CONFLICT OF INTERESTS client whether he is acting as a lawyer or in
another capacity.
Canon 21, 21.04
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.
Canon 15, 15.01 to 15.08
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 15.02.- A lawyer shall be bound by the
rule on privilege communication in respect of
matters disclosed to him by a prospective
client.
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.
Rule 15.04. - A lawyer may, with the written
consent of all concerned, act as mediator,
conciliator or arbitrator in settling disputes.
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.
Rule 15.06. - A lawyer shall not state or imply
that he is able to influence any public official,
tribunal or legislative body.
Rule 15.07. - A lawyer shall impress upon his
client compliance with the laws and the
principles of fairness.
Rule 15.08. - A lawyer who is engaged in
another profession or occupation concurrently
with the practice of law shall make clear to his
Jalandoni vs. Villarosa
Legal Ethics; Attorneys; Disbarment;
Complaints against members of the Bar are
pursued to preserve the integrity of the legal
profession, not for private vendetta
.—Complaints against members of the Bar are
pursued to preserve the integrity of the legal
profession, not for private vendetta. Thus,
whoever has such personal knowledge of
facts constituting a cause of action against
erring lawyers may file a verified complaint
with the Court or the IBP.
Same; Same; Same; ​Conflict of Interests;
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.
—Canon 15 of the Code of Professional
Responsibility (CPR) highlights the need for
candor, fairness and loyalty in all the dealings
of lawyers with their clients. Rule 15.03 of the
CPR aptly provides: 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. 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. Conflict of interest may be
determined in this manner: There is
representation of conflicting interests if the
acceptance of the new retainer will require the
attorney to do anything which will injuriously
affect his first client in any matter in which he
represents him and also whether he will be
called upon in his new relation, to use against
his first client any knowledge acquired through
their connection.
Same; Same; Same; The rule on conflict of
interests covers not only cases in which
confidential communications have been
confided but also those in which no
confidence has been bestowed or will be
used—the rule prohibits a lawyer 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 in totally unrelated
cases
Hornilla vs Salunat
Administrative Law; Attorneys; Conflict of
Interests; There is conflict of interest when
a lawyer represents inconsistent interests
of two or more opposing parties; Test to
determine conflict of interest​.—There is
conflict of interest when a lawyer represents
inconsistent interests of two or more opposing
parties. The test is “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. In brief, if he argues for one
client, this argument will be opposed by him
when he argues for the other client.” This rule
covers not only cases in which confidential
communications have been confided, but also
those in which no confidence has been
bestowed or will be used. Also, there is
conflict of interests 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 represents
him and also whether he will be called upon in
his new relation to use against his first client
any knowledge acquired through their
connection. Another test of the inconsistency
of interests is whether the acceptance of a
new relation will prevent an attorney from the
full discharge of his duty of undivided fidelity
and loyalty to his client or invite suspicion of
unfaithfulness or double dealing in the
performance thereof.
Same; Same; Same; ​A lawyer engaged as
counsel for a corporation cannot represent
members of the same corporation’s board
of directors in a derivative suit brought
against them.
Perez vs Dela Torre
Same; Same; Same; ​The prohibition against
representing conflicting interests is
founded on principles of public policy and
good taste—it behooves lawyers not only
to keep inviolate the client’s confidence,
but also to avoid the appearance of
impropriety 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 vs Cabucana
Legal Ethics; Attorneys​; Conflict of Interest;
It is well-settled that a lawyer is barred
from representing conflicting interests
except by written consent of all concerned
given after a full disclosure of the facts;
One test of inconsistency of interest is
whether the acceptance of a new relation
would prevent the full discharge of a
lawyer’s duty of undivided fidelity and
loyalty to the client or invite suspicion of
unfaithfulness or double-dealing in the
performance of that duty
Same; Same; Same; ​The proscription
against representation of conflicting
interests applies to a situation where the
opposing parties are present clients in the
same action or in an unrelated action; The
representation of opposing clients, though
unrelated, constitutes conflict of interest
or, at the very least, invites suspicion of
double dealing which the Court cannot
allow.
