Requirements for admission to the bar and
Meling in the 2002 Bar
continuous practice of law
Problem Areas in Legal Ethics
Arellano University School of Law – Arellano Law
Foundation
2018-2019
 Evaluating a person’s moral character is never
easy
A license to practice law is a privilege, and the decision to
grant such a license is not made as a matter of right or as
a matter of grace. It is a challenging decision that requires
a searching review by bar counsel, the Board, and this
court wherever an applicant's prior conduct raises
concerns about his or her current character and fitness.
The inquiry involved in evaluating a person's moral
character is easier said than done. -In the Matter of the
Bar Application of Tarra Denelle Simmons, No. 201,671-5,
Supreme Court of the State of Washington, April 05, 2018
 Applicant should be ready to present evidence
of good moral character
When applicants seek admission to the bar, they have
placed their character at issue. Therefore, the
applicant bears the burden of producing information
proving good moral character. - Mitchell Simon , Nick
Smith and Nicole Negowetti
 Good moral character and fitness to practice
law
Indeed, the requirement that those aspiring to become
lawyers must be of good moral character is universally
accepted. Although good moral character is an "unusually
ambiguous" term which "can be defined in an almost
unlimited number of ways," good moral character has
been the "historic unquestioned prerequisite of
fitness.“ - In the matter of the application of Donald G.
Matthews for admission to the bar of New Jersey, 462 A.2d
165 (1983)
 Good moral character is more important than
possession of legal learning
The requirement of good moral character is of much
greater import, as far as the general public is concerned,
than the possession of legal learning. - Olga M.
Samson v. Judge Virgilio G. Caballero, A.M. No. RTJ-08-
2138 , August 5, 2009
 Good moral character versus Good reputation
Good moral character is what a person really is, as
distinguished from good reputation or from the opinion
generally entertained of him, the estimate in which he is
held by the public in the place where he is known. Moral
character is not a subjective term but one which
corresponds to objective reality. The standard of personal
and professional integrity is not satisfied by such conduct
as it merely enables a person to escape the penalty of
criminal law. Good moral character includes at least
common honesty. - In the Matter of the Disqualification of
1
Bar Examinee Haron S.
Examinations, B.M. No. 1154, June 8, 2004
 What is an “upright character”?
“Upright character” is something more than an
absence of bad character. It means that he [an applicant
for admission] must have conducted himself as a man
of upright character ordinarily would, should, or
does. Such character expresses itself not in negatives nor
in following the line of least resistance, but quite often
in the will to do the unpleasant thing if it is right, and
the resolve not to do the pleasant thing if it is wrong.
- In re: James Joseph Hamm 123 P.3d 652 [2005]
 Honesty
“[H]onesty is considered to be a centerpiece of good moral
character.” – Drayton Beecher Smith II v. Board of
Professional Responsibility, No. W2017-00247-SC-R3-BP,
Supreme Court of Tennessee, November 8, 2017
 What is immoral conduct
"Immoral conduct" has been defined as that conduct
which is so willful, flagrant, or shameless as to show
indifference to the opinion of good and respectable
members of the community. The same must be "grossly
immoral, that is, it must be so corrupt and false as to
constitute a criminal act or so unprincipled as to be
reprehensible to a high degree.“
"There is perhaps no profession after that of the sacred
ministry in which a high-toned morality is more
imperative than that of the law.“
- Oliver Fabugais v. Atty. Berardo C.
Faunclo, Jr., A.C. no. 10145, June 11, 2018
 Grossly immoral act
A grossly immoral act is one that is so corrupt and false as
to constitute a criminal act or so unprincipled or
disgraceful as to be reprehensible to a high degree. It is a
willful, flagrant, or shameless act which shows a moral
indifference to the opinion of respectable members of the
community. - Figueroa v. Barranco, Jr. SBC Case No. 519
1997
 What is a crime involving moral turpitude
To consider a crime as one involving moral turpitude, the
act constituting the same must have been "done contrary
to justice, honesty, modesty, or good morals. [it must
involve] an act of baseness, vileness, or depravity in the
private duties which a man owes his fellowmen, or to
society in general, contrary to the accepted and
customary rule of right and duty between man and
woman, or conduct contrary to justice, honesty,
modesty, or good morals.- Re: Decision dated March 17,
2011 in criminal case no. SB-28361 entitled “People of the
Philippines v. Joselito C. Barrozo, A.C. No. 10207, July 21,
2015
 Effect of prior criminal conviction
“Although a prior conviction is not conclusive of a lack
of present good moral character, ... it adds to his
burden of establishing present good character by
requiring convincing proof of his full and complete
rehabilitation.”- In re: James Joseph Hamm 123 P.3d 652
[2005]
 An applicant convicted of a serious crime
In summary, when an applicant convicted of a serious
crime applies to practice law [] we conduct a conditional,
two-part inquiry. We first consider whether the
applicant has satisfied the burden of proving complete
rehabilitation from the character deficits that led to the
commission of the crime. If not, our inquiry ends and we
will deny the application. If the applicant proves
complete rehabilitation, we then decide whether the
applicant has otherwise demonstrated present good
moral character. - In the Matter of the Application of Lee
Keller KING, Applicant. Supreme Court of Arizona, En
Banc. June 28, 2006. 136 P.3d 878 (2006)
 Moral character and evidence of reform and
rehabilitation
A fundamental rule in bar admission cases is that
evidence of reform and rehabilitation is relevant to the
assessment of an applicant's moral character. - In the
matter of the application of Donald G. Matthews for
admission to the bar of New Jersey, 462 A.2d 165 (1983)
 How to establish rehabilitation
To establish rehabilitation, [an applicant] must show "that
he has both:
(1) accepted responsibility for his past criminal
conduct," and
"(2) identified and overcome the weakness that led to
the unlawful conduct.“ - In the Matter of the
Application of Alejandro LAZCANO, Applicant.
Supreme Court of Arizona, En Banc. January 8, 2010.
 Types of evidence found to be probative of
reform and rehabilitation
-the applicant must display complete candor in all filings
and proceedings required by the Committee on Character.
-Courts will weigh heavily the applicant's attitude as
expressed in hearings before the Board of Bar Examiners
and any reviewing courts, and
will look for a renunciation of the past misconduct.
-The absence of any misconduct over a period of
intervening years will, of course, be noted, and
a particularly productive use of one's time subsequent
to the misconduct will be credited.
