAGE 2 OF 85
LEGAL ETHICS LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
knowledge, educational attainment, and even
public trust since a lawyer is an officer of the
court. A bar candidate who is morally unfit
cannot practice law even if he passes the bar
examinations [Aguirre v. Rana, B.M. 1036
(2003)].
While the practice of law is not a right but a
privilege, the Court will not unwarrantedly
withhold this privilege from individuals who
have shown mental fitness and moral fiber to
withstand the rigors of the profession [In re:
Michael Medado]
A.3. PROFESSION, NOT BUSINESS
Lawyering is not a business; it is a profession
in which duty to public service, not money, is
the primary consideration. The gaining of a
livelihood is not a professional but a secondary
consideration [Burbe v. Magulta, A. C. 99-634
(2002)].
B. QUALIFICATIONS
Any person admitted to the bar and who is in
good and regular standing is entitled to
practice law [Sec. 1, Rule 138, Rules of Court,
hereinafter RoC].
Every applicant for admission as a member of
the bar must be:
(1) Citizen of the Philippines;
(2) At least 21 years of age;
(3) Of good moral character;
(4) Resident of the Philippines;
(5) Produce before the Supreme Court
satisfactory evidence:
a. Of good moral character;
b. That no charges against him, involving
moral turpitude, have been filed or are
pending in any court in the Philippines
[Sec. 2, Rule 138, RoC].
Requisites for the practice of law:
(1) Admission to the bar:
(a) Citizenship;
(b) Residence;
(c) Age (at least 21 years old);
UP LAW BOC
(d) Good moral character and no charges
involving moral turpitude
1. The purposes for this requirement
are:
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 [Dantes v. Dantes,
A.C. 6486 (2004)].
(e) Legal education (consisting of pre-law
and law proper);
(f) Pass the bar examinations;
(g) Take the lawyer’s oath;
(h) Sign the roll of attorneys.
(2) Good and regular standing:
(a) Remain a member of the Integrated
Bar of the Philippines (hereinafter
IBP);
(b) Regularly pay all IBP dues and other
lawful assessments
(c) Faithful observance of the rules and
ethics of the legal profession (e.g.:
(Mandatory Continuing Legal
Education, hereinafter MCLE));
(d) Be continually subject to judicial
disciplinary control [Agpalo (2004)].
Passing the bar is not the only qualification to
become an attorney-at-law. Two essential
requisites for becoming a lawyer still had to be
performed, namely: his lawyer’s oath to be
administered by this Court and his signature in
the roll of attorneys [Aguirre v. Rana, supra.].
B.1. CITIZENSHIP
The practice of all professions in the
Philippines shall be limited to Filipino citizens
save in cases prescribed by law [Sec. 14, Art.
XII, 1987 Constitution].
Ratio: Citizenship ensures allegiance to the
Republic and its laws.
PAGE 3 OF 85
LEGAL ETHICS LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
Filipino citizenship is a requirement for
admission to the bar and is, in fact, a
continuing requirement for the practice of law.
The loss thereof means termination of the
petitioner’s membership in the bar; ipso jure
the privilege to engage in the practice of law.
A Filipino lawyer who becomes a citizen of
another country and later re-acquires his
Philippine citizenship under RA 9225
(Citizenship Retention and Re-acquisition Act
of 2003), remains to be a member of the
Philippine Bar. However, the right to resume
the practice of law is not automatic. RA 9225
provides that a person who intends to practice
his profession in the Philippines must apply
with the proper authority for a license or
permit to engage in such practice. Thus, in
pursuance to the qualifications laid down by
the Court for the practice of law, the OBC
requires the following:
1) Petition for Re-Acquisition of
Philippine Citizenship;
2) Order (for Re-Acquisition of Philippine
citizenship);
3) Oath of Allegiance to the Republic of
the Philippines;
4) Identification Certificate (IC) issued by
the Bureau of Immigration;
5) Certificate of Good Standing issued by
the IBP;
6) Certification from the IBP indicating
updated payments of annual
membership dues;
7) Proof of payment of professional tax;
and
8) Certificate of compliance issued by the
MCLE Office. [Petition to Re-acquire
the Privilege to Practice Law of
Muneses, B.M. 2112 (2012)].
Requirements under Sec. 5 (4) before
applying with the Supreme Court for a license
or permit to engage in law practice:
1) Updating and payment of annual
membership dues in the IBP;
2) Payment of professional tax;
3) Completion of 36 hours of MCLE;
4) Retaking of the lawyer’s oath
UP LAW BOC
B.2. RESIDENCE
Ratio: His/her duties to his client and to the
court will require that he be readily accessible
and available.
B.3. AGE
Ratio: Maturity and discretion are required in
the practice of law.
B.4. GOOD MORAL CHARACTER
Absence of a proven conduct or act which has
been historically and traditionally considered
as a manifestation of moral turpitude. The act
or conduct need not amount to a crime; and
even if it does constitute an offense, a
conviction upon a criminal charge is not
necessary to demonstrate bad moral
character although it may show moral
depravity [Agpalo (2004)].
This requirement is not only a condition
precedent to admission to the practice of law,
its continued possession is also essential for
remaining in the practice of law. Good moral
character is what a person really is, as
distinguished from good reputation, the
estimate in which he is held by the public in
the place where he is known [In the Matter of
the Disqualification of Bar Examinee Haron S.
Meling In The 2002 Bar Examinations and For
Disciplinary Action As Member of The
Philippine Shari’a Bar, B.M. 1154 (2004)].All
aspects of moral character and behavior may
be inquired into in respect of those seeking
admission to the Bar. The scope of such
inquiry is, indeed, said to be properly broader
than inquiry into the moral proceedings for
disbarment. The requirement of good moral
character to be satisfied by those who would
seek admission to the bar must of necessity be
more stringent than the norm of conduct
expected from members of the general public.
The Supreme Court may deny lawyer’s oath-
taking based on a conviction for reckless
imprudence resulting in homicide (hazing
case). But after submission, for the Court’s
examination and consideration, relevant
evidence to show that he is a different person
now, that he has become morally fit for
admission to the ancient and learned
profession of the law [In re: Argosino]
Question of moral turpiture is for the Supreme
Court to decide, which is why applicants are
required to disclose any crime which they have
PAGE 4 OF 85
LEGAL ETHICS LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
been charged. Concealment or withholding
from the Court information about charges and
indictments is a ground for disqualification of
applicant or for revocation of license [Agpalo
2004].
By concealing pending criminal cases, the
applicant (in a petition to take the Bar
Examinations) then flunks the test of fitness
even if the cases are ultimately proven to be
unwarranted or insufficient to impugn or
affect the good moral character of the
applicant [In the Matter of the Disqualification
of Bar Examinee Haron S. Meling In The 2002
Bar Examinations and For Disciplinary Action
As Member of The Philippine Shari’a Bar, B.M.
1154 (2004)].
B.5. LEGAL EDUCATION
I. Pre-law
An applicant for admission to the bar
examination shall present a certificate issued
by the proper government agency that, before
commencing the study of law, he or she had
pursued and satisfactorily completed in an
authorized and recognized university or
college, requiring for admission thereto the
completion of a four-year high school course,
the course of study prescribed therein for a
bachelor's degree in arts or sciences.
A Filipino citizen who completed and obtained
his or her Bachelor of Laws degree or its
equivalent in a foreign law school must
present proof of having completed a separate
bachelor's degree course. [Sec. 6, Rule 138,
RoC as amended by Re: Letter of Atty.
Mendoza, B.M. 1153 (2010)].
II. Law proper
All applicants for admission shall, before
being admitted to the examination,
satisfactorily show that they have successfully
completed all the prescribed courses for the
degree of Bachelor of Laws or its equivalent
degree, in a law school or university officially
recognized by the Philippine Government or
by the proper authority in the foreign
jurisdiction where the degree has been
granted.
No applicant who obtained the Bachelor of
Laws degree in this jurisdiction shall be
admitted to the bar examination unless he or
she has satisfactorily completed the following
UP LAW BOC LEGAL ETHICS LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS

course in a law school or university duly accommodation of students to undergo on-

recognized by the government: the-job training/practicum in the lower courts.
1) Civil Law
2) Commercial Law Legal Education Board
3) Remedial Law
Under R.A. No. 7662 (Legal Education Reform
4) Criminal Law Act of 1993), the Legal Education Board (LEB)
5) Public International Law was created in order to uplift the standards of
6) Private International Law legal education by undertaking appropriate
reforms in the legal education system,
7) Political Law
requiring proper selection of law students,
8) Labor and Social Legislation maintaining quality among law schools, and
9) Medical Jurisprudence requiring legal apprenticeship and continuing
10) Taxation legal education.
11) Legal Ethics It is comprised of a Chairman (preferably
former justice of the Supreme Court or Court
of Appeals), 4 regular members (a
A Filipino citizen who graduated from a representative of the IBP, a representative of
foreign law school shall be admitted to the bar the Philippine Association of Law Schools
examination only upon submission to the (PALS), a representative from the ranks of
Supreme Court of certifications showing: active law practitioners, a representative from
1) Completion of all courses leading to the law students' sector, and the Secretary of
the degree of Bachelor of Laws or its the Department of Education or his
equivalent degree; representative as an ex officio member.
2) Recognition or accreditation of the The functions of the Board include:
law school by the proper authority; a) administering the legal education
and system in the country;
3) Completion of all the fourth year b) supervising the law schools in the
subjects in the Bachelor of Laws country;
academic program in a law school
duly recognized by the Philippine c) setting the standards of accreditation
Government. [Sec. 5, Rule 138, RoC as for law schools taking into account,
amended byRe: Letter of Atty. among others, the size of enrollment,
Mendoza, B.M. 1153 (2010)]. the qualifications of the members of
the faculty, the library and other
facilities, without encroaching upon
In B.M. No. 1552-A (2010), the Supreme Court the academic freedom of institutions
approved the guidelines on the legal of higher learning;
apprenticeship program in the Supreme Court d) accrediting law schools that meet the
and other collegiate appellate courts, standards of accreditation;
allowing qualified 4th year law students to
undergo the Legal Apprenticeship Program e) prescribing minimum standards for
for at the said courts for at least 160 hours. law admission and minimum
qualifications and compensation of
faculty members;
In A.M. No. 15-04-03-SC (Re Letters of Justice f) prescribing the basic curricula for the
Jose C. Vitug [Ret], Founding Dean of Angeles course of study aligned to the
University Foundation (AUF) School of Law, requirements for admission to the Bar,
dated 7 February 2015, and of Judge Ave A. law practice and social consciousness;
Zurbito-Alba, Municipal Trial court, Daraga,
Albay, dated 29 January 2015], the Supreme g) establishing a law practice internship
Court lifted the prohibition on the as a requirement for taking the Bar
which a law student shall undergo
PAGE 5 OF 85
UP LAW BOC LEGAL ETHICS LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS

with any duly accredited private or examinee. Examinees shall answer the
public law office or firm or legal questions personally without help from
assistance group anytime during the anyone.
law course for a specific period that
Upon verified application made by an
the Board may decide, but not to
examinee stating that his penmanship is so
exceed a total of twelve (12) months.
poor that it will be difficult to read his answers
For this purpose, the Board shall
without much loss of time, the Supreme Court
prescribe the necessary guidelines for
may allow such examinee to use a typewriter
such accreditation and the
in answering the questions. Only noiseless
specifications of such internship which
typewriters shall be allowed to be used.
shall include the actual work of a new
member of the Bar; and The committee of bar examines shall take
such precautions as are necessary to prevent
h) adopting a system of continuing legal
the substitution of papers or commission of
education.
other frauds. Examinees shall not place their
The LEB promulgated LEB Memorandum names on the examination papers. No oral
Order No 1, Series of 2011 to set forth the examination shall be given [Sec. 10, Rule 138,
policies and standards of legal education and RoC].
manual of regulations for law schools.[N.B.
Outside of the Bar Coverage] In December
2016, LEB promulgated LEB Memorandum iv. When and where to take examinations
Order No. 7, Series of 2016 which required the
Examination for admission to the bar of the
Philippine Law School Admission Test
Philippines shall take place annually in the
(PhilSAT) as a pre-requisite for admission to
City of Manila. They shall be held in 4 days to
the basic law courses leading either to a
be designated by the chairman of the
Bachelor of Laws or Juris Doctor degree
committee on bar examiners [Sec. 11, Rule 138,
beginning school year 2017-2018.
RoC].
Morning Political and
B.6. BAR EXAMINATIONS First International Law
I. When to file permit Day Afternoon Labor and Social
All applicants for admission shall file with the Legislation
clerk of the Supreme Court the evidence Morning Civil Law
required under Sec. 2 at least 15 days before Second
the beginning of the examination. If the Day Afternoon Taxation
applicant is not covered by Secs. and 4, they
Third Morning Mercantile Law
shall also file within the same period the
affidavit and certificate required by Sec. 5 [Sec. Day Afternoon Criminal Law
7, Rule 138, RoC].
Morning Remedial law
ii. Notice Fourth Afternoon Legal Ethics and
Notice of applications for admission shall be Day Practical
published by the clerk of the Supreme Court in Exercises
newspapers published in Filipino, English and
Spanish, for at least 10 days before the
beginning of the examination [Sec. 8, Rule 138, v. Passing average
RoC].
A candidate is deemed to have passed his
iii. Conduct of examinations examinations successfully if he obtained a
Persons taking the examination shall not general average of 75%in all subjects, without
bring papers, books or notes into the falling below 50%in any subject [Sec. 14, Rule
examination rooms. The questions shall be 138, RoC].
the same for all examinees and a copy thereof, The relative weights of the subjects used in
in English or Spanish, shall be given to each determining the average are as follows:
PAGE 6 OF 85
UP LAW BOC
Subject
Civil Law
Labor and Social Legislation
Mercantile Law
Criminal Law
Political and International Law
Taxation
Remedial Law
Legal Ethics and Practical Exercises
vi. Committee of Examiners
Examinations shall be conducted by a
committee of bar examiners to be appointed
by the Supreme Court. This committee shall
be composed of a Justice of the Supreme
Court as chairman, and 8 members of the bar,
who shall hold office for a period of one year.
The names of the members of this committee
shall be published in each volume of the
official reports [Sec. 12, Rule 138, RoC].
Pursuant to B.M. 1161 (2004), 2 examiners are
designated per bar subject.
The Bar Confidant acts as a sort of liaison
officer between the court and the Bar
Chairman on the other hand, and the
individual members of the committee on the
other. He is at the same time a deputy clerk of
court.
vii. Results
Not later than February 15th after the
examination, or as soon thereafter as may be
practicable, the committee shall file its report
on the result of such examination. The
examination papers and notes of the
committee shall be filed with the clerk and
may there be examined by the parties in
interest, after the court has approved the
report [Sec. 15, Rule 138, RoC].
viii. Flunkers
Candidates who have failed the bar
examinations for 3 times shall be disqualified
from taking another examination provided
that they may take a 4th and 5th examination if
LEGAL ETHICS LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
% they show to the satisfaction of the court that
they have enrolled in and passed regular 4th
15% year review classes as well as attended a pre-
10% bar review course in a recognized law school
for each examination [Sec. 16, Rule 138, RoC,
15% as amended by B.M. 1161 (2004)].
10%
15% ix. Disciplinary measures
10% No candidate shall endeavor to influence any
member of the committee, and during
20% examination, the candidates shall not
5% communicate with each other nor shall they
give or receive any assistance. Any violator
shall be barred from the examination, and the
same to count as a failure against him, and
further disciplinary action may be taken in the
discretion of the court [Sec. 13, Rule 138, RoC].
x. Civil service eligibility
Under RA 1080 (An Act Declaring the Bar and
Board Examinations as Civil Service
Examinations), as amended by RA 1844, the
Bar examinations is declared as civil service
examinations equivalent to:
(1) First grade regular examination for
appointment to a position which requires
proficiency in law; and
(2) Second grade regular examination for
appointment to a position which does not
require proficiency in law.
C. APPEARANCE OF NON-LAWYERS
General rule: Only members of the bar are
entitled to practice law.
Exceptions: The following are also allowed in
exceptional circumstances:
(1) Law students;
(2) By an agent/friend;
(3) By the litigant himself.
C.1. LAW STUDENT PRACTICE
A law student who has successfully completed
3rd year of the regular four-year prescribed law
curriculum and is enrolled in a recognized law
school's clinical legal education program
approved by the Supreme Court, may appear
without compensation in any civil, criminal or
PAGE 7 OF 85
UP LAW BOC
administrative case before any trial court,
tribunal, board or officer, to represent indigent
clients accepted by the legal clinic of the law
school [Sec. 1, Rule 138-A, RoC].
The appearance of the law student shall be
under the direct supervision and control of a
member of the IBP duly accredited by the law
school. Any and all pleadings, motions, briefs,
memoranda or other papers to be filed, must
be signed by the supervising attorney for and
in behalf of the legal clinic [Sec. 2, Rule 138-A,
RoC].
The Rules safeguarding privileged
communications between attorney and client
shall apply [Sec. 3, Rule 138-A, RoC].
The law student shall comply with the
standards of professional conduct governing
members of the bar. Failure of an attorney to
provide adequate supervision of student
practice may be a ground for disciplinary
action [Sec. 4, Rule 138-A, RoC].
Sec. 34, Rule 138, RoC is clear that
appearance before the inferior courts by a
non-lawyer is allowed, irrespective of whether
or not he is a law student. Thus, a law student
may appear under the circumstances of Sec.
38, as an agent or a friend of a party litigant,
without complying with the requirements of
Rule 138-A, e.g., supervision of a lawyer [Cruz
v. Mina, G.R. 154207 (2007)].
C.2. NON-LAWYERS IN COURTS
In the court of a municipality a party may
conduct his litigation in person, with the aid of
an agent or friend appointed by him for that
purpose, or with the aid of an attorney. In any
other court, a party may conduct his litigation
personally or by aid of an attorney, and his
appearance must be either personal or by a
duly authorized member of the bar [Sec 34,
Rule 138].
Public policy demands that legal work in
representation of parties should be entrusted
only to those possessing tested qualifications
[PAFLU v. Binalbagan, G.R. No. L-23959
(1971)].
PAGE 8 OF 85
LEGAL ETHICS LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
However, the Supreme Court, in the exercise of
its judicial power, can validly authorize a
layman to represent a litigant in court [Agpalo
(2004)].
A non-lawyer conducting his own litigation is
bound by the same rules in conducting the
trial of his case. He cannot, after judgment,
claim that he was not properly represented
[Agpalo (2004)].
C.3. NON-LAWYERS IN ADMINISTRATIVE
TRIBUNALS
There are laws which allow representation of
another by non-lawyers before such bodies.
(1) Art. 222, Labor Code allows non-lawyers
to appear before the NLRC or any Labor
Arbiter if (a) they represent themselves, or
(b) they represent their organizations
members
(2) The 2011 NLRC Rule of Procedure,
promulgated pursuant to Art 225(a),
Labor Code, allows (a) non-lawyers, who
are not necessarily a party to the case, to
represent a union or members thereof, (b)
non-lawyers who are duly-accredited
members of any legal aid office
recognized by the Department of Justice
or IBP, and (c) non-lawyer owners of
establishments, to appear before it.
(2) Under Sec. 9, Act 2259 (Cadastral Act), a
claimant may appear by himself, or by
some person in his behalf, before a
cadastral court.
(3) Under Sec. 50, RA 6657 (Comprehensive
Agrarian Reform Law), as amended by RA
9700, responsible farmer leaders shall be
allowed to represent themselves, their
fellow farmers, or their organizations in
any proceedings before the DAR:
Provided, however, That when there are
two or more representatives for any
individual or group, the representatives
should choose only one among
themselves to represent such party or
group before any DAR proceedings
In order that these laws will not infringe upon
the power of the Supreme Court to regulate
UP LAW BOC
the practice of law, the following limitations
must be observed:
(1) The non-lawyer should confine his work to
non-adversary contentions and should not
undertake purely legal work (i.e.,
examination of witness, presentation of
evidence);
(2) The services should not be habitual;
(3) Attorney’s fees should not be charged
[Agpalo (2004)].
C.4. PROCEEDINGS WHERE LAWYERS ARE
PROHIBITED FROM APPEARING
(1) In small claims cases, no attorney shall
appear in behalf of or represent a party at
the hearing, unless the attorney is the
plaintiff or defendant. If the court
determines that a party cannot properly
present his/her claim or defense and
needs assistance, the court may, in its
discretion, allow another individual who is
not an attorney to assist that party upon
the latter's consent [Sec. 17, Rules of
Procedure in Small Claims Cases].
(2) In all katarungang pambarangay
proceedings, the parties must appear in
person without the assistance of the
counsel or representative, except for
minors and incompetents who may be
assisted by their next of kin who are not
lawyers [Sec 415, RA 7160 (Local
Government Code)].
C.5. SELF-REPRESENTATION
Pursuant to Sec. 34, Rule 138, RoC, in any
court, a party may conduct his litigation in
person.
An attorney who is otherwise disqualified to
practice law, or has been disbarred or
suspended from practice, can validly
prosecute or defend his own litigation, he
having as much right as that of a layman
[Danforth v. Egan, 119 N.W. 1021 (1909)].
When a person conducts his litigation in
person, he is not engaged in the practice of
law [Agpalo (2004)].
A juridical person may also appear through its
non-lawyer agents or officers in the municipal
trial court.
PAGE 9 OF 85
LEGAL ETHICS LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
Sec. 34, Rule 138, RoC does not distinguish
between civil and criminal cases. However, in
criminal cases, the rule is qualified:
(1) Under Sec. 1(c), Rule 115, RoC, the accused
may defend himself in person “when it
sufficiently appears to the court that he
can properly protect his rights without the
assistance of counsel.”
(2) Under Sec. 7, Rule 116, RoC, in
determining whether a counsel de oficio
should be appointed, or, for that matter,
whether a counsel de parte should be
required (conversely, whether the accused
should be allowed to defend himself in
person), the gravity of the offense and the
difficulty of the questions that may arise
should be considered.
While the right to be represented by counsel is
immutable, the option to secure the services of
counsel de parte is not absolute. The court
may restrict the accused’s option to retain a
counsel de parte if:
(1) He insists on an attorney he cannot afford;
(2) He chose a person not a member of the
bar;
(3) The attorney declines for a valid reason
(e.g., conflict of interest) [People v. Serzo,
G.R. No. 118435 (1997)].
C.6. AGENT OR FRIEND
The agent or friend is not engaged in the
practice of law, since there is no habituality in
the activity and no attorney-client relationship
exists. Pursuant to Sec. 34, Rule 138, RoC, he
is only permitted to appear in the municipal
trial court.
In criminal cases, in localities where members
of the bar are not available, the court may
appoint any person (i.e., non-lawyer), who is a
resident of the province and of good repute for
probity and ability to defend the accused, in
lieu of a counsel de oficio [Sec. 7, Rule 116,
RoC]. In relation to Sec. 34, Rule 138, this is
only allowed in the municipal trial court.
UP LAW BOC
D. SANCTIONS FOR PRACTICE OR
APPEARANCE WITHOUT AUTHORITY
D.1. LAWYERS WITHOUT AUTHORITY
Under Sec. 27, Rule 138, RoC, corruptly or
willfully appearing as an attorney for a party
to a case without authority to do so is a ground
for disbarment or suspension.
D.2. PERSONS NOT LAWYERS
For BOTH persons not lawyers and lawyers
who appear without authority, the following
may be availed of:
(1) Petition for injunction;
(2) Declaratory relief;
(3) Contempt of court;
(4) Disqualification and complaints for
disbarment;
(5) Administrative complaint against the
erring lawyer or government official;
(6) Criminal complaint for estafa against the
person who falsely represented himself as
a lawyer to the damage of another.
E. PUBLIC OFFICIALS AND PRACTICE
OF LAW
E.1. PROHIBITION OR DISQUALIFICATION
OF FORMER GOVERNMENT ATTORNEYS
Under Sec. 7(b), RA 6713 (Code of Conduct and
Ethical Standards for Public Officials and
Employees), public officials and employees
during their incumbency shall not:
(1) Own, control, manage or accept
employment as officer employee,
consultant, counsel, broker, agent, trustee
or nominee / in any private enterprise
regulated, supervised or licensed by their
office / unless expressly allowed by law;
(2) Engage in the private practice of their
profession unless authorized by the
Constitution or law, provided that such
practice will not conflict or tend to conflict
with their official functions;
(3) Recommend any person to any position in
a private enterprise which has a regular or
PAGE 10 OF 85
LEGAL ETHICS LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
pending official transaction with their
office.
These prohibitions shall continue to apply for
a period of 1 year after resignation, retirement
or separation from public office, except in case
of the second.
The 1 year prohibition also applies to practice
of profession in connection with any matter
before the office he used to be with.
E.2. PUBLIC OFFICIALS WHO CANNOT
PRACTICE LAW OR WITH RESTRICTIONS
E.2.A. Absolute prohibition
(1) Judges and other officials or employees of
superior courts as [Sec. 35, Rule 148,
RoC];
(2) Officials and employees of the Office of
the Solicitor General [Sec. 35, Rule 148,
RoC];
(3) Government prosecutors [Lim-Santiago v.
Sagucio, A.C. 6705 (2006)];
(4) President, vice-president, cabinet
members, their deputies and assistants
[Sec. 15, Art. VII, 1987 Constitution];
(5) Chairmen and members of constitutional
commissions [Sec. 2, Art. IX-A, 1987
Constitution];
(6) Ombudsman and his deputies [par. 2, Sec.
8 (2), Art. X, 1987 Constitution];
(7) All governors, city and municipal mayors
[Sec. 90(a), RA 7160];
(8) Civil service officers or employees whose
duties require them to devote their entire
time at the disposal of the government
[Catu v Rellosa, A.C. 5738 (2008)];
(9) Those who, by special law, are prohibited
from engaging in the practice of their legal
profession.
E.2.B. Relative prohibition
(1) No senator or member of the House of
Representatives may personally appear as
counsel before any court of justice or
before the Electoral Tribunals, or quasi-
judicial and other administrative bodies
[Sec. 14, Art. VI, 1987 Constitution]
UP LAW BOC
a. The word “appearance” includes not
only arguing a case before any such
body, but also filing a pleading on
behalf of a client [Ramos v Manalac,
G.R. L-2610 (1951)].
(2) Sanggunian members may practice law
except during session hours and provided
they shall not:
a. Appear as counsel before any court
in any civil case wherein a local
government unit or any office,
agency, or instrumentality of the
government is the adverse party;
b. Appear as counsel in any criminal
case wherein an officer or employee
of the national or local government
is accused of an offense committed
in relation to his office;
c. Collect any fee for their appearance
in administrative proceedings
involving the local government unit
of which he is an official; and
d. Use property and personnel of the
government except when the
sanggunian member concerned is
defending the interest of the
government [Sec. 90(b), RA 7160].
E.2.C. Special restrictions
Under Sec. 1, RA 910, the pension of justices
therein is provided with a condition that no
retiring justice, during the time that he is
receiving said pension shall:
(1) Appear as counsel before any court in any
civil case wherein the Government or any
subdivision or instrumentality thereof is
the adverse party;
(2) In any criminal case wherein and officer or
employee of the government is accused of
an offense committed in relation to his
office; or
(3) Collect any fee for his appearance in any
administrative proceedings to maintain an
interest adverse to the Government,
insular, provincial or municipal, or to any
of its legally constituted officers.
PAGE 11 OF 85
LEGAL ETHICS LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
F. LAWYERS AUTHORIZED TO
REPRESENT THE GOVERNMENT
Any official or other person appointed or
designated in accordance with law to appear
for the Government of the Philippines shall
have all the rights of a duly authorized
member of the bar to appear in any case in
which said government has an interest direct
or indirect [Sec. 33, Rule 138, RoC]
G. LAWYER’S OATH
An applicant who has passed the required
examination, or has been otherwise found to
be entitled to admission to the bar, shall take
and subscribe before the Supreme Court the
corresponding oath of office [Sec. 17, Rule 138,
RoC].
The lawyer's oath is not a mere ceremony or
formality for practicing law. Every lawyer
should at all times weigh his actions according
to the sworn promises he makes when taking
the lawyer's oath. If all lawyers conducted
themselves strictly according to the lawyer's
oath and the Code of Professional
Responsibility, the administration of justice
will undoubtedly be faster, fairer and easier for
everyone concerned [In re: Argosino, A.M. 712
(1997)].
I, ___________________, do solemnly swear
that I will maintain allegiance to the
Republic of the Philippines; I will support
its Constitution and obey the laws as well
as the legal orders of the duly constituted
authorities therein; I will do no falsehood,
nor consent to the doing of any in court;
I will not wittingly or willingly promote or
sue any groundless, false or unlawful suit,
nor give aid nor consent to the same;
I will delay no man for money or malice,
and will conduct myself as a lawyer
according to the best of my knowledge
and discretion with all good fidelity as well
to the courts as to my clients; and
I impose upon myself this voluntary
obligation without any mental reservation
or purpose of evasion. So help me God.
[Form 28]
UP LAW BOC LEGAL ETHICS LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS

that no person may be deprived of life or

liberty, but by due process of law
II. Duties and
Responsibilities of a CODE OF PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY
(hereinafter CPR)
Lawyer A. TO SOCIETY (CANONS 1-6)