Same; Same; Same; ​When the same law
firm handles the civil case of the present
client and a prospective client, the rule
against representing conflicting interests
applies
Same; Same; Same; While there may be
instances where lawyers cannot decline
representation, they cannot be made to
labor under the conflict of interest between
a present client and a prospective one.
Catalan vs. Silvosa
Legal Ethics; Attorneys; Conflict of Interests;
A lawyer shall not represent conflicting
interests except by written consent of all
concerned given after a full disclosure of
facts. ​Atty. Catalan relies on Rule 6.03 which
states that “A lawyer shall not, after leaving
government service, accept engagement or
employment in connection with any matter in
which he had intervened while in said
service.” Atty. Silvosa, on the hand, relies on
Rule 2.01 which provides that “A lawyer shall
not reject, except for valid reasons the cause
of the defenseless or the oppressed” and on
Canon 14 which provides that “A lawyer shall
not refuse his services to the needy.” We
agree with Comm. Funa’s finding that Atty.
Silvosa violated Rule 6.03. When he entered
his appearance on the Motion to Post Bail
Bond Pending Appeal, Atty. Silvosa
conveniently forgot Rule 15.03 which provides
that “A lawyer shall not represent conflicting
interests except by written consent of all
concerned given after a full disclosure of
facts.”
Seares, Jr. vs. Gonzales
Attorneys; Legal Ethics; For administrative
liability under Canon 18 to attach, the
negligent act of the attorney should be
gross and inexcusable as to lead to a
result that was highly prejudicial to the
client’s interest.
Attorneys; Legal Ethics; ​Code of Professional
Responsibility; Conflict of Interests; Canon
15 of the Code of Professional
Responsibility prohibits an attorney from
representing a party in a controversy that
is either directly or indirectly related to the
subject matter of a previous litigation
involving another client.
Artezuela vs. Maderazo
Same; Same; ​To be guilty of representing
conflicting interests, a counsel-of-record
of one party need not also be
counsel-of-record of the adverse party; To
require that he also be counsel-of-record
of the adverse party would punish only the
most obvious form of deceit and reward,
with impunity, the highest form of
disloyalty.
Same; Same; An attorney may not, without
being guilty of professional misconduct,
act as counsel for a person whose interest
conflicts with that of his present or former
client.
Pormento vs Pontevedra
Same; Same; Same; Tests to determine if
there is a representation of conflicting
interests.
—Jurisprudence instructs that there is a
representation of conflicting interests if the
acceptance of the new retainer will require the
attorney to do anything which will injuriously
affect his first client in any matter in which he
represents him and also whether he will be
called upon in his new relation, to use against
his first client any knowledge acquired through
their connection. Another test to determine if
there is a representation of conflicting
interests is whether the acceptance of a new
relation will prevent an attorney from the full
discharge of his duty of undivided fidelity and
loyalty to his client or invite suspicion of
unfaithfulness or double dealing in the
performance thereof.
Same; Same; Same; Same; ​A lawyer is
forbidden from representing a subsequent
client against a former client when the
subject matter of the present controversy
is related, directly or indirectly, to the
subject matter of the previous litigation in
which he appeared for the former client
Same; Same; Same; Same; The proscription
against representation of conflicting
interests finds application where the
conflicting interests arise with respect to
the same general matter and is applicable
however slight such adverse interest may
be.
Same; Same; Same; Same; The fact that the
conflict of interests is remote or merely
probable does not make the prohibition
inoperative.
Same; Same; Same; Same; The termination
of the relation of attorney and client
provides no justification for a lawyer to
represent an interest adverse to or in
conflict with that of the former client.
Limitations/Restrictions of government
lawyers in the practice of law
Canon 6, 6.01 to 6.03
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.
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.
Rule 6.03 - A lawyer shall not, after leaving
government service, accept engagement or
employment in connection with any matter in
which he had intervened while in said service.
Rule 15.06. - A lawyer shall not state or imply
that he is able to influence any public official,
tribunal or legislative body.