-Affirmative recommendations from people aware of
the applicant's misconduct who specifically consider the
individual's fitness in light of that behavior may also be
found probative of present good character. - In the matter
of the application of Donald G. Matthews for admission to
the bar of New Jersey, 462 A.2d 165 (1983)
 Rehabilitation not enough to establish good
moral character
2
When an applicant for admission to the bar has
committed first-degree murder, a crime that
demonstrates an extreme lack of good moral
character, he must make an extraordinary showing of
present good moral character to establish that he or she is
qualified to be admitted to the practice of law xxx.
To show rehabilitation, [one] must show that he has
accepted responsibility for his criminal conduct.
Rehabilitation is a necessary, but not sufficient, ingredient
of good moral character of bar applicant who had been
convicted of a serious felony; applicant must establish his
current good moral character, independent of and in
addition to, evidence of rehabilitation. - In re: James
Joseph Hamm 123 P.3d 652 [2005]
 Passage of time without incident is
insufficient standing alone in re-application
The mere passage of time without incident is insufficient
standing alone to evidence King's triumph over the
weakness that caused his misconduct. ("Merely showing
that [an individual] is now living and doing those
things he . . . should have done throughout life, although
necessary to prove rehabilitation, is not sufficient to meet
the applicant's burden.") . - In the Matter of the
Application of Lee Keller KING, Applicant. Supreme Court
of Arizona, En Banc. June 28, 2006. 136 P.3d 878 (2006)
 Past and Present moral character
We also agree with Hamm that, under the Rule applicable
to Hamm's application, our concern must be with the
applicant's present moral character. In Greenberg, we
explained that "it is [the applicant's] moral character as of
now with which we are concerned."
xxx Past misconduct, however, is not irrelevant.
Rather, this Court must determine what past bad acts
reveal about an applicant's current character. - In re:
James Joseph Hamm 123 P.3d 652 [2005]
 Rehabilitation must come after probation
These courts reason that because probationers
typically behave well while on probation, admissions
authorities cannot adequately evaluate rehabilitation
until the applicant has successfully completed
probation; application before completion of a
probationary term is deemed premature.
Most also require significant time to elapse following
the end of probation so that the applicant can
demonstrate sustained rehabilitation. ("It is not
enough that petitioner kept out of trouble while being
watched on probation; he must affirmatively
demonstrate over a prolonged period his sincere
regret and rehabilitation.");
These requirements comport with Arizona's requirement
that an applicant with a felony conviction must show by
clear and convincing evidence that he has been
rehabilitated. - In the Matter of the Application of
Alejandro LAZCANO, Applicant. Supreme Court of
Arizona, En Banc. January 8, 2010.
Today, though, we hold that an applicant currently on a
felony deferred adjudication who remains under court
supervision may not be admitted to practice law until
the period of supervision has ended. Only after
successfully fulfilling the conditions of a felony
deferred adjudication may an applicant make the
necessary showing of complete rehabilitation necessary
for admission to the State Bar. - In the Matter of the
Application of Alejandro LAZCANO, Applicant. Supreme
Court of Arizona, En Banc. January 8, 2010.
As we explained in Hamm, although an applicant's
conviction for a serious crime does not constitute a
per se disqualification to practice law, it adds weight
to the applicant's burden of proving present good
moral character. Specifically, because past serious
misconduct may indicate flaws in an applicant's present
moral character, the applicant must initially
demonstrate complete rehabilitation before we
consider other evidence of present good moral
character. - In the Matter of the Application of Lee Keller
KING, Applicant. Supreme Court of Arizona, En Banc. June
28, 2006. 136 P.3d 878 (2006)
………
In summary, when an applicant convicted of a serious
crime applies to practice law in Arizona, we conduct a
conditional, two-part inquiry. We first consider
whether the applicant has satisfied the burden of
proving complete rehabilitation from the character
deficits that led to the commission of the crime. If not, our
inquiry ends and we will deny the application. If the
applicant proves complete rehabilitation, we then
decide whether the applicant has otherwise
demonstrated present good moral character. - In the
Matter of the Application of Lee Keller KING, Applicant.
Supreme Court of Arizona, En Banc. June 28, 2006. 136 P.3d
878 (2006)
……..
To prove complete rehabilitation, [applicant] must also
identify the weakness that caused him to engage in
criminal misconduct and then demonstrate that he has
overcome that weakness.
The mere passage of time without incident is insufficient
standing alone to evidence King's triumph over the
weakness that caused his misconduct. ("Merely showing
that [an individual] is now living and doing those things
he . . . should have done throughout life, although
necessary to prove rehabilitation, is not sufficient to meet
the applicant's burden.") . - In the Matter of the
Application of Lee Keller KING, Applicant. Supreme Court
of Arizona, En Banc. June 28, 2006. 136 P.3d 878 (2006)
 The Case of Tarra Denelle Simmons
Simmons was born to parents with substance abuse
problems, and she grew up in poverty, surrounded by
crime. She was the victim of many acts of sexual violence
during her childhood and adolescence, and endured
sporadic periods of homelessness beginning when she ran
away at age 13. As a juvenile, Simmons was adjudicated
3
for theft, possession of stolen property, and second
degree assault.
Simmons struggled with addiction for years, and her
adult history includes a 2001 conviction for second
degree assault and five 2011 convictions for organized
retail theft, unlawful possession of a firearm, and
possession of controlled substances. As a result of her
criminal convictions, Simmons' nursing license was
placed on probationary status, she served a total of
over three years in jail and prison, and she underwent
two bankruptcies and a foreclosure on her home.
………
However, when Simmons was sent to prison in late 2011,
she began engaging in meaningful treatment for her
trauma and addiction for the first time. Since then,
she has changed her life to a degree that can only be
deemed remarkable, both in terms of the efforts she has
put forth and the positive results she has achieved.
Simmons has maintained her sobriety and conducted
herself with complete openness and integrity over the past
six years. She has been candid about her past,
demonstrating sincere remorse and working diligently
to make amends to her community as an outspoken
advocate for civil legal aid with a focus on assisting
formerly incarcerated individuals facing barriers to
reentry.
……
Simmons attended the Seattle University School of Law
and became the first student in her school's history to be
awarded a two-year public interest fellowship from the
Skadden Foundation. She graduated magna cum laude
as a dean's medal recipient in May 2017, and letters
from faculty and classmates further make it clear that
Simmons was a substantial asset to the entire law school
community.
Letters from her supervisors and colleagues also
unequivocally state that Simmons excelled and
exhibited consistently ethical behavior in the five
legal internships she completed during law school, in
addition to the volunteer and advocacy work that she
undertook for no course credit.
……..
