II.

DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES

OF A LAWYER

CODE OF PROFESSIONAL
RESPONSIBILITY
Q: What are the four-fold
duties of a lawyer?

A:
1. Public/Society – (Canon 1-6, CPR)

2. Bar/Legal Profession – (Canon 7-9, CPR)

3. Courts – (Canon 10-13, CPR)

4. Clients – (Canon 14-22, CPR)

Chapter 1. Lawyer and Society
1. RESPECT FOR LAW AND LEGAL
PROCESSES
Note: Laws refers to all laws, and not just
those of general application. Thus, they
include presidential decrees, executive
orders, and administrative rules and
regulations enforcing or implementing
existing laws. (CPR Annotated, PhilJA)

Legal processes pertain to all the

proceedings in an action or proceeding.
(CPR Annotated, PhilJA)
CANON 1
- A LAWYER SHALL
UPHOLD THE
CONSTITUTION, OBEY
THE LAWS OF THE LAND,
AND PROMOTE RESPECT
FOR LAW AND FOR LEGAL
PROCESSES.
Q: What is the two-fold duty imposed
by the Canon 1 of the Canons of
Professional Responsibility?

A:
1. Personally obey the laws and the legal
processes; and
2. Inspire respect and obedience thereto.
(CPR Annotated, PhilJA)

Note: The portion of Canon 1 which calls

for lawyers to “promote respect for law
and for legal processes” is a call to uphold
the ‘Rule of Law’. (Funan, 2009)
Q. What is the Rule of Law?
A: “The supremacy of the law”. It provides that
decisions should be made by the application of known
legal principles or laws without the intervention of
discretion in their application. (Black’s Law Dictionary)

Note: The lawyer’s duty to uphold the Constitution,

the laws and the rule of law is imposed upon him at
the very moment he becomes a lawyer after reciting
the lawyer’s oath of office. All lawyers therefore are
sworn constitutionalists. (Funa, 2009)

A lawyer’s oath to uphold the cause of justice is

superior to his duty to his client; its primacy is
indisputable. (Cobb-Perez v. Lantin, No. L-22320, July
29, 1968)
Case 1 (Canon 1)
(Donton v. Atty. Tansingco, A.C. No. 6057, June 27, 2006)
Q. Peter Donton filed a complaint against Atty. Emmanuel
Tansingco and others, as the notary public who notarized the
Occupancy Agreement, for estafa thru falsification of public
document.

Atty. Tansingco in his complaint stated that he prepared and

notarized the Occupancy Agreement at the request of Mr. Stier, an
owner and long-time resident of a real property located at Cubao,
Quezon City. Since Mr. Stier is a U.S. Citizen and thereby disqualified
to own real property in his name, he agreed that the property be
transferred in the name of Mr. Donton, a Filipino.

Donton averred that Atty. Tansingco’s act of preparing the

Occupancy Agreement, despite knowledge that Stier is a
foreign national, constitutes serious misconduct and is a
deliberate violation of the Code. Donton prayed that Atty.
Tansingco be disbarred. Is Atty. Tansingco guilty of serious
misconduct?
Answer 1 (Canon 1)
Yes. Atty. Tansingco is liable for violation of Canon 1
and Rule 1.02 of the Code.

A lawyer should not render any service or give advice

to any client which will involve defiance of the laws
which he is bound to uphold and obey.

Atty. Tansingco had sworn to uphold the Constitution.

Thus, he violated his oath and the Code when he
prepared and notarized the Occupancy Agreement to
evade the law against foreign ownership of lands.
Atty. Tansingco used his knowledge of the law to
achieve an unlawful end. Such an act amounts to
malpractice in his office, for which he may be
suspended.
Case 2 (Canon 1)
Prosecutor Coronel entered his appearance
on behalf of the State before a Family Court
in a case for declaration of nullity of
marriage, but he failed to appear in all the
subsequent proceedings. When required by
the Department of Justice to explain, he
argued that the parties in the case were
ably represented by their respective
counsels and that his time would be better
employed in more substantial prosecutorial
functions, such as investigations, inquests
and appearances in court hearings.
Is Atty. Coronel’s explanation tenable?
Answer 2 (Canon 1)
Atty. Coronel’s explanation is not tenable.

The role of the State’s lawyer in nullification of

marriage cases is that of protector of the
institution of marriage (Art 48, FC). “The task of
protecting marriage as an inviolable social
institution requires vigilant and zealous
participation and not mere pro forma
compliance” (Malcampo-Sin v. Sin, G.R. No.
137590, Mar. 26, 2001). This role could not be
left to the private counsels who have been
engaged to protect the private interest of the
parties. (2006 Bar Question)
Rule 1.01, Canon 1

A lawyer shall not

engage in unlawful,
dishonest, immoral
or deceitful conduct.
Q: What are the acts punishable
under this Rule?
A: Act which are unlawful,
dishonest, immoral or deceitful.
Q: Define Unlawful Conduct.
A: It refers to a transgression of
any provision of law which need not
be a penal law. The presence of evil
intent on the part of the lawyer is
not essential in order to bring his
act or omission within the terms of
this Rule.
Q: Define Dishonest Conduct.
A: Dishonest conduct refers to the disposition to lie,
cheat, deceive, defraud, or betray; be
untrustworthy; lacking in integrity, honesty, probity,
integrity in principle, fairness and
straightforwardness.
Q: Define Immoral Conduct.
A: Immoral Conduct refers to a conduct which is
willful, flagrant, or shameless, and which shows a
moral indifference to the opinion of the good and
respectable members of the community. To warrant
disciplinary action, the act must not only be merely
immoral but GROSSLY IMMORAL.
Note: Grossly immoral conduct 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. (Figueroa v. Barranco, SBC Case
No. 519, July 31, 1997)
Q: What are the instances of Gross Immorality and the
resulting consequences?