Rule 3.03 ​- Where a partner accepts public
office, he shall withdrawal from the firm and
his name shall be dropped from the firm name
unless the law allows him to practice law
currently.
Sec 35, Rule 138, Rules of Court
Certain attorneys not to practice. — No judge
or other official or employee of the superior
courts or of the Office of the Solicitor General,
shall engage in private practice as a member
of the bar or give professional advice to
clients.
Section 7 (b) R.A. 6713. Prohibited Acts
and Transactions.
(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; or
Olazo vs Tinga
Same; Same; Same; Code of Conduct and
Ethical Standards for Public Officials and
Employees (R.A. No. 6713); ​As a rule,
government lawyers are not allowed to
engage in the private practice of their
profession during their incumbency. ​By way
of exception, a government lawyer can
engage in the practice of his or her
profession under the following conditions:
first, the private practice is authorized by
the Constitution or by the law; and second,
the practice will not conflict or tend to
conflict with his or her official functions.
Ramos vs. Imbang
Same; Same; Same; ​Lawyers in government client and the new client are
government service cannot handle private entirely parallel.
cases for they are expected to devote
themselves fulltime to the work of their Ali vs. Bubong
respective offices.
Same; Same; Same; Same; As an officer of
Same; Same; Same; Public Attorney’s the court one is subject to a rigid
Office (PAO); The Public Attorney’s Office discipline that demands that in his every
(PAO) was created for the purpose of exertion the only criterion be that truth and
providing free legal assistance to indigent justice triumph.
litigants; A Public Attorney’s Office (PAO) Same; Same; Same; Same; A lawyer in
lawyer should not accept attorney’s fees government service is a keeper of the
from a party as this is inconsistent with the public faith and is burdened with high
office’s mission. degree of social responsibility, perhaps
higher than her brethren in private
PCGG vs. Sandiganbayan & Tan practice.
Same; Same; Conflict of Interest;
Same; Same; Same; Same; The
“Adverse-Interest Conflicts” and
ill-conceived use of his knowledge of the
“Congruent-Interest Conflicts,” and
intricacies of the law calls for nothing less
“Revolving Door,” ​Explained; Words and
than the withdrawal of his privilege to
Phrases; As early as 1924, some American
practice law.
Bar Association (ABA) members have
questioned the form and function of the
canons and among their concerns was the Maderada vs. Mediodea
“revolving door” or “the process by which
S​ame; Same; Same; Private Practice Defined;
lawyers and others temporarily enter
Complainant cannot be said to be in the
government service from private life and
practice of law.—
then leave it for large fees in private
practice, where they can exploit Private practice ​has been defined by this
information, contacts, and influence Court as follows: “x x x. Practice is more
garnered in government service”; than an isolated appearance, for it consists
“Adverse-interest conflicts” exist where in frequent or customary action, a
the matter in which the former government succession of acts of the same kind. In
lawyer represents a client in private other words, it is frequent habitual
practice is substantially related to a matter exercise. Practice of law to fall within the
that the lawyer dealt with while employed prohibition of statute [referring to the
by the government and the interests of the prohibition for judges and other officials or
current and former are adverse; employees of the superior courts or of the
“Congruent-interest representation Office of the Solicitor General from
conflicts” are unique to government engaging in private practice] has been
lawyers and apply primarily to former interpreted as customarily or habitually
government lawyers, prohibiting lawyers holding one’s self out to the public, as a
from representing a private practice client lawyer and demanding payment for such
even if the interests of the former services, x x x.” ​Clearly, in appearing for
herself, complainant was not customarily or
habitually holding herself out to the public as a
lawyer. Neither was she demanding payment
for such services. Hence, she cannot be said
to be in the practice of law.
Same; Same; Same; Same; ​Her being an
employee of the judiciary does not remove
from her the right to proceedings in
propria persona or to self-representation.
Same; Same; Same; Same; The raison
d’etre for allowing litigants to represent
themselves in court will not apply when a
person is already appearing for another
party
CANON 16
Rule 16.01 - A lawyer shall account for all
money or property collected or received for or
from the client.
Rule 16.02 - A lawyer shall keep the funds of
each client separate and apart from his own
and those of others kept by him.