Despite Simmons' about-face life choices, her extensive
criminal history and recent substance abuse
nevertheless gave bar counsel reasonable grounds to refer
the matter for further consideration.
ISSUE
Has Simmons shown by clear and convincing evidence
that she is currently of good moral character and
possesses the requisite fitness to practice law
notwithstanding her previous criminal convictions?
The parties have debated the merits of a bright-line rule
for determining sufficient rehabilitation or recovery (for
example, creating a rebuttable presumption after a certain
number of years without relapsing or engaging in any
misconduct). Although we seek to provide guidance in
this opinion, we decline to adopt a specific time period
as evidence of complete rehabilitation for all
applicants because of the individualized inquiry of
character and fitness, and the complexity of
recovery.
We hold that Simmons has shown by clear and
convincing evidence that she is currently of good
moral character and she is fit to practice law,
Simmons has spent enough time in recovery, and she
accepts full responsibility for her prior conduct. She has
consistently demonstrated remorse, self-awareness,
fortitude, and an unwavering dedication to earning
and maintaining the respect of the profession.
Her success during law school, both academically and in
supervised internships, amply demonstrates she is worthy
to sit for the bar. Indeed, given the substantial
obstacles that she has overcome, her success is an
even stronger indicator of her abilities than it would
be for the average law student.
As noted by Dean Annette E. Clark of the Seattle
University School of Law, unlike Simmons, "[m]any of
our law students have lived lives of privilege, and so
when we attest to their character and fitness to practice
law, it is under circumstances where they have not been
tested in any meaningful sense by circumstances
such as poverty, substance abuse, and domestic
violence.“
………
Simmons, meanwhile, has overcome all of those
circumstances and more. Her remarkable achievements
would simply not be possible without her extraordinary
abilities and relentless hard work. We grant Simmons'
application to sit for the bar exam.
CONCLUSION
A license to practice law is a privilege, and the decision to
grant such a license is not made as a matter of right or as
a matter of grace. It is a challenging decision that requires
a searching review by bar counsel, the Board, and this
court wherever an applicant's prior conduct raises
concerns about his or her current character and fitness.
The inquiry involved in evaluating a person's moral
character is easier said than done.
…….
Simmons has proved by clear and convincing evidence
that she is currently of good moral character and fit to
practice law. We affirm this court's long history of
recognizing that one's past does not dictate one's
future. We therefore unanimously grant her application
to sit for the bar exam. - In the Matter of the Bar
Application of Tarra Denelle Simmons, No. 201,671-5,
Supreme Court of the State of Washington, April 05, 2018
 Chemical dependency/Alcoholism
There is no doubt, however, that chemical dependency
is a factor to be weighed in assessing fitness to
practice law. The Supreme Court of Minnesota has
specifically addressed the question of "whether chemical
dependency on alcohol is rationally related to fitness for
the practice of law such that it can form the basis for
preventing an otherwise qualified applicant from gaining
admission to the bar.“
4
That court recognized alcoholism as a disease and
acknowledged its impact on the practice of law. It
concluded that the matter should be remanded to the
State Board of Law Examiners for a decision on whether
the applicant had rehabilitated himself. In doing so, the
court commented on alcoholism:
….….
It is not a mere pattern of voluntary conduct; neither is
it an offense which necessarily involves moral
turpitude or reflects on the individual's honesty, fairness,
or respect for the rights of others or for the law. It cannot
be denied, however, and the Board well knows, that the
disease of alcoholism is frequently a contributing
factor to acts of attorney misconduct. - In re
Application for Admission to the Bar of Arkansas of Mark
Ashley CROSSLEY. 839 S.W.2d 1 (1992) Supreme Court of
Arkansas.
……
[W]e hold that since alcohol dependency can impact on
an applicant's fitness to practice law, it is an appropriate
factor to be considered by the Board of Law Examiners
in ascertaining whether an applicant has proven good
moral character sufficient to demonstrate his fitness and
capacity to practice law in this State. - In re Application for
Admission to the Bar of Arkansas of Mark Ashley
CROSSLEY. 839 S.W.2d 1 (1992) Supreme Court of
Arkansas.
 What is practice of law?
The Court ruled that the term “practice of law” implies
customarily or habitually holding oneself out to the
public as a lawyer for compensation as a source of
livelihood or in consideration of his services. The Court
further ruled that holding one’s self out as a lawyer may
be shown by acts indicative of that purpose, such as
identifying oneself as attorney, appearing in court in
representation of a client, or associating oneself as a
partner of a law office for the general practice of law. -
Atty. Noe-Lacsaman v. Atty. Busmente, A.C. No. 7269
[2011]
 What is practice of law?
Any activity, in and out of court, that requires the
application of law, legal procedure, knowledge, training
and experience. Moreover, we ruled that to engage in the
practice of law is to perform those acts which are
characteristics of the profession; to practice law 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. - Query of Atty. Silverio-Buffe,
A.M. No. 08-6-352-RTC [2009]
 What is practice of law?
The practice of law is not limited to the conduct of
cases or litigation in court; it embraces the
preparation of pleadings and other papers incident to
actions and special proceedings, the management of
such actions and proceedings on behalf of clients before
judges and courts, and in addition, conveyancing.
In general, all advice to clients, and all action taken for
them in matters connected with the law xxx. - Aguirre v.
Rana, B. M. No. 1036. June 10, 2003
 Practice of law is a privilege
The practice of law is neither a natural nor a
constitutional right but a privilege bestowed by the
State only upon the deserving and worthy for conferment
of such privilege. - Natanauan v. Atty. Tolentino, A.C. No.
4269, October 11, 2016
 Who may practice law?
Section 1, Rule 138 of the Rules of Court provides:
Who may practice law. – Any person heretofore duly
admitted as a member of the bar, or thereafter
admitted as such in accordance with the provisions of
this Rule, and who is in good and regular standing,
is entitled to practice law.
 Pre-law requirements
Rule 138 Sec. 6. Pre-Law. - No applicant for admission to
the bar examination shall be admitted unless he presents
a certificate that he has satisfied the Secretary of
Education that, before he began the study of law, he
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 with any of the following subjects as major or
field of concentration: political science, logic, english,
spanish, history and economics.
 Passing the bar exam is not enough
A bar candidate does not acquire the right to practice law
simply by passing the bar examinations. The practice
of law is a privilege that can be withheld even from one
who has passed the bar examinations, if the person
seeking admission had practiced law without a license.