Under the Sec. 20, Rule 138, RoC, it is the duty A.1. RESPECT FOR LAW AND LEGAL
of an attorney:
PROCESSES
(1) To maintain allegiance to the Republic of
the Philippines and to support the Canon 1. A lawyer shall uphold the Constitution,
Constitution and obey the laws of the obey the laws of the land and promote respect for
Philippines; law and legal process.
(2) To observe and maintain the respect due
to the courts of justice and judicial officers;
NOTE: Canon 1 is the 3rd top source of
(3) To counsel or maintain such actions or
Questions on the Code of Professional
proceedings only as appear to him to be
Responsibility. It was asked 18 times in the last
just, and such defenses only as he believes
20 years as of 2014 [Lex Pareto (2014 ed)]
to be honestly debatable under the law;
Freedom of speech and of expression, like all
(4) To employ, for the purpose of maintaining
constitutional freedoms, is not absolute and
the causes confided to him, such means
that freedom of expression needs on occasion
only as are consistent with truth and
to be adjusted to and accommodated with the
honor, and never seek to mislead the
requirements of equally important public
judge or any judicial officer by an artifice or
interests. One of these fundamental public
false statement of fact or law;
interests is the maintenance of the integrity
(5) To maintain inviolate the confidence, and and orderly functioning of the administration
at every peril to himself, to preserve the of justice [Zaldivar v. Gonzales, G.R. Nos.
secrets of his client, and to accept no 79690-707 and 80578 (1988)].
compensation in connection with his
Pursuant to Zaldivar v. Gonzales, G.R. Nos.
client’s business except from him or with
79690-707 and 80578 (1988)], the
his knowledge and approval;
responsibility of a ‘public’ lawyer (such as
(6) To abstain from all offensive personality Special Prosecutor), who owes duties of
and to advance no fact prejudicial to the fidelity and respect to the Republic and to the
honor or reputation of a party or witness, Supreme Court as the embodiment and the
unless required by the justice of the cause repository of the judicial power in the
with which he is charge; government of the Republic, to uphold the
dignity and authority of the Supreme Court
(7) Not to encourage either the
and not to promote distrust in the
commencement or the continuance of an
administration of justice is heavier than that of
action or proceeding, or delay any man’s
a private practicing lawyer [Zaldivar v.
cause, from any corrupt motive or interest;
Gonzales, G.R. Nos. 79690-707 and 80578
(8) Never to reject, for any consideration (1988)].
personal to himself, the cause of the
defenseless or oppressed;
(9) In the defense of a person accused of
Rule 1.01. A lawyer shall not engage in
unlawful, dishonest, immoral or deceitful
crime, by all fair and honorable means,
conduct.
regardless of his personal opinion as to
the guilt of the accused, to present every
defense that the law permits, to the end
UNLAWFUL CONDUCT
PAGE 12 OF 85
UP LAW BOC LEGAL ETHICS LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS

An unlawful conduct is act or omission which (5) The issuance of checks without sufficient
is against the law. Dishonesty involves lying or funds to cover the same. [Aca v. Salvado,
cheatsng [Agpalo (2004)] A.C. No. 10952, (2016)]

IMMORAL CONDUCT AND GROSSLY NOT GROSSLY IMMORAL

IMMORAL CONDUCT DISTINGUISHED
(1) Mere intimacy between a man and a
Immoral Conduct Grossly Immoral woman, both of whom possess no
Conduct impediment to marry, voluntarily carried
and devoid of deceit on the part of the
Acts that are willful, When it is so corrupt respondent, even if a child was born out of
flagrant, or as to constitute a wedlock of such relationship; it may
shameless, and that criminal act, or so suggest a doubtful moral character but
show a moral unprincipled as to be not grossly immoral [Figueroa v.
indifference to the reprehensible to a Barranco, SBC Case No. 519 (1997)]
opinion of the high degree, or
upright and when committed (2) Stealing a kiss from a client [Advincula v.
respectable under such Macabata, A.C. No. 7204 (2007)]
members of the scandalous or (3) Making sexual advances towards a client,
community revolting but stopping right after the client refused
circumstances as to such advances [Roa v Moreno, A.C. 8382
shock the (2010)].
community’s sense
of decency
Penalty of A lawyer may not be disciplined for failure to
disbarment pay her obligation [Toledo v. Abalos, 315
SCRA 419 (1999)], but unwarranted obstinacy
in evading the payment of a debt has been
[Perez v. Catindig, A.C. No. 5816 (2015) considered as a gross misconduct.
[Constantino v. Saludares, 228 SCRA 233
(1993)].
GROSSLY IMMORAL ACTS
(1) Wanton disregard for the sanctity of MORAL TURPITUDE
marriage as shown when the lawyer
pursued a married woman and thereafter Moral turpitude includes everything which is
cohabited with her [Guevarra v. Eala, A.C. done contrary to justice, honesty, modesty, or
No. 7136 (2007)] good morals. It involves an act of baseness,
vileness, or depravity in the private duties
(2) Rape of a neighbor’s wife, which which a man owed his fellowmen, or to society
constitutes serious moral depravity, even in general [Barrios v. Martinez, A.C. No. 4585
if his guilt was not proved beyond (2004)].
reasonable doubt in the criminal
prosecution for rape [Calub v. Suller, A.C. Murder, estafa, rape, violation of Batas
No. 1474 (2000)] Pambansa Blg. 22 (Bouncing Checks Law),
bribery, bigamy, adultery, seduction,
(3) Obtaining money from a client, without abduction, concubinage and smuggling are
rendering proper legal services, and considered crimes involving moral turpitude.
appropriating the proceeds of the
insurance policies of the client’s deceased Issuance of bouncing checks reflects on the
husband [Freeman v. Zenaida, A.C. 6246 lawyer’s moral character and he may be
(2011)] disciplined. [Lex Pareto, Bar 2001, 2002]
(4) Falsifying documents [Cobalt Resources, A lawyer is obligated to promote respect for
Inc. v Aguardo, A.C. 10781, (2016)] legal processes. This includes order of the

PAGE 13 OF 85
UP LAW BOC
commission on Bar Discipline of the IBP. [Lex
Pareto, Bar 2002]
Rule 1.02. A lawyer shall not counsel or abet
activities aimed at defiance of the law or at
lessening confidence in the legal
profession.
The promotion of organizations, with
knowledge of their objectives, for the purpose
of violating or evading the laws constitutes to
malpractice of gross misconduct in his office
[In re: Terrell, G.R. No. 1203 (1903)].
A lawyer should advise his client to uphold the
law, not to violate or disobey it. Conversely, he
should not recommend to his client any
recourse or remedy that is contrary to law,
public policy, public order, and public morals
[Coronel v. Cunanan, A.C. 6738 (2015)].
Rule 1.03. A lawyer shall not, for any corrupt
motive or interest, encourage any suit or
delay any man’s cause.
BARRATRY OR “MAINTENANCE”
The offense of inciting or stirring up quarrels,
litigation or groundless lawsuits, either at law
or otherwise [Bouvier]
Other prohibited acts include:
(1) Volunteering advice to bring lawsuits,
except where ties of blood, relationship or
trust make it a duty to do so
(2) Hunting up defects in titles or other causes
of action in order to be employed to bring
suit or breed litigation
(3) [Agpalo (2004)]
AMBULANCE-CHASING
Unethical practice of inducing personal injury
victims to bring suits. The practice of lawyers
in frequenting hospitals and homes of the
injured to convince them to go to court [Lex
Pareto (2014)]
Accident-site solicitation of any kind of legal
business by laymen employed by an attorney
for the purpose or by the attorney himself.
PAGE 14 OF 85
LEGAL ETHICS LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
Supports perjury, the defrauding of innocent
persons by judgments, upon manufactured
causes of actions and the defrauding of
injured persons having proper causes of action
but ignorant of legal rights and court
procedure.
A lawyer’s conduct of vindictiveness is a
decidedly undesirable trait especially when
one resorts to using the court not to secure
justice but merely to exact revenge warrants
his dismissal from the judiciary. [Saburnido v.
Madrono, A.C. No. 4497 (2001)]
AMBULANCE CHASING AND BARRATRY
DISTINGUISHED [Lex Pareto (2014)]
Ambulance Chasing Barratry
Refers to personal Refers to any action
injury
Refers to cases Refers to suits
brought before before judicial or
judicial bodies non-judicial bodies
Rule 1.04. A lawyer shall encourage his
clients to avoid, end or settle a controversy
if it will admit of a fair settlement.
The function of a lawyer is not only to conduct
litigation but to avoid it where possible, by
advising settlement or withholding suit. He
must act as mediator for compromise rather
than an instigator and conflict [Agpalo
(2004)].
It is the duty of a counsel to advise his client,
ordinarily a layman to the intricacies and
vagaries of the law, on the merit or lack of
merit of his case. If he finds that his client's
cause is defenseless, then it is his bounden
duty to advise the latter to acquiesce and
submit, rather than traverse the
incontrovertible. A lawyer must resist the
whims and caprices of his client, and temper
his client’s propensity to litigate. A lawyer's
oath to uphold the cause of justice is superior
to his duty to his client; its primacy is
indisputable [Castañeda v. Ago, G.R. No. L-
28546 (1975)]
UP LAW BOC
A.2. EFFICIENT, CONVENIENT LEGAL
SERVICES
Canon 2. A lawyer shall make his legal
services available in an efficient and
convenient manner compatible with the
independence, integrity and effectiveness
of the profession.
NOTE: Asked 4 times in the last 20 years as of
2014 [Lex Pareto (2014 ed)]
Free access to the courts and quasi-judicial
bodies and adequate legal assistance shall
not be denied to any person by reason of
poverty. [Sec. 11, Art. III, 1987 Constitution]
A person in need of legal services should be
able to find a lawyer who is qualified to provide
them. It is the responsibility of the bar to make
such services available [Agpalo (2004)].
Rule 2.01. A lawyer shall not reject, except
for valid reasons, the cause of the
defenseless or the oppressed.
Membership in the bar is a privilege burdened
with conditions. It could be that for some
lawyers, especially the neophytes in the
profession, being appointed counsel de
oficio is an irksome chore. For those holding
such belief, it may come as a surprise that
counsel of repute and of eminence welcome
such an opportunity. It makes even more
manifest that law is indeed a profession
dedicated to the ideal of service and not a
mere trade. It is understandable then why a
high degree of fidelity to duty is required of
one so designated. [Ledesma v. Climaco, G.R.
No. L-23815 (1974)]
Legal aid is not a matter of charity. It is a
means for the correction of social imbalance
that may and often do lead to injustice, for
which reason it is a public responsibility of the
bar [Sec. 1, Art. 1, IBP Handbook, Guidelines
Governing the Establishment and Operation
of the Legal Aid Office].
PAGE 15 OF 85
LEGAL ETHICS LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
Rule 2.02. In such cases, even if the lawyer
does not accept a case, he shall not refuse
to render legal advice to the person
concerned if only to the extent necessary to
safeguard the latter’s rights.
Advice may be on what preliminary steps to
take until the client has secured the services of
counsel. But he shall refrain from giving legal
advice if the reason for not accepting the case
is that there involves a conflict of interest
between him and a prospective client or
between a present client and a prospective
client. [Agpalo (2004)]
Rule 2.03. A lawyer shall not do or permit to
be done any act designed to primarily solicit
legal business.
A well-known lawyer has been engaged to run
a program in which he encourages indigent
party litigants to consult him free of charge
about their legal problems over a radio and
television network. Has he violated any ethical
rules? – YES, as it involves indirect advertising
and solicitation and is likewise violative of the
confidentiality of lawyer-client relationship.
His act may also be considered as a form of
self-praise hence subject to discipline [In re:
Tagorda, G.R. No. 32329, (1929), cited in Lex
Pareto (2014); Linsangan v. Tolentino, A.C.
6672(2009)]
Law is not a business but a profession. Unlike
a businessman, the lawyer has:
(1) Relation to the administration of justice
involving sincerity, integrity and reliability
as an officer of the court;
(2) Duty of public service;
(3) Relation to clients with the highest degree
of fiduciary;
(4) Relation to colleagues at the bar
characterized by candor, fairness and
unwillingness to resort to business
methods of advertising and encroachment
on their practice, or dealing directly with
their clients [Agpalo (2004)]
Thus, the practice of soliciting cases at law for
the purpose of gain, either personally or
UP LAW BOC LEGAL ETHICS LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS

through paid agents or brokers, constitutes The most worthy and effective
malpractice [Sec. 27, Rule 138, RoC]. advertisement possible, even for a young
A lawyer is not prohibited from engaging in lawyer, and especially with his brother
business or other lawful occupation. lawyers, is the establishment of a well-
Impropriety arises, though, when the business merited reputation for professional capacity
is of such a nature or is conducted in such a and fidelity to trust. This cannot be forced,
but must be the outcome of character and
manner as to be inconsistent with the lawyer’s
duties as a member of the bar. This conduct [Canon 27, Canons of Professional
inconsistency arises when the business is one Ethics; In re: Tagorda, supra].Rule 3.01. A
that can readily lend itself to the procurement lawyer shall not use or permit the use of any
of professional employment for the lawyer; or false, fraudulent, misleading, deceptive,
that can be used as a cloak for indirect undignified, self-laudatory or unfair
solicitation on the lawyer’s behalf; or is of a statement or claim regarding his
nature that, if handled by a lawyer, would be qualifications or legal services.
regarded as the practice of law [Villatuya v.
Tabalingcos, A.C. 6622 (2012)
ALLOWABLE ADVERTISEMENT
(1) Ordinary simple professional card;
Rule 2.04. A lawyer shall not charge rates
(2) Publication in reputable law list with brief
lower than those customarily prescribed
biographical and other informative data
unless the circumstances so warrant.
which may include:
(a) Name;
Ratio: the practice of law is profession and not
(b) Associates;
a trade. It is improper to lower your legal rates
just because another lawyer has offered a (c) Address;
lower legal fee. [Lex Pareto (2014)]
(d) Phone numbers;
This rule prohibits the competition in the
(e) Branches of law practiced;
matter of charging professional fees for the
purposed of attracting clients in favor of the (f) Birthday;
lawyer who offers lower rates. The rule does (g) Day admitted to the bar;
not prohibit a lawyer from charging a reduced
fee or none at all to an indigent or to a person (h) Schools and dates attended;
who would have difficulty paying the fee (i) Degrees and distinctions;
usually charged for such services [Agpalo
(2004)] (j) Public or quasi-public offices;
(k) Posts of honor;
A.3. TRUE, HONEST, FAIR, DIGNIFIED & (l) Legal authorships;
OBJECTIVE INFORMATION ON LEGAL (m) Teaching positions;
SERVICES
(n) Associations;
Canon 3. A lawyer in making known his
legal services shall use only true, honest, (o) Legal fraternities and societies;
fair, dignified and objective information or (p) References and regularly represented
statement of facts. clients must be published for that
purpose [Ulep v. The Legal Clinic, Inc.,
B.M. No. 553 (1993)];
NOTE: Canon 3 is 5th top source of Questions
on CPR. Asked 12 times in the last 20 years as (3) Publication of simple announcement of
of 2014 [Lex Pareto (2014)] opening of law firm, change of firm;
(4) Listing in telephone directory but not
under designation of special branch of
law;
PAGE 16 OF 85
UP LAW BOC
(5) If acting as an associate (specializing in a
branch of law), may publish a brief and
dignified announcement to lawyers (law
list, law journal);
(6) If in media, those acts incidental to his
practice and not of his own initiative;
(7) Writing legal articles;
(8) Activity of an association for the purpose
of legal representation.
The law list must be a reputable law list
published primarily for that purpose; it cannot
be a mere supplemental feature of a paper,
magazine, trade journal or periodical which is
published primarily for other purposes.
PROHIBITED ADVERTISEMENTS
[Sec. 27, Canon of Professional Ethics]
(1) Through touters of any kind whether allied
real estate firms or trust companies
advertising to secure the drawing of deeds
or wills;
(2) Offering retainers in exchange for
executorships or trusteeships to be
influenced by the lawyer;
(3) Furnishing or inspiring newspaper
comments concerning the manner of their
conduct, the magnitude of the interests
involved, the importance of lawyer’s
position, and all other like self-laudation.
A lawyer may not properly publish his brief
biographical and informative data in a daily
paper, magazine, trade journal or society
program in order to solicit legal business
[Khan v. Simbillo, A.C. 5299 (2003)].
It is highly unethical for an attorney to
advertise his talents or skill as a merchant
advertises his wares. The law is a profession
not a business. Solicitation of cases by himself
or through others is unprofessional and lowers
the standards of the legal profession. [In re:
Tagorda, supra].
In the last analysis, where to draw the line is a
question of good faith and good taste.
ENTERING INTO OTHER BUSINESSES
For it to constitute as inconsistent with the
lawyer’s profession, it is advisable that they
be entirely separate and apart such that a
PAGE 17 OF 85
LEGAL ETHICS LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
layman could distinguish between the two
functions.
The lawyer must make it clear to his client
whether he is acting as a lawyer or in
another capacity.
Rule 3.02. In the choice of a firm name,
no false, misleading or assumed name
shall be used. The continued use of the
name of a deceased partner is
permissible provided that the firm
indicates in all its communications that
said partner is deceased.
The continued use of the name of a deceased
partner is permissible provided that the firm
indicates in all its communications that said
partner is deceased [Agpalo (2004)].
Ratio: All partners by their joint efforts over a
period of years contributed to the goodwill
attached to the firm name, and the removal of
the deceased partner’s name disturbs the
client goodwill built through the years.
Firms may not use misleading names showing
association with other firms to purport legal
services of highest quality and ties with
multinational business enterprise especially
when such firm attached as an associate
cannot legally practice law in the Philippines
[Dacanay v. Baker and McKenzie, A.C. 2131
(1985)].
Rule 3.03. Where a partner accepts public
office, he shall withdraw from the firm and
his name shall be dropped from the firm
name unless the law allows him to practice
law concurrently.
Purpose: To prevent the law firm from using
his name to attract legal business and to avoid
suspicion of undue influence.
A civil service officer or employee whose duty
or responsibility does not require his entire
time to be at the disposal of the government
may not engage in the private practice of law
without the written permit from the head of
the department concerned [Agpalo (2004)].
UP LAW BOC
It is unlawful for a public official or employee
to, among others, engage in the private
practice of their profession, unless authorized
by the Constitution or law, provided that such
practice will not conflict or tend to conflict with
official functions [Samonte v. Gatdula, A.M.
No. P-99-1292 (1999)].
If the unauthorized practice on the part of a
person who assumes to be an attorney causes
damage to a party, the former may be held
liable for estafa [Agpalo (2004)]
ABSOLUTE AND RELATIVE PROHIBITION OF
PUBLIC OFFICIALS FROM PRACTICE OF
LAW:
When any of those absolutely prohibited
officials is appointed/elected/qualified, he
ceases, as a general rule, to engage in the
private practice of law and his right to practice
is suspended during his tenure in office.
Rule 3.04. A lawyer shall not pay or give
anything of value to representatives of the
mass media in anticipation of, or in return
for, publicity to attract legal business.
Purpose: To prevent some lawyers from
gaining an unfair advantage over others
through the use of gimmickry, press agentry or
other artificial means.
This rule prohibits making indirect publicity
gimmick, such as furnishing or inspiring
newspaper comments, procuring his
photograph to be published in connection
with cases which he is handling, making a
courtroom scene to attract the attention of
newspapermen, or arranging for the purpose
an interview with him by media people
[Agpalo 2004].
It is bad enough to have such undue publicity
when a criminal case is being investigated by
the authorities, even when it is being tried in
court; but when said publicity and
sensationalism is allowed, even encouraged,
when the case is on appeal and is pending
consideration by this Tribunal, the whole thing
becomes inexcusable, even abhorrent, and
this Court, in the interest of justice, is
constrained and called upon to put an end to
it and a deterrent against its repetition by
PAGE 18 OF 85
LEGAL ETHICS LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
meting an appropriate disciplinary measure,
even a penalty to the one liable. [Cruz v. Salva,
G.R. No. L-12871 (1959)]
A.4 PARTICIPATION IN THE IMPROVEMENT
AND REFORMS IN THE LEGAL SYSTEM
Canon 4. A lawyer shall participate in the
development of the legal system by
initiating or supporting efforts in law reform
and in the improvement of the
administration of justice.
NOTE: Asked 2 times in the last 20 years as of
2014 [Lex Pareto (2014 ed)]
This is a duty that flows from the lawyer’s
sense of public responsibility [Agpalo
(2004)].
EXAMPLES
(1) Presenting position papers or resolutions
for the introduction of pertinent bills in
Congress;
(2) Submitting petitions to the Supreme
Court for the amendment of the RoC.
The Misamis Oriental Chapter of the IBP has
been commended by the Supreme Court when
it promulgated a resolution wherein it
requested the IBP’s National Committee on
Legal Aid to ask for the exemption from the
payment of filing, docket and other fees of
clients of the legal aid offices in the various IBP
chapters [Re: Request of NCLA to Exempt
Legal Aid Clients from Paying Filing, Docket
and Other Fees (2009)].
A.5. PARTICIPATION IN LEGAL EDUCATION
PROGRAM
Canon 5. A lawyer shall keep abreast of
legal developments, participate in
continuing legal education programs,
support efforts to achieve high standards in
law schools as well as in the practical
training of law students and assist in
disseminating information regarding the
law and jurisprudence.
UP LAW BOC
B.M. 850, as amended
(Dated Feb. 15, 2015. Effective Mar. 1, 2015)
Re: Rules on Mandatory Continuing Legal
Education for Active Members of the
Integrated Bar of the Philippines
xxx The Court Resolved to REQUIRE all
members of the IBP to file a written entry of
appearance indicating their MCLE
exemption or compliance number for the
current or immediately preceding
compliance period and date of issuance
thereof before appearing as counsel or
engaging in oral argument in open court or
before a quasi-judicial body. However,
counsels who affixed their signatures in
their pleadings and indicated their MCLE
exemption or compliance number in their
pleadings need not file a separate entry of
appearance. Henceforth, all counsels,
including partners of law firms whose
names appear in the said pleadings, shall
also indicate their MCLE exemption or
compliance number.
This resolution shall take effect on March 1,
2015 following its publication in a
newspaper of general circulation."
Pursuant to Supreme Court Resolution dated
January 14, 2014, the phrase “failure to
disclose the required information would cause
the dismissal of the case and the expunction
of the pleadings from the records” in B.M.
1922 (2008) is repealed and amended to read,
“failure to disclose the required information
would subject the counsel to appropriate
penalty and disciplinary action.”
MANDATORY CONTINUING LEGAL
EDUCATION (MCLE) PROGRAM
A program which requires lawyers to show
proof of having undertaken improvement in
their knowledge as a precondition for
renewing their license to practice [Lex Pareto
(2014)]
See also: V. Mandatory Continuing Legal
Education (MCLE) below
There is no doubt that Atty. Flores failed to
obey the trial court’s order to submit proof of
PAGE 19 OF 85
LEGAL ETHICS LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
his MCLE compliance notwithstanding the
several opportunities given him. Court orders
are to be respected not because the judges
who issue them should be respected, but
because of the respect and consideration that
should be extended to the judicial branch of
the Government. Disrespect to judicial
incumbents is disrespect to that branch the
Government to which they belong, as well as
to the State which has instituted the judicial
system. [Rodriguez-Manahan v. Flores, A.C.
No. 8954 (2013)]
A.6. APPLICABILITY TO GOVERNMENT
LAWYERS
Canon 6. These canons shall apply to
lawyers in government service in the
discharge of their official duties.
NOTE: Asked 5 times in the last 20 years as of
2014 [Lex Pareto (2014 ed)]
Where a lawyer’s 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. Although
the general rule is that a lawyer who holds a
government office may not be disciplined as a
member of the bar for infractions he
committed as a government official, he may,
however, be disciplined as a lawyer if his
misconduct constitutes a violation of his oath
a member of the legal profession [Ali v Butong,
A.C. 4018 (2005)].
A member of the bar who assumes public
office does not shed his professional
obligation. Lawyers in government are public
servants who owe the utmost fidelity to the
public service. A lawyer in public service is a
keeper of public faith and is burdened with a
high degree of social responsibility, perhaps
higher than her brethren in private practice
[Vitriolo v. Dasig, A.C. 4984 (2003)].
May a former government lawyer appear in a
case against the government? – YES, he may
appear in a case unless there is a specific
ethical rule or provision of law which prohibits
him from doing so. [Lex Pareto (2014)]
UP LAW BOC
When may a former government lawyer be
prohibited from accepting a legal
engagement? [Lex Pareto (2014)]
a. A lawyer shall not after leaving the
government service accept
engagement or employment in
connection with any matter in which
he had intervened while in said
service;
b. Retired members of the judiciary
receiving pensions form the
government should not practice law
where the government is the adverse
party or in a criminal case involving a
government employee in the
performance of his duties as such
Sec. 4, RA 6713 provides the norms of conduct
of public officials and employees.
Rule 6.01. The primary duty of a lawyer
engaged in public prosecution is not to
convict but to see that justice is done. The
suppression of facts or the concealment of
witnesses capable of establishing the
innocence of the accused is highly
reprehensible and is cause for disciplinary
action.
A public prosecutor is a quasi-judicial officer
with the two-fold aim which is that guilt shall
not escape or innocence suffers. He should not
hesitate to recommend to the court the
acquittal of an accused if the evidence in his
possession shows that the accused is innocent
[Agpalo (2004)].
In criminal cases, a public prosecutor should
be present for the following reasons: [Lex
Pareto (2014)]
1. To protect the interest of the State (As the
criminal case is in reality a crime against
the State)
2. To see to it that justice is done (Rule 6.01)
Naturally, the private prosecutor is
interested only to convict the accused.
However, the primary duty of the public
prosecutor is not to convict, but to see
that justice is done.
PAGE 20 OF 85
LEGAL ETHICS LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
A prosecuting attorney, by the nature of his
office, is under no compulsion to file a
particular criminal information where he is not
convinced that he has evidence to prop up the
averments thereof, or that the evidence at
hand points to a different conclusion. This is
not to discount the possibility of the
commission of abuses on the part of the
prosecutor. But we must have to recognize
that a prosecuting attorney should not be
unduly compelled to work against his
conviction. In case of doubt, we should give
him the benefit thereof. A contrary rule may
result in our courts being unnecessarily
swamped with unmeritorious cases. Worse
still, a criminal suspect's right to due process -
the sporting idea of fair play - may be
transgressed. So it is, that in People vs. Sope,
this Court made the pronouncement that "[i]t
is very logical that the prosecuting attorney,
being the one charged with the prosecution of
offenses, should determine the information to
be filed and cannot be controlled by the
offended party." [People v. Pineda, G.R. No.
L-26222 (1967)]
Rule 6.02. 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.
A lawyer should not use his position to feather
his private law practice and accept any private
legal business that may conflict with his
official duties. In case of conflict, he should
terminate his professional relationship, and
his official duties must prevail [Agpalo (2004)].
Government employees are expected to
devote themselves completely to public
service. For this reason, the private practice of
profession is prohibited [Ramos v. Imbang,
A.C. 6788 (2007)].
It bears stressing also that government
lawyers who are public servants owe fidelity to
the public service, a public trust. As such, they
should be more sensitive to their professional
obligations as their disreputable conduct is
more likely to be magnified in the public eye
[Huyssen v. Gutierrez, A.C. 6707 (2006)].
UP LAW BOC LEGAL ETHICS LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS

prohibitions continue to apply for a period of

one year after the public official or employee’s
Rule 6.03. A lawyer shall not, after leaving
resignation, retirement, or separation from
government service, accept engagement or
public office, except for the private practice of
employment in connection with any matter
profession under subsection (b)(2), which can
in which he had intervened while in said
already be undertaken even within the one-
service.
year prohibition period. As an exception to this
exception, the one-year prohibited period
applies with respect to any matter before the
HOW GOVERNMENT LAWYERS MAY LEAVE
office the public officer or employee used to
GOVERNMENT SERVICE:
work with. [Query of Karen Silverio-Buffe, A.M.
(1) Retirement; 08-6-352-RTC (2009)].
(2) Resignation;
(3) Expiration of the term of office; B. TO THE LEGAL PROFESSION
(4) Abandonment; (CANONS 7-9)
(5) Dismissal
B.1. IBP
General rule: Practice of profession is allowed
i. Bar Integration
immediately after leaving public service.
The Supreme Court may adopt rules of court
Exceptions: The lawyer cannot practice as to
to effect the integration of the Philippine Bar
matters with which he had connection during
under such conditions as it shall see fit in order
his term. This prohibition lasts:
to raise the standards of the legal profession
(1) For one year, if he had not intervened; improve the administration of justice and
enable the bar to discharge its public
(2) Permanently, if he had intervened.
responsibility more effectively. [Sec. 1, RA
The “matter” contemplated are those that are 6397 (An Act Providing for the Integration of
adverse-interest conflicts (substantial the Philippine Bar, and Appropriating Funds
relatedness and adversity between the Therefor.].
government matter and the new client’s
Integration does not make a lawyer a member
matter in interest) and congruent-interest
of any group of which he is not already a
representation conflicts (prohibits lawyers
member. He became a member of the Bar
from representing a private practice client
when he passed the Bar Examinations. All that
even if the interests of the former government
integration actually does is to provide an
client and the new client are entirely parallel).
official national organization for the well-
“Intervention” should be significant and
defined but unorganized and uncohesive
substantial which can or have affected the
group of which every lawyer is already a
interest of others (i.e. an act of a person has
member [In the matter of the IBP, 49 SCRA 22
the power to influence the subject
(1973)].
proceedings) [PCGG v. Sandiganbayan, G.R.
Nos. 151809-12 (2005)]. The IBP is essentially a semi-governmental
entity, a private organization endowed with
Sec. 7 of RA 6713 generally provides for the
certain governmental attributes. While it is
prohibited acts and transactions of public
composed of lawyers who are private
officials and employees. Sec. 7(b)(2) prohibits
individuals, the IBP exists to perform certain
them from engaging in the private practice of
vital public functions and to assist the
their profession during their incumbency. As
government particularly in the improvement
an exception, a public official or employee can
of the administration of justice, the upgrading
engage in the practice of his or her profession
of the standards of the legal profession, and
under the following conditions: first, the
its proper regulation.
private practice is authorized by the
Constitution or by the law; and second, the The basic postulate of the IBP is that it is non-
practice will not conflict, or tend to conflict, political in character and that there shall be
with his or her official functions. The neither lobbying nor campaigning in the
PAGE 21 OF 85
UP LAW BOC
choice of the IBP Officers. The fundamental
assumption is that the officers would be
chosen on the basis of professional merit and
willingness and ability to serve. The unseemly
ardor with which the candidates pursued the
presidency of the association detracted from
the dignity of the legal profession. The
spectacle of lawyers bribing or being bribed to
vote did not uphold the honor of the
profession nor elevate it in the public’s esteem
[In re: 1989 Elections of the IBP, A.M. 491
(1989)].
ii. General Objectives of the IBP
(1) To elevate the standards of the legal
profession;
(2) To improve the administration of justice;
 warrant suspension of membership in the
(3) To enable the bar to discharge its public
responsibility more effectively [Sec. 2, IBP
By-Laws].
iii. Purposes of the IBP
(1) To assist in the administration of justice;
(2) To foster and maintain on the part of its
members high ideals of integrity, learning,
professional competence, public service
and conduct;
(3) To safeguard the professional interest of
its members;
(4) To cultivate among its members a spirit of
cordiality and brotherhood;
(5) To provide a forum for the discussion of
law, jurisprudence, law reform, pleading,
practice and procedure, and the relations
of the bar to the bench and to the public,
and publish information relating thereto;
(6) To encourage and foster legal education;
(7) To promote a continuing program of legal
research in substantive and adjective law,
and make reports and recommendations
thereon. [Sec. 2, IBP By-Laws]
[Note: Purposes of the IBP is one of the
favorite questions asked in the Bar. – 2016
Faculty Ed.]
PAGE 22 OF 85
LEGAL ETHICS LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
iv. Membership and Dues
Sec. 9, Rule 139-A, RoC. Membership Dues
– Every member of the IBP shall pay such
annual dues as the Board of Governors shall
determine with the approval of the
Supreme Court.A fixed sum equivalent to
10% of the collection from each Chapter
shall be set aside as a Welfare Fund for
disabled members of the Chapter and the
compulsory heirs of deceased members
thereof.
Sec. 10, Rule 139-A, RoC. Effect of non-
payment of dues -- Subject to the provisions
of Sec. 12 of this Rule, default in the
payment of annual dues for 6 months shall
IBP, and default in such payment for 1 year
shall be a ground for the removal of the
name of the delinquent member from the
Roll of Attorneys.
A membership fee in the IBP is an exaction for
regulation, while the purpose of a tax is
revenue. If the Court has inherent power to
regulate the bar, it follows that as an incident
to regulation, it may impose a membership fee
for that purpose. It would not be possible to
push through an Integrated Bar program
without means to defray the concomitant
expenses. The doctrine of implied powers
necessarily includes the power to impose such
an exaction [In the matter of the IBP, supra.].
A lawyer can engage in the practice of law only
by paying his dues, and it does not matter if his
practice is “limited.” The exemption granted
to senior citizens in RA 7432 (Seniors Citizen
Act) does not include payment or membership
or association dues [Santos v. Llamas, A.C.
4749 (2000)].
In a case involving a Filipino lawyer staying
abroad, the Supreme Court said that there is
nothing in the law or rules, which allows his
exemption from payment of membership dues.
At most, he could have informed the Secretary
of the IBP of his intention to stay abroad
before he left. In such case, his membership in
the IBP could have been terminated and his
obligation to pay dues discontinued [Letter of
Atty. Arevalo, B.M. 1370 (2005)].
UP LAW BOC
B.2. UPHOLDING THE DIGNITY & INTEGRITY
OF THE PROFESSION
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.
The bar has to maintain a high standard of
legal proficiency, honesty, and fair dealing to
be an effective instrument in the proper
administration of justice. In order to do so, it is
necessary that every lawyer should strive to
uphold the honor and dignity of the legal
profession and to improve not only the law,
but the the administration of justice as well
[Agpalo (2004)]
A lawyer should actively support the activities
of the IBP and not limit himself to paying dues
[Agpalo (2004)].
Rule 7.01. A lawyer shall be answerable for
knowingly making a false statement or
suppressing a material fact in connection
with his application for admission to the
bar.
A lawyer must be a disciple of truth. While a
lawyer has the solemn duty to defend his
client’s rights and is expected to display the
utmost zeal in defense of his client’s cause, his
conduct must never be at the expense of truth
[Young v. Batuegas, A.C. 5379 (2003)].
A student aspiring to be a lawyer must study
and observe the duties and responsibilities of
a lawyer. He cannot claim that the CPR does
not apply to him [Agpalo (2004)].
PENALTIES
(1) Disqualification of the applicant from
taking the bar, if the concealment is
discovered before he takes the bar
examinations;
(2) Prohibition from taking the lawyer’s oath,
if the concealment is discovered after the
PAGE 23 OF 85
LEGAL ETHICS LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
candidate has taken the bar
examinations;
(3) Revocation of license to practice, if the
concealment was discovered after he has
taken his lawyer’s oath [In re: Petition to
Take the Lawyer’s Oath, Caesar Z. Distrito,
petitioner, B.M. 1209 (2003)].
If what the applicant concealed is a crime
which does not involve moral turpitude, it is
the fact of concealment and not the
commission of the crime itself that makes him
morally unfit to become a lawyer. It should be
noted that the application was made under
oath, which he lightly took when he made the
concealment [In re: Petition to Take the
Lawyer’s Oath, Caesar Z. Distrito, petitioner,
supra].
Rule 7.02. A lawyer shall not support the
application for admission to the bar of any
person known by him to be unqualified in
respect to character, education, or other
relevant attribute.
A lawyer should volunteer information or
cooperate in any investigation concerning
alleged anomaly in the bar examination so
that those candidates who failed therein can
be ferreted out and those lawyers responsible
therefor can be disbarred [In re: Parazo, G.R.
082027 (1948)].
A lawyer should not readily execute an
affidavit of good moral character in favor of an
applicant who has not live up to the standard
set by law [Agpalo (2004)].
Rule 7.03. A lawyer shall not engage in
conduct that adversely reflects on his
fitness to practice law, nor shall he, whether
in public or private life, behave in a
scandalous manner to the discredit of the
legal profession.
General rule: The Court will not assume
jurisdiction to discipline one of its members for
UP LAW BOC
misconduct alleged to be committed in his
private capacity
Exception: An attorney will be removed not
only for malpractice and dishonesty in his
profession, but also for gross misconduct not
connected with his professional duties, which
show him to be unfit for the office and
unworthy of the privileges which his license
and the law confer upon him [Piatt v Abordo,
58 Phil 350 (1933)].
It is not necessary for a lawyer to be convicted
for an offense before a lawyer can be
disciplined for gross immorality. It is enough
that the act charged constitutes a crime
[Agpalo (2004)].
There is no distinction as to whether the
transgression is committed in the lawyer’s
professional capacity or in his private life or in
his private transaction because a lawyer may
not divide his personality so as to be an
attorney at one time and a mere citizen at
another [Funa].
In general, all crimes of which fraud and deceit
is an element or those which are inherently
contrary to rules of right, conduct, honesty or
morality in a civilized community, involve
moral turpitude. [Agpalo (2004)]
SEE ALSO: Rule 1.01
B.3. COURTESY, FAIRNESS & CANDOR
TOWARDS PROFESSIONAL COLLEAGUES
Canon 8. A lawyer shall conduct himself
with courtesy, fairness and candor toward
his professional colleagues, and shall avoid
harassing tactics against opposing counsel.
LAWYER DON’Ts:
(1) Take advantage of the excusable
unpreparedness or absence of counsel
during the trial of a case;
(2) Make use, to his or to his client’s benefit,
the secrets of the adverse party acquired
through design or inadvertence;
(3) Criticize or impute ill motive to the lawyer
who accepts what in his opinion is a weak
case;
PAGE 24 OF 85
LEGAL ETHICS LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
(4) Proceed to negotiate with the client of
another lawyer to waive all kinds of claim
when the latter is still handling the civil
case [Camacho v. Pangulayan, A.C. 4807
(2000)].
(5) Steal another lawyer’s client;
(6) Induce a client to retain him by promise of
better service, good result or reduced fees
for 
 his services;
(7) Disparage another lawyer, make
comparisons or publicize his talent as a
means to further his law practice;
(8) In the absence of the adverse party’s
counsel, interview the adverse party and
question him as to the facts of the case
even if the adverse party was willing;
(9) Sanction the attempt of his client to settle
a litigated matter with the adverse party
without the consent nor knowledge of the
latter’s counsel.
Lawyers should treat their opposing counsels
and other lawyers with courtesy, dignity and
civility. Any undue ill feeling between clients
should not influence counsels in their conduct
and demeanor toward each other. Mutual
bickering, unjustified recriminations and
offensive behavior among lawyers not only
detract from the dignity of the legal profession,
but also constitute highly unprofessional
conduct subject to disciplinary action [Reyes v.
Chiong, A.C. 5148 (2003)].
Rule 8.01. A lawyer shall not, in his
professional dealings, use language, which
is abusive, offensive or otherwise improper.
A lawyer should treat the opposing counsel
and his brethren in the law profession with
courtesy, dignity, and civility. They may do as
adversaries do in law: strive mightily but eat
and drink as friends [Valencia v. Cabanting,
A.M. 1302 (1991)].
The Court recognizes the adversarial nature of
our legal system which has necessitated
lawyers to use strong language in
advancement of the interest of the clients.
However, as members of a noble profession,
lawyers are always impressed with the duty to
UP LAW BOC
represent their client’s cause, or as in this case,
to represent a personal matter in court, with
courage and zeal but that should not be used
as a license for the use of offensive and
abusive language. In maintaining the integrity
and dignity of the legal profession, a lawyer’s
language – spoken or in his pleadings – must
be dignified. [Sanchez v. Aguilos, A.C. 10543
(2016)].
IMPROPER LANGUAGE
(1) Behaving without due regard for the trial
court and the opposing counsel and
threatening the court that he would file a
petition for certiorari [Bugaring v.
Espanol, G.R. No. 133090 (2001)];
(2) Calling an adverse counsel as “bobo” or
using the word “ay que bobo” in reference
to the manner of offering evidence
[Castillo v. Padilla, A.C. 2339 (1984)].
(3) Stating that “justice is blind and also
“deaf and dumb”” [In Re: Almacen, G.R.
L-27654(1970)].
(4) Stating that the demand from a former
client’s counsel should be treated “as a
mere scrap of paper or should have been
addressed by her counsel… to the urinal
project of the MMDA where it may service
its rightful purpose [Sanchez v. Aguilos,
supra.].
Lack or want of intention is no excuse for the
disrespectful language employed. Counsel
cannot escape responsibility by claiming that
his words did not mean what any reader must
have understood them as meaning [Rheem of
the Philippines v Ferrer, G.R. L-22979 (1967)].
Rule 8.02. A lawyer shall not, directly or
indirectly, encroach upon the professional
employment of another lawyer; however, it
is the right of any lawyer, without fear or
favor, to give proper advice and assistance
to those seeking relief against unfaithful or
neglectful counsel.
A LAWYER MAY:
(1) Accept employment to handle a matter
previously handled by another lawyer:
PAGE 25 OF 85
LEGAL ETHICS LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
(a) Provided the other lawyer has been
given notice of termination of service,
lest it amounts to an improper
encroachment upon the professional
employment of the original counsel
[Laput v. Remotigue, A.M. 219 (1962)];
or
(b) In the absence of a notice of
termination from the client, provided
he has obtained the conformity of the
counsel whom he would substitute; or
(c) In the absence of such conformity, a
lawyer must at least give sufficient
notice to original counsel so that
original counsel has the opportunity to
protect his claim against the client.
(2) Give advice or assistance to any person who
seeks relief against an unfaithful or
neglectful lawyer;
(3) Associate as a colleague in a case, provided
he communicate with the original counsel
before making an appearance as co-
counsel:
(a) Should the original lawyer object, he

 should decline association but if the
original lawyer is relieved, he may
come into the case; or
(b) Should it be impracticable for him,
whose judgment has been overruled
by his co- counsel to cooperate
effectively, he should ask client to
relieve him.
B.4. NO ASSISTANCE IN UNAUTHORIZED
PRACTICE OF LAW
Canon 9. A lawyer shall not, directly or
indirectly, assist in the unauthorized
practice of law.
Generally, to engage in the practice of law is
to do any of those acts which are characteristic
of the legal profession [Agpalo (2004)].
In Cayetano v. Monsod, the Court held that
practice of law means any activity, in or out of
court, which requires the application of law,
legal procedure, knowledge, training and
experience. To engage in the practice of law is
to perform acts which are usually performed
UP LAW BOC
by members of the legal profession. Generally,
to practice law is to render any kind of service
which requires the use of legal knowledge or
skill [Aguirre v. Rana, supra.].
3 principle types of professional activities:
1. Legal advice and instructions to clients to
inform them of their rights and obligations
2. Preparation for clients of documents
requiring knowledge of legal principles not
possessed by ordinary laymen
3. Appearance for clients before public
tribunals which possess power and authority
to determine rights of life, liberty, and
property according to law, in order to assist
in the proper interpretation and
enforcement of law [Agpalo (2004)].
EXAMPLES OF PRACTICE OF LAW
(1) Legal advice and instructions to clients to
inform them of their rights and
obligations;
(2) Preparation for clients of documents
requiring knowledge of legal principles
not possessed by ordinary laymen;
(3) Appearance for clients before public
tribunals, whether, administrative, quasi-
judicial or legislative agency.
ILLEGAL PRACTICE OF LAW EXAMPLES
(1) Appearing as counsel even before taking
lawyer’s oath [Aguirre v. Rana, B.M. 1036
(2003)];
(2) Using the title “Attorney” in his name
even though he is a Shari’a lawyer [Alawi
v. Alauya, A.M. SDC-97-2-P (1997)].
A corporation cannot engage in the practice
law directly or indirectly. It may only hire in-
house lawyers to attend to its legal business.
A corporation cannot employ a lawyer to
appear for others for its benefit. A corporation
cannot perform the conditions required
membership to the bar. In addition, the
confidential and trust relation between an
PAGE 26 OF 85
LEGAL ETHICS LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
attorney and his client cannot arise if the
attorney is employed by a corporation [Agpalo
(2004)].
NOT ALLOWED:
(1) Automobile club that solicits
membership by advertising that it offers
free legal services of its legal department
to members;
(2) Collection agency or credit exchange that
exploits lawyer’s services;
(3) Bank using lawyer’s name as director in
advertising its services in drawing wills
and other legal documents.
Unauthorized practice of law applies to both
non-lawyers and lawyers prohibited from the
private practice of law.
The purpose is to protect the public, the court,
the client and the bar from the incompetence
or dishonesty of those unlicensed to practice
law and not subject to the disciplinary control
of the court [Phil. Assoc. of Free Labor Union v.
Binalbagan Isabela Sugar Co., G.R. L-23959
(1971)].
NOTE: Exceptions under APPEARANCE OF
NON-LAWYERS above
Rule 9.01. A lawyer shall not delegate to
any unqualified person the performance of
any task which by law may only be
performed by a member of the bar in good
standing.
Ratio: The practice of law is limited only to
individuals who have the necessary
educational qualifications and good moral
character. Moreover, an attorney-client
relationship is a strictly personal one. Lawyers
are selected on account of their special fitness
through their learning or probity for the work
at hand.
ACTS THAT MAY ONLY BE DONE BY A
LAWYER
(1) The computation and determination of the
period within which to appeal an adverse
judgment [Eco v. Rodriguez, G.R. L-16731
(1960)];
UP LAW BOC
(2) The examination of witnesses or the
presentation of evidence [Robinson v.
Villafuerte, G.R. L-5346 (1911)].
MAY BE DELEGATED TO NON-LAWYERS:
(1) The examination of case law;
(2) Finding and interviewing witnesses;
(3) Examining court records;
(4) Delivering papers and similar matters
[Agpalo [2004].
Rule 9.02. A lawyer shall not divide or
stipulate to divide a fee for legal services
with persons not licensed to practice law,
except:
 relationship.Such a relationship cannot exist
(a) Where there is a pre-existing
agreement with a partner or associate
that, upon the latter’s death, money
shall be paid over a reasonable period
of time to his estate or to persons
specified in the agreement; or
(b) Where a lawyer undertakes to
complete unfinished legal business of
a deceased lawyer; or
(c) Where a lawyer or law firm includes
non- lawyer employees in a retirement
plan, even if the plan is based in whole
or in part, on a profitable sharing
arrangement.
Ratio: Allowing non-lawyers to get attorney’s
fees would confuse the public as to whom they
should consult. It would leave the bar in a
chaotic condition because non-lawyers are
also not subject to disciplinary action.
An agreement between a union lawyer and a
layman president of the union to divide
equally the attorney’s fees that may be
awarded in a labor case violates this rule, and
is illegal and immoral [Amalgamated
Laborers Assn. v. CIR, G.R. L-23467 (1968)].
A donation by a lawyer to a labor union of part
of his attorney’s fees taken from the proceeds
of a judgment secured by him for the labor
union is improper because it amounts to a
rebate or commission [Halili v. CIR, G.R. L-
24864 (1965)].
PAGE 27 OF 85
LEGAL ETHICS LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
A contract between a lawyer and a layman
granting the latter a percentage of the fees
collected from clients secured by the layman
and enjoining the lawyer not to deal directly
with said clients is null and void, and the
lawyer may be disciplined for unethical
conduct [Tan Tek Beng v. David, A.C. 1261
(1983)].
While non-lawyers may appear before the
NLRC or any labor arbiter under Art. 222,
Labor Code, they are still not entitled to
receive attorney’s fees.The statutory rule that
an attorney shall be entitled to have and
recover from his client a reasonable
compensation or remuneration for the
services they have rendered presupposes the
existence of an attorney-client
when the client’s representative is a non-
lawyer [Five J Taxi v. NLRC, G.R. 111474 (1994)].
C. TO THE COURTS (CANONS 10-13)
C.1. CANDOR, FAIRNESS & GOOD FAITH
TOWARDS THE COURTS
Canon 10. A lawyer owes candor, fairness
and good faith to the court.
A lawyer is, first and foremost, an officer of the
court. Accordingly, should there be a conflict
between his duty to his client and that to the
court, he should resolve the conflict against
the former and in favor of the latter, his
primary responsibility being to uphold the
cause of justice [Cobb Perez v. Lantin, G.R. L-
22320 (1968)].
Candor in all of the lawyer’s dealings is the
very essence of honorable membership in the
legal profession [Cuaresma v. Daquis, G.R. L-
35113 (1975)].
Rule 10.01. A lawyer shall not do any
falsehood, nor consent to the doing of any
in court; nor shall he mislead, or allow the
court to be misled by any artifice.
UP LAW BOC
A lawyer should not conceal the truth from the
court, nor mislead the court in any manner no
matter how demanding his duties to clients
may be. His duties to his client should yield to
his duty to deal candidly with the court. For no
client is entitled to receive from the lawyer any
service involving dishonesty to the courts
[Comments of IBP Committee that drafted the
Code, hereinafter, IBP Committee].
Some cases of Falsehood Committed by
Lawyers:
1. Falsely stating in a deed of sale that
property is free from all liens and
encumbrances [Sevilla v. Zoleta, 96
Phil 979 (1955)];
2. Falsifying a power of attorney to use in
collecting the money due to the
principal and appropriating the
money for his own benefit [In Re:
Rusiana, A.C. 270 (1959)];
3. Denying having received the notice to
file brief which is belied by the return
card [Ragasajo v. IAC, G.R. L-69129
(1987)];
4. Presenting falsified documents in
court which he knows to be false
[Bautista v. Gonzales, A.M. 1625
(1990)];
5. Filing false charges or groundless
suits [Retia v. Gorduiz, A.M. 1388
(1980)].
6. Knowingly alleging an untrue
statement of fact in a pleading [Young
v. Batuegas, supra.]
7. Allowing the use of a forged signature
on a petition filed before a court
[Velasco-Tamaray v. Daquis, A.C.
10868 (2016)].
Rule 10.02. A lawyer shall not knowingly
misquote or misrepresent the contents of a
paper, the language or the argument of
opposing counsel, or the text of a decision
or authority, or knowingly cite as law a
provision already rendered inoperative by
PAGE 28 OF 85
LEGAL ETHICS LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
repeal or amendment, or assert as a fact
that which has not been proved.
In citing the Supreme Court’s decisions, and
rulings, it is the bounden duty of courts, judges
and lawyers to reproduce or copy the same
word- for-word and punctuation mark-for-
punctuation mark. Ever present is the danger
that if not faithfully and exactly quoted, the
decisions and rulings may lose their proper
and correct meaning, to the detriment of other
courts, lawyers and the public who may
thereby be misled [Insular Life Employees Co.
v. Insular Life Association, G.R. L-25291 (1971)].
The legal profession demands that lawyers
thoroughly go over pleadings, motions and
other documents dictated or prepared by
them, typed or transcribed by their secretaries
or clerks, before filing them with the court. If a
client is bound by the acts of his counsel, with
more reason should counsel be bound by the
acts of his secretary who merely follows his
orders [Adez Realty, Inc. v. CA, G.R. 100643
(1992)].
Professional misconduct involving the misuse
of constitutional provisions for the purpose of
insulting Members of this Court is a serious
breach of the rigid standards that a member
of good standing of the legal profession must
faithfully comply with [In Re: Subpoena Duces
Tecum dated January 11, 2010 of Acting
Director Aleu A. Amante, PIAB-C, Office of the
Ombudsman and Re: Order of the Office of the
Ombudsman Referring the complaint of Attys.
Oliver O. Lozano and Evangeline J. Lozano-
Endriano Against Chief Justice Reynato S.
Puno [ret.]. A.M. 10-1-13-SC & 10-9-9-SC
(2012)]
Rule 10.03. A lawyer shall observe the rules
of procedure and shall not misuse them to
defeat the ends of justice.
Filing multiple actions constitutes an abuse of
the court’s processes. Those who file multiple
or repetitive actions subject themselves to
disciplinary action for incompetence or willful
violation of their duties as attorneys to act with
good fidelity to the courts, and to maintain
only such actions that appear to be just and
consistent with truth and honor [Olivares v.
Villalon, A.C. 6323 (2007)].
UP LAW BOC
A lawyer should not abuse his right of recourse
to the courts for the purpose of arguing a
cause that had been repeatedly rebuffed.
[Garcia v. Francisco, A.C. 3923 (1993)].
It is the duty of an attorney to employ, for the
purpose of maintain the causes confided to
him, such means only as are consistent with
truth and honor, and never seek to mislead the
judge or any judicial officer by an artifice or
false statement of fact or law [Sec. 20 (d), Rule
138, RoC]
C.2. RESPECT FOR COURTS & JUDICIAL
OFFICERS
Canon 11. A lawyer shall observe and
maintain the respect due to the courts and
to judicial officers and should insist on
similar conduct by others.
Observing respect due to the courts means
that a lawyer should conduct himself toward
judges:
(1) With courtesy everyone is entitled to
expect [Paragas v Cruz, G.R. L-24438
(1965)];
(2) With the propriety and dignity required by
the courts [Salcedo v Hernandez, G.R. L-
42992 (1935)].
Lawyers are duty bound to uphold the dignity
and authority of the Court, to which they owe
their fidelities, and to promote the
administration of justice. Respect to the courts
guarantees the stability of other institutions.
[In re: Sotto, 82 Phil 595 (1949)].
If a pleading containing derogatory, offensive
and malicious statements is submitted in the
same court or judge in which the proceedings
are pending, it is direct contempt, equivalent
as it is to a misbehavior committed in the
presence of or so near a court or judge as to
interrupt the administration of justice. Direct
contempt is punishable summarily [In re:
Letter of Atty. Sorreda, A.M. 5-3-04 (2006)].
Liberally imputing sinister and devious
motives and questioning the impartiality,
integrity, and authority of the members of the
Court result in the obstruction and perversion
PAGE 29 OF 85
LEGAL ETHICS LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
of the dispensation of justice [Estrada v.
Sandiganbayan, G.R. 148560 (2000)].
Even as lawyers passionately and vigorously
propound their points of view, they are bound
by certain rules of conduct for the legal
profession. This Court is certainly not claiming
that it should be shielded from criticism. All
the Court demands are the same respect and
courtesy that one lawyer owes to another
under established ethical standards. There is
no exemption from this sworn duty for law
professors, regardless of their status in the
academic community or the law school to
which they belong [Re: Letter of the UP
Faculty, A.M. 10-10-4-SC (2011)].
In Bueno v. Raneses, A.M. 8383 (2012) the
lawyer was disbarred because “he maligned
the judge and the Judiciary by giving the
impression that court cases are won, not on
the merits, but through deceitful means – a
decidedly black mark against the Judiciary.”
Lawyers should not perform acts that would
tend to undermine and/or denigrate the
integrity of the courts, such as the subject
checkbook entry which contumaciously
imputed corruption against the
Sandiganbayan. It is their sworn duty as
lawyers and officers of the court to uphold the
dignity and authority of the courts. Respect for
the courts guarantees the stability of the
judicial institution; without this guarantee, the
institution would be resting on very shaky
foundations. [PHILCOMPSAT Holdings
Corporation v. Lokin, Jr. A.C. 11139 (2016)].
Rule 11.01. A lawyer shall appear in court
properly attired.
Respect begins with the lawyer’s outward
physical appearance in court. Sloppy or
informal attire adversely reflects on the lawyer
and demeans the dignity and solemnity of
court proceedings.
A lawyer who dresses improperly may be cited
with contempt [Agpalo (2004)].
PROPER ATTIRE
Male: Long-sleeved Barong Tagalog or coat
and tie
UP LAW BOC
Female: Semi-formal or business attires
Judges: Same attire as above under their robes
Courts have ordered a male attorney to wear a
necktie and have prohibited a female attorney
from wearing a hat. However, the permission
of a dress with a hemline five inches above the
knee was held to be acceptable as such “had
become an accepted mode of dress even in
places of worship” [Aguirre (2006)]
Rule 11.02. A lawyer shall punctually appear
at court hearings.
Punctuality is demanded by the respect which
the lawyer owes to the court, the parties, and
the opposing counsel [Funa].
Inexcusable absence from, or repeated
tardiness in, attending a pre-trial or hearing
may subject the lawyer to disciplinary action
as his actions show disrespect to the court and
are therefore considered contemptuous
behavior [Agpalo (2004)].
Non-appearance at hearings on the ground
that the issue to be heard has become moot
and academic is a lapse in judicial propriety
[De Gracia v. Warden of Makati, G.R. L-42032
(1976)].
Rule 11.03. A lawyer shall abstain from
scandalous, offensive or menacing
language or behavior before the courts.
A lawyer’s language should be forceful but
dignified, emphatic but respectful, as befitting
an advocate and in keeping with the dignity of
the legal profession [Surigao Mineral
Reservation Board v. Cloribel, G.R. L-27072
(1970)].
Every citizen has the right to comment upon
and criticize the actuations of public officers.
This right is not diminished by the fact that the
criticism is aimed at a judicial authority, or that
it is articulated by a lawyer. Such right is
especially recognized where the criticism
concerns a concluded litigation, because then
the court's actuations are thrown open to
public consumption. Well-recognized
therefore is the right of a lawyer, both as an
PAGE 30 OF 85
LEGAL ETHICS LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
officer of the court and as a citizen, to criticize
in properly respectful terms and through
legitimate channels the acts of courts and
judges. But it is the cardinal condition of all
such criticism that it shall be bona fide, and
shall not spill over the walls of decency and
propriety. Intemperate and unfair criticism is a
gross violation of the duty of respect to courts
[In Re: Almacen, G.R. L-27654 (1970)].
The court does not close itself to comments
and criticisms so long as they are fair and
dignified. Going beyond the limits of fair
comments by using insulting, disparaging and,
intemperate language necessitates and
warrants a rebuke from the court. While it is
expected of lawyers to advocate their client’s
cause, they are not at liberty to resort to
arrogance, intimidation and innuendo
[Sangalang v. IAC, G.R. 71169 (1988)].
It is human nature that there be bitter feelings
which often reach to the judge as the source of
the supposed wrong. A judge, therefore, ought
to be patient, and tolerate everything which
appears as but a momentary outbreak of
disappointment. Lawyers may not be held to
too strict an account for words said in the heat
of the moment, because of chagrin at losing
cases, and that the big way is for the court to
condone even contemptuous language. While
judges must exercise patience, lawyers must
also observe temperate language as well
[Soriano v. CA, G.R. 100633 and 101550
(2001)].
Rule 11.04. A lawyer shall not attribute to a
Judge motives not supported by the record
or have no materiality to the case.
Post-litigation utterances or publications,
made by lawyers, critical of the courts and
their judicial actuations, whether amounting
to a crime or not, which transcend the
permissible bounds of fair comment and
legitimate criticism and thereby tend to bring
them into disrepute or to subvert public
confidence in their integrity and in the orderly
administration of justice, constitute grave
professional misconduct which may be visited
with disbarment or other lesser appropriate
disciplinary sanctions by the Supreme Court in
the exercise of the prerogatives inherent in it
UP LAW BOC
as the duly constituted guardian of the morals
and ethics of the legal fraternity. [In Re:
Almacen, supra.].
The rule allows criticism so long as it is
supported by the record or it is material to the
case [Agpalo (2004)].Any serious accusation
against a judicial officer that is utterly
baseless, unsubstantiated and unjustified
shall not be countenanced [Go v. Abrogar, G.R.
152672 (2007)].
The constitutional right to freedom of
expression of members of the bar may be
circumscribed by their ethical duties as
lawyers to give due respect to the courts and
to uphold the public’s faith in the legal
profession and the justice system [Re: Letter of
UP Law Faculty, supra.].
Rule 11.05. A lawyer shall submit grievances
against a Judge to the proper authorities
only.
The duty to respect does not preclude a
lawyer from filing administrative
complaints against erring judges.
The lawyer shall not file an administrative
case until he has exhausted judicial remedies
which result in a finding that the judge has
gravely erred [Agpalo (2004)].
It has been held in Maceda v. Vasquez, G.R.
102781 (1993) that in criminal complaints
against a judge or other court employees
arising from their administrative duties, the
Ombudsman must defer action and refer the
same to the Supreme Court for determination
whether said judges or court employees acted
within the scope of their administrative duties.
Otherwise, in the absence of any
administrative action, the investigation being
conducted by the Ombudsman encroaches
into the court’s power of administrative
supervision over all courts and its personnel
under Sec. 6, Art. VIII, 1987 Constitution, in
violation of the doctrine of separation of
powers.
PAGE 31 OF 85
LEGAL ETHICS LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
C.3. ASSISTANCE IN THE SPEEDY &
EFFICIENT ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE
Canon 12. A lawyer shall exert every effort
and consider it his duty to assist in the
speedy and efficient administration of
justice.
All persons shall have the right to a speedy
disposition of their cases before all judicial,
quasi-judicial, or administrative bodies. [Sec.
16, Art. III, 1987 Constitution]
It is the duty of an attorney not to encourage
either the commencement or the continuance
of an action or proceeding or delay any man’s
cause from any corrupt motive or interest. [Sec.
20(g), Rule 138, RoC].
The filing of another action containing the
same subject matter, in violation of the
doctrine of res judicata, runs contrary to this
canon [Siy Lim v. Montano, A.C. 5653 (2006)].
Rule 12.01. A lawyer shall not appear for
trial unless he has adequately prepared
himself on the law and the facts of his case,
the evidence he will adduce and the order of
its preference. He should also be ready with
the original documents for comparison with
the copies.
This could be read in conjunction with Rule
18.02, CPR: “A lawyer shall not handle any
legal matter without adequate preparation.”
Without adequate preparation, the lawyer
may not be able to effectively assist the court
in the efficient administration of justice.
NON-OBSERVANCE OF PREPARATION:
(1) The postponement of the pre-trial or
hearing, which would thus entail delay in
the early disposition of the case;
(2) The judge may consider the client non-
suited or in default;
(3) The judge may consider the case deemed
submitted for decision without client’s
UP LAW BOC
evidence, to his prejudice [Agpalo
(2004)].
Half of the work of the lawyer is done in the
office. It is spent in the study and research.
Inadequate preparation obstructs the
administration of justice [Martin’s Legal Ethics
(1988)].
A newly hired counsel who appears in a case
in the midstream is presumed and obliged to
acquaint himself with all the antecedent
processes and proceedings that have
transpired in the record prior to his takeover
[Villasis v. CA, G.R. L-34369 (1974)].
Some Acts Which Amount to Obstruction in
the Administration of Justice:
1. Inadequate preparation;
2. Instructing complaining witness in a
criminal action not to appear at the
schedule hearing so that the case
against the client would be dismissed;
3. Asking a client to plead guilty to a
crime which the lawyer knows his
client did not commit;
4. Advising a client who is detained for
crime to escape from prison;
5. Employing dilatory tactics to frustrate
satisfaction of clearly valid claims;
6. Prosecuting clearly frivolous cases or
appeals to drain the resources of the
other party and compel him to submit
out of exhaustion;
7. Filing multiple petitions or complaints
for a cause that has been previously
rejected in the false expectation of
getting favorable action;
8. Other acts of similar nature [Funa].
Rule 12.02. A lawyer shall not file multiple
actions arising from the same cause.
Ratio: There is an affirmative duty of a lawyer
to check against useless litigations. His
signature in every pleading constitutes a
certificate by him that to the best of his
knowledge there is a good ground to support
it and that it is not to interpose for delay. The
PAGE 32 OF 85
LEGAL ETHICS LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
willful violation of this rule may subject him to
appropriate disciplinary action or render him
liable for the costs of litigation [Agpalo
(2004)].
This Rule prohibits against forum shopping.
FORUM SHOPPING
(1) When, as a result or in anticipation of an
adverse decision in one forum, a party
seeks a favorable opinion in another
forum through means other than appeal
or certiorari by raising identical causes of
action, subject matter, and issues.
(2) The institution of involving the same
parties for the same cause of action,
either simultaneously or successively, on
the supposition that one or the other
court would come out with a favorable
disposition [Araneta v. Araneta, G.R.
190814 (2013)].
An indicium of the presence of or the test for
determining whether a litigant violated the
rule against, forum shopping is where the
elements of litis pendentia are present or
where a final judgment in one case will
amount to res judicata in the other case.
REQUISITES OF LITIS PENDENTIA
(1) Identity of parties, or at least such parties
as represent the same interests in both
actions;
(2) Identity of rights asserted and relief
prayed for, the relief being founded on
the same 
 facts; and
(3) Identity of the two preceding particulars
is such that any judgment rendered in the
pending case, regardless of which party is
successful, would amount to res judicata
in the other [HSBC v. Catalan, G.R.
159590 (2004)].
REQUISITES OF RES JUDICATA:
(1) There be a decision on the merits;
(2) It be decided by a court of competent
jurisdiction;
UP LAW BOC
(3) The decision is final; and
(4) The two actions involved identical parties,
subject matter, and causes of action.
(1) Sec. 5, Rule 7, RoC requires that a
certificate against forum shopping be
executed that:Plantiff or principal party
has not theretofore commenced any
action or filed any claim involving the
same issues in any court, tribunal or
quasi-judicial agency and, to the best of
his knowledge, no such other action or
claim is pending therein; if there is such
other pending action or claim, a complete
statement of the present status thereof;
(2) If he should thereafter learn that the
same or similar action or claim has been
filed or is pending, he shall report that
fact within five days there from to the
court wherein his aforesaid complaint or
initiatory pleading has been filed.
Failure to comply with the foregoing
requirements shall not be curable by mere
amendment of the complaint or other
initiatory pleading but shall cause for the
dismissal of the case without prejudice, unless
otherwise provided, upon motion after
hearing.
SUBMISSION OF A FALSE CERTIFICATION
OR NON-COMPLIANCE WITH ANY OF THE
UNDERTAKINGS IN A CERTIFICATION OF
NON-FORUM SHOPPING:
(1) Shall constitute indirect contempt of
court;
(2) Without prejudice to the corresponding
administrative and criminal actions.
IF ACTS OF THE PARTY OR HIS COUNSEL
CONSTITUTE WILLFUL AND DELIBERATE
FORUM SHOPPING:
(1) Be a ground for summary dismissal with
prejudice;
(2) Constitute direct contempt;
(3) Be a cause for administrative sanctions.
The rule against forum shopping and the
requirement that a certification to that effect
PAGE 33 OF 85
LEGAL ETHICS LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
be complied with in the filing of complaints,
petitions or other initiatory pleadings in all
courts and agencies applies to quasi-judicial
bodies, such as the NLRC or Labor Arbiter
[Agpalo (2004)].
Rule 12.03. 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.
The court censures the practice of counsels
who secures repeated extensions of time to file
their pleadings and thereafter simply let the
period lapse without submitting the pleading
on even an explanation or manifestation of
their failure to do so. There exists a breach of
duty not only to the court but also to the client
[Achacoso v. CA, G.R. L-35867 (1973)].
An attorney is bound to protect his client’s
interest to the best of his ability and with
utmost diligence. A failure to file brief for his
client certainly constitutes inexcusable
negligence on his part [Ford v. Daitol, A.C.
3736 (1995)].
Rule 12.04. A lawyer shall not unduly delay
a case, impede the execution of a judgment
or misuse court processes.
It is one thing to exert to the utmost one’s
ability to protect the interest of one’s client. It
is quite another thing to delay if not defeat the
recovery of what is justly due and demandable
due to the misleading acts of a lawyer [Manila
Pest Control v. WCC, G.R. L-27662 (1968)].
Once a judgment becomes final and executory,
the prevailing party should not be denied the
fruits of his victory by some subterfuge devised
by the losing part. Unjustified delay in the
enforcement of a judgment sets at naught the
role of courts in disposing justiciable
controversies with finality [Aguilar v. Manila
Banking Corporation, G.R. 157911 (2006)].
The failure of a lawyer to follow the directives
of the court to submit documents and to pay
damages after his suspension from the
UP LAW BOC
profession constitutes gross misconduct
[Floran v. Ediza, A.C. No. 5325 (2016)]
If a lawyer is honestly convinced of the futility
of an appeal in a civil suit, he should not
hesitate to inform his client that mostly likely
the verdict will not be altered. A lawyer should
temper his client’s desire to seek appellate
review [Agpalo (2004)].
Rule 12.05. A lawyer shall refrain from
talking to his witness during a break or
recess in the trial, while the witness is still
under examination.
Ratio: The purpose is to prevent the suspicion
that he is coaching the witness what to say
during the resumption of the examination; to
uphold and maintain fair play with the other
party and to prevent the examining lawyer
from being tempted to coach his own witness
to suit his purpose [Callanta].
Rule 12.06. A lawyer shall not knowingly
assist a witness to misrepresent himself or
to impersonate another.
While a lawyer may interview witnesses in
advance of trial or attend to their needs if
needed, the lawyer should avoid any action as
may be misrepresented as an attempt to
influence the witness what to say in court
[Agpalo (2004)].
Art. 184, Revised Penal Code (hereinafter,
RPC). The lawyer who presented a witness
knowing him to be a false witness is
criminally liable for offering false testimony
in evidence. The lawyer is both criminally
and administratively liable.
Subornation of perjury is committed by a
person who knowingly and willfully procures
another to swear falsely and the witness
suborned [or induced] does testify under
circumstances rendering him guilty of perjury
[US v. Ballena, G.R. L-6294 (1911)].
PAGE 34 OF 85
LEGAL ETHICS LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
Rule 12.07. A lawyer shall not abuse,
browbeat or harass a witness nor needlessly
inconvenience him.
It is the duty of a lawyer:
(f)to abstain from all offensive personality and
to advance no fact prejudicial to the honor and
reputation of a party or witness unless
required by the justice of the cause with which
he is charged [Sec. 20(f), Rule 138. RoC].
(1) RIGHTS OF WITNESSES [Sec. 3, Rule 132,
RoC];To be protected from irrelevant,
improper or insulting questions and from
a harsh or insulting demeanor;
(2) Not to be detained longer than the
interests of justice require
(3) Not to be examined except as to matters
pertinent to the issues before the court;
(4) Not to give an answer which will tend to
subject him to a penalty for an offense