Rule 16.03 - A lawyer shall deliver the funds
and property of his client when due or upon
demand. However, he shall have a lien over
the funds and may apply so much thereof as
may be necessary to satisfy his lawful fees
and disbursements, giving notice promptly
thereafter to his client. He shall also have a
lien to the same extent on all judgments and
executions he has secured for his client as
provided for in the Rules of Court.
Rule 16.04 - A lawyer shall not borrow money
from his client unless the client's interest 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.
RULE 138
Section 24. Compensation of attorneys;
agreement as to fees. — An attorney shall be
entitled to have and recover from his client no
more than a reasonable compensation for his
services, with a view to the importance of the
subject matter of the controversy, the extent of
the services rendered, and the professional
standing of the attorney. No court shall be
bound by the opinion of attorneys as expert
witnesses as to the proper compensation, but
may disregard such testimony and base its
conclusion on its own professional knowledge.
A written contract for services shall control the
amount to be paid therefor unless found by
the court to be unconscionable or
unreasonable.
Section 25. Unlawful retention of client's
funds; contempt. — When an attorney unjustly
retains in his hands money of his client after it
has been demanded, he may be punished for
contempt as an officer of the Court who has
misbehaved in his official transactions; but
proceedings under this section shall not be a
bar to a criminal prosecution.
Section 37. Attorneys' liens. — An attorney
shall have 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 such funds to
the satisfaction thereof. He shall also have a
lien to the same extent upon all judgments for
the payment of money, and executions issued
in pursuance of such judgments, which he has
secured in a litigation of his client, from and
after the time when he shall have the caused
a statement of his claim of such lien to be
entered upon the records of the court
rendering such judgment, or issuing such
execution, and shall have the caused written
notice thereof to be delivered to his client and
to the adverse party; and he shall have the
same right and power over such judgments
and executions as his client would have to
enforce his lien and secure the payment of his
just fees and disbursements.
Atty. Salomon vs. Atty. Frial
Legal Ethics; Attorneys; Grave Misconduct;
Attachments; A writ of Attachment issues to
prevent the defendant from disposing of the
attached property, thus securing the
satisfaction of any judgment that may be
recovered by the plaintiff or any proper party;
Money or other trust property coming into
the possession of the lawyer should be
reported and accounted for promptly and
should not under any circumstances be
commingled with his own or be used by
him.
Same; Same; Same; Same; For his
negligence and unauthorized possession
of attached cars, respondent lawyer is
guilty of infidelity in the custody of said
cars and grave misconduct.
Almendarez, Jr. vs. Atty. Langit
Legal Ethics; Attorneys; Attorney’s Lien; A
lawyer is not entitled to unilaterally
appropriate his client’s money for himself
by the mere fact that the client owes him
attorney’s fees.
Same; Same; Contempt; A lawyer’s failure
to turn over the money to his client despite
the latter’s demands gives rise to the
presumption that he had converted the
money for his personal use and benefit, a
gross violation of general morality as well
as of professional ethics, impairing public
confidence in the legal profession, and
which also renders the lawyer liable for
contempt.
Chua vs. Atty. Mesina
Legal Profession; Attorneys; Disbarment;
Advising clients to execute another Deed
of Absolute Sale antedated to 1979 to
evade payment of capital gains taxes, the
lawyer violated his duty to promote
respect for law and legal processes, and
not to abet activities aimed at defiance of
the law— what intended to, as defrauding
not a private party but the government is
aggravating.
Same; Same; Same; ​When respondent
convinced complainants to execute
another document, a simulated Deed of
Absolute Sale wherein they made it appear
that complainants reconveyed the
Melencio property to his mother, he
committed dishonesty
Dalisay vs. Atty. Mauricio
Legal Ethics; Attorneys; Once a lawyer
accepts money from a client, an
attorney-client relationship is established,
giving rise to the duty of fidelity to the
client’s cause.
Same; Same; ​Attorney-Client Relationship;
Money entrusted to a lawyer for a specific
purpose, such as for filing fee, but not
used for failure to file the case should be
immediately returned.