True, respondent here passed the 2000 Bar Examinations
and took the lawyer’s oath. However, it is the signing in
the Roll of Attorneys that finally makes one a full-
fledged lawyer. The fact that respondent passed the bar
examinations is immaterial. Passing the bar is not the only
qualification to become an attorney-at-law. Respondent
should know that 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, B. M. No. 1036. June
10, 2003
 Signing of the Lawyer’s Oath is not equivalent
to “taking the oath”
Respondent Abad should know that the circumstances
which he has narrated do not constitute his admission
to the Philippine Bar and the right to practice law
thereafter. He should know that two essential requisites
for becoming a lawyer still had to be performed,
5
namely: his lawyer's oath to be administered by this
Court and his signature in the Roll of Attorneys. (Rule
138, Secs. 17 and 19, Rules of Court.) - Re: Elmo Abad, A. M.
No. 139 [1983]
Within the context of legal ethics is homicide a crime
involving moral turpitude?
This is not to say that all convictions of the crime of
homicide do not involve moral turpitude. Homicide
may or may not involve moral turpitude depending on
the degree of the crime. Moral turpitude is not involved
in every criminal act and is not shown by every known and
intentional violation of statute, but whether any
particular conviction involves moral turpitude may be a
question of fact and frequently depends on all the
surrounding circumstances.
……
While . . . generally but not always, crimes mala in se
involve moral turpitude, while crimes mala prohibita do
not, it, cannot always be ascertained whether moral
turpitude does or does not exist by classifying a
crime as malum in se or as malum prohibitum, since
there are crimes which are mala in se and yet but rarely
involve moral turpitude and there are crimes which
involve moral turpitude and are mala prohibita only. It
follows therefore, that moral turpitude is somewhat a
vague and indefinite term, the meaning of which
must be left to the process of judicial inclusion or
exclusion as the cases are reached.
As to what crime involves moral turpitude, is for the
Supreme Court to determine. – IRRI v. NLRC, G.R. No.
97239 May 12, 1993
 Whether or not a lawyer is entitled to
exemption from payment of his IBP dues
during the time that he was inactive in the
practice of law
Thus, payment of dues is a necessary consequence of
membership in the IBP, of which no one is exempt. This
means that the compulsory nature of payment of dues
subsists for as long as one’s membership in the IBP
remains regardless of the lack of practice of, or the
type of practice, the member is engaged in.
There is nothing in the law or rules which allows
exemption from payment of membership dues. At
most, as correctly observed by the IBP, he could have
informed the Secretary of the Integrated Bar 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 could have been discontinued.
- Letter of Atty. Cecilio Y. Arevalo Jr. B.M. 1370 May 9, 2005
 Is IBP membership fee a form of tax?
For the court to prescribe dues to be paid by the members
does not mean that the Court is attempting to levy a tax.
A membership fee in the Bar association is an exaction
for regulation, while tax purpose of a tax is a revenue.
If the judiciary 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 put on an integrated Bar program without means to
defray the expenses. The doctrine of implied powers
necessarily carries with it the power to impose such
exaction. - Letter of Atty. Cecilio Y. Arevalo Jr. B.M. 1370
May 9, 2005
 There is no provision under the CPR which
prohibits the
unauthorized practice of law
CANON 9 - A lawyer shall not, directly or indirectly, assist
in the unauthorized practice of law.
While a reading of Canon 9 appears to merely prohibit
lawyers from assisting in the unauthorized practice of
law, the unauthorized practice of law by the lawyer
himself is subsumed under this provision, because at
the heart of Canon 9 is the lawyer's duty to prevent the
unauthorized practice of law. - Petition to sign in the Roll
of Attorneys, Medado, B.M. No. 2540 [2013]
Intent is necessary to be guilty of unauthorized
practice of law
In several cases, we have ruled that the unauthorized
practice of law by assuming to be an attorney and
acting as such without authority constitutes indirect
contempt which is punishable by fine or imprisonment or
both. The liability for the unauthorized practice of law
under Section 3(e), Rule 71 of the Rules of Court is in the
nature of criminal contempt and the acts are punished
because they are an affront to the dignity and authority of
the court, and obstruct the orderly administration of
justice. In determining liability for criminal contempt,
well-settled is the rule that intent is a necessary
element, and no one can be punished unless the
evidence makes it clear that he intended to commit
it. - Normatan & Pagayokan v. Balajadia, G.R. No. 169517
2006
 Examples of unauthorized practice of law
In the cases where we found a party liable for the
unauthorized practice of law, the party was guilty of some
overt act like:
1. signing court pleadings on behalf of his client;
2. appearing before court hearings as an attorney;
3. manifesting before the court that he will practice law
despite being previously denied admission to the
bar; or
4. deliberately attempting to practice law and
5. holding out himself as an attorney through circulars
with full knowledge that he is not licensed to do
so.
- Normatan & Bayombong, Nueva Vizcaya and take the Bar
Pagayokan v. Balajadia, G.R. No. 169517 2006
 Violation of Rule 138 section 6
“[b]y utilizing the school records of his cousin and name-
sake, Juan M. Publico when, in actual fact, petitioner had
not completed Grade VI of his elementary schooling,
much less, First and Second Year High School.”
For all the foregoing, we find and so hold that respondent
falsified his school records, by making it appear that he
had finished or completed Grade VI elementary and
First and Second Year high school, when in truth and
6
in fact he had not, thereby violating the provisions of
Sections 5 and 6, Rule 127 of the Rules of Court, which
require completion by a bar examinee or candidate of the
prescribed courses in elementary, high, pre-law and law
school, prior to his admission to the practice of law. - In
re: Juan Publico, Petition for Reinstatement in the Roll of
Attorneys February 20, 1981
 Took the Bar examination without any college
degree
Complainant and respondent are siblings born to
Porferio R. Caronan, Jr. and Norma A. Caronan.
Respondent is the older of the two, having been born on
February 7, 1975, while complainant was born on August
5, 1976. Both of them completed their secondary
education at the Makati High School where
complainant graduated in 1993 and respondent in 1991.
Upon his graduation, complainant enrolled at the
University of Makati where he obtained a degree in
Business Administration in 1997.
……
He started working thereafter as a Sales Associate for
Philippine Seven Corporation (PSC), the operator of 7-11
Convenience Stores. In 2001, he married Myrna G. Tagpis
with whom he has two (2) daughters. Through the years,
complainant rose from the ranks until, in 2009, he was
promoted as a Store Manager of the 7-11 Store in
Muntinlupa.