 unless otherwise provided by law;
(5) Not to give an answer which will tend to
degrade the witness’ reputation, but a
witness must answer the fact of any
previous 
 final conviction for a criminal
offense.
PD 1829 (PENALIZING OBSTRUCTION OF
APPREHENSION AND PROSECUTION OF
CRIMINAL OFFENDERS) PENALIZES THE
FOLLOWING:
(1) Threatening directly or indirectly another
with the infliction of any wrong upon his
person, honor or property or that of any
immediate member or members of his
family in order to prevent such person
from appearing in the investigation of, or
official proceedings in, criminal cases, or
imposing a condition, whether lawful or
unlawful, in order to prevent a person
from appearing in the investigation of or in
official proceedings in, criminal cases;
(2) Giving of false or fabricated information to
mislead or prevent the law enforcement
agencies from apprehending the offender
or from protecting the life or property of
UP LAW BOC
the victim; or fabricating information from
the data gathered in confidence by
investigating authorities for purposes of
background information and not for
publication and publishing or
disseminating the same to mislead the
investigator or to the court.
Rule 12.08. A lawyer shall avoid testifying in
behalf of his client, except:
(a) On formal matters, such as the
mailing, authentication or custody of
an instrument, and the like; or
(b) On substantial matters, in cases where
his testimony is essential to the ends of
justice, in which event he must, during
his testimony, entrust the trial of the
case to another counsel.
Ratio: The underlying reason for the
impropriety of a lawyer acting in such dual
capacity lies in the difference between the
function of a witness and that of an advocate.
The function of a witness is to tell the facts as
he recalls then in answer to questions. The
function of an advocate is that of a partisan.It
is difficult to distinguish between the zeal of
an advocate and the fairness and impartiality
of a disinterested witness. The lawyer will find
it hard to disassociate his relation to his client
as an attorney and his relation to the party as
a witness [Agpalo (2004)].
When a lawyer is a witness for his client,
except as to merely formal matters, such as
the attestation or custody of an instrument
and the like, he should leave the trial of the
case to other counsel. Except when essential
to the ends of justice, a lawyer should avoid
testifying in court in behalf of his client [PNB v.
Uy Teng Piao, G.R. L-35252 (1932)].
C.4. RELIANCE ON MERITS OF HIS CAUSE &
AVOIDANCE OF ANY IMPROPRIETY WHICH
TENDS TO INFLUENCE OR GIVES THE
APPEARANCE OF INFLUENCE UPON THE
COURTS
Canon 13. A lawyer shall rely upon the
merits of his cause and refrain from any
PAGE 35 OF 85
LEGAL ETHICS LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
impropriety which tends to influence, or
gives the appearance of influencing the
court.
The judiciary, as the branch of government
tasked to administer justice, to settle
justiciable controversies or disputes involving
enforceable and demandable rights, and to
afford redress of wrongs for the violation of
said rights must be allowed to decide cases
independently, free of outside influence or
pressure [In Re: Published Alleged Threats
against Members of the Court in the Plunder
Law Case Hurled by Atty. Leonard De Vera,
A.M. 01-12-03-SC (2002)].
Rule 13.01. A lawyer shall not extend
extraordinary attention or hospitality to, nor
seek opportunity for cultivating familiarity
with Judges.
Marked attention and unusual hospitality on
the part of a lawyer to a judge, uncalled for by
the personal relations of the parties, subject
both the judge and the lawyer to
misconstructions of motive and should be
avoided [Canon 3, Canons of Professional
Ethics].
In order not to subject both the judge and the
lawyer to suspicion, the common practice of
some lawyers of making judges and
prosecutors godfathers of their children to
enhance their influence and their law practice
should be avoided by judges and lawyers alike
[IBP Committee].
It is improper for a litigant or counsel to see a
judge in chambers and talk to him about a
matter related to the case pending in the court
of said judge [Austria v. Masaquel, G.R. L-
22536 (1967)].
Rule 13.02. A lawyer shall not make public
statements in the media regarding a
pending case tending to arouse public
opinion for or against a party.
Ratio: Newspaper publications regarding a
pending or anticipated litigation may interfere
UP LAW BOC
with a fair trial, prejudice the administration of
justice, or subject a respondent or an accused
to a trial by publicity and create a public
inference of guilt against him [Agpalo (2004)].
Public statements may be considered
contemptuous when the character of the act
done and its direct tendency to prevent and
obstruct the discharge of official duty.
In the original decision of the Supreme Court
in Re: Request Radio-TV Coverage of the Trial
in the Sandiganbayan of the Plunder Cases
against Former President Joseph Estrada, A.M.
01-4-03-SC (2001), it was stated that the
propriety of granting or denying the petition
involve the weighing out of the constitutional
guarantees of freedom of the press and the
right to public information, on the one hand,
and the fundamental rights of the accused, on
the other hand, along with the constitutional
power of a court to control its proceedings in
ensuring a fair and impartial trial. It was held
that when these rights race against one
another, the right of the accused must be
preferred to win, considering the possibility of
losing not only the precious liberty but also the
very life of an accused.
In the resolution of the motion for
reconsideration, the Supreme Court allowed
the video recording of proceedings, but
provided that the release of the tapes for
broadcast should be delayed. In so doing,
concerns that those taking part in the
proceedings will be playing to the cameras
and will thus be distracted from the proper
performance of their roles – whether as
counsel, witnesses, court personnel, or judges
– will be allayed.
Rule 13.03. A lawyer shall not brook or invite
interference by another branch or agency of
the government in the normal course of
judicial proceedings.
Ratio: The rule is based upon the principle of
separation of powers [Aguirre (2006)]. It also
endangers the independence of the judiciary
[IBP Committee].
PAGE 36 OF 85
LEGAL ETHICS LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
The Supreme Court is supreme — the third
great department of government entrusted
exclusively with the judicial power to
adjudicate with finality all justiciable disputes,
public and private. No other department or
agency may pass upon its judgments or
declare them 'unjust.' Consequently, and
owing to the foregoing, not even the President
of the Philippines as Chief Executive may pass
judgment on any of the Court's acts.
[Maglasang v. People, G.R. No. 90083 (1990)]
D. TO THE CLIENTS (CANONS 14-22)
The attorney-client relationship is:
(1) Strictly personal;
(2) Highly confidential;
(3) Fiduciary.
A written contract, although the best evidence
to show the presence of an attorney-client
relationship is not essential for the
employment of an attorney.
Documentary formalism is not an essential
element in the employment of an attorney; the
contract may be express or implied. To
establish the relation, it is sufficient that the
advice and assistance of an attorney is sought
and received in any matter pertinent to his
profession [Pacana v. Pascual-Lopez, A.C. No.
8243 (2009)].
CONCEPT OF RETAINER
Either the act of a client by which he engages
the services of an attorney to render legal
advice or to defend and prosecute his cause in
court (general or special) OR the fee which a
client pays to an attorney when the latter is
retained [Agpalo (2004)].
D.1. AVAILABILITY OF SERVICE WITHOUT
DISCRIMINATION
Canon 14. A lawyer shall not refuse his services
to the needy.
General Rule: A lawyer is not obliged to act as
legal counsel for any person who may wish to
 UP LAW BOC
become his client. He has the right to decline
employment.
Exceptions:
(1) A lawyer shall not refuse his services to the
needy [Canon 14, CPR]
(2) A lawyer shall not decline to represent a
person solely on account of the latter’s
race, sex, creed or status of life, or because
of his own opinion regarding the guilt of
said person. [Rule 14.01, CPR]
(3) A lawyer may not refuse to accept
representation of an indigent client unless:
a. He is in no position to carry out the
work effectively or competently;
b. He labors under a conflict of interest
between him and the prospective
client or between a present client
and the prospective client. [Rule
14.03, CPR]
Ratio: It is a declared policy of the State to
value the dignity of every human person and
guarantee the rights of every individual,
particularly those who cannot afford the
services of counsel [RA 9999 (Free Legal
Assistance Act of 2010)].
RA 9999 provides incentives for free legal
service. Thus, a lawyer or professional
partnerships rendering actual free legal
services shall be entitled to an allowable
deduction from the gross income,
(1) The amount that could have been
collected for the actual free legal
services rendered OR
(2) Up to 10% of the gross income
derived from the actual performance
of legal profession, whichever is
lower.
This is different from the 60-hour mandatory
legal aid services under Mandatory Legal Aid
Service for Practicing Lawyers, B.M. 2012
(2009).
INDIGENT:
(1) A person who has no visible means of
income or whose income is insufficient for
the subsistence of his family, to be
PAGE 37 OF 85
LEGAL ETHICS LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
determined by the fiscal or judge, taking
into account the members of his family
dependent upon him for subsistence [Sec.
2, RA 6033 (An Act Requiring Courts to
Give Preference to Criminal Cases Where
the Party or Parties Involved are
Indigents)]
(2) A person who has no visible means of
support or whose income does not exceed
P300.00 per month or whose income even
in excess of P300.00 per month is
insufficient for the subsistence of his
family [Sec. 2, RA 6035 (An Act Requiring
Stenographers to Give Free Transcript of
Notes to Indigent and Low Income
Litigants and Providing a Penalty for the
Violation Thereof)].
LAWS ON INDIGENTS OR LOW INCOME
LITIGANTS:
(1) All courts shall give preference to the
hearing and/or disposition of criminal
cases where an indigent is involved either
as the offended party or accused [Sec. 1,
RA 6033]
(2) Any indigent litigant may, upon motion,
ask the Court for adequate travel
allowance to enable him and his indigent
witnesses to attendant the hearing of a
criminal case commenced by his
complaint or filed against him. The
allowance shall cover actual
transportation expenses by the cheapest
means from his place of residence to the
court and back. When the hearing of the
case requires the presence of the indigent
litigant and/or his indigent witnesses in
court the whole day or for two or more
consecutive days, allowances may, in the
discretion of the Court, also cover
reasonable expenses for meal and lodging
[Sec. 1, RA 6034 (An Act Providing
Transportation and Other Allowances for
Indigent Litigants)].
A stenographer who has attended a hearing
before an investigating fiscal or trial judge or
hearing commissioner of any quasi-judicial
body or administrative tribunal and has
officially taken notes of the proceeding thereof
shall, upon written request of an indigent or
low income litigant, his counsel or duly
authorized representative in the case
UP LAW BOC
concerned, give within a reasonable period to
be determined by the fiscal, judge,
commissioner or tribunal hearing the case, a
free certified transcript of notes take by him on
the case [Sec. 1, RA 6035] This Canon could be
read in conjunction with Rule 2.01, CPR: “A
lawyer shall not reject, except for valid reasons,
the cause of the defenseless or the oppressed.”
i. Services Regardless of a Person’s Status
Rule 14.01. A lawyer shall not decline to
represent a person solely on account of the
latter’s race, sex, creed or status of life, or
because of his own opinion regarding the guilt
of said person.
It is the duty of an attorney, in the defense of a
person accused of a crime, by all fair and
honorable means, regardless of his personal
opinion as to the guilt of the accused, to
present every defense that the law permits, to
the end that no person may be deprived of life
or liberty, but by due process of law [Sec. 20(i),
Rule 138, RoC]
Regardless of personal feelings, a lawyer
should not decline representation because a
client or a cause is unpopular or community
reaction is adverse [IBP Committee]
ii. Services as Counsel de Oficio
Rule 14.02. A lawyer shall not decline, except
for serious and sufficient cause, an
appointment as counsel de oficio or as amicus
curiae, or a request from the Integrated Bar of
the Philippines or any of its chapters for
rendition of free legal aid.
RoC provides:
(1) It is the duty of an attorney never to reject,
for any consideration personal to himself,
the cause of the defenseless or oppressed
[Sec. 20(h), Rule 138];
(2) A court may assign an attorney to render
professional aid free of charge to any party
in a case, if upon investigation it appears
that the party is destitute and unable to
PAGE 38 OF 85
LEGAL ETHICS LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
employ an attorney, and that the services
of counsel are necessary to secure the
ends of justice and to protect the rights of
the party. It shall be the duty of the
attorney so assigned to render the
required service, unless he is excused
therefrom by the court for sufficient cause
shown [Sec. 31, Rule 138]
Counsel de oficio - one appointed or assigned
by the court.
Counsel de parte- one employed or retained by
the party himself.
WHO MAY BE APPOINTED AS COUNSEL DE
OFICIO IN CRIMINAL CASES:
(1) A member of the bar in good standing
who, by reason of their experience and
ability, can competently defend the
accused [Sec. 7, Rule 116, RoC];
(2) In localities without lawyers:
(a) Any person resident of the province
and of good repute for probity and
ability [Sec. 7, Rule 116, RoC];
• Note: In relation to Sec. 34, Rule
138, RoC this is only allowed in the
municipal trial court.
(b) A municipal judge or a lawyer
employed in any branch, subdivision
or instrumentality of the government
within the province [Sec. 1, PD 543
(Authorizing the Designation of
Municipal Judges and Lawyers in any
Branch of the Government Service to
Act as Counsel De Oficio for the
Accused Who are Indigent in Places
Where There are No Available
Practicing Attorneys].
CONSIDERATIONS IN THE APPOINTMENT OF
A COUNSEL DE OFICIO:
(1) Gravity of the offense;
(2) Difficulty of the questions that may arise;
(3) Experience and ability of the appointee.
UP LAW BOC
WHEN THE COURT MAY APPOINT A
COUNSEL DE OFICIO (IN CRIMINAL
ACTIONS):
(1) Before arraignment, the court shall
inform the accused of his right to counsel
and ask him if he desires to have one.
Unless the accused is allowed to defend
himself in person or has employed
counsel of his choice, the court must
assign a counsel de officio to defend him,
[Sec. 6, Rule 116, RoC];
(2) It is the duty of the clerk of the trial court,
upon filing of a notice of appeal, to
ascertain from the appellant, if confined
in prison, whether he desires the Regional
Trial Court, Court of Appeals or the
Supreme Court to appoint a counsel de
officio [Sec. 13, Rule 122, RoC];
(3) The clerk of the CA shall designate a
counsel de oficio if it appears from the
case record that:
(a) The accused is confined in prison,
(b) Is without counsel de parte on
appeal, or
(c) Has signed the notice of appeal
himself, the clerk of Court of Appeals
shall designate a counsel de oficio.
An appellant who is not confined in prison may,
upon request, be assigned a counsel de officio
within ten days from receipt of the notice to file
brief and he establishes his right thereto [Sec.
2, Rule 124, RoC]
iii. Valid Grounds for Refusal to Serve
PAGE 39 OF 85
LEGAL ETHICS LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
Rule 14.03. A lawyer may not refuse to
accept representation of an indigent client
unless:
(a) He is in no position to carry out the
work effectively or competently;
(b) He labors under a conflict of interest
between him and the prospective client
or between a present client and the
prospective client.
Reason: One of the burdens of the privilege to
practice law is to render, when so required by
the court, free legal services to an indigent
litigant.
Even if the lawyer does not accept a case, he
shall not refuse to render legal advice to the
person concerned if only to the extent
necessary to safeguard the latter’s rights.
[Rule 2.02, Canon 2, CPR]
Rule 14.04. A lawyer who accepts the cause of
a person unable to pay his professional fees
shall observe the same standard of conduct
governing his relations with paying clients.
Neither the amount of attorney's fees nor the
client's financial ability to pay such fees should
serve as the test to determine the extent of the
lawyer's devotion to his client’s cause [Agpalo
(2004)].
If a lawyer volunteers his services to a client,
and therefore not entitled to attorney’s fees,
he is still bound to attend to a client’s case
with all due diligence and zeal. [Blanza v.
Arcangel, A.C. No. 492 (1967)]
Pursuant to A.M. 08-11-7-SC IRR (2009),
clients of the National Legal Aid Committee
and the IBP local chapter’s legal aid offices are
exempted from the payment of legal fees.
Under Sec. 16-D, RA 9406 (An Act
Reorganizing and Strengthening the Public
Attorney's Office (PAO)), clients of the PAO are
exempte from paying docket and other fees
incidental to institution actions in court and
other quasi-judicial bodies.
UP LAW BOC LEGAL ETHICS LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS

D.2. CANDOR, FAIRNESS AND LOYALTY TO Confidences of Secrets of clients

CLIENTS
Canon 15. A lawyer shall observe candor,
fairness and loyalty in all his dealings and
transactions with his clients.
i. Confidentiality Rule
Purpose: To protect the client from possible
breach of confidence as a result of a
consultation with a lawyer [Hadjula v.
Madianda, A.C. No. 6711 (2007)]
The relationship between a lawyer and his/her
client should ideally be imbued with the
highest level of trust and confidence. This is
the standard of confidentiality that must
prevail to promote a full disclosure of the
clients most confidential information to
his/her lawyer for an unhampered exchange
of information between them [Aniñon v.
Sabitsana, Jr., A.C. 5098 (2012).
Confidential communication- information
transmitted by voluntary act of disclosure
between attorney and client in confidence and
by means which so far as the client is aware,
discloses the information to no third person
other than one reasonably necessary for the
transmission of the information or the
accomplishment of the purpose for which it
was given [Mercado v. Vitriolo, A.C. No. 5108
(2005)].
clients
exactly pertinent
to the case).
Communication may be transmitted by any
form of agency, such as a messenger, an
interpreter or any other form of transmission.
It is immaterial whether the agent is the agent
of the attorney, the client or both.
Question of privilege is determined by the
court. The burden of proof is on the party who
asserts the privilege.
Canon 21 enjoins a lawyer to preserve the
confidence and secrets of his client even after
the attorney-client relation is terminated.
ii. Privileged Communications
Rule 15.02. A lawyer shall be bound by the rule
on privileged communication in respect of
matters disclosed to him by a prospective
client.
Ratio: to make the prospective client free to
discuss whatever he wishes with the lawyer
without fear that what he tells the lawyer will
not be divulged nor used against him, and for
the lawyer to be equally free to obtain
information from the prospective client [IBP
Committee].

REQUISITES
Confidences of Secrets of clients
clients (1) The person to whom information is given
is a lawyer.
Refer to information Refer to
protected by information • However, if a person is pretending to
attorney-client gained in the be a lawyer and client discloses
privilege under the profession confidential communications, the
Rules of Court (i.e., relationship that attorney-client privilege applies;
information the client has (2) There is a legal relationship existing,
pertinent to the case requested to be except in cases of prospective clients;
being handled). held inviolate or
the disclosure of (3) Legal advice must be sought from the
which would be attorney in his professional capacity with
embarrassing or respect to communications relating to
would likely be that purpose.
detrimental to the (4) The client must intend the communication
client (i.e., be confidential.
information not

PAGE 40 OF 85
UP LAW BOC LEGAL ETHICS LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS

PERSONS ENTITLED TO PRIVILEGE An attorney cannot, without the consent of his

client, be examined as to any communication
(1) The lawyer, client, and third persons who
made by the client to him or his advice given
by reason of their work have acquired
thereon in the course of professional
information about the case being
employment; nor can an attorney’s secretary,
handled, including:
stenographer, or clerk be examined, without
(a) Attorney’s secretary, stenographer the consent of the client and his employer,
and clerk; concerning any fact the knowledge of which
has been acquired in such capacity [Sec. 24(b),
(b) Interpreter, messengers, or agents
Rule 130].
transmitting communication;
(c) Accountant, scientist, physician,
engineer who has been hired for General rule: As a matter of public policy, a
effective consultation; client’s identity should not be shrouded in
mystery. Thus, a lawyer may not invoke the
(2) Assignee of the client’s interest as far as
privilege and refuse to divulge the name or
the communication affects the realization
identity of this client.
of the assigned interest.
Exceptions: Client identity is privileged in the
following instances:
SCOPE OF THE PRIVILEGE
(1) Where a strong probability exists that
(1) Does not cover transactions that occurred revealing the client's name would
beyond the lawyer’s employment with the implicate that client in the very activity for
client [Palm v. Iledan, Jr., A.C. No. 8242 which he sought the lawyer's advice.
(2009)].
(2) Where disclosure would open the client to
(2) Period to be considered is the date when civil liability
the privileged communication was made
(3) Where the government's lawyers have no
by the client to the attorney in relation to
case against an attorney's client unless, by
either a crime committed in the past or
revealing the client’s name, the said name
with respect to a crime intended to be
would furnish the only link that would
committed in the future. If the crime was
committed in the past, the privilege form the chain of testimony necessary to
convict an individual of a crime [Regala v.
applies. If it is still to be committed, the
Sandiganbayan, G.R. 105938 (1996)]..
privilege does not apply, because the
communication between a lawyer and his
client must be for a lawful purpose or in
Ratio:
furtherance of a lawful end to be
privileged [People v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. (1) The court has a right to know that the
No. 115439 (1996)]. client whose privileged information is
sought to be protected is flesh and blood.
(3) Limited only to communications which are
legitimately and properly within the scope (2) The privilege begins to exist only after the
of a lawful employment of a lawyer. It does attorney-client relationship has been
not extend to those made in established. The attorney-client privilege
contemplation of a crime or perpetration does not attach unless there is a client.
of a fraud. It is not within the profession of
(3) The privilege generally pertains to the
a lawyer to advise a client as to how he
subject matter of the relationship.
may commit a crime. [Genato v. Silapan,
A.C. 4078 (2003)]. (4) Due process considerations require that
the opposing party should, as a general
(4) Embraces not only oral or written
rule, know his adversary [Regala v.
statements but also actions, signs or other
Sandiganbayan, supra.].
means of communications.