A:
1. Abandonment of wife and cohabiting with another woman.
DISBARRED. (Obusan v. Obusan, Jr., Adm. Case No. 1392
April 2, 1984)
2. A lawyer who had carnal knowledge with a woman through
a promise of marriage which he did not fulfill. DISBARRED.
(In re: Disbarment of Armando Puno, A.C. No. 389,February
28, 1967)
3. Seduction of a woman who is the niece of a married
woman with whom respondent lawyer had an adulterous
relation. DISBARRED. (Royong v. Oblena, A.C. No. 376, April
30, 1963)
4. Lawyer arranging marriage of his son to a woman with
whom the lawyer had illicit relations. DISBARRED. (Mortel v.
Aspiras,A.M. No. 145, December 28, 1956)
5. Lawyer inveigling a woman into believing that they have been married civilly
to satisfy his carnal desires. DISBARRED. (Terre v. Terre, A.M. No. 2349 July 3,
1992)
6. Lawyer taking advantage of his position as chairman of the college of medicine
and asked a lady student to go with him to Manila where he had carnal
knowledge of her under threat that if she refused, she would flunk in all her
subjects. DISBARRED. (Delos Reyes v. Aznar, A.M. No. 1334 November 28, 1989)
7. Bigamy perpetrated by the lawyer. DISQUALIFIED FROM ADMISSION TO THE
BAR. (Royong vs. Oblena, A.C. No. 376, April 30, 1963)
8. Concubinage coupled with failure to support illegitimate children. SUSPENDED
INDEFINITELY. (Laguitan v. Tinio, A.M. No. 3049, December 4, 1989)
9. Maintaining adulterous relationship with a married woman. SUSPENDED
INDEFINITELY. (Cordova v. Cordova, A.M. No. 3249, November 29, 1989)
10. A retired judge who penned a decision 7 months after he retired, antedating
the decision and forcing his former court staff to include it in the expediente of
the case. DISBARRED. (Radjaie v. Alovera, A.C. No. 4748, August 4,2000)
11. Forging a Special Power of Attorney. SUSPENDED FOR 3 YEARS. (Rural Bank of
Silay, Inc. v. Pilla, A.C. No. 3637, January 24,2001)
12. Attempting to engage in an opium deal SUSPENDED FOR 1 YEAR. ( Piatt v.
Abordo, 58 Phil. 350, September 1, 1933)
13. Facilitating the travel of a person to the U.S. using spurious travel
documents. DISBARRED. (Sebastian v. Calis, A.C. No. 5118, September 9, 1999)
Case 1 (Rule 1.01, Canon 1)
Atty. Adaza obtained a loan from Orbe with
interest. He then issued two checks as
installment. However, the first check was
dishonored. The other check was not accepted for
being a stale check. Efforts were exerted by Orbe
to see him but her efforts turned to be futile.

After a criminal case was filed, Atty. Adaza went

to Orbe’s house and promised to pay the checks.
Orbe then agreed to have the service of the
warrant of arrest withheld but, again, Atty. Adaza
failed to make good of his promise. Did the act of
Atty. Adaza’s in issuing worthless checks
constitute gross misconduct?
Answer 1 (Rule 1.01, Canon 1)
Yes. A member of the bar may be removed or suspended from
office as an attorney for any deceit, malpractice, or misconduct in
office. The word "conduct" used in the rules is not limited to
conduct exhibited in connection with the performance of the
lawyer's professional duties but it also refers to any misconduct,
although not connected with his professional duties, that would
show him to be unfit for the office and unworthy of the privileges
which his license and the law confer upon him. The grounds
expressed in Section 27, Rule 138, of the Rules of Court are not
limitative and are broad enough to cover any misconduct,
including dishonesty, of a lawyer in his professional or private
capacity. Such misdeed puts his moral fiber, as well as his fitness
to continue in the advocacy of law, in serious doubt. Atty.Adaza's
issuance of worthless checks and his contumacious refusal to
comply with his just obligation for nearly eight years is appalling
and hardly deserves compassion from the Court. (Orbe v. Atty.
Adaza, A.C. No. 5252, May 20, 2004)
 Case 2 (Rule 1.01, Canon 1)
Q: Atty. Danilo Velasquez was charged before IBP Committee on Bar
Discipline with Gross Misconduct and Gross Immoral Conduct by
complainant Mecaral. Complainant Mecaral was his secretary and she
became his lover and common-law wife. Atty. Velasquez then
brought her to the mountainous Upper San Agustin in Caibiran,
Biliran where he left her with a religious group known as the Faith
Healers Association of the Philippines, of which he was the leader.
Although he visited her daily, his visits became scarce, prompting
her to return home to Naval, Biliran. Furious, Atty. Velasquez
brought her back to San Agustin where, on his instruction, his
followers tortured, brainwashed and injected her with drugs. When
she tried to escape, the members of the group tied her spread-
eagled to a bed. Made to wear only a T-shirt and diapers and fed
stale food, she was guarded 24 hours a day by the women members.
Her mother sought the help of the Provincial Social Welfare
Department which immediately dispatched two women volunteers to
rescue her. The religious group refused to release her, however,
without the instruction of Atty. Velasquez. Is Atty. Velasquez guilty
of gross immoral conduct and violated Canon 1, Rule 1 of the Code of
Professional Responsibility?
 Answer 2 (Rule 1.01, Canon 1)
Yes. Atty. Velasquez’ act of converting his secretary into a
mistress is grossly immoral which no civilized society in
the world can countenance. The subsequent detention and
torture of the complainant is gross misconduct [which]
only a beast may be able to do. Certainly, Atty. Velasquez
had violated Canon 1 of the Code of Professional
Responsibility.
When a lawyer’s moral character is assailed, such
that his right to continue practicing his cherished
profession is imperiled, it behooves him to meet the
charges squarely and present evidence, to the satisfaction
of the investigating body and this Court, that he is morally
fit to keep his name in the Roll of Attorneys. Atty.
Velasquez has not discharged the burden. (Mecaral v.
Velasquez, A.C. No. 8392, June 29, 2010)
Q: What are the acts which do not constitute gross immorality?