……
Meanwhile, upon graduating from high school,
respondent enrolled at the Pamantasan ng Lungsod ng
Maynila (PLM), where he stayed for one (1) year before
transferring to the Philippine Military Academy (PMA) in
1992. In 1993, he was discharged from the PMA and
focused on helping their father in the family's car rental
business. In 1997, he moved to Nueva Vizcaya with his
wife, Rosana, and their three (3) children. Since then,
respondent never went back to school to earn a
college degree.
……
In 1999, during a visit to his family in Metro Manila,
respondent told complainant that the former had enrolled
in a law school in Nueva Vizcaya.
Subsequently, in 2004, their mother informed
complainant that respondent passed the Bar
Examinations and that he used complainant's name
and college records from the University of Makati to
enroll at St. Mary's University's College of Law in
Examinations. Complainant brushed these aside as he did
not anticipate any adverse consequences to him.
……
In 2006, complainant was able to confirm respondent's
use of his name and identity when he saw the name
"Patrick A. Caronan" on the Certificate of Admission
to the Bar displayed at the latter's office in Taguig
City. Nevertheless, complainant did not confront
respondent about it since he was pre-occupied with his
job and had a family to support.
Sometime in May 2009, however, after his promotion as
Store Manager, complainant was ordered to report to the
head office of PSC in Mandaluyong City where, upon
arrival, he was informed that the National Bureau of
Investigation (NBI) was requesting his presence at its
office in Taft Avenue, Manila, in relation to an
investigation involving respondent who, at that point,
was using the name "Atty. Patrick A. Caronan.“
……
On the other hand, a fellow church-member had also told
him that respondent who, using the name "Atty. Patrick
A. Caronan," almost victimized his (church-member's)
relatives. Complainant also received a phone call from a
certain Mrs. Loyda L. Reyes (Reyes), who narrated how
respondent tricked her into believing that he was
authorized to sell a parcel of land in Taguig City when in
fact, he was not. Further, he learned that respondent was
arrested for gun-running activities, illegal possession of
explosives, and violation of Batas Pambansa Bilang (BP)
22.
……
Due to the controversies involving respondent's use of the
name "Patrick A. Caronan," complainant developed a fear
for his own safety and security. He also became the
subject of conversations among his colleagues, which
eventually forced him to resign from his job at
PSC. Hence, complainant filed the present
Complaint-Affidavit to stop respondent's alleged use
of the former's name and identity, and illegal
practice of law.
……
Here, respondent exhibited his dishonesty and utter
lack of moral fitness to be a member of the Bar when he
assumed the name, identity, and school records of his own
brother and dragged the latter into controversies which
eventually caused him to fear for his safety and to resign
from PSC where he had been working for years. Good
moral character is essential in those who would be
lawyers. This is imperative in the nature of the office of a
lawyer, the trust relation which exists between him and
his client, as well as between him and the court.
Finally, respondent made a mockery of the legal
profession by pretending to have the necessary
qualifications to be a lawyer. He also tarnished the
image of lawyers with his alleged unscrupulous activities,
which resulted in the filing of several criminal cases
against him. Certainly, respondent and his acts do not
have a place in the legal profession where one of the
primary duties of its members is to uphold its integrity
and dignity. - Patrick A. Caronan v. Richard A. Caronan
a.k.a. “Atty. Patrick A. Caronan”, July 12, 2016, A.C. No. 11316
 Is breach of promise to marry
gross immorality?
Respondent was prevented from taking the lawyer’s oath
in 1971 because of the charges of gross immorality made
by complainant. To recapitulate, respondent bore an
illegitimate child with his sweetheart, Patricia Figueroa,
who also claims that he did not fulfill his promise to
marry her after he passes the bar examinations.
7
We find that these facts do not constitute gross
immorality warranting the permanent exclusion of
respondent from the legal profession. His engaging in
premarital sexual relations with complainant and
promises to marry suggests a doubtful moral
character on his part but the same does not
constitute grossly immoral conduct. The Court has
held that to justify suspension or disbarment the act
complained of must not only be immoral, but grossly
immoral. - Figueroa v. Barranco, Jr. SBC Case No. 519 1997
 Not grossly immoral
Respondent lawyer who made avowals to being a
respectable father to three children, and also to being a
respected leader of his community apparently had no
qualms or scruples about being seen sleeping in his
own bed with another man’s wife, his arms entwined
in tender embrace with the latter.
The acts complained or in this case might not be grossly
or starkly immoral in its rawness or coarseness, but they
were without doubt condemnable.
- Oliver Fabugais v. Atty. Berardo C.
Faunclo, Jr., A.C. no. 10145, June 11, 2018
 Is poverty of litigant a justification to engage
in illegal practice of law?
The defense of respondent that "his participation (sic) for
defendants' cause was gratuitous as they could not
engage the services of counsel by reason of poverty
and the absence of one in the locality" cannot, even if
true, carry the day for him, - Zeta v. Malinao, A.M. No. P-
220, December 20, 1978
 Can a lawyer-detainee practice law?
As a matter of law, when a person indicted for an offense
is arrested, he is deemed placed under the custody of the
law. He is placed in actual restraint of liberty in jail so that
he may be bound to answer for the commission of the
offense. He must be detained in jail during the pendency
of the case against him, unless he is authorized by the
court to be released on bail or on recognizance. Let it be
stressed that all prisoners whether under preventive
detention or serving final sentence can not practice
their profession nor engage in any business or
occupation, or hold office, elective or appointive,
while in detention. This is a necessary consequence
of arrest and detention. – PP v. Hon. Maceda and
Javellana G.R. No. 89591-96 January 24, 2000
 What is the effect of non-payment of IBP
dues?
Rule 139-A, Section 10 which provides that "default in the
payment of annual dues for six months shall warrant
suspension of membership in the Integrated Bar, and
default in such payment for one year shall be a ground
for the removal of the name of the delinquent
member from the Roll of Attorneys.“ - Santos, Jr. V.
Atty. Llamas A.C No. 4749 [2000]
  Misrepresenting to the public and the courts
that he had paid his IBP dues
By indicating "IBP-Rizal 259060" in his pleadings and
thereby misrepresenting to the public and the courts
that he had paid his IBP dues to the Rizal Chapter,
respondent is guilty of violating the Code of Professional
Responsibility which provides:
Rule 1.01 - A lawyer shall not engage in unlawful,
dishonest, immoral or deceitful conduct.
CANON 7 - A LAWYER SHALL AT ALL TIMES UPHOLD
THE INTEGRITY AND DIGNITY OF THE LEGAL
PROFESSION, AND SUPPORT THE ACTIVITIES OF THE
INTEGRATED BAR.
CANON 10 - A LAWYER OWES CANDOR, FAIRNESS
AND GOOD FAITH TO THE COURT.