PAGE 41 OF 85
UP LAW BOC
Information relating to the identity of the
client may fall within the ambit of the privilege
when the client’s name itself has an
independent significance, such that disclosure
would then reveal client confidences [Regala
v. Sandiganbayan, supra. ]
General rule: The protection given to the client
is perpetual and does not cease with the
termination of the litigation, nor is it affected
by the client’s ceasing to employ the attorney
and retaining another, or by any other change
of relation between them. It even survives the
death of the client [Bun Siong Yao v. Aurelio,
A.C. No. 7023 (2006)]
Exception: Some privileged communications
lose their privileged character by some
supervening act done pursuant to the purpose
of the communication (e.g., a communication
intended by the client to be sent to a third
person through his attorney loses confidential
character once it reached the third party).
EXAMPLES OF PRIVILEGED MATTERS
(1) Work product of lawyer (his effort,
research and thought contained in his
file);
(2) Report of a physician, an accountant, an
engineer or a technician, whose services
have been secured by a client as part of
his communication to his attorney or by
the attorney to assist him render effective
legal assistance to his client;
(3) Records concerning an accident in which
a party is involved;
(4) Consultation which has to do with the
preparation of a client to take the witness
stand.
iii. Conflict of Interest
Rule 15.01. A lawyer, in conferring with a
prospective client, shall ascertain as soon as
practicable whether the matter would involve
a conflict with another client or his own
interest, and if so, shall forthwith inform the
prospective client.
PAGE 42 OF 85
LEGAL ETHICS LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
Rule 15.03. A lawyer shall not represent
conflicting interests except by written consent
of all concerned given after a full disclosure of
the facts.
The rule prohibiting conflict of interest was
fashioned to prevent situations wherein a
lawyer would be representing a client whose
interest is directly adverse to any of his present
or former clients [Tulio v. Bunhangin, A.C. No.
7110, (2016)]
It is explicit that a lawyer is prohibited from
representing new clients whose interests
oppose those of a former client in any manner,
whether or not they are parties in the same
action or on totally unrelated cases [Orola v.
Ramos, A.C. 9860 (2013)].
There is conflict of interest when a lawyer
represents inconsistent interests of two or
more opposing parties. [Hornilla v. Salunat,
A.C. 5804 (2003)].
It is only upon strict compliance with the
condition of full disclosure of facts that a
lawyer may appear against his client;
otherwise, his representation of conflicting
interests is reprehensible. Such prohibition is
founded on principles of public policy and
good taste as the nature of the lawyer-client
relations is one of trust and confidence of the
highest degree [Nuigue v. Sedillo, A.C. 9906
(2013)].
Lawyers are expected not only to keep
inviolate the clients confidence, but also to
avoid the appearance of treachery and
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 [Gonzales v.
Cabucana, A.C. 6836 (2006)].
REQUISITES
(1) There are conflicting duties;
(2) The acceptance of the new relations
invites or actually leads to unfaithfulness
or double-dealing to another client; or
(3) The attorney will be called upon to use
against his first client any knowledge
acquired in the previous employment.
UP LAW BOC
TESTS OF CONFLICT OF INTERESTS
(1) 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 its
performance.
(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 matter in which he represented him
and also whether he will be called upon in
his new relation to use against the first
client any knowledge acquired through
their connection
(3) Whether or not in behalf of one client, it is
the lawyer’s duty to fight for an issue or
claim, but it is his duty to oppose it for the
other client [Hornilla v. Salunat, supra.].
(4) Whether the lawyer will be asked to use
against his former client any confidential
information acquired through their
connection or previous employment
[Palm v. Iledan, Jr., A.C. 8242 (2009)]
Note: The test to determine whether there is a
conflict of interest in the representation is
probability, not certainty, of conflict.
EFFECTS OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST
Representing adverse interest may result in:
(1) Disqualification as counsel in the new
case;
(2) If prejudicial to interests of latter client,
setting aside of a judgment;
(3) Administrative and criminal (for betrayal
of trust) liability;
(4) Forfeiture of attorney’s fees.
Rule 15.04. A lawyer may, with the written
consent of all concerned, act as mediator,
conciliator or arbitrator in settling disputes.
An attorney’s knowledge of the law and his
reputation for fidelity may make it easy for the
disputants to settle their differences amicably.
PAGE 43 OF 85
LEGAL ETHICS LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
However, he shall not act as counsel for any of
them. [Agpalo (2004)]
General rule: A lawyer may not represent two
opposing parties at any point in time. A lawyer
need not be the counsel-of-record of either
party. It is enough that the counsel had a hand
in the preparation of the pleading of one party.
Exception: When the parties agree AND for
amicable settlement [Agpalo (2004)].
At a certain stage of the controversy, before it
reaches the court, a lawyer may represent
conflicting interests with the consent of the
parties [Dee v. CA, G.R. No. 77439 (1989)]
iv. Candid and Honest Advice to Clients
Rule 15.05. A lawyer when advising his client
shall give a candid and honest opinion on the
merits and probable results of the client’s
case, neither overstating nor understating the
prospects of the case.
A lawyer is bound to give candid and honest
opinion on the merit or lack of merit of client’s
case, neither overstating nor understating the
prospect of the case. He should also give an
honest opinion as to the probable results of
the case [Agpalo (2004)]
The signature of counsel constitutes a
certificate by him that he has read the
pleading; that to the best of his knowledge,
information, and belief there is good ground to
support it; and that it is not interposed for
delay [Sec. 3, Rule 7, RoC]
vi. Compliance with Laws
Rule 15.07. A lawyer shall impress upon his
client compliance with the laws and principles
of fairness.
It is the duty of an attorney to counsel or
maintain such actions or proceedings only as
appear to him to be just, and such defenses
only as he believes to be honestly debatable
under the law [Sec. 20(c), Rule 138, RoC].
A lawyer is required to represent his client
within the bounds of law. He is enjoined to
employ only fair and honest means to attain
the lawful objectives of his client and not to
allow his client to dictate the procedure in
handling the case.
UP LAW BOC
A lawyer appears in court in representation of
his client not only as an advocate but also as
an officer of the court. To permit lawyers to
resort to unscrupulous practices for the
protection of the supposed rights of their
clients is to defeat the administration of justice
[Agpalo (2004)]
vii. Concurrent Practice of Another Profession
Rule 15.08. A lawyer who is engaged in
another profession or occupation concurrently
with the practice of law shall make clear to his
client whether he is acting as a lawyer or in
another capacity.
Exercise of dual profession is not prohibited
but a lawyer must make it clear when he is
acting as a lawyer or when he is acting in
another capacity, especially in occupations
related to the practice of law [In re: Rothman,
12 N.J. 528 (1953)]
Ratio: Certain ethical considerations may be
operative in one profession and not in the
other [Agpalo (2004)]
A lawyer is not barred from dealing with his
client but the business transaction must be
characterized with utmost honesty and good
faith. Business transactions between an
attorney and his client are disfavored and
discouraged by policy of law because by virtue
of a lawyer’s office, he is an easy position to
take advantage of the credulity and ignorance
of his client. Thus, there is no presumption of
innocence or improbability of wrongdoing in
favor of lawyers [Nakpil v. Valdez, A.C. No.
2040 (1998)]
D.3. CLIENT’S MONEYS AND PROPERTIES
Canon 16. A lawyer shall hold in trust all
moneys and properties of his client that may
come into his possession.
Lawyers cannot acquire or purchase, even at a
public or judicial auction, either in person or
through the mediation of another, the
property and rights which may be the object of
any litigation in which they take part by virtue
of their profession [Art. 1491(5), Civil Code].
PAGE 44 OF 85
LEGAL ETHICS LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
Ratio: The prohibition is based on the existing
relation of trust or the lawyer’s peculiar
control over the property.
A lawyer is not barred from dealing with his
client, but the transaction must be
characterized with utmost honesty and good
faith. The burden is on the attorney to prove
that the transaction was fair and that it did not
proceed from undue influence [Agpalo
(2004)].
REQUISITES
(1) There is an attorney-client relationship;
(2) The property or interest of the client is in
litigation;
(3) The attorney takes part as counsel in the
case;
(4) The attorney purchases or acquires the
property or right, by himself or through
another, during the pendency of litigation
[Laig v. CA, G.R. No. L-26882 (1978)]
Any scheme which has the effect of
circumventing the law comes within the
prohibition [Agpalo (2004)].
INSTANCES WHEN PROHIBITION IN ART. 1491,
CIVIL CODE APPLIES:
(1) Even if the purchase or lease of the
property in litigation is in favor of a
partnership, of which counsel is a partner
[Mananquil v. Villegas, A.C. No. 2430
(1990)]
(2) If the purchase is made by the wife of the
attorney [In re: Calderon, G.R. No. L-2409
(1907)]
(3) Mortgage of property in litigation to the
lawyer. In this case, acquisition is merely
postponed until foreclosure but effect is
the same. It also includes assignment of
property [Ordonio v. Eduarte, A.M. No.
3216, (1992)].
The purchase by a lawyer of the property in
litigation from his client is void and could
produce no legal effect [Arti. 1409(7), Civil
Code]
UP LAW BOC
INSTANCES WHEN PROHIBITION IN ART. 1491
DOES NOT APPLY:
(1) When the attorney is not a counsel in the
case involving the same property at the
time of acquisition;
(2) When purchaser is a corporation, even if
the attorney was an officer [Tuason v.
Tuason, G.R. No. L-3404 (1951)]
(3) When sale takes place after termination
of litigation, except if there was fraud or
use/abuse of confidential information or
where lawyer exercised undue influence;
(4) Where property in question is stipulated
as part of attorney’s fees, provided that,
the same is contingent upon the
favorable outcome of litigation and,
provided further, that the fee must be
reasonable.
i. Fiduciary Relationship
Rule 16.01. A lawyer shall account for all
money or property collected or received for or
from the client.
Ratio: The lawyer merely holds said money or
property in trust.
When a lawyer collects or receives money from
his client for a particular purpose (such as for
filing fees, registration fees, transportation
and office expenses), he should promptly
account to the client how the money was spent.
If he does not use the money for its intended
purpose, he must immediately return it to the
client [Belleza v. Macasa, A.C. No. 7815
(2009)]
The fact that a lawyer has a lien for fees on
money in his hands would not relieve him from
the duty of promptly accounting for the funds
received [Daroy v. Legaspi, A.C. No. 936
(1975)]
Ethical and practical considerations make it
both natural and imperative for a lawyer to
issue receipts, even if not demanded, and to
keep copes of the receipts for his own records.
[Tarog v. Ricafort, A.C. 8243 (2011)]
A lawyer's failure, to return upon demand, the
funds held by him on behalf of his client gives
rise to the presumption that he has
PAGE 45 OF 85
LEGAL ETHICS LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
appropriated the same for his own use in
violation of the trust reposed in him by his
client. [Sison v. Camacho, A.C. No. 10910,
(2016)]
ii. Commingling of Funds
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.
A lawyer should not commingle a client’s
money with that of other clients and with his
private funds, nor use the client’s money for
his personal purposes without the client’s
consent. [Daroy v. Legaspi, A.C. No. 936
(1975)]
iii. Delivery of Funds
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.
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 Sec.
shall not be a bar to criminal prosecution [Sec.
25, Rule 138, RoC]
Money collected by a lawyer in pursuance of a
judgment in favor of his clients is held in trust
and must be immediately turned over to them
[Busiños v. Ricafort, A.C. No. 4349 (1997)]
The failure of an attorney to return the client’s
money upon demand gives rise to the
presumption that he has misappropriated it
for his own use to the prejudice of and in
violation of the trust reposed in him by the
client [Jinon v. Jiz, A.C. No. 9615 (2013)]
An attorney has a lien upon the funds
documents and papers of his client which have
lawfully come into his possession and may
retain the same until his lawful fees and
disbursements have been paid and may apply
UP LAW BOC
such funds to the satisfaction thereof [Sec. 37,
Rule 138, RoC]
BUT a lawyer is not entitled to unilaterally
appropriate his client’s money for himself by
the mere fact alone that the client owes him
attorney’s fees. The fact alone that a lawyer
has a lien for fees on moneys in his hands
collected for his client does not relieve him of
his duty to promptly account for the moneys
received; his failure to do so constitutes
professional misconduct [Rayos v. Hernandez,
G. R. 169079 (2007)].
iv. Borrowing or Lending
Rule 16.04. A lawyer shall not borrow money
from his client unless the client’s interests are
fully protected by the nature of the case or by
independent advice. Neither shall a lawyer
lend money to a client except when, in the
interest of justice, he has to advance necessary
expenses in a legal matter he is handling for
the client.
A LAWYER IS PROHIBITED FROM
BORROWING MONEY FROM HIS CLIENT
Ratio: This rule is intended to prevent the
lawyer from taking advantage of his influence
over his client [Junio v. Grupo, A.C. 5020
(2001)].
The canon presumes that the client is
disadvantaged by the lawyer’s ability to use all
the legal maneuverings to renege on her
obligation [Frias v. Lozada, A.C. No. 6656
(2005)]
The profession demands of an attorney an
absolute abdication of every personal
advantage conflicting in any way, directly or
indirectly, with the interest of his client
[Barnachea v. Quiocho, A.C. No. 5925 (2003)]
A lawyer who borrows jewelry from his client
in order to obtain and appropriate for himself
the proceeds from a pledge is liable under this
canon. [Yu v. Dela Cruz, A.C. No. 10912, (2016)]
PAGE 46 OF 85
LEGAL ETHICS LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
A LAWYER IS PROHIBITED FROM LENDING
MONEY TO HIS CLIENT
Ratio: The canon intends to assure the
lawyer’s independent professional judgment,
for if the lawyer acquires a financial interest in
the outcome of the case, the free exercise of
his judgment may be adversely affected
[Agpalo (2004)].
Exception: When, in the interest of justice, he
has to advance necessary expenses in a legal
matter he is handling.
D.4. FIDELITY TO CLIENT’S CAUSE
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.
The failure to exercise due diligence and the
abandonment of a client’s cause make such a
lawyer unworthy of the trust which the client
has reposed on him [Cantilller v. Potenciano,
A.C. No. 3195 (1989)]
Once he agrees to take up the cause of the
client, no fear or judicial disfavor or public
unpopularity should restrain him from the full
discharge of his duty [Santiago v. Fojas, A.M.
No. 4103 (1995)]
In the discharge of his duty of entire devotion
to the client's cause, a lawyer should present
every remedy or defense authorized by law in
support of his client’s cause, regardless of his
personal views. He sjould not be afraid of the
possibility that he may displease the judge or
the general public [Agpalo (2004)].
D.5. COMPETENCE AND DILIGENCE
Canon 18. A lawyer shall serve his client with
competence and diligence.
A lawyer must exercise ordinary diligence or
that reasonable degree of care and skill
having reference to the character of the
business he undertakes to do, as any other
member of the bar similarly situated
commonly possesses and exercises. He is not,
however, bound to exercise extraordinary
diligence [Pajarillo v. WCC, G.R. No. L-42927
(1980)]
A client is entitled to the benefit of any and
every remedy and defense authorized by law,
UP LAW BOC
and is expected to rely on the lawyer to assert
every such remedy or defense [Garcia v. Bala,
A.C. No. 5309 (2005)]
In the absence of evidence on the contrary,
however, a lawyer is presumed to be prompt
and diligent in the performance of his
obligations and to have employed his best
efforts, learning, and ability in the protection
of his client’s interests and in the discharge of
his duties as an officer of the court [Agpalo
(2004)].
i. Adequate Preparation
Rule 18.02. A lawyer shall not handle any legal
matter without adequate preparation.
A lawyer should safeguard his client’s rights
and interests by thorough study and
preparation, mastering applicable law and
facts involved in a case, and keeping
constantly abreast of the latest jurisprudence
and developments in all branches of the law
[Agpalo (2004)]
A lawyer should give adequate attention, care
and time to his cases. This is the reason why a
practicing lawyer should accept only so many
cases he can handle. [Legarda v. CA, G.R. No.
94457 (1991)]
The lawyer’s diligence and dedication to his
work and profession not only promote the
interest of his client, it likewise help attain the
ends of justice by contributing to the proper
and speedy administration of cases, bring
prestige of the bar and maintain respect to the
legal profession [Endaya v. Oca, A.C. 3967
(2003)].
ii. Negligence
Rule 18.03. A lawyer shall not neglect a
legal matter entrusted to him, and his
negligence in connection therewith shall
render him liable
If by reason of the lawyer’s negligence, actual
loss has been caused to his client, the latter
has a cause of action against him for damages.
[Callanta]
General rule: A client is bound by the
attorney’s conduct, negligence and mistake in
PAGE 47 OF 85
LEGAL ETHICS LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
handling the case or in management of
litigation and in procedural technique, and he
cannot be heard to complain that result might
have been different had his lawyer proceeded
differently.
Exceptions: He is not so bound where the
ignorance, incompetence or inexperience of
lawyer is so great and error so serious that the
client, who has good cause, is prejudiced and
denied a day in court [People v. Manzanilla,
G.R. No. L-17436 (1922); Alarcon v. CA, G.R.
No. 126802 (2000)]
EXAMPLES OF LAWYER’S NEGLIGENCE:
1) Failure of counsel to ask for additional
time to answer a complaint resulting in a
default judgment against his client
(Mapua v. Mendoza, G.R. L-19295
(1923)];
2) Failure to bring suit immediately, as when
it was filed when the defendant had
already become insolvent and recovery
could no longer be had;
3) Failure to ascertain date of receipt from
post office of notice of decision resulting
in the non-perfection of the appellant’s
appeal [Joven-De Jesus v. PNB, G.R. No.
L-19299 (1964)]
4) Failure to file briefs within the
reglementary period [People v. Cawili,
G.R. No. L-30543, (1970)];
5) Failure to attend a trial without filing a
motion for postponement or without
requesting either of his two partners in
the law office to take his place and appear
for the defendants [Gaerlan v. Bernal,
G.R. No. L-4039 (1952)];
6) Failure to appear at pre-trial [Agravante
v. Patriarca, G.R. No. L-48324 (1990)];
7) Failure of counsel to notify clients of the
scheduled trial which prevented the latter
to look for another lawyer to represent
them while counsel was in the hospital
[Ventura v. Santos, 59 Phil. 123 (1993)];
8) Failure to appear simply because the
client did not go to counsel’s office on the
date of the trial as was agreed upon
(Alcoriza v. Lumakang, A.M. No. 249
(1978)];
UP LAW BOC
9) Failure to pay the appellate docket fee
after receiving the amount for the
purpose [Capulong v. Alino, A.M. No. 381
(1968)]
10) Failure to file a Motion for
Reconsideration and to update clients of
the adverse result of a case [Orazme v.
Oro, A.C. No. 10945, (2016)]
11) Withdrawing from a case without the
proper motion and without informing the
client [Chang v. Hidalgo, A.C. No.
6934,(2016)]
iii. Collaborating Counsel
Rule 18.01. A lawyer shall not undertake a
legal service which he knows or should
know that he is not qualified to tender.
However, he may render such service if, with
the consent of his client, he can obtain as
collaborating counsel a lawyer who is
competent on the matter.
WHEN A LAWYER ACCEPTS A CASE,
WHETHER FOR A FEE OR NOT, HIS
ACCEPTANCE IS AN IMPLIED
REPRESENTATION:
1) That he possesses the requisite degree of
academic learning, skill and ability
necessary in the practice of his
profession;
2) That he will exert his best judgment in the
prosecution or defense of the litigation
entrusted to him;
3) That he will exercise ordinary diligence or
that reasonable degree of care and skill
demanded of the business he undertakes
to do, to protect the client’s interests and
take all steps or do all acts necessary
thereof [Uy v. Tansinsin, A.C. 8252
(2009)]; and
4) That he will take steps as will adequately
safeguard his client’s interests [Islas v.
Platon, G.R. No. L-23183 (1924)]
Some cases involve specialized fields of law
and require special training of which a lawyer
may not be knowledgable. In such a case, he
should follow this rule [Agpalo (2004)].
PAGE 48 OF 85
LEGAL ETHICS LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
iv. Duty to Apprise Client
Rule 18.04. A lawyer shall keep the client
informed of the status of his case and shall
respond within a reasonable period of time to
client’s request for information.
The relationship of lawyer-client being one of
confidence, there is ever present the need for
the lawyer to inform timely and adequately the
client of important developments affecting
the client’s case [Carandang v. Obmina, A.C.
7813 (2009)].
Even if the lawyer was honestly and sincerely
protecting the interests of his client, he still
does not have the right to waive the appeal
without the knowledge and consent of his
client [Abay v. Montesino, A.C. 5718 (2003)].
The client should not, however, sit idly by. It is
also his duty to make proper inquiries from his
counsel concerning his case, in keeping with
that standard of care which an ordinarily
prudent man bestows upon his important
business [Agpalo (2004)].
D.6. REPRESENTATION WITH ZEAL WITHIN
LEGAL BOUNDS
Canon 19. A lawyer shall represent his client
with zeal within the bounds of the law.
i. Use of Fair and Honest Means
Rule 19.01. A lawyer shall employ only fair and
honest means to attain the lawful objectives of
his client and shall not present, participate in
presenting or threaten to present unfounded
criminal charges to obtain an improper
advantage in any case or proceeding.
It is the duty of an attorney to employ, for the
purpose of maintaining the causes confided to
him, such means only as are consistent with
truth and honor, and never seek to mislead the
judge or any judicial officer by an artifice or
false statement of fact or law [Sec. 20(d), Rule
138, RoC]
A lawyer should not file or threaten to file any
unfounded or baseless criminal case or cases
UP LAW BOC LEGAL ETHICS LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS

against the adversaries of his client designed D.7. ATTORNEY’S FEES

to secure a leverage to compel adversaries to
yield or withdraw their own cases against the
lawyer’s client. [Pena v. Aparicio, A.C. No.
7298 (2007)]
ii. Client’s Fraud
Rule 19.02. A lawyer who has received
information that his client has, in the course of
the representation, perpetrated a fraud upon
a person or tribunal, shall promptly call upon
the client to rectify the same, and failing which
he shall terminate the relationship with such
client in accordance with the Rules of Court.
This rule merely requires the lawyer to
terminate his relationship with the client in the
event the latter fails or refuses to rectify the
fraud. [Agpalo (2004)]
iii. Procedure in Handling The Case
Canon 20. A lawyer shall charge only fair and
reasonable fees.
Any counsel worthy of his hire is entitled to be
fully recompensed for his services. With his
capital consisting solely of his brains and with
his skill, acquired at tremendous cost not only
in money but in the expenditure of time and
energy, he is entitled to the protection of any
judicial tribunal against any attempt of the
part of the client to escape payment of his fees
[Albano v. Caloma, A.C. 528 (1967)].
An attorney is entitled to have and recover
from his client no more than a reasonable
compensation for his services with a view to:
(1) The importance of the subject matter of
the controversy;
(2) The extent of the services rendered; and

Rule 19.03. A lawyer shall not allow his client (3) The professional standing of the attorney.
to dictate the procedure on handling the case. No court shall be bound by the opinion of
attorneys as expert witnesses as to the proper
compensation but may disregard such
Within client’s Within counsel’s testimony and base its conclusion on its own
control control professional knowledge.
MATTERS OF MATTERS OF LAW
A written contract for services shall control the
SUBSTANCE
amount to be paid therefore unless found by
All the proceedings
the court to be unconscionable or
The cause of action, in court to enforce
unreasonable. [Sec. 24, Rule 138, RoC]
the claim or the remedy, to bring
demand sued upon, the claim, demand, Subject to the availability of funds, the court
and the subject cause of action, or may, in its discretion, order an attorney
matter of the subject matter of employed as counsel de oficio to be
litigation are all the suit to hearing, compensated in such a sym as the court may
within the exclusive trial, determination, fix in accordancewith Sec. 24, Rule 138, RoC
control of a client. judgment, and [Sec. 32, Rule 138, RoC].
execution, are within
The mere fact that an agreement had been
An attorney may the exclusive control
reached between attorney and client fixing the
not impair, of the attorney
amount of the attorney’s fees, does not
compromise, settle, [Belandres v. Lopez
insulate such agreement from review and
surrender, or Sugar Central Mill, modification by the Court where the fees
destroy them G.R. No. L-6869
clearly appear to be excessive or unreasonable
without his client's (1955)].
[Tanhueco v. De Dumo, A.M. No. 1437 (1989)]
consent.

PAGE 49 OF 85
UP LAW BOC LEGAL ETHICS LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS

WHEN A LAWYER CANNOT RECOVER THE 1) Appear as counsel before any court
FULL AMOUNT STIPULATED IN THE in any civil case wherein a local
CONTRACT: government unit or any office,
(1) When the services were not performed, agency, or instrumentality of the
and if the lawyer withdrew before the government is the adverse party;
case was finished, he will be allowed only 2) Appear as counsel in any criminal
reasonable fees; case wherein an officer or employee
(2) When there is justified dismissal of an ofthe national or local government
attorney, the contract will be nullified and is accused of an offense committed
payment will be on quantum meruit in relation to his office.
basis;
3) Collect any fee for their appearance
(3) When the stipulated fees are in administrative proceedings
unconscionable or unreasonable; involving the local government unit
(4) When the stipulated fees are in excess of of which he is an official; and
what is expressly provided by law; 4) Use property and personnel of the
(5) When the lawyer is guilty of fraud or bad government except when the
faith in the manner of his employment; Sanggunian member concerned is
(6) When the counsel’s services are worthless defending the interest of the
because of negligence; government.
c) Doctors of medicine may practice their
(7) When the contract is contrary to laws,
morals, and good policies. profession even during official hours of
work only on occasions of emergency:
WHEN THERE IS NO EXPRESS CONTRACT Provided, that the officials concerned do
The absence of a formal contract will not not derive monetary compensation
negate the payment of attorney’s fees because therefrom.
the contract may be express or implied. In the
absence of an express contract, payment of
attorney’s fees may be justified by virtue of the Rule 20.01. A lawyer shall be guided by the
innominate contract of facio ut des (I do and following factors in determining his fees:
you give) which is based on the principle that (a) The time spent and the extent of the
“no one shall enrich himself at the expense of services rendered or required;
another” [Corpus v. CA, G.R. No. L-40424
(b) The novelty and difficulty of the
(1980)]
questions involved;
(c) The importance of the subject matter;
NOTE: RA 7160, Section 90. Practice of
(d) The skill demanded;
Profession.
a) All governors, city and municipal mayors (e) The probability of losing other
are prohibited from practicing their employment as a result of acceptance
of the proffered case;
profession or engaging in any occupation
other than the exercise of their functions as (f) The customary charges for similar
local chief executives. services and the schedule of fees of the
IBP chapter to which he belongs;
b) Sanggunian members may practice their
professions, engage in any occupation, or (g) The amount involved in the controversy
teach in schools except during session and the benefits resulting to the client
from the service;
hours: Provided, That Sanggunian
members who are also members of the Bar (h) The contingency or certainty of
shall not: compensation;

PAGE 50 OF 85
UP LAW BOC LEGAL ETHICS LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS

(i) The character of the employment, It is the duty of an attorney to accept no

whether occasional or established; and compensation in connection with his client’s
business except from him or with his
(j) The professional standing of the
knowledge and approval [Sec. 20(e), Rule 138,
lawyer.
RoC]
A corollary of the fo regoing rule is the
MANNER BY WHICH ATTORNEYS MAY BE principle that whatever a lawyer receives from
PAID the opposite party in the service of his client
belongs to the client. A lawyer may not claim
(1) A fixed or absolute fee which is payable
the fees in the concept of damages awarded
regardless of the result of the case;
by the court in favor the client, the latter and
(2) A contingent fee that is conditioned upon not the former being entitled thereto, except
the securing of a favorable judgment and when he and his client have agreed that
recovery of money or property and the whatever amount the court may award as
amount of which may be on a percentage attorney's fees would form part of the lawyer's
basis; compensation [Agpalo (2004)].
(3) A fixed fee payable per appearance;
(4) A fixed fee computed by the number of
hours spent;
i. Acceptance Fees
(5) A fixed fee based on a piece of work;
Acceptance of money from a client establishes
(6) A combination of any of the above an attorney-client relationship and gives rise
stipulated fees. to the duty of fidelity to the client’s cause
[Emiliano Court Townhouses Homeowners
Association v. Dioneda, A.C. No. 5162 (2003)].
Rule 20.02. A lawyer shall, in cases of referral, Failure to render the legal services agreed
with the consent of the client, be entitled to a upon, despite receipt of an acceptance fee, is
division of fees in proportion to work a clear violation of the CPR [Macarulay v.
performed and responsibility assumed. Seriña, A.C. No. 6591 (2005)].
The referral of a client by a lawyer to another
lawyer does not entitle the former to a
commission or to a portion of the attorney’s ii. Contingency Fee Arrangements
fees. It is only when, in addition to the referral, A distinction should be made between a
he performs legal service or assumes champertous contract and a contingent
responsibility in the case that he will be contract with respect to attorney’s fees:
entitled to a fee [Agpalo (2004)]
Champertous Contingent
Rule 20.03. A lawyer shall not, without the full Contract Contract
knowledge and consent of the client, accept
any fee, reward, costs, commission, interest, A champertous A contingent
rebate or forwarding allowance or other contract is one contract is an
compensation whatsoever related to his where the lawyer agreement in
professional employment from anyone other stipulates with his which the lawyer’s
than the client. client that he will fee, usually a fixed
bear all the expenses percentage of what
Ratio: The rule is designed to secure the for the prosecution may be recovered
lawyer’s fidelity to the client’s cause and to of the case, the in the action, is
prevent that situation in which receipt by him recovery of things or made to depend
of a rebate or commission from another in property being upon the success in
connection with the client’s cause may claimed, and the the effort to
interfere with the full discharge of his duty to latter pays only upon enforce or defend
his client [Agpalo (2004)]. successful litigation. the client’s right.
The lawyer does
PAGE 51 OF 85
UP LAW BOC LEGAL ETHICS LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS

This contract is void not undertake to (2) Written notice thereof to be delivered to
for being against shoulder the his client and to the adverse party.
public policy expenses of From then on, he shall have the same right
litigation. and power over such judgments and
It is a valid executions as his client would have to enforce
agreement. his lien and secure the payment of his just fees
and disbursements [Sec. 37, Rule 138, RoC]

Contingent fee contracts are subject to the

supervision and close scrutiny of the court in REQUISITES:
order that clients may be protected from (1) Attorney-client relationship;
unjust charges. A much higher compensation
is allowed as contingent fees because of the (2) The attorney has rendered services;
risk that the lawyer may get nothing if the suit (3) A money judgment favorable to the client
fails [Masmud v. NLRC, G.R. 183385 (2009)]. has been secured in the action; and
(4) The attorney has a claim for attorney’s
iii. Attorney’s Liens fees or advances statement of his claim
has been recorded in the case with notice
served upon the client and adverse party.
Retaining lien
An attorney shall have a lien upon the funds,
documents and papers of his client which have Retaining lien Charging lien
lawfully come into his possession. Thus:
Nature
(1) He may retain the same until his lawful
Passive lien. It Active lien. It can be
fees and disbursements have been paid;
cannot be actively enforced by
(2) May apply such funds to the satisfaction enforced. It is a execution. It is a
thereof. [Sec. 37, Rule 138, RoC] general lien. special lien.
Basis
Requisites (RPC): Lawful possession Securing of a
(1) Attorney-client relationship; of funds, papers, favorable money
documents, judgment for client
(2) Lawful possession by lawyer of the client’s property belonging
funds, documents and papers in his to client
professional capacity; and
(3) Unsatisfied claim for attorney’s fees or
disbursements. Coverage
Covers only funds, Covers all
Charging lien papers, documents, judgments for the
He shall also have a lien to the same extent and property in the payment of money
upon all judgments for the payment of money, lawful possession of and executions
and executions issued in pursuance of such the attorney by issued in pursuance
judgments, which he has secured in a reason of his of such judgment
litigation of his client. This lien exists from and professional
after the time when he shall have caused: employment
(1) A statement of his claim of such lien to be
entered upon the records of the court Effectivity
rendering such judgment, or issuing such As soon as the As soon as the claim
execution; and lawyer gets for attorney’s fees
possession of the had been entered
funds, papers,
PAGE 52 OF 85
UP LAW BOC LEGAL ETHICS LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS

documents, into the records of QUANTUM MERUIT

property the case Means “as much as a lawyer deserves.”
Applicability Essential requisite: Acceptance of the benefits
May be exercised Generally, it is by one sought to be charged for services
before judgment or exercisable only rendered under circumstances as reasonably
execution, or when the attorney to notify him that lawyer expects
regardless thereof had already secured compensation.
a favorable
judgment for his
client WHEN AUTHORIZED:
(1) The agreement as to counsel fees is
Notice invalid for some reason other than the
Client need not be Client and adverse illegality of the object of performance;
notified to make it party need to (2) There is no express contract for attorney’s
effective notified to make it fees agreed upon between the lawyer and
effective the client;
(3) When although there is a formal contract
of attorney’s fees, the stipulated fees are
found unconscionable or unreasonable
iv. Fees and Controversies with Clients
by the court;
Rule 20.04. A lawyer shall avoid controversies (4) When the contract for attorney’s fees is
with clients concerning his compensation and void due to purely formal matters or
shall resort to judicial action only to prevent defects of execution;
imposition, injustice or fraud.
(5) When the counsel, for justifiable cause,
A lawyer should avoid controversies with was not able to finish the case to its
clients concerning compensation so far as conclusion;
shall be compatible with self-respect and with
his right to receive a reasonable recompense (6) When lawyer and client disregard the
for his services, and he should resort to law contract of attorney’s fees;
suits with clients only to prevent injustice, (7) When there is a contract, but no
imposition or fraud. Lawyers thus seldom, if stipulation as to attorney’s fees.
ever, file judicial actions for the recovery of
their fees unless righteous and well founded
and unless forced by the client's intolerable QUANTUM MERUIT GUIDELINES
attitude because such lawsuits cannot fail to
create the impression, however, wrong it may (1) Time spent and extent of the services
be, that those instituting them are rendered. A lawyer is justified in fixing
mercenaries [Agpalo (2004)]. higher fees when the case is so
complicated and requires more time and
efforts to finish it.
JUDICIAL ACTIONS TO RECOVER (2) Nature and importance of subject matter.
ATTORNEY’S FEES: The more important the subject matter or
(1) An appropriate motion or petition as an the bigger value of the interest or
incident in the main action where he property in litigation, the higher is the
rendered legal services; attorney’s fee.
(2) A separate civil action for collection of (3) Novelty and difficulty of questions
attorney’s fees. involved. When the questions in a case
are novel and difficult, greater efforts,
deeper study, and research are bound to
burn the lawyer’s time and stamina

PAGE 53 OF 85
UP LAW BOC LEGAL ETHICS LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS

considering that there are no local not to the lawyer

precedents to rely upon. but to the client –
(4) Skill demanded of the lawyer. The totality unless they have
of the lawyer’s experience provides him agreed that the
the skill and competence admired in award shall pertain
lawyers. to the lawyer as
additional
(5) Loss of opportunity for other employment compensation or as
on the part of the lawyer who accepts the part thereof
retainer. It is only but fair that a client [Traders Royal Bank
should compensate his lawyer for being Employees Union-
eprived of the chance to earn legal fees Independent v.
from others by reason of his employment NLRC, G.R. No.
as his counsel. 120592 (1997)].
(6) Results secured. The importance to a
client of his lawyer’s services depends
upon the successful outcome of his D.8. PRESERVATION OF CLIENT’S
litigation. CONFIDENCES
(7) Whether the fee is contingent.
Canon 21. A lawyer shall preserve the
confidence and secrets of his client even after
(8) Capacity of client to pay. the attorney-client relation is terminated.

A determination of all these factors would Ratio:

indispensably require nothing less than a full-
blown trial where private respondent can (1) Unless the client knows that his attorney
adduce evidence to establish its right to lawful cannot be compelled to reveal what is
attorney's fees and for petitioner to oppose or told to him, he will suppress what he
refute the same [Metrobank v. CA, G.R. No. thinks to be unfavorable and the advice
86100 (1990)] which follows will be useless if not
misleading;
The above rules apply in the case of a counsel
de parte. A counsel de oficio may not demand (2) To encourage a client to make full
from the accused attorney’s fees even if he disclosure to his attorney and to place
wins the case. However, subject to availability unrestricted confidence in him in matters
of funds, the court may, in its discretion, order affecting his rights or obligations [Agpalo
an attorney employed as counsel de oficio to (2004)].
be compensated in such sum as the court may It is the duty of an attorney to maintain
fix. inviolate the confidence, and at every peril to
v. Concepts of Attorney’s Fees himself to preserve, the secrets of his client
and to accept no compensation in connection
Ordinary concept Extraordinary with his client’s business except from him or
concept with his knowledge and approval [Sec. 20(e),
An attorney’s fee is An attorney’s fee is Rule 138, RoC].
the reasonable an indemnity for
compensation paid damages ordered
to a lawyer for the by the court to be IMPOSITION OF CRIMINAL LIABILITY
legal services he paid by the losing 1) Upon any lawyer who, by any malicious
has rendered to a party to the breach of professional duty or of
client. Its basis of prevailing party in inexcusable negligence or ignorance,
this compensation litigation. The basis reveals any of the secrets of the latter
is the fact of of this is any of the learned by him in his professional
employment by the cases authorized by capacity.
client. law and is payable
PAGE 54 OF 85
UP LAW BOC
2) Upon a lawyer who, having undertaken
the defense of a client or having received
confidential information from said client
in a case, undertakes the defense of the
opposing party in the same case, without
the consent of his first client. [Art. 209,
RPC]
The protection given to the client is perpetual
and does not cease with the termination of the
litigation, nor is it affected by the party’s
ceasing to employ the attorney and retaining
another, or by any other change of relation
between them. It even survives the death of
the client [Genato v. Silapan, supra.].
i. Prohibited Disclosures and Use
Rule 21.02. A lawyer shall not, to the
disadvantage of his client, use information
acquired in the course of employment, nor
shall he use the same to his own advantage or
that of a third person, unless the client with
full knowledge of the circumstances consents
thereto.
This strikes deeply against the attorney-client
relationship [Agpalo (2004)].
Rule 21.03. A lawyer shall not, without the
written consent of his client, give information
from his files to an outside agency seeking
such information for auditing, statistical,
bookkeeping, accounting, data processing, or
any similar purpose.
The work and product of a lawyer, such as his
effort, research, and thought, and the records
of his client, contained in his files are
privileged matters. Neither the lawyer nor,
after his death, his heir or legal representative
may properly disclose the contents of such file
cabinet without client’s consent [Agpalo
(2004)].
Rule 21.05. A lawyer shall adopt such
measures as may be required to prevent those
whose services are utilized by him from
disclosing or using confidences or secrets of
the client.
The client’s secrets which clerical aids of
lawyers learn of in the performance of their
PAGE 55 OF 85
LEGAL ETHICS LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
services are covered by privileged
communication. It is the duty of lawyer to
ensure that this is being followed (e.g.,
execution of confidentiality agreements)
[Agpalo (2004)].
Ratio: The prohibition against a lawyer from
divulging the confidences and secrets of his
clients will become futile exercise if his clerical
aids are given liberty to do what is prohibited
of the lawyer.
Rule 21.06. A lawyer shall avoid indiscreet
conversation about a client’s affairs even with
members of his family.
A lawyer must also preserve the confidences
and secrets of his clients outside the law office,
including his home. He should avoid
committing calculated indiscretion, that is,
accidental revelation of secrets obtained in his
professional employment [Agpalo (2004)].
Rule 21.07. A lawyer shall not reveal that he
has been consulted about a particular case
except to avoid possible conflict of interest.
Cf:
Rule 15.01. A lawyer, in conferring with a
prospective client, shall ascertain as soon as
practicable whether the matter would involve
a conflict with another client or his own
interest, and if so, shall forthwith inform the
prospective client.
Rule 14.03. A lawyer may not refuse to
accept representation of an indigent client
unless:
(b) He labors under a conflict of interest
between him and the prospective client or
between a present client and the
prospective client.
THE PRIVILEGED COMMUNICATION RULE
APPLIES EVEN TO PROSPECTIVE CLIENTS
The disclosure and the lawyer’s opinion
thereon create an attorney-client relationship,
even though the lawyer does not eventually
UP LAW BOC
accept the employment or the prospective
client did not thereafter actually engage the
lawyer. By the consultation, the lawyer already
learned of the secrets of prospective client.
This rule, of course, is subject to exception of
representation of conflicting interests
[ Agpalo (2004)].
ii. Disclosure, When Allowed
Rule 21.01. A lawyer shall not reveal the
confidences or secrets of his client except:
(a) When authorized by the client after
acquainting him of the consequences
of the disclosure;
(b) When required by law;
(c) When necessary to collect his fees or
to defend himself, his employees or
associates or by judicial action.
Rule 21.01(a) refers to a waiver by the client.
Since the attorney-client privilege against
disclosure of the client's confidence is
intended primarily for the client's protection,
only the client as a rule can waive the privilege.
Rule 21.01 (b) and (c) are for the protection of
the attorney’s rights. The privileged relation
cannot be used as a shield against
wrongdoing nor can it be employed as an
excuse to deny a lawyer the right to protect
himself against abuse by the client or false
charges by third persons [Agpalo (2004)].
Rule 21.04. A lawyer may disclose the affairs
of a client of the firm to partners or associates
thereof unless prohibited by the client.
The professional employment of a law firm is
equivalent to the retainer of the members
thereof even though only one of them is
consulted; conversely, the employment of one
member of a law firm is generally considered
as employment of the law firm [Agpalo
(2004)].
D.9. WITHDRAWAL OF SERVICES
Canon 22. A lawyer shall withdraw his services
only for good cause and upon notice
appropriate in the circumstances.
PAGE 56 OF 85
LEGAL ETHICS LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
An attorney-client relationship may be
terminated by the client, the lawyer, or by the
court for reasons beyond the parties’ control.
The termination entails certain duties on the
part of the client and his lawyer. [Agpalo
(2004)].
CAUSES OF TERMINATION OF ATTORNEY-
CLIENT RELATIONSHIP
(1) Withdrawal of the lawyer;
(2) Death of the lawyer;
(3) Disbarment or suspension of the lawyer
from the practice of law;
(4) Declaration of presumptive death of the
lawyer;
(5) Conviction of a crime and imprisonment
of the lawyer;
(6) Discharge or dismissal of the lawyer by
the client;
(7) Appointment or election of a lawyer to a
government position which prohibits
private practice of law;
(8) Death of the client;
(9) Intervening incapacity or incompetence
of the client during pendency of case;
(10) Full termination of the case.
General rule: The client has the right to
discharge his attorney at any time with or
without just cause or even against his consent.
Exceptions:
(1) The client cannot deprive his counsel of
right to be paid services if the dismissal
is without cause.
(2) The client cannot discharge his counsel
as an excuse to secure repeated
extensions of time.
(3) Notice of discharge is required for both
the court and the adverse party [Agpalo
(2004)].
A client may at any time dismiss his attorney
or substitute another in his place, but if the
contract between the client and the attorney
has been reduced to writing and the dismissal
was without justifiable cause, he shal be
UP LAW BOC
entitled to recover from the client the full
compensation stipulated in the contract [Sec.
26, Rule 138, RoC].
Rule 22.01. A lawyer may withdraw his
services in any of the following cases:
(a) When the client pursues an illegal or
immoral course of conduct in
connection with the matter he is
handling;
(b) When the client insists that the lawyer
pursue conduct violative of these
canons and rules;
(c) When his inability to work with co-
counsel will not promote the best
interest of the client;
(d) When the mental or physical condition
of the lawyer renders it difficult for him
to carry out the employment
effectively;
(e) When the client deliberately fails to
pay the fees for the services or fails to
comply with the retainer agreement;
(f) When the lawyer is elected or
appointed to public office; and
(g) Other similar cases.
A lawyer may retire at any time from any
action or special proceeding:
(1) With the written consent of his client filed
in court and copy thereof served upon the
adverse party; or
(2) Without the consent of his client, should
the court, on notice to the client and
attorney, and on hearing, determine that
he ought to be allowed to retire. [Sec. 26,
Rule 138, RoC]
General rule: The withdrawal in writing, with
the client’s conformity, does not require the
approval of the court to be effective.
Exception: If no new counsel has entered his
appearance, the court may, in order to prevent
a denial of a party’s right to the assistance of
counsel require that the lawyer’s withdrawal
be held in abeyance until another lawyer shall
PAGE 57 OF 85
LEGAL ETHICS LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
have appeared for the party [Villasis v. CA, G.R.
No. L-34369 (1974)]
Although a lawyer may withdraw his services
when the client deliberately fails to pay the
fees for the services, withdrawal is unjustified
if client did not deliberately fail to pay
[Montano v. IBP, A.C. No. 4215 (2001)]
Rule 22.02. A lawyer who withdraws or is
discharged shall, subject to a retaining lien,
immediately turn over all papers and property
to which the client is entitled, and shall
cooperate with his successor in the orderly
transfer of the matter, including all
information necessary for the proper handling
of the matter.
REQUIREMENTS OF A VALID SUBSTITUTION
OF COUNSEL
(1) The filing of a written application for
substitution;
(2) The client’s written consent;
(3) The written consent of the attorney to be
substituted
(4) If the above written consent cannpot be
secured, a proof of service of notice of
such motion on the attorney to be
substituted [Agpalo (2004)].
At the discretion of the court, a lawyer, who
has been dismissed by a client, is allowed to
intervene in a case in order to protect the
client’s rights [Obando v. Figueras, G.R. No.
134854 (2000)]
The offensive attitude of a client is not an
excuse to just disappear and withdraw from a
case without notice to the court and to the
client, especially when attorney’s fees have
already been paid [Chang v. Hidalgo, A.C.
6934 (2016)].
UP LAW BOC
III. Suspension,
Disbarment, and
Discipline of Lawyers
(Rule 139-B, Rules of
Court)
A. NATURE AND CHARACTERISTICS OF
DISCIPLINARY ACTIONS AGAINST
LAWYERS
A.1. SUI GENERIS
• Disciplinary proceedings are sui generis,
i.e. they belong to a class of their own
• They are neither purely civil nor purely
criminal; they do not involve a trial of an
action or a suit, but is rather an
investigation by the Court into the conduct
of its officers.
• They may be initiated by the Court motu
proprio. The Court merely calls upon a
member of the Bar to account for his
actuations as an officer of the Court with
the end in view of preserving the purity of
the legal profession and the proper and
honest administration of justice in the
exercise of its disciplinary powers.
• Public interest is the 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 [In Re: Almacen supra., Itong v.
Florendo, A.C. 4428 (2011)].
Any interested person or the court motu
proprio may initiate disciplinary proceedings.
The right to institute disbarment proceedings
is not confined to clients nor is it necessary
that the person complaining suffered injury
from the alleged wrongdoing. Disbarment
proceedings are matters of public interest and
the only basis for the judgment is the proof or
failure of proof of the charges [Figueras v.
Jimenezsupra.].
PAGE 58 OF 85
LEGAL ETHICS LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
A.2. PRESCRIPTION
In Frias v. Bautista-Lozada, A.C. 6656 (2006),
the Supreme Court, citing Calo v. Degamo, A.C.
516 (1967) and Heck v. Santos, A.M. RTJ-01-
1657 (2004), declared that the defense of
prescription does not lie in administrative
proceedings gainst lawyers for an
administrative complaint against a member of
the bar does not prescribe. Thus, Sec. 1, Rule
VIII of the Rules of Procedure of the
Commission on Bar Discipline, which provided
for a prescription period of 2 years from the
date of the professional misconduct, was
struck down for being ultra vires.
However, in Isenhardt v. Real, A.C. 8254
(2012), the Supreme Court ruled that “the rule
[Sec. 1, Rule VIII, Rules of Procedure of the
Commission on Bar Discipline] should be
construed to mean two years from the date of
discovery of the professional misconduct.”
A.3. OTHER CHARACTERISTICS
(1) Investigation is not interrupted or
terminated by reason of the desistance,
settlement, compromise, restitution,
withdrawal of the charges, or failure of the
complainant to prosecute the same [par.
2, Sec. 5, Rule 139-B, RoC].
(2) Proceedings against attorneys shall be
private and confidential. However, the
final order of the Supreme Court shall be
published like its decisions in other cases.
[Sec. 18, Rule 139-B, RoC]
(a) PURPOSE
1. To enable the Court to make its
investigations free from any
extraneous influence or
interference;
2. To protect the personal and
professional reputation of
attorneys and judges from the
baseless charges of disgruntled,
vindictive, and irresponsible
clients and litigants;
3. To deter the press from publishing
administrative cases or portions
thereof without authority [Saludo,
Jr. v. CA, G.R. 121404 (2006)].
UP LAW BOC
(b) This is a privilege/right which may be
waived by the very lawyer in whom and
for the protection of whose personal
and professional reputation it is
vested, pursuant to the general
principle that rights may be waived
unless the waiver is contrary to public
policy, among others” [Villalon v. IAC,
G.R. 73751 (1986)].
(3) Laws dealing with double jeopardy or
prescription or with procedure like
verification of pleadings and prejudicial
questions have no application to
disbarment proceedings [Pimentel, Jr. v.
Llorente, A.C. 4680 (2000)].
(4) Because the proceedings are distinct from
and proceed independently of civil or
criminal cases,whatever has been decided
in the disbarment case cannot be a source
of right that may be enforced in another
action. At best, such judgment may only
be given weight when introduced as
evidence, but in no case does it bind the
court in the civil action [Esquivias v. CA,
G.R. 119714 (1997)].
(5) The disbarment proceeding does not
violate the due process clause. The
proceeding itself, when instituted in
proper cases, is due process of law [In Re:
Montagne, G.R. 1107 (1904)].
(6) In a disbarment proceeding, it is
immaterial that the complainant is in pari
delicto because the proceeding is not to
grant relief to the complainant, but to
purge the law profession of unworthy
members, to protect the public and the
courts [Mortel v. Aspiras, G.R. L-9152
(1956)].
(7) The rule in criminal cases that the penalty
cannot be imposed in the alternative
applies in administrative disciplinary
cases, which also involve punitive
sanctions [Navarro v. Meneses III, CBD
A.C. 313 (1998)].
(8) Monetary claims cannot be granted
except restitution and return of monies
and properties of the client given in the
course of the lawyer-client relationship
PAGE 59 OF 85
LEGAL ETHICS LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
B. GROUNDS
Sec. 27, Rule 138, RoC. Attorneys removed or
suspended by Supreme Court on what
grounds. — A member of the bar may be
removed or suspended from his office as
attorney by the Supreme Court for any deceit,
malpractice, or other gross misconduct in such
office, grossly immoral conduct, or by reason
of his conviction of a crime involving moral
turpitude, or for any violation of the oath which
he is required to take before the admission to
practice, or for a wilful disobedience of any
lawful order of a superior court, or for corruptly
or willful appearing as an attorney for a party
to a case without authority so to do. The
practice of soliciting cases at law for the
purpose of gain, either personally or through
paid agents or brokers, constitutes
malpractice.
Broadly speaking, the grounds for discipline of
a lawyer consist of those acts of misconduct
committed before and after his admission to
the practice [Agpalo (2004)].
GROUNDS FOR DISBARMENT OR
SUSPENSION:
(1) Deceit, malpractice or other gross
misconduct in office;
(2) Grossly immoral conduct;
(3) Conviction of a crime involving moral
turpitude;
(4) Any violation of the lawyer’s oath;
(5) Willful disobedience of any lawful order of
a superior court;
(6) Corruptly or willfully appearing as an
attorney without authority so to do
Deceit is false representation of a matter of
fact whether by words or conduct, by false or
misleading allegations, or by concealment of
that which should have been disclosed which
deceives or is intended to deceive another so
that he shall act upon it to his legal injury
[Alcantara v. CA, G.R. 147259 (2003)].
Malpractice ordinarily refers to any
malfeasance or dereliction of duty committed
by a lawyer. It consists of a failure of an
UP LAW BOC LEGAL ETHICS LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS

attorney to use such skill, prudence and latter learned by him in his
diligence as lawyers of ordinary skill and professional capacity; or
capacity commonly possess and exercise in
(b) Having undertaken the defense of a
the performance of tasks which they
client or having received confidential
undertake, and when such failure proximately
information from said client in a
causes damage, it gives rise to an action in tort
case, shall undertake the defense of
[Tan Tek Beng v. David, A.C. 1261 (1983)].Gross
the opposing party in the same case,
misconduct is any inexcusable, shameful or
without the consent of his first client.
flagrant unlawful conduct on the part of a
person concerned in the administration of
justice which is prejudicial to the rights of the
The enumeration is not to be taken as a
parties or to the right determination of the
limitation to the general power of courts to
cause. Such conduct is generally motivated by
suspend or disbar a lawyer. The inherent
a premeditated, obstinate or intentional
powers of the court over its officers cannot be
purpose [Yap v. Inopiquez, Jr., A.M. RTJ-03-
restricted [Quingwa v. Puno, A.C. 389 (1967)].
1760 (2003)].
Immorality connotes conduct that shows
indifference to the moral norms of society and Misconduct in private capacity
the opinion of good and respectable members General rule: The Court will not assume
of the community. The conduct must be jurisdiction to discipline one of its members for
“grossly immoral” (i.e., so corrupt and false as misconduct alleged to be committed in his
to constitute a criminal act or so unprincipled private capacity
as to be reprehensible to a high degree) to
warrant disciplinary action [Ui v. Bonifacio, Exception: An attorney will be removed not
A.C. 3319 (2000)]. only for malpractice and dishonesty in his
profession, but also for gross misconduct not
connected with his professional duties, which
Moral turpitude involves an act of baseness, show him to be unfit for the office and
vileness, or depravity in the private duties unworthy of the privileges which his licence
which a man owes to his fellow men, or to and the law confer upon him [Piatt v Abordo,
society in general, contrary to the accepted supra.].
and customary rule of right and duty between
man and woman, or conduct contrary to C. PROCEEDINGS
justice, honesty, modesty or good morals
[Barrios v. Martinez, A.C. 4585 (2004)].
PROCEDURE FOR DISBARMENT
Institution either by:
OTHER STATUTORY GROUNDS (a) The Supreme Court, motu proprio, or
(b) The IBP Board of Governors, motu proprio or upon
(1) Purchase by a lawyer of his client’s referral by the Supreme Court or by a Chapter Board of
property in litigation [Art. 1491, Civil Officers or
Code] constitutes a breach of (c) Upon verified complaint by any person
professional ethics for which a
disciplinary action may be brought
against him [Bautista v. Gonzales, A.M.
1625 (1990)]. 6 copies of the verified complaint shall be filed with
the Secretary of the IBP or Secretary of any of its
(2) Under Art. 209, RPC, administrative and
chapter and shall be forwarded to the IBP Board of
criminal sanctions may be imposed upon
Governors.
any attorney-at-law or solicitor who:
(a) By malicious breach of professional
duty or of inexcusable negligence or
ignorance, shall prejudice his client, Investigation by the National Grievance
or reveal any of the secrets of the investigators.