1. Stealing a kiss from a client (Advincula v. Macabata, A.C. No. 7204,

March 7, 2007)
2. Live-in relationship involving two unmarried persons
3. Failure to pay a loan
- A lawyer may not be disciplined for failure to pay a loan. The proper
remedy is the filing of an action for collection of a sum of money in
regular courts (Toledo v. Abalos, A.C. No. 5141, September 29,
1999)

Exception: A deliberate failure to pay just debts and the issuance of

worthless checks (Lao v. Medel, A.C. No. 5916 July 1, 2003)
Having incurred just debts, a lawyer has the moral duty and legal
responsibility to settle them when they become due. He should comply
with his just contractual obligations, act fairly and adhere to high ethical
standards to preserve the court’s integrity, since he is an employee
thereof. (Cham v. Paita-Moya, A.C. No.7494, June 27, 2008).
Note: Just debts include unpaid rentals, electric bills, claims adjudicated
by a court of law, and claims the existence and justness which are
admitted by the debtor (Cham v. Paita-Moya, A.C. No.7494 June 27,
2008)
Q: Differentiate morality from immoral
conduct and grossly immoral conduct.
Morality as Immoral conduct
understood in law is has been defined as
a human standard that conduct which
based on natural is willful, flagrant, or
moral law which is shameless and
embodied in man’s which shows a moral
conscience and indifference to the
which guides him to opinion of the good
do good and avoid and respectable
evil. members of the
community (Arciga
v. Maniwang, A.M.
No. 1608, Aug. 14,
1981).
Q: Define deceitful conduct.

A: An act that has the proclivity for fraudulent and

deceptive misrepresentation, artifice or device that is
used upon another who is ignorant of the fact, to the
prejudice and damage of the party imposed upon. (CPR
Annotated, PhilJA)

Note: 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, Atty.
Llamas 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. His act is also a violation of Rule 10.01 which
provides that: A lawyer shall not do any falsehood, nor
consent to the doing of any in court; nor mislead or allow
the court to be misled by any artifice. (Santos Jr. v. Atty.
Llamas, A.C. No. 4749, Jan. 20, 2000)
Case 3 (Rule 1.01, Canon 1)
Atty. Limon was Docena’s lawyer in a
civil case. During that case, he asked
Docena to post a supersedeas bond to
stay execution of the appealed
decision. Docena forwarded the money
to Atty. Limon. Later, the case was
decided in their favor. They were
unable to recover the money because
the clerk of court said no such bond
had ever been filed. IBP suspended
Atty. Limon for one year. Is disbarment
warranted?
Answer 3 (Rule 1.01, Canon 1)

A: Yes. Atty. Limon’s allegation that the money was

payment of his fees was overcome by other evidence.
The law is not a trade nor craft but a profession. Its
basic ideal is to render public service and to secure
justice for those who seek its aid. If it has to remain an
honorable profession and attain its basic ideal, lawyers
should not only master its tenets and principles but
should also, by their lives, accord continuing fidelity to
them. By extorting money from his client through
deceit, Limon has sullied the integrity of his brethren in
the law and has indirectly eroded the people’s
confidence in the judicial system. He is disbarred for
immoral, deceitful and unlawful conduct. (Docena v.
Atty. Limon, A.C. No. 2387, Sept. 10, 1998)
Case 4 (Rule 1.01, Canon 1)
Catherine and Atty. Rongcal
maintained an illicit affair. Catherine
filed a case for disbarment against
Atty. Rongcal based on gross immoral
conduct alleging that he
misrepresented himself to be single
when he was in fact married, and due
to the false pretenses she succumbed
to his sexual advances. Will her
petition prosper?
Answer 4 (Rule 1.01, Canon 1)

Yes. Good moral character is a continuing

condition in a privilege of law practice. The mere
fact of sexual relation between two unmarried
adults is not sufficient to warrant administrative
sanction for such illicit behavior, it is not with
respect to betrayal of the marital vow of fidelity.
Atty. Rongcal is guilty of immorality in violation of
Rule 1.01 that a lawyer should not engage in
unlawful, dishonest, immoral or deceitful conduct.
But his remorse over his indiscretion and the fact
of ending the illicit relationship mitigates the
liability. Hence a penalty of imposing a fine will
suffice with a warning that the same will be dealt
more severely. (Vitug v. Rongcal, A.C. No. 6313,
Sept. 7, 2006)
Q: Define moral turpitude.
A: Moral turpitude imports an act of
baseness, vileness or depravity in the
duties which one person owes to another
or to society in general which is contrary to
the usual accepted and customary rule of
right and duty which a person should
follow. The question as to whether an
offense involves moral turpitude is for the
Supreme Court to decide. (1992, 1993,
1997, 2004 Bar Questions)
Q: What are examples of acts that involve
moral turpitude and their consequences?