Rule 10.01 - A lawyer shall not do any falsehood, nor
consent to the doing of any court; nor shall he mislead or
allow the court to be misled by any artifice. - Santos, Jr. V.
Atty. Llamas A.C No. 4749 [2000]
 Is a “senior citizen” lawyer exempted from
payment of ITR also exempted from payment
of IBP dues?
While it is true that R.A. No. 7432, §4 grants senior
citizens "exemption from the payment of individual
income taxes: provided, that their annual taxable income
does not exceed the poverty level as determined by the
National Economic and Development Authority (NEDA)
for that year," the exemption does not include
payment of membership or association dues. - Santos,
Jr. V. Atty. Llamas A.C No. 4749 [2000]
 May a lawyer who has lost his Filipino
citizenship still practice law in the
Philippines?
The Constitution provides that the practice of all
professions in the Philippines shall be limited to Filipino
citizens save in cases prescribed by law. Since Filipino
citizenship is a requirement for admission to the bar, loss
thereof terminates membership in the Philippine bar and,
consequently, the privilege to engage in the practice of
law. In other words, the loss of Filipino citizenship ipso
jure terminates the privilege to practice law in the
Philippines. The practice of law is a privilege denied to
foreigners. - Petition for leave to resume practice of
law,Dacanay B.M. No. 1678 December 17, 2007
 Effect of reacquisition of Filipino citizenship
A Filipino lawyer who becomes a citizen of another
country and later re-acquires his Philippine citizenship
under R.A. No. 9225, remains to be a member of the
Philippine Bar. – Petition to reacquire the privilege to
practice law in the Philippines, Muneses, B.M. 2112 [2012]
 Requirements before one can resume practice
of law after reacquiring Filipino citizenship
8
Before a lawyer who reacquires Filipino citizenship
pursuant to RA 9225 can resume his law practice, he must
first secure from this Court the authority to do so,
conditioned on:
(a) the updating and payment in full of the annual
membership dues in the IBP;
(b) the payment of professional tax;
(c) the completion of at least 36 credit hours of
mandatory continuing legal education; this is
specially significant to refresh the
applicant/petitioner’s knowledge of Philippine laws
and update him of legal developments and
(d) the retaking of the lawyer’s oath which will not only
remind him of his duties and responsibilities as a
lawyer and as an officer of the Court, but also renew
his pledge to maintain allegiance to the Republic of
the Philippines. – Petition for leave to resume practice
of law, Dacanay B.M. No. 1678 December 17, 2007
 What is the purpose for requiring the retaking
of Lawyer’s Oath?
The retaking of the lawyer’s oath which will not only
remind him of his duties and responsibilities as a lawyer
and as an officer of the Court, but also renew his pledge to
maintain allegiance to the Republic of the Philippines.
 Citizenship requirement in order to practice
law in the Philippines
Constitution Art. 12 Section 14. xxx. The practice of all
professions in the Philippines shall be limited to Filipino
citizens, save in cases prescribed by law.
 Requirements for all applicants for admission
to the bar
Section 2, Rule 138 (Attorneys and Admission to Bar) of
the Rules of Court:
Requirements for all applicants for admission to the bar.
– Every applicant for admission as a member of the bar
must be a citizen of the Philippines, at least
twenty-one years of age, of good moral character,
and a resident of the Philippines; and must produce
before the Supreme Court satisfactory evidence of
good moral character, and that no charges against
him, involving moral turpitude, have been filed or
are pending in any court in the Philippines.
 Continuing requirements to practice law
The second requisite for the practice of law ―
membership in good standing ― is a continuing
requirement. This means continued membership and,
concomitantly, payment of annual membership dues in
the IBP; payment of the annual professional tax;
compliance with the mandatory continuing legal
education requirement; faithful observance of the rules
and ethics of the legal profession and being continually
subject to judicial disciplinary control. -Petition for leave
to resume practice of law, Dacanay B.M. No. 1678
December 17, 2007
  Phases of admission to the bar
Moreover, admission to the bar involves various phases
such as furnishing satisfactory proof of educational,
moral and other qualifications; passing the bar
examinations; taking the lawyer’s oath and signing
the roll of attorneys and receiving from the clerk of
court of this Court a certificate of the license to
practice. - Petition for leave to resume practice of
law,Dacanay B.M. No. 1678 December 17, 2007
 Can a successful examinee take his oath
before any person allowed by law to
administer an oath?
Rule 138 Sec. 17. Admission and oath of successful
applicants. - 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.
Inasmuch as the oath as lawyer is a prerequisite to the
practice of law and may be taken only, before the
Supreme Court, by those authorized by the latter to
engage in such practice xxx. – PP v. De Luna, et. al. G.R.
Nos. L-10236-48. January 31, 1958
 Section 2. Section 41 of the Administrative
Code of 1987 is hereby amended to read as
follows
Sec. 41. Officers Authorized to Administer Oath. - The
following officers have general authority to administer
oaths:
President;
Vice-President;
Members and Secretaries of both Houses of the Congress;
Members of the Judiciary;
Secretaries of Departments;
provincial governors and lieutenant-governors;
city mayors;
municipal mayors;
bureau directors;
…authorized to administer oath
regional directors;
clerks of courts;
registrars of deeds;
other civilian officers in the public service of the
government of the Philippines whose appointments are
vested in the President and are subject to confirmation by
the Commission on Appointments;
all other constitutional officers;
and notaries public."
 Duties of Attorneys
Rule 138 section 20 - It is the duty of an attorney:
(a) To maintain allegiance to the Republic of the
Philippines and to support the Constitution and
obey the laws of the Philippines;
9
(b) To observe and maintain the respect due to the courts
of justice and judicial officers;
(c) 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;
(d) 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;
(e) To maintain inviolate the confidence, and at every
peril to himself, to preserve the secrets of his client,
and to accept no compensation in connection with
his client's business except from him or with his
knowledge and approval;
(f) To abstain from all offensive personality and to
advance no fact prejudicial to the honor or
reputation of a party or witness, unless required by
the justice of the cause with which he is charged;
(g) 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;
(h) Never to reject, for any consideration personal to
himself, the cause of the defenseless or oppressed;
(i) In the defense of a person accused of 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.
 What is a lawyer’s proof of authority to
practice of law?
Rule 138 Sec. 18. Certificate. - The Supreme Court shall
thereupon admit the applicant as a member of the bar for
all the courts of the Philippines, and shall direct an order
to be entered to that effect upon its records, and that a
certificate of such record be given to him by the clerk of
court, which certificate shall be his authority to
practice.