Same; Same; Same; Same; When a lawyer
accepts a case, his acceptance is implied
representation that he possesses the
requisite academic learning, skill and
ability to handle the case.
Tarog vs. RIcafort
Attorneys; Code of Professional
Responsibility; A lawyer shall account for all
money or property collected or received
for or from the client.
Same; Same; ​A lawyer shall keep the funds
of each client separate and apart from his
own and those of others kept by him
Bayonla vs. Atty. Reyes
Administrative Law; Attorneys; Code of
Professional Responsibility; ​A lawyer shall
hold in trust all moneys and properties of
her client that may come into her
possession.
Same; Same; Same; The unjustified
withholding of money belonging to the
client warrants the imposition of
disciplinary sanctions on the lawyer.
J.K. Mercado and Sons vs. Atty. De Vera
Administrative Law; Attorneys; Practice of
law embraces any activity, in or out of
court, which requires the application of
law, as well as legal principles, practice or
procedure and calls for legal knowledge,
training and experience.
Burbe vs. Atty. Magulta
Same; Same; ​Lawyer-Client Relationship; If
a person, in respect to business affairs or
troubles of any kind, consults a lawyer
with a view to obtaining professional
advice or assistance, and the attorney
voluntarily permits or acquiesces with the
consultation, then the professional
employment is established.
Same; Same; Same; ​A lawyer-client
relationship exists notwithstanding the
close personal relationship between the
lawyer and the complainant or the
nonpayment of the former’s fees.
Same; Same; Same; A lawyer falls short of
the standard demanded from attorneys
when he converts into his legal fees the
filing fee entrusted to him by his client and
thus fails to file the complaint promptly,
and the fact that he returns the amount
does not exculpate him from his breach of
duty.
Judge Angeles vs. Atty. Uy Jr
Same; Same; Professional Misconduct;
Lawyers are bound to promptly account
for money or property received by them on
behalf of their clients and failure to do so
constitutes professional misconduct.
—The records do not clearly show whether
Attorney Uy had in fact appropriated the said
amount; in fact, Mrs. Del Rosario
acknowledged that she had received it on
February 12, 1999. They do show, however,
that respondent failed to promptly report that
amount to her. This is clearly a violation of his
professional responsibility. Indeed, in Aya v.
Bigornia, the Court ruled that money collected
by a lawyer in favor of his clients must be
immediately turned over to them. In Daroy v.
Legaspi, the Court held that “lawyers are
bound to promptly account for money or
property received by them on behalf of their
clients and failure to do so constitutes
professional misconduct.”
CANON 15
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.
CANON 21
- A LAWYER SHALL PRESERVE THE
CONFIDENCE AND SECRETS OF HIS
CLIENT EVEN AFTER THE
ATTORNEY-CLIENT RELATION IS
TERMINATED.
Palm vs. Atty. Iledan
Legal Ethics; Attorneys; Conflict of Interests;
Where the documents are public records,
they could not be considered confidential;
Even if the information about the necessity
to amend the corporate by-laws may have
been given to respondent lawyer, it could
not be considered a confidential
information—since the proposed
amendments must be approved by at least
a majority of the stockholders, and copies
of the amended by-laws must be filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission
(SEC), the information could not have been
intended to be confidential.
Santos Foundation vs. Atty. Funk
Attorneys; Legal Ethics; Code of Professional
Responsibility; ​Conflicts of Interests; A
lawyer cannot represent conflicting
interests except by written consent of all
concerned given after a full disclosure of
the facts.
Quiambao vs. Atty. Bamba
Legal Ethics; Attorneys; ​Conflict of Interests;
It behooves lawyers not only to keep
inviolate the client’s confidence, but also
avoid appearance of treachery and
double-dealing for only then can litigants
be encouraged to entrust their secrets to
their lawyers—in the course of a
lawyer-client relationship, the lawyer
learns all the facts connected with the
client’s case, including the weak and
strong points of the case.