1. Conviction of estafa and/or BP 22. DISBARRED. (In the

Matter of Disbarment Proceedings v. Narciso N. Jaramillo,
A.C. No. 229, April 30,1957)
2. Conviction of bribery/ attempted bribery. DISBARRED.
(In Re: Dalmacio De los Angeles, A.C. No. L-350, Angust
7,1959); 7 C.J.S., p. 736;5 Am. Jur. P. 428)
3. Conviction of murder. DISBARRED. (In Re: Disbarment
Proceedings Against Atty. Diosdado Q. Gutierrez, A.C.
No.L- 363, July 31,1962)
4. Conviction of homicide. DISBARRED. (Soriano v. Dizon,
A.C. No. 6792, January 25,2006)
5. Conviction of illegal marriage before admission to the
bar. DISQUALIFIED FROM BEING ADMITTED TO THE BAR.
(Villasanta v. Peralta, 101 Phil.313, April 30, 1957)
6. Conviction of falsification of public document. REMOVED
FROM HIS OFFICE/NAME ERASED FROM ROLL OF
ATTORNEYS. (Ledesma de Jesus-Paras v. Quinciano Vailoces,
A.C. No. 439, April 12,1961)

7. Conviction of estafa through falsification of public

document. DISBARRED. (Villanueva v. Sta. Ana, CBD Case
No. 251, July 11, 1995)

8. Conviction of abduction. SUSPENDED FROM OFFICE FOR 1

YEAR. (In Re Basa, 41 Phil. 275, December 7,1920)

9. Conviction of concubinage. SUSPENDED FROM OFFICE

FOR 1 YEAR. (In re Isada, 60 Phil. 915, November 16,1934)

10. Conviction of smuggling. DISBARRED. (In re Rovero, A.C.

No. 126, October 24,1952)
Case of moral turpitude
Resurreccion as defendant
delivered to Atty. Sayson an
amount representing the
compensation or settlement money
in a case for homicide thru reckless
imprudence. However, Atty. Sayson
did not turn over the amount to his
client, forcing Resurreccion to pay
the same amount again. Atty.
Sayson was later convicted for
estafa. Should Atty. Sayson be
disbarred?
Answer
Yes. Good moral character is not only a
condition precedent to admission to the
legal profession, but it must also remain
extant in order to maintain one’s good
standing in that exclusive and honored
fraternity. Act of moral turpitude (i.e.
done contrary to justice, honesty & good
morals) such as estafa or falsification
renders one unfit to be a member of the
legal profession. (Resurreccion v. Atty.
Sayson, G.R. No. 88202, Dec. 14, 1998)
Rule 1.02, Canon 1
A lawyer shall not
counsel or abet activities
aimed at defiance of the
law or at lessening
confidence in the legal
system. (1994, 1998 Bar
Questions)
Important Note:
A lawyer should not promote nor
hold an organization known to be
violating the law nor assist it in a
scheme which is dishonest. He
should not allow his services to be
engaged by an organization whose
members are violating the law and
defend them should they get
caught.
Case 1 (Rule 1.02, Canon 1)
Q: Atty. Asilo, a lawyer and a notary
public, notarized a document already
prepared by spouses Roger and Luisa
when they approached him. It is
stated in the document that Roger and
Luisa formally agreed to live
separately from each other and either
one can have a live-in partner with full
consent of the other. What is the
liability of Atty. Asilo, if any?
Answer 1 (Rule 1.02, Canon 1)
Atty. Asilo may be held administratively liable for
violating Rule 1.02 of the CPR - a lawyer shall not
counsel or abet activities aimed at defiance of the law
or at lessening confidence in the legal system. An
agreement between two spouses to live separately
from each other and either one could have a live-in
partner with full consent of the other, is contrary to law
and morals. The ratification by a notary public who is a
lawyer of such illegal or immoral contract or document
constitutes malpractice or gross misconduct in office.
He should at least refrain from its consummation. (In
Re: Santiago, A.C. No. 923, June 21, 1940;
Panganiban v. Borromeo, 58 Phil. 367; In Re: Bucana,
A.C. No. 1637, July 6, 1976) (1998 Bar Question
Rule 1.03, Canon 1

A lawyer shall not, for

any corrupt motive or
interest, encourage
any suit or proceeding
or delay any man’s
cause.
Unprofessional Acts prohibited by
Rule 1.03.
1. Volunteering advice to bring lawsuit
except where ties of blood, relationship and
trust make it a duty to do so
2. Hunting up defects in titles or other
causes of action and informing thereof to be
employed to bring suit or collect judgment,
or to breed litigation by seeking out claims
for personal injuries or any other grounds
to secure them as clients
3. Employing agents or runners for like
purposes
4. Paying direct or indirect reward to
those who bring or influence the
bringing of such cases to his office
5. Searching for unknown heirs and
soliciting their employment of him
6. Initiating a meeting of a club and
inducing them to organize and
contest legislation under his
guidance
7. Purchasing notes to collect them
by litigation at a profit
Q: What is crime of maintenance? {Unauthorized intervention by a
nonparty in a lawsuit, in the form of financial or other support and assistance to prosecute or
defend the litigation}
A: A lawyer owes to society and to the court the duty not to stir
up litigation.