 Authority to appear in behalf of a client
Sec. 21. Authority of attorney to appear. - An attorney is
presumed to be properly authorized to represent any
cause in which he appears, and no written “power of
attorney” is required to authorize him to appear in
court for his client, but the presiding judge may, on
motion of either party and on reasonable grounds therefor
being shown, require any attorney who assumes the
right to appear in a case to produce or prove the
authority under which he appears, and to disclose,
whenever pertinent to any issue, the name of the person
who employed him, and may thereupon make such
order as justice requires. An attorney wilfully appearing in
court for a person without being employed, unless by
leave of the court, may be punished for contempt as an
officer of the court who has misbehaved in his official
transactions.
 Presumption in favor of the counsel’s
authority to appear

The presumption in favor of the counsels authority to
appear in behalf of a client is a strong one. A lawyer is not
even required to present a written authorization from the
client. In fact, the absence of a formal notice of entry
of appearance will not invalidate the acts performed
by the counsel in his clients name. However, the court,
on its own initiative or on motion of the other party
require a lawyer to adduce authorization from the client.
– LBP v. Pamintuan Development, G.R. no. 16788, October
25, 2005
 Failure to sign in the Roll of Attorneys
Petitioner did not sign in the Roll of Attorneys for 32 years.
What he had signed at the entrance of the PICC was
probably just an attendance record.
As Medado is not yet a full-fledged lawyer, we cannot
suspend him from the practice of law. However, we see it
fit to impose upon him a penalty akin to suspension by
allowing him to sign in the Roll of Attorneys one ( 1) year
after receipt of this Resolution. For his transgression of the
prohibition against the unauthorized practice of law, we
likewise see it fit to fine him in the amount of P32,000. –
Petition to sign in the Roll of Attorneys, Medado, B.M. No.
2540 [2013]
 Name in the Roll of Attorneys must be used in
pleadings
This Court has already severely reprimanded respondent
from using a name other than authorized name in the
"Roll of Attorneys" and was warned that a repetition of
the same overt act may warrant his suspension of
disbarment from office in the future.
- Pangan v. Atty. Dionision
Ramos,A.M. No. 1053 August 31, 1981
 Certificate of Membership & Certificate of
Membership in Good Standing in IBP does not
confer membership in the bar
Certificate of Membership in the Integrated Bar of the
Philippines as well as a Certificate of Membership in
Good Standing with the Quezon City Chapter of the
Integrated Bar of the Philippines do not constitute his
admission to the Philippine Bar and the right to
practice law thereafter. - Re: Elmo Abad, A. M. No. 139
[1983]
 Requirements after flunking the bar 3 times
Sec. 16. Failing candidates to take review course. -
Candidates who have failed the bar examinations for
three times shall be disqualified from taking another
examination unless they show to the satisfaction of the
court that they have enrolled in and passed regular
fourth year review classes as well as attended a pre-
bar review course in a recognized law school.
The professors of the individual review subjects attended
by the candidates under this rule shall certify under oath
that the candidates have regularly attended classes and
passed the subjects under the same conditions as ordinary
10
students and the ratings obtained by them in the
particular subject.
 Requirements after flunking the bar 3 times
Enrollment and completion of pre-bar review course
is an additional requirement under Rule 138 of the Rules
of Court for those who failed the bar examinations for
three (3) or more times. - In re: Purisima, B.M. Nos. 979
and 986 [2002]
 A “Counselor” is not an “Attorney”
The title of "attorney" is reserved to those who, having
obtained the necessary degree in the study of law and
successfully taken the Bar Examinations, have been
admitted to the Integrated Bar of the Philippines and
remain members thereof in good standing; and it is
they only who are authorized to practice law in this
jurisdiction.
Alauya says he does not wish to use the title, "counsellor"
or "counsellor-at-law," because in his region, there are
pejorative connotations to the term, or it is confusingly
similar to that given to local legislators. The ratiocination,
valid or not, is of no moment. His disinclination to use the
title of "counsellor" does not warrant his use of the title of
attorney.
His disinclination to use the title of "counselor" does not
warrant his use of the title of attorney. - Alawi v. Alauya,
A.M. SDC-97-2-P. February 24, 1997
 Can an “indefinite suspension” from the
practice of law prohibit a lawyer from filing a
citizen or taxpayer suit?

Petitioner Alan F. Paguia (petitioner), as citizen and
taxpayer, filed this original action for the writ of
certiorari to invalidate President Gloria Macapagal-
Arroyo’s nomination of respondent former Chief Justice
Hilario G. Davide, Jr. (respondent Davide) as Permanent
Representative to the United Nations (UN) for violation
of Section 23 of Republic Act No. 7157 (RA 7157), the
Philippine Foreign Service Act of 1991.
In their separate Comments, respondent Davide, the
Office of the President, and the Secretary of Foreign
Affairs (respondents) raise threshold issues against the
petition. First, they question petitioner’s standing to
bring this suit because of his indefinite suspension
from the practice of law.
……
An incapacity to bring legal actions peculiar to petitioner
also obtains. Petitioner’s suspension from the practice of
law bars him from performing “any activity, in or out of
court, which requires the application of law, legal
procedure, knowledge, training and experience.”
Certainly, preparing a petition raising carefully
crafted arguments on equal protection grounds and
employing highly legalistic rules of statutory
construction to parse Section 23 of RA 7157 falls
within the proscribed conduct. - Paguia v. Office of the
President, G.R. No. 176278 [2010]
 RULE 7
EXEMPTIONS
 Section 1. Parties exempted from the MCLE
B.M. No. 850 August 22, 2000
The following members of the Bar are exempt from the
MCLE requirement:
(a) The President and the Vice President of the
Philippines, and the Secretaries and
Undersecretaries of Executives Departments;
(b) Senators and Members of the House of
Representatives;
(c) 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 lawyers covered
by the Philippine Judicial Academy program of
continuing judicial education;
……
(d) The Chief State Counsel, Chief State Prosecutor and
Assistant Secretaries of the Department of Justice;
(e) The Solicitor General and the Assistant Solicitor
General;
(f) The Government Corporate Counsel, Deputy and
Assistant Government Corporate Counsel;
(g) The Chairmen and Members of the Constitutional
Commissions;
(h) The Ombudsman, the Overall Deputy Ombudsman,
the Deputy Ombudsmen and the Special
Prosecutor of the Office of the Ombudsman;
(i) Heads of government agencies exercising quasi-judicial
functions;
(j) Incumbent deans, bar reviews and professors of law
who have teaching experience for at least 10 years
accredited law schools;
(k) The Chancellor, Vice-Chancellor and members of the
Corps of Professors and Professorial Lectures of the
Philippine Judicial Academy; and
(l) Governors and Mayors.