Same; Same; Same; The proscription
against representation of conflicting
interests applies to a situation where the
opposing parties are present clients in the
same action or in an unrelated action—a
lawyer’s representation of opposing
clients in two cases, though unrelated,
obviously constitutes conflict of interests,
or at least, invites a suspicion of double
dealing.
Same; Same; Same; ​The representation of
conflicting interest in good faith and with
honest intention on the part of the lawyer
does not make the proscription
inoperative; Lawyers are not obliged to act
either as an adviser or advocate to every
person who wish to become their
client—they have the right to decline such
employment subject to the Code of
Professional Responsibility.
De Guzman vs. Atty. De Dios
Legal Ethics; Attorneys; Conflict of Interests;
Where a lawyer was retained by a person
to form a corporation and appeared as
counsel in behalf of said person but said
lawyer was subsequently shown to be in
collusion with the board of directors of the
corporation against the said client, there is
a clear case of conflict of interest.
Terminating and Establishing Attorney-Client
Relationship
Virgo vs. Atty. Amorin
Legal Ethics; Attorney-Client Relationships;
Relationship is said to exist when a lawyer
acquiesces or voluntarily permits the
consultation of a person, who in respect to
a business or trouble of any kind, consults
a lawyer with a view of obtaining
professional advice or assistance; It is not
essential that the client should have
employed the lawyer on any previous
occasion or that any retainer should have
been paid, promised or charged for,
neither is it material that the attorney
consulted did not afterward undertake the
case about which the consultation was
had, for as long as the advice and
assistance of the attorney is sought and
received in matters pertinent to his
profession.
Urban Bank vs. Atty. Pena
Rule 138 Section 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 attorneys wilfully appear 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.
Francisco vs. Atty. Portugal
Administrative Law; Attorneys; ​In a criminal
case, the lawyer for the accused has a
higher duty to be circumspect in defending
the accused.
—In a criminal case like that handled by
respondent in behalf of the accused,
respondent has a higher duty to be
circumspect in defending the accused for it is
not only the property of the accused which
stands to be lost but more importantly, their
right to their life and liberty.
Same; Same; ​It is the counsel, not his
client, who has the duty to file the Notice
of Withdrawal​.
—Respondent ought to know that he was the
one who should have filed the Notice to
Withdraw and not the accused. His tale that
he sent a registered letter to the accused and
gave them instructions on how to go about
respondent’s withdrawal from the case defies
credulity. It should have been respondent who
undertook the appropriate measures for the
proper withdrawal of his representation. He
should not have relied on his client to do it for
him if such was truly the case. Without the
presentation of the alleged registry receipt (or
the return card, which confirms the receipt of
the mail by the recipient) of the letter he
allegedly sent to PO3 Joaquin, the Court
cannot lend credence to respondent’s naked
claim, especially so that complainants have
been resolute in their stand that they did not
hear from respondent after the latter had filed
the ad cautelam petition. He could relieve
himself of his responsibility as counsel only
first by securing the written conformity of the
accused and filing it with the court pursuant to
Rule 138, Section 26 of the Rules of Court.
Same; Same; ​A client has the absolute
right to terminate the attorney client
relation at anytime with or without cause
-​The right of an attorney to withdraw or
terminate the relation other than for sufficient
cause is, however, considerably restricted.
Among the fundamental rules of ethics is the
principle that an attorney who undertakes to
conduct an action impliedly stipulates to carry
it to its conclusion. He is not at liberty to
abandon it without reasonable cause. A
lawyer’s right to withdraw from a case before
its final adjudication arises ​only from the
client’s written consent or from a good
cause.
Canon 22
Rule 22.01 - A lawyer may withdraw his
services in any of the following case:
(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.
Atty. Jalandoni vs. Atty. Villarosa
Same; Same; ​Withdrawal of Appearance;
The right of an attorney to withdraw or
terminate the relation other than for
sufficient cause is considerably
restricted—an attorney may only retire
from a case either by written consent of
his client or by permission of the court
after due notice and hearing, in which
event the attorney should see to it that the
name of the new lawyer is recorded in the
case
B.R. Sebastian Ent. vs. CA
Lawyers; Pleadings and Practice; ​Death of
Atty. Crispin Baizas did not extinguish the
lawyer-client relationships between the law
firm of Baizas, Alberto and Associates and
petitioner.
