FACTS: 2 years after passing the Bar exam, a complaint was filed against Diao on false

representation of his application to the Bar examination that he has the requisite academic
qualification. The Solicitor General made an investigation and recommended to strike the name
of Diao off the rolls of attorney because contrary to the allegations in his petition for
examination in this Court, he had not completed, before taking up law subjects, the required
pre-legal education prescribed by the Department of Private Education.

I: WON Diao may continue to practice the law profession.

RULING: The court held that his admission to the bar was under the pretense that he had
acquired a pre-legal education, an academic requirement before one could take the bar exam.
Such admission having been obtained under false pretenses is thereby revoked. The fact that he
hurdled the Bar examinations is immaterial. Passing such examinations is not the only
qualification to become an attorney-at-law, taking the prescribed courses of legal study in the
regular manner is equally essential. His name thus was stricken out from the Rolls of Attorneys.