……
Section 2. Other parties exempted from the MCLE
The following Members of the Bar are likewise exempt:
(a) Those who are not in law practice, private or
public.
(b) Those who have retired from law practice with the
approval of the IBP Board of Governors.
Section 3. Good cause for exemption from or
modification of requirement
A member may file a verified request setting forth good
cause for exemption (such as physical disability, illness,
post graduate study abroad, proven expertise in law, etc.)
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.
……
Section 4. Change of status
The compliance period shall begin on the first day of the
month in which a member ceases to be exempt under
Sections 1, 2, or 3 of this Rule and shall end on the same
day as that of all other members in the same Compliance
Group.
Section 5. Proof of exemption
11
Applications for exemption from or modification of the
MCLE requirement shall be under oath and supported by
documents.
 Good cause for exemption from (MCLE) or
modification of requirement B.M. 850
Rule 7 Section 3. Good cause for exemption from or
modification of requirement
A member may file a verified request setting forth good
cause for exemption (such as physical disability, illness,
post graduate study abroad, proven expertise in law, etc.)
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.
 Whether respondent is administratively
liable for his failure to comply with the MCLE
requirements.
Section 12(5) of the MCLE Implementing Regulations
provides:
xxxx
(5) Any other act or omission analogous to any of the
foregoing or intended to circumvent or evade
compliance with the MCLE requirements. A member
failing to comply with the continuing legal
education requirement will receive a Non-
Compliance Notice stating his specific deficiency
and will be given sixty (60) days from the receipt of
the notification to explain the deficiency or
otherwise show compliance with the
requirements. Such notice shall be written in capital
letters as follows:
YOUR FAILURE TO PROVIDE ADEQUATE
JUSTIFICATION FOR NON-COMPLIANCE OR PROOF
OF COMPLIANCE WITH THE MCLE REQUIREMENT
WITHIN 60 DAYS FROM RECEIPT OF THIS NOTICE
SHALL BE A CAUSE FOR LISTING YOU AS A
DELINQUENT MEMBER AND SHALL NOT BE
PERMITTED TO PRACTICE LAW UNTIL SUCH TIME
AS ADEQUATE PROOF OF COMPLIANCE IS RECEIVED
BY THE MCLE COMMITTEE.
……
The Member may use the 60-day period to complete his
compliance with the MCLE requirement. Credit units
earned during this period may only be counted toward
compliance with the prior period requirement unless
units in excess of the requirement are earned in which
case the excess may be counted toward meeting the
current compliance period requirement.
A member who is in non-compliance at the end of the
compliance period shall pay a non-compliance fee of
P1,000.00 and shall be listed as a delinquent member
of the IBP by the IBP Board of Governors upon the
recommendation of the MCLE Committee, in which
case Rule 139-A of the Rules of Court shall apply.
……
Rule 139-A
Section 10. Effect of non-payment of dues. — Subject to
the provisions of Section 12 of this Rule, default in the
payment of annual dues for six months shall warrant
suspension of membership in the Integrated Bar, and
default in such payment for one year shall be a ground
for the removal of the name of the delinquent
member from the Roll of Attorneys.
……
In addition, his listing as a delinquent member of the
IBP is also akin to suspension because he shall not be
permitted to practice law until such time as he submits
proof of full compliance to the IBP Board of Governors,
and the IBP Board of Governors has notified the MCLE
Committee of his reinstatement, under Section 14 of the
MCLE Implementing Regulations. Hence, we deem it
proper to declare respondent as a delinquent member
of the IBP and to suspend him from the practice of law
for six months or until he has fully complied with the
requirements of the MCLE for the First, Second, Third,
and Fourth Compliance Periods, whichever is later, and
he has fully paid the required non-compliance and
reinstatement fees. - Atty. Samuel B. Amado v. Atty.
Homobono A. Adaza, A.C. No. 9834, August 26, 2015
……
With regard to Orlando’s alleged violation of BM No. 1922,
the Court agrees with the IBP that his failure to disclose
the required information for MCLE compliance in the
complaint for damages he had filed against his brother
Marcelo is not a ground for disbarment. At most, his
violation shall only be cause for the dismissal of the
complaint as well as the expunction thereof from the
records. – Maximo Doble III v. Atty. Orlando 0. Ailes, A.C.
No. 10628, July 01, 2015
 Failure to disclose MCLE information in
pleadings
OCA Circular no. 79-2014
Administrator on this matter which is contrary to the
foregoing is hereby superseded.
For your information, guidance and strict compliance. 26
May 2014
 Written entry of appearance and MCLE
compliance SC Resolution February 17, 2015

"B.M. No. 850 (Re: Rules on Mandatory Continuing Legal
Education for Active Members of the Integrated Bar of the
Philippines). Acting on the Letter dated January 13, 2015 of
Hon. Bernardo P. Pardo, Chairperson, MCLE Governing
Board, submitting for the Court's approval the MCLE
Governing Board Resolution No. 007-2014, the Court
Resolved to REQUIRE all members of the Integrated Bar
of the Philippines 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."
Thank you for your attention!!

In the Resolution of the Court En Banc dated January 14,

2014 in the above-cited administrative matter, the Court
RESOLVED, upon the recommendation of the MCLE
Governing Board, to: (a) AMEND the June 3, 2008
resolution by repealing the phrase “Failure to disclose the
required information would cause the dismissal of the
case and the expunction of the pleadings from the
records” and replacing it with “Failure to disclose the
required information would subject the counsel to
appropriate penalty and disciplinary action”; and
……
(b) PRESCRIBE the following rules for non-disclosure of
current MCLE compliance/exemption number in the
pleadings:
(i) The lawyer shall be imposed a fine of P2,000.00 for the
first offense, P3,000.00 for the second offense
and P4,000.00 for the third offense;
(ii) In addition to the fine, counsel may be listed as a
delinquent member of the Bar pursuant to
Section 2, Rule 13 of Bar Matter No. 850 and its
implementing rules and regulations; and
(iii) The non-compliant lawyer shall be discharged from
the case and the client/s shall be allowed to
secure the services of a new counsel with the
concomitant right to demand the return of
fees already paid to the non-compliant
lawyer.
This revokes OCA Circular No. 66-2008 dated July 22,
2008, and any prior circular from the Office of the Court

12