Q: What is the difference between barratry and

ambulance chasing?
A: Barratry is an offense of frequently exciting and stirring up
quarrels and suits, either at law or otherwise; lawyer’s act of
fomenting suits among individuals and offering his legal services
to one of them.

Note: Barratry is not a crime under the Philippine laws.

However, it is proscribed by the rules of legal ethics. (CPR
Annotated, PhilJA)

Ambulance chasing is an act of chasing victims of accidents for

the purpose of talking to the said victims (or relatives) and
offering his legal services for the filing of a case against the
person(s) who caused the accident(s) (1993 Bar Question).
Ambulance Chasing has spawned a number
of recognized evils
(FSMD):
1. Fomenting of litigation with resulting burdens on the courts and
the public;
2. Subordination of perjury;
3. Mulcting of innocent persons by judgments, upon manufactured
causes of action; and
4. Defrauding of injured persons having proper causes of action but
ignorant of legal rights and court procedures by means of contracts
which retain exorbitant percentages of recovery and illegal charges
for court costs and expenses and by settlement made for quick
returns of fees and against just rights of the injured persons
(Hightower v. Detroit Edison Co. 247 NW 97, 1993)

Note: Volunteer advice to bring lawsuit comes within the prohibition,

except where ties of blood, relationship and trust make it a duty to do
so.
Q: Does the rule absolutely prohibit all forms
of voluntary giving of advice?

A: No. It may be allowed when the giving of

advice is motivated by a desire to protect one
who does not recognize that he may have legal
problems or who is ignorant of his legal rights or
obligations. (CPR Annotated, PhilJA)

Q: When does voluntary giving of advice

become improper?

A: When it is motivated by a desire to obtain

personal benefit, secure personal publicity, or
cause legal action to be taken merely to harass or
injure another. (CPR Annotated, PhilJA)
Case 1 (Rule 1.03, Canon 1)
Q: While Atty. Ambo Lancia was on his way
to office in Makati, he chanced upon a
vehicular accident involving a wayward bus
and a small Kia whose driver, a Mr. Malas,
suffered serious physical injuries. Coming to
the succor of the badly injured Mr. Malas,
Atty. Lancia drove him to the nearest
hospital. On their way to the hospital, Mr.
Malas found out that Atty, Lancia was a
practicing lawyer. In gratitude for his help,
Mr. Malas retained Atty. Lancia to file suit
against the bus company and its driver.
If you were Atty. Lancia, would you accept
the case?
Answer 1 (Rule 1.03, Canon 1)

I will not accept the case if I were Atty.

Lancia because it is difficult to dismiss the
suspicion that Atty. Lancia had assisted
Mr. Malas for the purpose of soliciting
legal business. It is not clear from the
facts how Mr. Malas learned that Atty.
Lancia was a practicing lawyer. This could
have happen only if Atty. Lancia
introduced himself as a lawyer. Moreover,
Atty. Lancia may be utilized as a witness.
(1994 Bar Question)
Rule 1.04, Canon 1

A lawyer shall encourage

his clients to avoid, end
or settle a controversy if
it will admit of a fair
settlement. (2004 Bar
Question)
Note:
It is the duty of the lawyer to temper his
client’s propensity to litigate and resist his client’s
whims and caprices for the lawyer also owes duty
to the court. Lawyer should be a mediator for
concord and a conciliator for compromise rather
than an initiator of controversy and a predator of
conflict.
The rule requires that lawyers encourage
settlement only when the same is fair. It should
be noted that the duty and the right of the lawyer
is limited to encouraging the client to settle.
Ultimately, however, the final decision to settle a
claim rests upon the client. (CPR Annotated,
PhilJA)
Case 1 (Rule 1.04, Canon 1)
Jon de Ysasi III was employed by his father, in
their farm in Negros Occidental. During the entire
period of Jon de Ysasi III's illnesses, his father took
care of his medical expenses and Jon de Ysasi III
continued to receive compensation. However, later on,
without due notice, his father ceased to pay Jon de
Ysasi III’s salary. Jon de Ysasi III made oral and
written demands from Atty. Sumbingco (Jon de Ysasi's
auditor and legal adviser) for an explanation for the
sudden withholding of his salary, as well as for the
remittance of his salary. Both demands, however, were
not acted upon. Jon de Ysasi III filed a case in court.
Can the lawyers who have been employed by the
parties be admonished for not trying to reconcile the
parties before the filing of suit?
Answer 1 (Rule 1.04, Canon 1)
Yes. The conduct of the respective counsel of the parties, as
revealed by the records, sorely disappoints the Court and
invites reproof. Both counsels may well be reminded that their
ethical duty as lawyers to represent their clients with zeal goes
beyond merely presenting their clients' respective causes in
court. It is just as much their responsibility, if not more
importantly, to exert all reasonable efforts to smooth over legal
conflicts, preferably out of court and especially in consideration
of the direct and immediate consanguineous ties between their
clients. Once again, the useful function of a lawyer is not only
to conduct litigation but to avoid it whenever possible by
advising settlement or withholding suit. He is often called upon
less for dramatic forensic exploits than for wise counsel in
every phase of life. He should be a mediator for concord and a
conciliator for compromise, rather than a virtuoso of
technicality in the conduct of litigation.
CANON 2
A LAWYER SHALL MAKE HIS
LEGAL SERVICES AVAILABLE IN
AN EFFICIENT AND
CONVENIENT MANNER
COMPATIBLE WITH THE
INDEPENDENCE, INTEGRITY
AND EFFECTIVENESS OF THE
PROFESSION.
Rationale:

It is the lawyer’s prime

duty to see to it that
justice is accorded to all
without discrimination.
Rule 2.01, Canon 2

A lawyer shall not

reject, except for valid
reasons, the cause of
the defenseless or the
oppressed
Q: Who are considered Defenseless?
A: Defenseless are those are not in a
position to defend themselves due to
poverty, weakness, ignorance or other
similar reasons.

Q: Who are considered Oppressed?

A: Oppressed are those who are the
victims of the cruelty, unlawful, exaction,
domination or excessive use of authority.
Note:
By specific authority the court may appoint an
attorney to render professional aid to a destitute
appellant in a criminal case who is unable to
employ an attorney. Correspondingly a duty is
imposed upon a lawyer so assigned to “render the
required service”. A lawyer so appointed as
counsel for an indigent prisoner, the Canons of
Professional Ethics demands, should always “exert
his best efforts” in the indigent’s behalf. (People v.
Estebia, G.R. No. L- 26868, Feb. 27, 1969)
The inability to pay for legal services is not a valid
reason to refuse acceptance of a case. This is
because the profession is a branch of the
administration of justice and not a mere money-
getting trade. (CPR Annotated, PhilJA)
Note:
A lawyer who accepts the cause of a person unable to pay
his professional fees shall observe the same standard of
conduct governing his relation with paying client.

LEGAL AID IS NOT A MATTER OF CHARITY, BUT A PUBLIC

RESPONSIBILITY. It is a means for the correction of social
imbalance that may and often do lead to injustice, for
which reason it is the public responsibility of the Bar.
(PROPOSED RULE ON MANDATORY. LEGAL AID SERVICE
FOR PRACTICING. LAWYERS. RESOLUTION. (February 10,
2009).

AN ACT PROVIDING A MECHANISM FOR FREE LEGAL

ASSISTANCE AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES R.A. NO. 9999
FEB. 23, 2010
Q: Who are these indigent and pauper litigants?
A: Under Section 19, Rule 141, Rules of Court, Indigent
litigants are those:

1. Whose gross income and that of their immediate family do

not exceed an amount double the monthly minimum wage of
an employee; and

2. Who do not own real property with a fair market value as

stated in the current tax declaration of more than three
hundred thousand (P300,000.00) pesos shall be exempt from
the payment of legal fees

Note: A party may be authorized to litigate his action, claim

or defense as an indigent if the court upon an ex-parte
application and hearing, is satisfied that the party is one who
has no money or property sufficient and available for food,
shelter and basic necessities for himself and his family.
(Section 21, Rule 3, RRC)
Rule 2.02, Canon 2
In such cases, even if the
lawyer does not accept a
case, he shall not refuse to
render legal advice to the
person concerned if only to
the extent necessary to
safeguard the latter’s
rights.
Q: What does rendering of legal advice include?

A: It shall include preliminary steps that should be taken,

at least, until the person concerned has obtained the
services of a proper counsel’s representation. Even though
no attorney-client relationship is created between the
parties, the lawyer, by providing interim advice, preserves
the dignity of the profession by inspiring public faith in the
profession. (CPR Annotated, PhilJA)
Note: If only to the extent necessary to safeguard the
latter’s right means such as advising him what preliminary
steps to take until he shall have secured the services of
counsel. However, he shall refrain from giving this
preliminary advice if there is a conflict of interest between
a present client and a prospective one. Extending such
legal advice will create and establish an attorney-client
relationship between them and may involve a violation of
the rule prohibiting a lawyer from representing conflicting
interest.
Rule 2.03, Canon 2

A lawyer shall not do

or permit to be done
any act designated
primarily to solicit
legal business. (1997
Bar Question)
Q: Why is legal profession not considered
as a business?

A: It is not a business because it is a:

1. Relation, as an “officer of the court”, to the
administration of justice involving thorough
sincerity, integrity and reliability
2. Duty of public service
3. Relation to clients with the highest degree of
fiduciary
4. Relation to the colleagues at the bar
characterized by candor, fairness, and
unwillingness to resort to current business
methods of advertising and encroachment on
their practice, or dealing directly with their
clients. (2006 Bar Question)
Important Note:

The best type of

advertisement for a
lawyer is a well-deserved
reputation for
competence, honesty and
fidelity to private trust
and public duty.
Case 1 (Rule 2.03, Canon 2)
Atty. David agreed to give ½ of his professional
fees to an intermediary or commission agent and he
also bound himself not to deal directly with the
clients. Can he be subject to disciplinary action?