PAGE 60 OF 85
UP LAW BOC
Submission of investigative report to the IBP Board
of Governors.
Board of Governors decides within 30 days and
transmits decision to the SC within 10 days from
resolution
SC renders final decision for disbarment/
suspension/ dismissal.
All charges against the following shall be filed
with the Supreme Court:
(1) Justices of the Court of Appeals;
(2) Justices of the Sandiganbayan;
(3) Judges of the Court of Tax Appeals; and
(4) Judges of lower courts [Sec. 1 (2), Rule
139-B, RoC].
Charges filed against justices and judges
before the IBP shall immediately be forwarded
to the Supreme Court for disposition and
adjudication, including those filed prior to
their appointment in the Judiciary [Sec. 1 (2),
Rule 139-B].
In BAR MATTER N0. 1645 (RE: AMENDMENT
OF RULE 139-B), dated October 13, 2015, the
Supreme Court issued new rules governing
administrative disciplinary cases against
lawyers. Under the new rules, investigation by
the Solicitor General is no longer required.
Only the Supreme Court can dismiss cases
against lawyers. The provision in the old Rule
139-B, of the Rules of Court that the Board of
Governors can dismiss cases has been
repealed by amendment.
D. DISCIPLINE OF FILIPINO LAWYERS
PRACTICING ABROAD
The disbarment or suspension of a member of
the Philippine Bar by a competent court or
other disciplinary agency in a foreign
jurisdiction where he has also been admitted
as an attorney is a ground for his disbarment
PAGE 61 OF 85
LEGAL ETHICS LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
or suspension if the basis of such action
includes any of the acts hereinabove
enumerated [In re: Maquera, B.M. 793 (2004)].
The judgment, resolution or order of the
foreign court or disciplinary agency shall be
prima facie evidence of the ground for
disbarment or suspension. [Sec. 27, Rule 138,
RoC as amended by Supreme Court
Resolution dated Feb 13, 1992]
E. DISCIPLINE OF LAWYERS IN
GOVERNMENT
General rule: A lawyer who holds a
government office may not be disciplined as a
member of the Bar for misconduct in the
discharge of his duties as a government
official.
Exception: If that misconduct as a government
official is of such a character 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 ground
In People v. Castaneda, G.R. 208290 (2013)
the lawyers representing the offices under the
executive branch were reminded that they still
remain as officers of the court from whom a
high sense of competence and fervor is
expected. The Court reminded the lawyers in
the government that the canons embodied in
the CPR equally apply to lawyers in
government service in the discharge of their
official tasks. They should exert every effort
and consider it their duty to assist in the
speedy and efficient administration of justice.
F. QUANTUM OF PROOF
The proof required is clear, convincing and
satisfactory evidence.
Burden of Proof and Presumption of Innocence
The burden of proof in disbarment and
suspension proceedings always rests on the
shoulders of the complainant. The Court
exercises its disciplinary power only if the
complainant establishes the complaint by
UP LAW BOC
clearly preponderant evidence that warrants
the imposition of the harsh penalty. As a rule,
an attorney enjoys the legal presumption that
he is innocent of the charges made against
him until the contrary is proved. An attorney is
further presumed as an officer of the Court to
have performed his duties in accordance with
his oath [Joven and Reynaldo C. Rasing v.
Cruz and Magsalin, A.C. 7686 (2013)].
G. DISCIPLINARY MEASURES
(1) Warning, an act or fact of putting one on
his guard against an impending danger,
evil consequences or penalties.
(2) Admonition, a gentle or friendly reproof,
mild rebuke, warning or reminder,
counseling, on a fault, error or oversight;
an expression of authoritative advice.
(3) Reprimand, a public and formal censure
or severe reproof, administered to a
person in fault by his superior officer or a
body to which he be-longs. It is imposed
on a minor infraction of the lawyer’s duty
to the court or client
(4) Suspension, a temporary withholding of a
lawyer’s right to practice his profession as
a lawyer for:
(a) A definite period; or
(b) An indefinite period, which amounts to
qualified disbarment, in which case,
lawyer determines for himself for how
long or how short his suspension shall
last by proving to court that he is once
again fit to resume practice of law.
(5) Censure, an official reprimand.
(6) Disbarment, the act of the Philippine
Supreme Court in withdrawing from an
attorney the privilege to practice law and
striking out the name of the lawyer from
the roll of attorneys.
(7) Interim suspension, the temporary
suspension of a lawyer from the practice of
law pending imposition of final discipline.
It includes:
(a) Suspension upon conviction of a
serious crime.
PAGE 62 OF 85
LEGAL ETHICS LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
(b) Suspension when the lawyer’s
continuing conduct is likely to cause
immediate and serious injury to a
client or public.
(8) Probation, a sanction that allows a lawyer
to practice law under specified conditions.
OTHER SANCTIONS AND REMEDIES
(1) Restitution;
(2) Assessment of costs;
(3) Limitation upon practice;
(4) Appointment of a receiver;
(5) Requirement that a lawyer take the bar
examination or professional responsibility
examination;
(6) Requirement that a lawyer attend
continuing education courses;
(7) Other requirements that the Supreme
Court or disciplinary board deems
consistent with the purposes of sanctions.
MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES
(1) Absence of a prior disciplinary record;
(2) Absence of a dishonest or selfish motive;
(3) Personal or emotional problems;
(4) Timely good faith effort to make
restitution or to rectify consequences of
misconduct;
(5) Full and free disclosure to disciplinary
board or cooperative attitude toward
proceedings;
(6) Inexperience in the practice of law;
(7) Character or reputation;
(8) Physical or mental disability or
impairment;
(9) Delay in disciplinary proceedings;
(10) Interim rehabilitation;
(11) Imposition of other penalties or
sanctions;
(12) Remorse;
(13) Remoteness of prior offenses;
(14) Others:
(a) Good Faith;
(b) Want of intention to commit a wrong;
(c) Lack of material damage to the
complaining witness;
(d) Desistance of complainant;
UP LAW BOC LEGAL ETHICS LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS

(e) Error in judgment; professional employment, against a

(f) Honest and efficient service in various former client.
government positions;
(g) Ready admission of the infraction H. EFFECT OF EXECUTIVE PARDON
coupled with explanation and plea for
(1) Conditional pardon: disbarment case will
forgiveness;
not be dismissed on such basis
(h) Clean record of professional service in
the past; (2) Absolute pardon granted before
conviction: disbarment case will be
(i) Rendered professional services out of
dismissed
pure generosity;
(j) Punished in another capacity for a (3) Absolute pardon granted before
misconduct for which he now faces a conviction: No automatic reinstatement to
disbarment proceeding; the bar. It must be shown by evidence
aside from absolute pardon that he is now
(k) Old Age & long membership (may also
a person of good moral character and fit
be an aggravation de-pending on the
and proper person to practice law.
circumstance);

AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCES: I. EFFECT OF COMPROMISE

(1) Prior disciplinary offenses; AGREEMENTS
(2) Dishonest or selfish motive;
(3) A pattern of misconduct; The compromise agreement between the
(4) Multiple offenses; complainant and the lawyer, or the fact that
(5) Bad faith obstruction of the disciplinary the complainant already forgave the latter,
proceeding by intentionally failing to does not necessarily warrant the dismissal of
comply with rules or orders of the the administrative case.
disciplinary agency; Exception: When as a consequence of the
(6) Submission of false evidence, false withdrawal or desistance, no evidence is
statements, or other deceptive practices adduced to prove the charges [Banaag v.
during the disciplinary process; Salindong, A.C. 1563 (1984)].
(7) Refusal to acknowledge wrongful nature
of conduct;
(8) Vulnerability of victim;
(9) Substantial experience in the practice of
law;
(10) Indifference to making restitution. [See
IBP Guidelines 9.22]
(11) Others:
(a) Abuse of authority or of attorney-client
relationship;
(b) Sexual intercourse with a relative;
(c) Making the institution of marriage a
mockery;
(d) Charge of gross immorality;
(e) Previous punishment as member of the
bar;
(f) Defraud upon the government;
(g) Use of knowledge or information,
acquired in the course of a previous
PAGE 63 OF 85
UP LAW BOC
IV. Readmission to the
Bar
A. LAWYERS WHO HAVE BEEN
SUSPENDED
Guidelines in the lifting an order of suspension
(1) Upon expiration of the period of
suspension, respondent shall file a sworn
statement with the court, through the
Office of the Bar Confidant, stating therein
that he or she has desisted from the
practice of law and has not appeared in
any court during the period of his or her
suspension;
(2) Copies of the sworn statement furnished
to the local chapter of the IBP and to the
executive judge of the courts where the
respondent has pending cases handled by
him or her, and/or where he or she has
appeared as counsel;
(3) The sworn statement shall be considered
as proof of respondent’s compliance with
the order of suspension [Maniago v. De
Dios, A.C. 7472 (2010)].
B. LAWYERS WHO HAVE BEEN
DISBARRED
Considerations for Reinstatement
(1) The applicant’s character and standing
prior to disbarment;
(2) The nature or character of the misconduct
for which he is disbarred;
(3) His conduct subsequent to disbarment
[Cui v. Cui, G.R. L-18727 (1964)];
(4) His efficient government service [In re:
Adriatico, G.R. L-2532 (1910)];
(5) The time that has elapsed between
disbarment and the application for
reinstatement and the circumstances that
he has been sufficiently punished and
disciplined [Prudential Bank v. Benjamin
Grecia, A.C. 2756 (1986)];
PAGE 64 OF 85
LEGAL ETHICS LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
(6) Applicant’s appreciation of significance of
his dereliction and his assurance that he
now possesses the requisite probity and
integrity;
(7) Favorable endorsement of the IBP and
local government officials and citizens of
his community, pleas of his loved ones
[Yap Tan v. Sabandal, B.M. 44 (1989)];
The sole objective is to determine whether or
not the applicant has satisfied and convinced
the court by positive evidence that the effort
he has made toward the rehabilitation of his
characer has been successful [In re: Rusuina,
A.C. 270 (1974)].
Guidelines in resolving requests for judicial
clemency of disbarred lawyers
(1) There must be proof of remorse and
reformation. These include testimonials of
credible institutions and personalities;
(2) Sufficient time must have lapsed from the
imposition of the penalty to ensure a
period of reformation;
(3) The age of the person asking for clemency
must show that he still has productive
years ahead of him that can be put to good
use by giving him a chance to redeem
himself;
(4) There must be a showing of promise (e.g.,
intellectual aptitude, contribution to legal
scholarship), and potential for public
service;
(5) Other relevant factors to justify clemency
[Re: Letter of Judge Diaz, A.M. 07-7-17-SC
(2007)].
The quantum of evidence necessary for
reinstatement is the same as that for
admission to the bar, except that the court,
when circumstances so warrant, may require
an applicant to present additional proof of his
qualifications [Cui v. Cui, supra.].
The court, in reinstating a lawyer, may impose
certain conditions on his re-admission [Agpalo
(2004)].
C. LAWYERS WHO HAVE BEEN
REPATRIATED
UP LAW BOC LEGAL ETHICS LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS

Lawyers who reacquire their Philippine

citizenship should apply to the Supreme Court V. Mandatory
for license or permit to practice their
profession. [Sec. 5(4), RA 9225]
Continuing Legal
See also: B.1. CITIZENSHIP under II. Practice of Education (MCLE)
Law above.

A. PURPOSE

Continuing legal education is required of

members of the IBP to:
(1) Ensure that throughout their career, they
keep abreast with law and jurisprudence;
(2) Maintain the ethics of the profession; and
(3) Enhance the standards of the practice of
law [Sec. 1, Rule 1, B.M. 850]

B. REQUIREMENTS

Members of the IBP shall complete, every

three years, at least 36 hours of continuing
legal education activities approved by the
MCLE Committee. Of the 36 hours:

Subject # of
Hours
Legal Ethics 6 hours
Trial and Pre-trial Skills 4 hours
Alternative Dispute 5 hours
Resolution
Updates on substantive and 9 hours
procedural laws and
Jurisprudence
International law and 2 hours
International Conventions
Legal Writing and Oral 4 hours
Advocacy
Other MCLE prescribed 6 hours
subjects
[Sec. 2, Rule 2, B.M. 850]

PAGE 65 OF 85
UP LAW BOC
PARTICIPATORY LEGAL EDUCATION [SEC. 2,
RULE 5, B.M. 850]
(1) Attending approved education activities
like seminars, conferences, conventions,
symposia, in-house education programs,
workshops, dialogues or round table
discussion;
(2) Speaking or lecturing, or acting as
assigned panelist, reactor, commentator,
resource speaker, moderator, coordinator
or facilitator in approved education
activities;
(3) Teaching in a law school or lecturing in a
bar review class;
NON-PARTICIPATORY LEGAL EDUCATION
[SEC. 3, RULE 5, B.M. 850]
(1) Preparing, as an author or co-author,
written materials published or accepted
for publication, e.g., in the form of an
article, chapter, book, or book review
which contribute to the legal education of
the author member, which were not
prepared in the ordinary course of the
member’s practice or employment;
(2) Editing a law book, law journal or legal
newsletter.
Other activities, such as rendering mandatory
legal aid services pursuant to Sec. 8, B.M.
2012, may be credited as MCLE activities.
C. COMPLIANCE
The IBP members covered by the requirement
are divided into three compliance groups:
(1) Compliance Group 1 consists of members
in the National Capital Region (NCR) or
Metro Manila;
(2) Compliance Group 2 consists members in
Luzon outside NCR; and
(3) Compliance Group 3 consists of members
in Visayas and Mindanao [Sec. 2, Rule 3,
B.M. 850].
The initial compliance period shall begin not
later than 3 months from the constitution of
the MCLE Committee. The compliance period
shall be for 36 months and shall begin the day
PAGE 66 OF 85
LEGAL ETHICS LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
after the end of the previous compliance
period [Sec. 1, Rule 3, B.M. 850].
For those admitted or readmitted after the
establishment of the program, they will be
permanently assigned to the appropriate
compliance group based on their chapter
membership on the date of admission or
readmission.
The initial compliance period after admission
or readmission shall begin on the first day of
the month of admission or readmission and
shall end on the same day as that of all other
members in the same compliance group.
However:
(1) Where 4 months or less remain of the
initial compliance period after admission
or readmission, the member is not
required to comply with the program
requirement for the initial compliance;
(2) Where more than 4 months remain of the
initial compliance period after admission
or readmission, the member shall be
required to complete a number of hours
of approved continuing legal education
activities equal to the number of months
remaining in the compliance period in
which the member is admitted or
readmitted. Such member shall be
required to complete a number of hours
of education in legal ethics in proportion
to the number of months remaining in the
compliance period. Fractions of hours
shall be rounded up to the next whole
number [Sec. 3, Rule 3, BM 850].
D. EXEMPTIONS
EXEMPTED MEMBERS FROM THE MCLE
(1) The President and the Vice President of
the Philippines, and the Secretaries and
Undersecretaries of Executives
Departments;
(2) Senators and Members of the House of
Representatives;
(3) The Chief Justice and Associate Justices
of the Supreme Court, incumbent and
retired members of the judiciary,
incumbent members of the Judicial and
Bar Council and incumbent court
UP LAW BOC
lawyers covered by the Philippine
Judicial Academy program of
continuing judicial education;
(4) The Chief State Counsel, Chief State
Prosecutor and Assistant Secretaries of
the Department of Justice;
(5) The Solicitor General and the Assistant
Solicitor General;
(6) The Government Corporate Counsel,
Deputy and Assistant Government
Corporate Counsel;
(7) The Chairmen and Members of the
Constitutional Commissions;
(8) The Ombudsman, the Overall Deputy
Ombudsman, the Deputy Ombudsmen
and the Special Prosecutor of the Office
of the Ombudsman;
(9) Heads of government agencies
exercising quasi-judicial functions;
(10) Incumbent deans, bar reviewers and
professors of law who have teaching
experience for at least ten years
accredited law schools;
(11) The Chancellor, Vice-Chancellor and
members of the Corps of Professors and
Professorial Lectures of the Philippine
Judicial Academy;
(12) Governors and Mayors.
(13) Those who are not in law practice,
private or public; and
(14) Those who have retired from law
practice with the approval of the IBP
Board of Governors [Sec. 1 and 2, Rule 7,
B.M. 850]
A member may file a verified request setting
forth good cause for exemption (e.g., physical
disability, illness, post graduate study abroad,
proven expertise in law) from compliance with
or modification of any of the requirements,
including an extension of time for compliance,
in accordance with a procedure to be
established by the MCLE Committee. [Sec. 3,
Rule 7, B.M. 850]
When a member ceases to be exempt, the
compliance period begins on the first day of
the month in which he ceases to be exempt
and shall end on the same day as that of all
PAGE 67 OF 85
LEGAL ETHICS LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
other members in the same Compliance
Group. [Sec. 4, Rule 7, B.M. 850]
Applications for exemption from or
modification of the MCLE requirement shall
be under oath and supported by documents
[Sec. 5, Rule 7, B.M. 850].
E. SANCTIONS
(1) A member who, for whatever reason, is in
non-compliance at the end of the
compliance period shall pay a non-
compliance fee.
(2) Any member who fails to satisfactorily
comply shall be listed as a delinquent
member by the IBP Board of Governors
upon the recommendation of the MCLE
Committee, in which case, Rule 139-A,
Rules of Court, governing the IBP, shall
apply [Sec. 1 and 2, Rule 13, B.M. 850]
(a) Membership fee shall continue to
accrue at the active rate against a
member during the period he/she is
listed as a delinquent member [Sec. 3,
Rule 13, B.M. 850].
Under B.M. 1922 (2008), practicing members
of the bar are required to indicate in all
pleadings filed before the courts or quasi-
judicial bodies, the number and date of issue
of their MCLE Certificate of Compliance or
Certificate of Exemption, as may be applicable,
for the immediately preceding compliance
period.
This has been amended, pursuant to B.M. 850,
as amended (Dated Feb. 15, 2015. Effective
Mar. 1, 2015):
“xxx The Court Resolved to REQUIRE all
members of the IBP to file a written entry of
appearance indicating their MCLE exemption
or compliance number for the current or
immediately preceding compliance period
and date of issuance thereof before appearing
as counsel or engaging in oral argument in
open court or before a quasi-judicial body.
However, counsels who affixed their
signatures in their pleadings and indicated
their MCLE exemption or compliance number
in their pleadings need not file a separate
entry of appearance. Henceforth, all counsels,
UP LAW BOC
including partners of law firms whose names
appear in the said pleadings, shall also
indicate their MCLE exemption or compliance
number.”
Pursuant to Supreme Court Resolution dated
January 14, 2014, the phrase “failure to
disclose the required information would cause
the dismissal of the case and the expunction
of the pleadings from the records” in B.M.
1922 (2008) is repealed and amended to read,
“failure to disclose the required information
would subject the counsel to appropriate
penalty and disciplinary action.”
F. BAR MATTER 2012: THE RULE ON
MANDATORY LEGAL AID SERVICE
(2009)
Purpose
To enhance the duty of lawyers to society as
agents of social change and to the courts as
officers thereof by helping improve access to
justice by the less privileged members of
society and expedite the resolution of cases
involving them. Mandatory free legal service
by members of the bar and their active support
thereof will aid the efficient and effective
administration of justice especially in cases
involving indigent and pauper litigants [Sec.
2]
Scope
The rule governs the mandatory requirement
for practicing lawyers to render free legal aid
services in all cases (whether, civil, criminal or
administrative) involving indigent and pauper
litigants where the assistance of a lawyer is
needed. It shall also govern the duty of other
members of the legal profession to support
the legal aid program of the IBP [Sec. 3].
Practicing lawyers
Members of the Philippine Bar who appear for
and in behalf of parties in courts of law and
quasi-judicial agencies, excluding the
following:
(1) Government employees and incumbent
elective officials not allowed by law to
practice;
PAGE 68 OF 85
LEGAL ETHICS LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
(2) Lawyers who by law are not allowed to
appear in court;
(3) Supervising lawyers of students enrolled
in law student practice in duly accredited
legal clinics of law schools and lawyers of
non-governmental organizations and
peoples’ organizations, who by the nature
of their work already render free legal aid
to indigent and pauper litigants; and
(4) Lawyers do not appear for and in behalf
of parties in courts of law and quasi-
judicial agencies [Sec. 4(a)].
INDIGENT AND PAUPER LITIGANTS
(1) Those whose gross income and that of
their immediate family do not exceed an
amount double the monthly minimum
wage of an employee; and
(2) Those who do not own real property with
a fair market value as stated in the
current tax declaration of more than three
hundred thousand (P300,000.00) pesos,
pursuant to Sec. 19, Rule 141, RoC [Sec.
4(b)]
Requirements for every practicing lawyer
(1) To render a minimum of 60 hours of free
legal aid services to indigent litigants in a
year. Said 60 hours shall be spread within
a period of twelve 12 months, with a
minimum of 5 hours of free legal aid
services each month
(2) To coordinate with the Clerk of Court for
cases where he may render free legal aid
service and shall be required to secure
and obtain a certificate from the Clerk of
Court attesting to the number of hours
spent rendering free legal aid services in
a case [Sec. 5]
Penalties
Should a lawyer fail to render the minimum
prescribed number of hours., he shall be
required to explain why he was unable to do so.
If no explanation has been given or if the
National Committee on Legal Aid (NCLA)
finds the explanation unsatisfactory, the
NCLA shall make a report and
recommendation to the IBP Board of
Governors for the erring lawyer to be declared
UP LAW BOC
a member of the IBP who is not in good
standing.
After acceptance of the recommendation, the
lawyer shall be declared a member not in good
standing. He will be furnished a notice that
includes a directive to pay P4,000.00 penalty
which shall accrue to the special fund for the
legal aid program of the IBP.
Any lawyer who fails to comply with these
duties for at least three consecutive years shall
be the subject of disciplinary proceedings to
be instituted motu proprio by the Committee
on Bar Discipline. [Sec. 7]
credit for mcleA lawyer who renders
mandatory legal aid service for the required
number of hours in a year for the 3year-period
covered by a compliance period shall be
credited: 2 credit units for legal ethics, 2 credit
units for trial and pretrial skills, 2 credit units
for alternative dispute resolution, 4 credit
units for legal writing and oral advocacy, 4
credit units for substantive and procedural
laws and jurisprudence and 6 credit units for
such subjects as may be prescribed by the
MCLE Committee
A lawyer who renders mandatory legal aid
service for the required number of hours in a
year for at least 2 consecutive years within the
3 year-period covered by a compliance period
shall be credited: 1 credit unit for legal ethics,
1 credit unit for trial and pretrial skills, 1 credit
unit for alternative dispute resolution, 2 credit
units for legal writing and oral advocacy, 2
credit units for substantive and procedural
laws and jurisprudence and 3 credit units for
such subjects as may be prescribed by the
MCLE Committee [Sec. 8].
PAGE 69 OF 85
LEGAL ETHICS LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
VI. Notarial Practice
(A.M. No. 02-8-13-SC,
as amended)
A.M. No. 02-8-13-SC is referred to as the 2004
Rules on Notarial Practice [hereinafter Notarial
Rules]. In 2008, it was amended by the Court en
banc via 2 resolutions: Resolution dated February
12, 2008 and Resolution dated February 19, 2008.
[Note: Notarial Practice is one of the favorite
questions asked in the Bar. – 2017 Faculty Ed.]
A. QUALIFICATIONS OF NOTARY
PUBLIC
1. Must be a Filipino citizen;
2. Must be over 21 years old;
3. Must be a resident of the Philippines
for at least 1 year;
4. Must maintain a regular place of work
or business in the city or province
where com-mission is to be issued;
5. Must be a member of the Philippine
Bar in good standing, with clearances
from: The Office of the Bar Confidant
of the Supreme Court, and the IBP;
6. Must not have been convicted in the
first instance of any crime involving
moral turpitude [Sec. 1, Rule III]
B. TERM OF OFFICE OF NOTARY PUBLIC
Sec. 11, Rule III,. A person commissioned as
notary public may perform notarial acts in any
place within the territorial jurisdiction of the
commissioning court for a period of 2 years
commencing the first day of January of the
year in which the commissioning is made,
unless earlier revoked or the notary public has
resigned under these Rules and the RoC
Sec. 13, Rule III. A notary public may file a
written application with the Executive Judge
for the renewal of his commission within 45
days before the expiration thereof.
C. POWERS AND LIMITATIONS
UP LAW BOC LEGAL ETHICS LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS

3. Jurats;
Notarization is not an empty, meaningless 4. Signature witnessings
and routinary act. It converts a private
5. Copy certifications; and
document into a public instrument, making it
admissible as evidence without the necessity 6. Any other act authorized by the
of preliminary proof of its authenticity and due Notarial Rules [Sec. 1(a), Rule IV]
execution [Sicat v. Ariola, A.C. 5864 (2005)]. a. Certifying the affixing of signature
by thumb or other mark on an
Lawyers commissioned as notaries public are instrument or document
mandated to subscribe to the sacred duties presented for notarization [Sec.
appertaining to their office, such duties being 1(b), Rule IV]
dictated by public policy impressed with b. Signing on behalf of a person
public interest [Mondejar v. Rubia, A.C. 5907 who is physically unable to
and 5942 (2006)]. sign or make a mark on an
instrument or document [Sec.
C.1. POWERS 1(c), Rule IV]
A notary public can perform the following
notarial acts:
1. Acknowledgments;
2. Oaths and affirmations;

Basic Definition Common Requisites

Represents to the notary public that
the signature was voluntarily affixed for
Acknowledgment the purposes stated in the instrument
and declares that instrument was
executed as a free and voluntary act
Avows under penalty of law to the whole (2) Is attested to be personally
Oath or Affirmation
truth [Sec. 2 (c), Rule II]
Sign the instrument and take an oath or
affirmation before the notary public as
Jurat
to such instrument [Sec. 6 (c), (d), Rule
II]
Signature Signs the instrument in the presence of
witnessing the notary public [Sec. 14 (c), Rule II]
(1) Appears in person before the
notary public and presents an
integrally complete instrument
or document;
known to the notary public or
identified by the notary public
through competent evidence of
identity as defined by the
Notarial Rules

PAGE 70 OF 85
UP LAW BOC JUDICIAL ETHICS
Copy Certification
Refers to a notarial act in which a notary
public: (PC-CD)
(1) Is presented with an instrument or
document that is neither a vital record, a
public record, nor publicly recordable;
(2) Copies or supervises the copying of the
instrument or document;
(3) Compares the instrument or document
with the copy; and
(4) Determines that the copy is accurate and
complete [Sec. 4, Rule II]
Certifying the Affixing of Signature by
Thumb/Other Mark
A notary public is authorized if:
(1) The thumb or other mark is affixed in the
presence of the notary public and of two
(2) disinterested and unaffected witnesses
to the instrument or document;
(2) Both witnesses sign their own names in
addition to the thumb or other mark;
(3) The notary public writes below the thumb
or other mark: “Thumb or Other Mark
affixed by (name of signatory by mark) in
the presence of (names and addresses of
witnesses) and undersigned notary
public;” and
(4) The notary public notarizes the signature
by thumb or other mark through an
acknowledgment, jurat, or signature
witnessing. [Sec. 1(b), Rule IV,]
Signing on Behalf of a Person Who is Physically
Unable to Sign or Make a Mark
A notary public is authorized if:
(1) The notary public is directed by the person
unable to sign or make a mark to sign on
his behalf;
(2) The signature of the notary public is
affixed in the presence of two
disinterested and unaffected witnesses to
the instrument or document;
(3) Both witnesses sign their own names;
PAGE 71 OF 85
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
(4) The notary public writes below his
signature: “Signature affixed by notary in
presence of (names and addresses of
person and two witnesses);” and
(5) The notary public notarizes his signature
by acknowledgment or jurat [Sec. 1(c),
Rule IV].
“Physically unable to sign” does not include
the situation where a person is physically
unable to sign because he is in another place
[Uy (2004)].
C.2. LIMITATIONS
i. Relating to Notarial Acts
A notary public shall not perform a notarial act
outside his regular place of work or business;
provided, however, that on certain exceptional
occasions or situations, a notarial act may be
performed at the request of the parties in the
following sites located within his territorial
jurisdiction:
(a) Public offices, convention halls, and
similar places where oaths of office may
be administered;
(b) Public function areas in hotels and similar
places for the signing of instruments or
documents requiring notarization;
(c) Hospitals and other medical institutions
where a party to an instrument or
document is confined for treatment; and
(d) Any place where a party to an instrument
or document requiring notarization is
under detention [Sec. 2(a), Rule IV]
A person shall not perform a notarial act if the
person involved as signatory to the instrument
or document:
(a) Is not in the notary's presence personally
at the time of the notarization; and
(b) Is not personally known to the notary
public or otherwise identified by the
notary public through competent
evidence of identity as defined by the
Notarial Rules [Sec. 2(b), Rule IV].
A notary public is disqualified from performing
a notarial act if he:
UP LAW BOC
(a) Is a party to the instrument or document
that is to be notarized;
(b) Will receive, as a direct or indirect result,
any commission, fee, advantage, right,
title, interest, cash, property, or other
consideration, except as provided by the
Notarial Rules and by law; or
(c) A notary public is disqualified from
performing is a spouse, common-law
partner, ancestor, descendant, or relative
by affinity or consanguinity of the
principal within the fourth civil degree
[Sec. 3, Rule IV]
A notary public shall not perform any notarial
act described in the Notarial Rules if:
(a) The notary knows or has good reason to
believe that the notarial act or
transaction is unlawful or immoral;
(b) The signatory shows a demeanor which
engenders in the mind of the notary
public reasonable doubt as to the
former's knowledge of the consequences
of the transaction requiring a notarial act;
and
(c) In the notary's judgment, the signatory is
not acting of his or her own free will [Sec.
4, Rule IV]
A notary public shall not:
(a) Execute a certificate containing
information known or believed by the
notary to be false;
(b) Affix an official signature or seal on a
notarial certificate that is incomplete
[Sec. 5, Rule IV]
A notary public shall not notarize:
(a) A blank or incomplete instrument or
document; or
(b) An instrument or document without
appropriate notarial certification [Sec. 6,
Rule IV
ii. Relating to Notarial Register
In the notary's presence, any person may
inspect an entry in the notarial register, during
regular business hours, provided;
JUDICIAL ETHICS LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
(a) The person's identity is personally known
to the notary public or proven through
competent evidence of identity as defined
in the Notarial Rules;
(b) The person affixes a signature and thumb
or other mark or other recognized
identifier, in the notarial register in a
separate, dated entry;
(c) The person specifies the month, year,
type of instrument or document, and
name of the principal in the notarial act or
acts sought; and
(d) The person is shown only the entry or
entries specified by him;
The notarial register may be examined by a
law enforcement officer in the course of an
official investigation or by virtue of a court
order.
If the notary public has a reasonable ground to
believe that a person has a criminal intent or
wrongful motive in requesting information
from the notarial register, the notary shall
deny access to any entry or entries therein [Sec.
4, Rule VI]
D. NOTARIAL REGISTER
A notarial register refers to a permanently
bound book with numbered pages containing
a chronological record of notarial acts
performed by a notary public [Sec. 5, Rule II]
Rule VI, Secs. I and 2 of the Notarial Rules
require a notary public to keep and maintain a
Notarial Register wherein he will record his
every notarial act. His failure to make the
proper entry or entries in his notarial register
concerning his notarial acts is a ground for
revocation of his notarial commission [Agadan,
et al. v. Kilaan, A.C. No. 9385 (2013)].
D.1. ENTRIES
i. By the Notary Public
Required to be entered at the time of
notarization:
(1) The entry number and page number;
PAGE 72 OF 85
UP LAW BOC JUDICIAL ETHICS
(2) The date and time of day of the notarial
act;
(3) The type of notarial act;
(4) The title or description of the instrument,
document or proceeding;
(5) The name and address of each principal;
(6) The competent evidence of identity as
defined by the Notarial Rules if the
signatory is not personally known to the
notary;
(7) The name and address of each credible
witness swearing to or affirming the
person's identity;
(8) The fee charged for the notarial act;
(9) The address where the notarization was
performed if not in the notary's regular
place of work or business; and
(10) Any other circumstance the notary public
may deem of significance or relevance;
(11) Reasons and circumstances for not
completing a notarial act;
(12) Circumstances of any request to inspect
or copy an entry in the notarial register,
including the:
(a) Requester’s name;
(b) Requester’s address;
(c) Requester’s signature;
(d) Requester’s thumbmark or other
recognized identifier;
(e) Evidence of requester’s identity;
and
(f) Reasons for refusal to allow
inspection or copying of a journal
entry;
(13) Brief description of the substance of a
contract presented for notarization;
(14) In case of a protest of any draft, bill of
exchange or promissory note, a full and
true record of all proceedings in relation
thereto and shall note therein:
(a) Whether the demand for the sum of
money was made, by whom, when
and where;
(b) Whether he presented such draft,
bill or note;
PAGE 73 OF 85
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
(c) Whether notices were given, to
whom and in what manner; where
the same was made, when and to
whom and where directed; and
(d) Of every other fact touching the
same [Sec. 2, Rule VI]
ii. By Other Persons
At the time of notarization, the notary's
notarial register shall be signed or a thumb or
other mark affixed by each:
1. Principal;
2. Credible witness swearing or affirming
to the identity of a principal; and
3. Witness to a signature by thumb or
other mark, or to a signing by the
notary public on behalf of a person
physically unable to sign [Sec. 3, Rule
VI]
D.2. CLOSING
At the end of each week, the notary public
shall certify in his notarial register the number
of instruments or documents executed, sworn
to, acknowledged, or protested before him; or
if none, this certificate shall show this fact.
[Sec. 2(g), Rule VI]
D.3. SUBMISSION
A certified copy of each month’s entries and a
duplicate original copy of any instrument
acknowledged before the notary public shall,
within the first ten days of the month following,
be forwarded to the Clerk of Court and shall be
under the responsibility of such officer. If there
is no entry to certify for the month, the notary
shall forward a statement to this effect in lieu
of certified copies herein required. [Sec. 2(h),
Rule VI]
E. JURISDICTION OF NOTARY PUBLIC
AND PLACE OF NOTARIZATION
A person commissioned as notary public may
perform notarial acts in any place within the
territorial jurisdiction of the commissioning
court. [Sec. 11, Rule III]
UP LAW BOC JUDICIAL ETHICS
General rule: A notary public shall not perform
a notarial act outside his regular place of work
or business
Exception: on certain exceptional occasions or
situations, a notarial act may be performed at
the request of the parties in the following sites
located within his territorial jurisdiction:
1) Public offices, convention halls, and
similar places where oaths of office may
be administered;
2) Public function areas in hotels and similar
places for the signing of documents
requiring notarization;
3) Hospitals and other medical institutions
where a party to an instrument or
document is confined for treatment; and
4) Any place where a party to the instrument
or document requiring notarization is
under detention. [Sec. 2, Rule VI]
F. REVOCATION OF COMMISSION
1. The Executive Judge shall revoke a
notarial commission for any ground on
which an application for a commission
may be denied;
2. In addition, the Executive Judge may
revoke the commission of, or impose
appropriate administrative sanctions
upon, any notary public who:
(a) Fails to keep a notarial register;
(b) Fails to make the proper entry or
entries in his notarial register
concerning his notarial acts;
(c) Fails to send the copy of the entries
to the Executive Judge within the
first ten days of the month following;
(d) Fails to affix to acknowledgments
the date of expiration of his
commission;
(e) Fails to submit his notarial register,
when filled, to the Executive Judge;
(f) Fails to make his report, within a
reasonable time, to the Executive
Judge concerning the performance
of his duties, as may be required by
the judge;
PAGE 74 OF 85
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
(g) Fails to require the presence of a
principal at the time of the notarial
act;
(h) Fails to identify a principal on the
basis of personal knowledge or
competent evidence;
(i) Executes a false or incomplete
certificate under Sec. 5, Rule IV;
(j) Knowingly performs or fails to
perform any other act prohibited or
mandated by these Rules; and
(k) Commits any other dereliction or act
which in the judgment of the
Executive Judge constitutes good
cause for revocation of com-mission
or imposition of administrative
sanction [Sec. 1(a) and (b), Rule XI,]
A notary public should not notarize a
document unless the person who signed the
same is the very same person who executed
and personally appeared before him to attest
to the contents and the truth of what are
stated therein. Without the personal
appearance of the person who actually
executed the document, the notary public
would be unable to verify the genuineness of
the signature of the acknowledging party and
to ascertain that the document is the party’s
free act or deed.
When a lawyer commissioned as a notary
public fails to discharge his duties as such, he
is meted the penalties of revocation of his
notarial commission, disqualification from
being commissioned as a notary public for a
period of 2 years, and suspension from the
practice of law for 1 year. [Agbulos v. Viray ,
G.R. No. 7350 (2013)]
G. COMPETENT EVIDENCE OF IDENTITY
Competent evidence of identity means the
identification of an individual based on:
(1) At least one current identification
document issued by an official agency
bearing the photograph and signature of
the individual, such as but not limited to,
passport, driver's license, Professional
Regulation Commission ID, NBI
UP LAW BOC
clearance, police clearance, postal ID,
voter’s ID, Barangay cetification, GSIS e-
card, SSS card, Philhealth card, senior
citizen car, OWWA ID, OFW ID, seaman’s
book, alien’s certificate of
registration/immigrant certificate of
registration, government office ID,
certification from the NCWDO, DSWD
certification; or
(2) The oath or affirmation of:
(a) One credible witness not privy to the
instrument, document or transaction
who is personally known to the notary
public and who personally knows the
individual; or
(b) Two credible witnesses neither of
whom is privy to the instrument,
document or trans-action who each
personally knows the individual and
shows to the notary public
documentary identification. [Sec. 12,
Rule II, as amended by Resolution
dated Feb. 19, 2008]
H. SANCTIONS
H.1. Disciplinary Sanctions
The Executive Judge may motu proprio initiate
administrative proceedings against a notary
public and impose the appropriate
administrative sanctions on the grounds for
revocation of commission mentioned [Sec. 1(d),
Rule XI]
H.2. CRIMINAL SANCTIONS
The Executive Judge shall cause the
prosecution of any person who:
1. Knowingly acts or otherwise
impersonates a notary public;
2. Knowingly obtains, conceals, defaces,
or destroys the seal, notarial register,
or official records of a notary public;
and
3. Knowingly solicits, coerces, or in any
way influences a notary public to
commit official misconduct. [Sec. 1,
Rule XII]
JUDICIAL ETHICS LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
VI. Canons of
Professional Ethics
A. ORIGIN
In 1917 and 1946, The Philippine Bar
Association (PBA) adopted the American Bar
Association (ABA)’s Canons of Professional
Ethics (first Canons 1 to 32, then Canons 33 to
47).
In 1980, the IBP adopted a proposed Code of
Professional Responsibility, which was later
approved and promulgated by the SC as the
present Code of Professional Responsibility
[Agpalo (2004)].
B. LEGAL STATUS
While the PBA, a civic non-profit association
and a private entity of limited membership
within the Philippine bar, enjoys high regard in
the legal community, the rules or canons it has
adopted are per se binding only on its
members.
It would be grave error to declare that the
Canons of Professional Ethics, on their own,
serves as an indisputable source of obligations
and basis of penalties imposable upon
members of the Philippine legal profession.
This would violate the long-established
constitutional principle that it is the Supreme
Court which is tasked with the promulgation of
rules governing the admission to the practice
of law, as well as the pleading, practice and
procedure in all courts.
If provisions of the Canons of Professional
Ethics have jurisprudentially been enforced, or
acknowledged as basis for legal liability by the
Supreme Court, they may be recognized as a
binding standard imposable upon members of
the bar, not because said canons or the PBA
itself said so, but because the Court said so
[Tinga, J., Sep. Opinion, PCGG v.
Sandiganbayan, supra.]
PAGE 75 OF 85
UP LAW BOC JUDICIAL ETHICS LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS

LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS

JUDICIAL ETHICS

PAGE 76 OF 85
UP LAW BOC
I. Administrative
Jurisdiction over
Judges and Justices
A. SUPREME COURT
Under Sec. 2, Art. XI , 1987 Constitution,
Justices of the Supreme Court may be
removed from office, on impeachment, and
conviction of culpable violation of the
Constitution, treason, bribery, graft and
corruption, other high crimes, or betrayal of
public trust; all other Justices and judges from
the Court of Appeals to the lowest level may
be removed from office as provided by law, but
not by impeachment.
According to J. Carpio’s dissenting opinion in
In re: Charges of Plagiarism, etc. against
Associate Justice del Castillo, A.M. 10-7-17-SC
(2011), pursuant to Sec. 3 (1) and (6), Art. XI,
1987 Constitution, the sole disciplining
authority (i.e. exclusive authority to discipline)
of all impeachable officers, including Justices
of the Supreme Court, is Congress. He further
says that while impeachment is often
described as a political process, it also
functions as the equivalent of administrative
disciplinary proceedings against impeachable
officers since impeachable officers are not
subject to administrative disciplinary
proceedings either by the Executive or Judicial
branch, in the same manner that non-
impeachable officers are subject.
B. ALL OTHER COURTS
Pursuant to Sec. 6, Art. VIII, 1987 Constitution,
only the Supreme Court can oversee
compliance with the law and the ROC on the
part of the Presiding Justice of the CA down to
the lowest municipal trial court judge and take
the proper administrative action against them
if they commit any violation thereof, requiring
JUDICIAL ETHICS LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
supervisory or administrative
[Agpalo, (2004)].
sanction
Thus, the Ombudsman has no power to
entertain and investigate administrative
complaints against judges and court
personnel. Complaints against judges and
court personnel should accordingly be filed
with the Supreme Court [Maceda v. Vasquez,
supra.; Dolalas v. Office of the Ombudsman,
G.R. 118808 (1996)].
Administrative jurisdiction over a court
employee belongs to the Supreme Court,
regardless of whether the offense was
committed before or after employment in the
judiciary. Indeed, the standard procedure is for
the CSC to bring its complaint against a
judicial employee before the Office of the
Court Administrator [Ampong v. CSC, G.R.
167916 (2008)].
In order for the Court to acquire jurisdiction
over an administrative case, the complaint
must be filed during the incumbency of the
respondent. Once jurisdiction is acquired, it is
not lost by reason of respondent’s cessation
from office [Re: Missing Exhibits and Court
Properties in Regional Trial Court, Branch 4,
Panabo City, Davao Del Norte, AM. 10-2-41-
RTC (2013)].
Pursuant to Sec. 11, Art. VIII, 1987 Constitution,
the Supreme Court en banc shall have the
power to discipline judges of lower courts, or
order their dismissal by a vote of majority of
the Members who actually took part in the
deliberations on the issues in the case and
voted thereon.
PAGE 77 OF 85
UP LAW BOC JUDICIAL ETHICS
II. Disqualifications of
Justices and Judges
[Rule 137, ROC]
NOTE: Asked 3 times in the Bar; 1994, 1991,
2008. [Lex Pareto (2014)]
A. COMPULSORY DISQUALIFICATION
No judge or judicial officer shall sit in any case,
without the written consent of all parties in
interest and entered upon the record, in which:
(1) He, or his wife or child, is pecuniarily
interested as heir, legatee, creditor or
otherwise; or
(2) He is related to either party within the
6th degree of consanguinity or affinity, or
to counsel within the 4th degree,
computed according to the rules of civil
law;
(3) He has been executor, administrator,
guardian, trustee or counsel; or
(4) He has presided in any inferior court
when his ruling or decision is the subject
of review [par. 1, Sec. 1].
The rule on compulsory disqualification of a
judge to hear a case rests on the salutary
principle that no judge should preside in a
case in which he is not wholly free,
disinterested, impartial and independent. A
judge has both the duty of rendering a just
decision and the duty of doing it in a manner
completely free from suspicion as to its
fairness and as to his integrity.
The law conclusively presumes that a judge
cannot objectively or impartially sit in such a
case and, for that reason, prohibits him and
strikes at his authority to hear and decide it, in
the absence of written consent of all parties
concerned. The purpose is to preserve the
people's faith and confidence in the courts'
justice [Garcia v. De La Peña, A.M. MTJ-92-
687 (1994)].
The relationship of the judge with one of the
parties may color the facts and distort the law
PAGE 78 OF 85
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
to the prejudice of a just decision. Where this
is probable or even only possible, due process
demands that the judge inhibit himself, if only
out of a sense of delicadeza [Javier v.
COMELEC, G.R. L-68379-81 (1996)].
GROUNDS FOR COMPULSORY INHIBITION
OF A JUDGE – ASKED IN 2004 AND 2010 [LEX
PARETO (2014)]
ACTUAL BIAS OR PREJUDICE
In Umale v. Villaluz (1973), a judge inhibited
himself from trying a robbery case due to his
personal knowledge of the case. The Supreme
Court stated that it is possible that the
respondent Judge might be influenced by his
personal knowledge of the case when he tries
and decides the same on the merits, which
would certainly constitute a denial of due
process to the party adversely affected by his
judgment or decision. Thus, it is best that,
after some reflection, the judge, on his own
initiative disqualified himself from hearing the
robbery case and thereby rendering himself
available as witness to any of the parties
subject to cross-examination.
In People v. Gomez (1967), the judge
dismissed criminal informations on the
suspicion, arising from a dinner invitation from
a stranger and a subsequent personal
investigation, that the court was being used as
a forum for extortion and exploitation of the
persons charged. The Supreme Court found
this unstated extraneous matter makes the
dismissal as one affected with partiality and
bias. The prayer of the judge to be disqualified
in hearing the case because he has lost all
respect in the manner in which the prosecutor
has been prosecuting the case was granted.
ECONOMIC INTEREST OF JUDGE OR HIS
FAMILY
In Oktubre v. Velasco (2004), a municipal
judge, as private complainant, caused three
criminal complaints to be filed before his own
court. He also issued a warrant of arrest and
subpoenas before finally inhibiting himself
from hearing the cases. The Supreme Court
found him guilty of grave misconduct, gross
ignorance of the law and grave abuse of
UP LAW BOC JUDICIAL ETHICS
authority, and dismissed him from service. It
stated that the idea that a judge can preside
over his own case is anathema to the notion of
impartiality and that his subsequent inhibition
from the three cases does not detract from his
culpability for he should not have taken
cognizance of the cases in the first place.
REVIEWING OWN CASES
In Sandoval v. CA (1996), the Supreme Court
that an Associate Justice who only partly
presided over a case in the trial court and who
did not render the final decision cannot be said
to have been placed in a position where he had
to review his own decision and, as such, was
not legally bound, on this ground, to inhibit
himself as ponente of the case. Nevertheless,
it was held that he should have voluntarily
inhibited himself for his earlier involvement in
the case constitutes just or valid reason under
Sec. 1, Rule 137. A judge should not handle a
case in which he might be perceived, rightly or
wrongly, to be susceptible to bias and
partiality.
PREVIOUSLY SERVED AS COUNSEL
A judge may validly disqualify himself due to
his bias and prejudice. [However,] bias and
prejudice cannot be presumed [Soriano v.
Angeles (2000)]. The mere imputation of bias
or partiality is not sufficient for a judge to
inhibit, especially when the charge is without
basis. It must be proven with clear and
convincing evidence. [Gochan v. Gochan
(2003)] Moreover, it has been held that bias
and prejudice must be shown to have
stemmed from an extra-judicial source and
result in an opinion on the merits on some
basis other than the evidence presented
[Aleria v. Velez (1998)].
OTHER EXAMPLES
Disqualification was also allowed when the
judge has been previously associated with a
party as counsel, [Austria v. Masaquel (1978)]
notarized the affidavit of a person to be
presented as witness [Mateo v. Villaluz (1973)],
if he is a material witness to a case [AmJur;
Lewis v. State (2002)]
PAGE 79 OF 85
LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
B. VOLUNTARY DISQUALIFICATION
A judge may, in the exercise of his sound
discretion, disqualify himself from sitting in a
case, for just or valid reasons other than those
mentioned [par. 2, Sec. 1].
Sec. 5, Canon 3, New Code of Judicial
Conduct of the Philippine Judiciary, A.M.
03-05-91-SC (2004):
Judges shall disqualify themselves from
participating in any proceedings in which
they are unable to decide the matter
impartially or in which it may appear to a
reasonable observer that they are unable to
decide the matter impartially. Such
proceedings include, but are not limited to,
instances where:
(a) The judge has actual bias or prejudice
concerning a party or personal
knowledge of disputed evidentiary
facts concerning the proceedings;
(b) The judge previously served as a lawyer
or was a material witness in the matter
in controversy;
(c) The judge, or a member of his or her
family, has an economic interest in the
outcome of the matter in controversy;
(d) The judge served as executor,
administrator, guardian, trustee, or
lawyer in the case or matter in
controversy, or a former associate of
the judge served as counsel during
their association, or the judge or lawyer
was a material witness therein;
(e) The judge's ruling in a lower court is the
subject of review;
(f) The judge is related by consanguinity
or affinity to a party litigant within the
6th civil degree or to counsel within the
fourth civil degree; or
(g) The judge knows that his or her spouse
or child has a financial interest, as heir,
legatee, creditor, fiduciary, or
otherwise, in the subject matter in
controversy or in a party to the
proceeding, or any other interest that
could be substantially affected by the
outcome of the proceedings.
UP LAW BOC JUDICIAL ETHICS LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS

The mere imputation of bias or partiality is not

A judge must maintain and preserve the trust enough ground for inhibition, especially when
and faith of the parties-litigants. He must hold the charge is without basis. Extrinsic evidence
himself above reproach and suspicion. At the must further be presented to establish bias,
very first sign of lack of faith and trust to his bad faith, malice, or corrupt purpose, in
actions, whether well-grounded or not, the addition to palpable error which may be
judge has no other alternative but inhibit inferred from the decision or order itself
himself from the case. [Philippine Commercial International Bank v.
Dy Hong Pi, G.R. 171137 (2009)].
A judge may not be legally prohibited from
sitting in a litigation, but when circumstances
appear that will induce doubt to his honest C. OBJECTION
actuations and probity in favor of either party,
or incite such state of mind, he should conduct
a careful self-examination. He should exercise The objecting party to his competency may, in
his discretion in a way that the people's faith writing, file with the subject official his
in the courts of justice is not impaired. The objection and its grounds. The said official
better course for the judge under such may, in accordance with his determination of
circumstances is to disqualify himself. That the question of his disqualification, either: 1)
way, he avoids being misunderstood, his
proceed with the trial or 2) withdraw
reputation for probity and objectivity is
preserved [Bautista v. Rebueno, G.R. L-46117 therefrom.
(1978)].
The decision of the said official shall be in
A judge should not be disqualified because he
was a classmate (or a co-member in a writing and filed with the other papers in the
fraternity) of one of the counsels if there is no case, but no appeal or stay shall be allowed
proof that such relationship results in actual from, or by reason of, his decision in favor his
bias or prejudice. To allow disqualification own competency, until final judgement in the
would unnecessarily burden other trial judges case [Sec. 2].
to whom the case will be assigned. Confusion
would result, because a judge would then be
barred from sitting in a case whenever one of
his former classmates (and he could have
many) appeared. [Masadao and Elizaga, cited
in Lex Pareto (2014)]
Mere fact that a counsel who is appearing
before a judge was one of those who
recommended him to the Bench is not a valid
ground from voluntary inhibition. “Utang na
loob” per se should not be a hindrance to the
administration of justice. Nor should
recognition of such value prevent the
performance of judicial duties. However,
where the judge admits that he may be
suspected of surrendering to the persuasions
of utang na loob, and he may succumb to it
considering that he and members of the
family, no less shall ever remain obliged in
eternal gratitude to the recommending
counsel, the judge should inhibit himself.
[Query of Executive Judge Estrella Estrada,
etc, A.M. No. 87-9-3918-RTC (1987) cited in
Lex Pareto (2014)]

PAGE 80 OF 85
UP LAW BOC JUDICIAL ETHICS LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS

(3) The House refers the complaint to the

III. Discipline of proper committee;
Members of the (4) The committee holds a hearing, approves
the resolution calling for impeachment,
Judiciary and Initiation and submits the same to the House;
(5) The House considers the resolution and
of Complaint against votes to approve it by at least one-third of
all its members, which resolution
Judges and Justices becomes the article of impeachment to
be filed with the Senate when approved;
and
TENURE
(6) The Senate tries the public official under
The members of the Supreme Court and the article [J. Abad, Separate Concurring
judges of lower courts shall hold office during Opinion, Gutierrez v. HOR Committee on
a good behavior until they reach the age of Justice, G.R. 193459 (2011)].
seventy years or become incapacitated to
discharge the duties of their office [Sec. 11, Art.
VIII, 1987 Constitution]. B. LOWER COURTS AND JUSTICES OF
COURT OF APPEALS, AND
A. SUPREME COURT SANDIGANBAYAN, AND COURT OF TAX
APPEALS (RULE 140, ROC)

Members of the Supreme Court may be

removed from office on impeachment for, and HOW INITIATED:
conviction of, culpable violation of the
Proceedings for the discipline of judges of
Constitution, treason, bribery, graft and
regular and special courts and justices of the
corruption, other high crimes, or betrayal of
Court of Appeals and the Sandiganbayan may
public trust [Sec. 2, Article XI, 1987
be instituted:
Constitution].
(1) Motu propio by the Supreme Court;
The impeachment of public officials has been
established for removing otherwise (2) Upon the verified complaint, supported
constitutionally tenured and independent by affidavits of persons who have
public officials for culpable violation of the personal knowledge of the facts alleged
Constitution, treason, bribery, graft and therein or by documents which may
corruption, other high crimes, or betrayal of substantiate said allegations; or
public trust. The power to initiate (3) Upon an anonymous complaint,
impeachment cases rests with the House of supported by public records of
the Representatives while the power to try the indubitable integrity.
same rests with the Senate.

The complaint shall be in writing and shall

PROCEDURE state clearly and concisely the acts and
Based on Sec. 3, Article VI, 1987 Constitution, omissions constituting violations of standards
the steps leading to impeachment are as of conduct prescribed for judges, the RoC, or
follows: the Code of Judicial Conduct [Sec. 1].
(1) A verified complaint for impeachment is The right to institute disbarment proceedings
filed by a member of the House or is not confined to clients nor is it necessary
endorsed by him; that the person complaining suffered injury
from the alleged wrongdoing. The procedural
(2) The complaint is included in the order of
requirement observed in ordinary civil
business of the House;
proceedings that only the real party-in-
interest must initiate the suit does not apply in
PAGE 81 OF 85
UP LAW BOC
disbarment cases. Disbarment proceedings
are matters of public interest and the only
basis for the judgment is the proof or failure of
proof of the charges [Figueros v Jimenez, A.C.
9116 (2014)].
INVESTIGATION
Upon the filing of the comment of the
respondent or upon the expiration of the
period for such filing, which is ten days from
the date of service to him of the copy of the
complaint [Sec. 2], the SC shall:
(1) Refer the matter to the Office of the Court
Administrator for evaluation, report, and
recommendation; or
(2) Assign the case for investigation, report,
and recommendation to:
(a) A retired member of the Supreme
Court, if the respondent is a justice of
the Court of Appeals and the
Sandiganbayan;
(b) A justice of the Court of Appeals, if
the respondent is a judge of a
Regional Trial Court or of a special
court of equivalent rank; or
(c) A judge of the Regional Trial Court, if
the respondent is a judge of an
inferior court [Sec. 3, Rule 140].
HEARING AND TERMINATION
The investigating justice of judge shall set a
day for the hearing and send notice to the
parties. If the respondent fails to appear, the
investigation shall proceed ex parte.
The investigating justice or judge shall
terminate the proceedings:
(1) Within 90 days from the date of its
commencement; or
(2) Within such extension as the Supreme
Court may grant [Sec. 4].
REPORT AND ACTION
Within 30 days from termination, the
investigating justice or judge shall submit to
the Supreme Court a report containing his
findings of fact and recommendation,
accompanied by the evidence and pleadings
filed by the parties. Such report shall be
JUDICIAL ETHICS LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
confidential and shall be for the exclusive use
of the Supreme Court.
A copy of the decision or resolution of the court
shall be attached to the record of the
respondent in the OCA [Secs. 5 and 12]
The Supreme Court shall take action on the
report as the facts and the law may warrant
[Sec. 6]
AUTOMATIC CONVERSION OF
ADMINISTRATIVE CASES TO DISCIPLINARY
PROCEEDINGS
Pursuant to A.M. No. 02-9-02-SC,
administrative cases against justices of the
Court of Appeals and the Sandiganbayan,
judges of regular and special courts, and court
officials who are lawyers, shall also be
considered a disciplinary action against them,
if they are based on grounds which are
likewise grounds for the disciplinary action of
members of the bar for:
(1) Violation of the Lawyer's Oath;
(2) Violation of the Code of Professional
Responsibility;
(3) Violation of the Canons of
Professional Ethics; or
(4) Such other forms of breaches of
conduct that have been traditionally
recognized as grounds for the
discipline of lawyers.
The respondent is required to comment on the
complaint and show cause why he should not
also be suspended, disbarred or otherwise
disciplinarily sanctioned as a member of the
bar. Judgment in both respects may be
incorporated in one decision or resolution.
EFFECT OF WITHDRAWAL OR DESISTANCE
The actuations of a judge seriously affect the
public interest inasmuch as they involve the
administration of justice. It is for this reason
that a motion to withdraw a complaint will not
justify the dismissal of the administrative case
against the judge.
To condition administrative actions upon the
will of every complainant, who may, for one
PAGE 82 OF 85
UP LAW BOC JUDICIAL ETHICS LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS

reason or another, condone a detestable act,

is to strip the Supreme Court of its supervisory
power to discipline erring members of the
judiciary [Anguluan v. Taguba (1979)].
Complainant's desistance is not an obstacle to
the taking of disciplinary action against a
judge if the record reveals that he had not
performed his duties properly [Espayos v. Lee
(1979)].

C. GROUNDS AND SANCTIONS

General rule: A judge cannot be subjected to

liability – civil, criminal, or administrative – for
any his official acts, not matter how erroneous,
as long as he acts in good faith (i.e. in the
absence of fraud, malice, dishonesty, or
corruption) [Agpalo (2004)].
Ratio: A judicial officer, in exercising the
authority vested in him, shall be free to act
upon his own convictions, without
apprehension of personal consequences to
himself.
This concept of judicial immunity rests upon
consideration of public policy, its purpose
being to preserve the integrity and
independence of the judiciary [Pabalan v.
Guevarra (1976)].
Exception: A judge may be held criminally,
civilly or administratively liable for
malfeasance or misfeasance in office [Valdez v.
Valera, A.M. 1628-CAR (1978)]. Administrative
charges are classified as serious, less serious,
or light [Sec. 7]

PAGE 83 OF 85
UP LAW BOC JUDICIAL ETHICS LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS

Serious Charges Less Serious Charges Light Charges

Grounds (1) Bribery, direct or indirect; (1) Undue delay in (1) Vulgar and
rendering a decision unbecoming
(2) Dishonesty and violations of the
or order, or in conduct;
Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices
transmitting the
Law (RA 3019); (2) Gambling in
records of a case;
public;
(3) Gross misconduct constituting
(2) Frequently and
violations of the Code of Judicial (3) Fraternizing with
unjustified absences
Conduct; lawyers and
without leave or
litigants with
(4) Knowingly rendering an unjust habitual tardiness;
pending
judgment or order as determined
(3) Unauthorized case/cases in his
by a competent court in an
practice of law; court; and
appropriate proceeding;
(4) Violation of (4) Undue delay in
(5) Conviction of a crime involving
Supreme Court the submission
moral turpitude;
rules, directives, and of monthly
(6) Willful failure to pay a just debt; circulars; reports.
(7) Borrowing money or property from (5) Receiving additional
lawyers and litigants in a case or double
pending before the court; compensation
unless specifically
(8) Immorality;
authorized by law;
(9) Gross ignorance of the law or
(6) Untruthful
procedure;
statements in the
(10) Partisan political activities; and certificate of service;
(11) Alcoholism and/or vicious habits and
[Sec. 8]. (7) Simple misconduct
[Sec. 9]
Sanctions (1) Dismissal from the service, (1) Suspension from (1) A fine of not less
[Sec. 11] forfeiture of all or part of the office without salary than P1,000.00
benefits as the Court may and other benefits but not
determine, and disqualification for not less than one exceeding
from reinstatement or nor more than three P10,000.00;
appointment to any public office, months; or and/or
including government-owned or
(2) A fine of more than (2) Censure;
controlled corporations.
P10,000.00 but not
Forfeiture of benefits does not (3) Reprimand;
exceeding
include accrued leave credits;
P20,000.00 (4) Admonition with
(2) Suspension from office without warning.
salary and other benefits for more
than three but not exceeding six
months; or
(3) A fine of more than P20,000.00
but not exceeding P40,000.00

PAGE 84 OF 85
UP LAW BOC
The word “misconduct” implies a wrongful
intention and not a mere error or judgment.
For serious [or gross] misconduct to exist,
there must be reliable evidence showing that
the judicial acts complained of were corrupt or
inspired by an intention to violate the law, or
were in persistent disregard of well-known
legal rules [In re: Impeachment of Horrilleno
(1922)].
The commission of two or administrative
offenses alleged in the same administrative
complaint may aggravate the offense and
render the same serious, which will warrant
dismissal of the judge from the service
[Agpalo (2004)].
The enumerated acts are not exclusive. Other
acts analogous thereto and conviction in a
criminal prosecution may also be grounds for
discipline, as the word “include” in
enumerating the charges implies and as
rulings of the Supreme Court on disciplinary
cases show [Agpalo (2004)].
Like misconduct, inefficiency as a ground for
disciplinary action must be serious or one
which is weighty or momentous and not
trifling. Negligence in the performance of duty,
if reckless in character, could amount to
serious or inexcusable inefficiency [Agpalo
(2004)]
ILLUSTRATIVE CASES [as cited in Agpalo
(2004)]
(1) Failure to deposit funds with the
municipal treasurer or produce them
despite promise to do so [Montemayor v.
Collado (1981)];
(2) Misappropriation of fiduciary funds (i.e.,
proceeds of cash bail bond) by depositing
the check in a personal account, thus
converting the trust fund to personal use
[Barja v. Beracio (1976)];
JUDICIAL ETHICS LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
(3) Extorting money from a party-litigant
who has a pending case [Haw Tay v.
Singayao (1988)]:
(4) Solicitation of donation for office
equipment [Lecaroz v. Garcia (1981)];
(5) Frequent unauthorized absences in office
[Municipal Council of Casiguruhan,
Quezon v. Morales (1974)];
(6) Delay in the disposition of cases in
violation of the canon that a judge must
promptly dispose of all matters
submitted to him [Balagot v. Opinion
(1991)];
(7) Unduly granting repeated motions for
postponement [Araza v. Reyes (1975)];
(8) Unawareness of or unfamiliarity with the
application of the Indeterminate
Sentence Law and duration and
graduation of penalties [In re: Paulin
(1980)];
(9) Reducing to a ridiculous amount
(P6,000.00) the bail bond of the accused
murderer, enabling him to escape the
toils of the law [Soriano v. Mabbayad
(1975)].
(10) Imposing the penalty of subsidiary
imprisonment on a party for failure to pay
civil indemnity in violation of RA 5465
[Monsanto v. Palarca (1983)].
RECENT CASES
(1) Directing a subordinate to alter the TSN by
incorporating statements pertaining to
substantial matters not actually made
during the hearing [Balanay v. White, A.M.
No. RTJ-16-2443, (2016)]
PAGE 85 OF 85