Judicial Clemency and Reinstatement
In Re. Petition for Reinstatement of Torres
Attorneys; Reinstatement to the Bar; When
exercising its inherent power to grant
reinstatement, the Court should see to it
that only those who establish their present
moral fitness and knowledge of the law will
be readmitted to the Bar.
Same; Same; The basic inquiry in a petition
for reinstatement to the practice of law is
whether the lawyer has sufficiently
rehabilitated himself or herself in conduct
and character
Same; Same; Judicial Clemency; ​Guidelines
Laid Down by the Supreme Court (SC) in
Resolving Requests for Judicial
Clemency.​—
In Re: Letter of Judge Augustus C. Diaz,
Metropolitan Trial Court of Quezon City,
Branch 37, Appealing for Judicial Clemency,
533 SCRA 534 (2007), the Court laid down
the following guidelines in resolving requests
for judicial clemency, to wit:
1. There must be proof of remorse and
reformation. These shall include but
should not be limited to certifications or
testimonials of the officer(s) or chapter(s)
of the Integrated Bar of the Philippines,
judges or judges associations and
prominent members of the community with
proven integrity and probity. A subsequent
finding of guilt in an administrative case
for the same or similar misconduct will
give rise to a strong presumption of
non-reformation.
2. Sufficient time must have lapsed from
the imposition of the penalty to ensure a
period of reform.
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
(such as intellectual aptitude, learning or
legal acumen or contribution to legal
scholarship and the development of the
legal system or administrative and other
relevant skills), as well as potential for
public service. 5. There must be other
relevant factors and circumstances that
may justify clemency.
Same; Same; Same; The principle which
should hold true not only for judges but also
for lawyers, being officers of the court, is that
judicial “​[c]lemency, as an act of mercy
removing any disqualification, should be
balanced with the preservation of public
confidence in the courts.”
Tan v. Sabandal
Legal Ethics; Lawyers; Admission to the
Bar; Lawyer’s Oath; Since respondent
Sabandal has shown contrition and
willingness to reform and has submitted
proof of his good moral character and civic
consciousness, he may now be allowed to
take the lawyer’s oath.
In Re: Letter of Judge Diaz
Same; Same; Clemency; Proof of
reformation and a showing of potential and
promise are indispensable.
—Clemency, as an act of mercy removing any
disqualification, should be balanced with the
preservation of public confidence in the
courts. The Court will grant it only if there is a
showing that it is merited. ​Proof of
reformation and a showing of potential and
promise are indispensable.
Same; Same; Same; ​Judge Diaz’s 12 years
of service in the judiciary may be taken as
proof of his dedication to the institution.
—In this case, Judge Diaz expressed sincere
repentance for his past malfeasance. He
humbly accepted the verdict of this Court in
Alvarez. Three years have elapsed since the
promulgation of Alvarez. It is sufficient to
ensure that he has learned his lesson and that
he has reformed. His 12 years of service in
the judiciary may be taken as proof of his
dedication to the institution. Thus, the Court
may now open the door of further
opportunities in the judiciary for him.
In Re: Disbarment Proceedings against
Atty. Gutierrez
Same; Same; Same; "​Moral turpitude"
construed.—The term "moral turpitude"
includes every thing which is done
contrary to justice, honesty, modesty or
good morals. (In re Base, 41 Phil. 275). As
used in disbarment statutes, it means an
act of baseness, vileness, or depravity in
the private and social duties which a man
owes to his fellow men or to society in
general, contrary to the accepted rule of
right and duty between man and man.
Same; Same; Same; ​Effect of Pardon.—The
rule that pardon operates to wipe out the
conviction and is a bar to any proceeding
for the disbarment of the attorney after the
pardon has been granted applies only
where the pardon is absolute, but net
when, as in this case the pardon granted is
conditional and merely remitted the
unexecuted portion of the penalty. In such
a case, the attorney must be judged upon
the fact of his conviction for the crime he
has committed.