Answer 1 (Rule 2.03, Canon 2)

Yes. The agreement is void because it was
tantamount to malpractice which is the practice of soliciting
cases of law for the purpose of gain either personally or
through paid agents or brokers. Malpractice ordinarily
refers to any malfeasance or dereliction of duty committed
by a lawyer. The meaning of malpractice is in consonance
with the notion that the practice of law is a profession not a
business. The lawyer may not seek or obtain employment
by himself or through others, to do so would be
unprofessional. (Tan Tek Beng v. David, A. C. No. 1261,
Dec. 29, 1983)
Are advertisements of lawyers and law firms
allowed in Philippine jurisdiction?

GR: No advertisements allowed. The most worthy

and effective advertisement possible is the
establishment of a well-merited reputation for
professional capacity and fidelity to trust.
Note: Lawyers may not advertise their services or
expertise nor should they resort to indirect
advertisements for professional employment, such as
furnishing or inspiring newspaper comments, or
procuring his photograph to be published in
connection with causes in which the lawyer has been
engaged or concerning the manner of their conduct,
the magnitude of the interest involved, the
importance of the lawyer's position, and all other
self-laudation.
What is the rationale for the
prohibition on advertisements?

1. The profession is primarily for public service;

2. Commercializes the profession
3. Involves self-praise and puffing
4. Damages public confidence
5. May increase lawsuits and result in needless
litigation

Note: It is highly unethical for an attorney to

advertise his talents or skill as a merchant
advertises his wares. (In re: Tagorda, 53 Phil
42, Mar. 23, 1929)
What activities constitute indirect
solicitation?

1. Writing and selling for publication articles

of general nature on legal subjects
2. Writing unsolicited article on a legal
subject.

Note: If engaged in another profession or

occupation concurrently with the practice of
law, the lawyer shall make clear to his client
whether he is acting as a lawyer or in
another capacity.
Case 2 (Rule 2.03, Canon 2)

Atty. Dulcinea writes a regular column in a

newspaper of general circulation and articles
on unforgettable legal stories in a leading
magazine. Her by-line always includes the
name of her firm where she is a name
partner. Would you consider this as improper
advertising? Explain your answer.

Answer 2 (Rule 2.03, Canon 2)

Atty. Dulcinea’s by-line including the firm name

where she belongs is improper because it is an
indirect way of solicitation or is an advertisement
of the law firm.
Case 2 (Rule 2.03, Canon 2)
A paid advertisement appeared in the July 5, 2000 issue
of Philippine Daily Inquirer, which reads: "ANNULMENT' OF
MARRIAGE Specialist 532-4333/521-2667." Similar
advertisements were published in the August 2 and 6, 2000
issues of the Manila Bulletin and August 5, 2000 issue of The
Philippine Star.
A staff member of the SC called up the published
telephone number and pretended to be an interested party. She
spoke to Mrs. Simbillo, who claimed that her husband, Atty.
Simbillo, was an expert in handling annulment cases and can
guarantee a court decree within four to six months, provided
the case will not involve separation of property or custody of
children. Mrs. Simbillo also said that her husband charges a fee
of P48,000.00, half of which is payable at the time of filing of
the case and the other half after a decision thereon has been
rendered.
Does the appearance of the following: "ANNULMENT' OF
MARRIAGE Specialist 532-4333/521-2667", in a newspaper,
amount to advertising and solicitation of legal services
prohibited by the Code of Professional Responsibility and the
Rules of Court?
Answwer 2 (Rule 2.03, Canon 2)
Yes. It has been repeatedly stressed that the practice of
law is not a business. It is a profession in which duty to
public service, not money, is the primary consideration.
Lawyering is not primarily meant to be a money-making
venture, and law advocacy is not a capital that
necessarily yields profits. The gaining of a livelihood
should be a secondary consideration. The duty to public
service and to the administration of justice should be the
primary consideration of lawyers, who must subordinate
their personal interests or what they owe to themselves.
(Atty. Khan Jr. v. Atty. Simbillo, A.C. No. 5299, Aug. 19,
2003)
Note: The rule against solicitation applies to a lawyer
who offers monetary reward to those who can serve as
witness/es in the case, which he is handling. (CPR
Annotated, PhilJA)
Rule 2.04, Canon 2

A lawyer shall not

charge rates lower than
those customarily
prescribed unless the
circumstances so
warrant. (1997, 2005
Bar Questions)
Question: Dante wants to file a case
against his wife for support; he secured
the services of Atty. Reyes, his cousin and
a private practitioner. However, Dante
does not have sufficient money to pay for
legal services. Nevertheless, Atty. Reyes
accepted the case and promised to charge
a lower rate. Did Atty. Reyes violate the
Code of Professional Responsibilities?
Answer: No, Atty. Reyes did not violate the
CPR.
GR: A lawyer shall not charge rates lower than
those customarily prescribed.
XPN: When clients are relatives, co-lawyers, or
are indigents. These are the valid justifications.
Note: What the rule prohibits is a
competition in the matter of
charging professional fees for the
purpose of attracting clients in favor
of the lawyer who offers lower
rates. The rule does not prohibit a
lawyer from charging a reduced fee
or none at all to an indigent.
(Comments of the IBP Committee)
CANON 3
A LAWYER IN MAKING KNOWN
HIS LEGAL SERVICES SHALL
USE ONLY TRUE, HONEST, FAIR,
DIGNIFIED AND OBJECTIVE
INFORMATION OR STATEMENT
OF FACTS
(1993,1997,1998,2001,2002,20
03 Bar Questions)
Rationale
The practice of law is not a
trade like the sale of
commodities to the general
public where ‘the usual
exaggerations in trade, when
the proper party had the
opportunity to know the facts,
are not in themselves
fraudulent.”
Q: Is giving of advice on legal matters
through the medium of a newspaper
column or radio or television broadcast
improper?

A: Yes, as giving of legal advice through such

medium cannot be undertaken by a layman
because that service constitutes practice of
law. Nor can it be undertaken by a lawyer
because that work involve indirect advertising,
violation of the confidential relation of
attorney and client, and a breach of the
traditional standards of the profession.
(Agpalo, Legal and Judicial Ethics)
Q: Atty. E has a daily 10-minute radio program
billed as a “Court of Common Troubles.” The
program is advertised by the radio station as a
public service feature for those who seek but
cannot afford to pay for legal advice. Its
sponsors include a food processing company
and a detergent manufacturing firm which
share with the radio station the monthly
remuneration of Atty. E. Is there any
impropriety in Atty. E’s role under the above
arrangement?
A: Giving advice on legal matters through the
medium of a newspaper column or radio station or
television broadcast is improper. It would involve
indirect advertising and violation of the confidential
relation between the lawyer and the client. (Agpalo,
Legal Ethics) (1997 Bar Question)
Rule 3.01, Canon 3
A lawyer shall not use or
permit the use of any false,
fraudulent, misleading,
deceptive, undignified, self-
laudatory or unfair
statement or claim
regarding his qualifications
or legal services. (1997 Bar
Question)
Question: Cite some examples of
information in lawyer advertising, that
could be considered deceptive.

Answer:
1. Misstatements of fact
2. Suggestions that the ingenuity or prior
record of a lawyer rather than the justice
of the claim are the principal factors
likely to determine the result
3. Inclusion of information irrelevant on
selecting a lawyer
4. Representations concerning the quality
of service, which cannot be measured or
verified. (CPR Annotated, PhilJA)
Question:
Atty. Lana a famous family lawyer, asked
his secretary to draft the contents of his
new calling card. The secretary inserted
in such draft the phrase, the “best family
lawyer in the Philippines”. The draft was
checked by Atty. Lana and approved it.
The new calling cards were then made
and Atty. Lana gave it to prospective
clients. Did Atty. Lana commit any
unethical act?

Answer: Yes, under Rule 3.01 of CPR,

violation of Rule 3.01 is unethical, whether
done by him personally or through another
with his permission.
Rule 3.02, Canon 3
In the choice of a firm name, no
false, misleading or assumed
name shall be used. The
continued use of the name of a
deceased partner is permissible
provided that the firm indicates
in all its communications that
said partner is deceased. (1994,
1996, 2001 Bar Questions)
Question: What is the reason in allowing a firm to
use the name of a deceased partner?
Answer: All the partners have by their joint and several
efforts over a period of years contributed to the good will
attached to the firm name. In the case of a firm having
widespread connections, this good will is disturbed by a
change in firm name every time a partner dies, and that
reflects a loss in some degree of the good will to the
building up of which the surviving partners have
contributed their time, skill and labor through a period of
years. (CPR Annotated, PhilJA)

Note: The doctrine in, “In the matter of the petition for
authority to continue use of the firm Ozaeta, Romulo, De
Leon etc., and petition for authority to continue use of
firm name – Sycip, Salazar, Feliciano, etc.” (July 30,
1979) that a law firm cannot continue using the name of
a deceased partner due to the possibility of deception
upon the public, is abandoned by Rule 3.02.
Note: No name not belonging to any of
the partners or associates may be used
in the firm name for any purpose.

Continued use of the name of a

deceased partner is permissible provided
that the firm indicates in all its
communications that said partner is
deceased. The use of a cross after the
name of the deceased partner is
sufficient indication. It is advisable
though that the year of the death be
also indicated.
Rule 3.03, Canon 3
Where a partner accepts
public office, he shall
withdraw from the firm
and his name shall be
dropped from the firm
name unless the law
allows him to practice
law concurrently.
Q: Is a Filipino lawyer allowed to
practice under a name of a foreign law
firm?
A: Filipino lawyers cannot practice law
under the name of a foreign law firm, as the
latter cannot practice law in the Philippines
and the use of a foreign law firm in the
country is unethical. (Dacanay v. Baker and
McKenzie, A.C. No. 2131, May 10, 1985)

Rationale: To prevent the law firm or

partners from making use of the name of
the public official to attract business and to
avoid suspicion of undue influence.
Rule 3.04, Canon 3

A lawyer shall not pay or

give anything of value to
representatives of the
mass media in
anticipation of, or in
return for, publicity to
attract legal business.
Note:
The purpose of the rule is to
prevent some lawyers from
gaining an unfair advantage
over others through the use
of gimmickry, press agentry
or other artificial means.
Case 1 (Rule 3.04, Canon 3)

Q: Fiscal Salva conducted the

investigation of the case concerning
the killing of Monroy, in the session
hall of the Municipal Court of Pasay
City to accommodate the public and
members of the press. Also, he told
the press that “if you want to ask
question, I am allowing you to do so
and the questions will be reproduced
as my own”. Is the act of the fiscal in
sensationalizing the case unethical?
Answer 1 (Rule 3.04, Canon 3)

Yes. Fiscal Salva should be publicly

reprehended and censured for the
uncalled and wide publicity and
sensationalism that he had given to
and allowed in connection with his
investigation, whatever be his
motive, which is considered and
found to be contempt of court (Cruz
v Salva, G.R. No. L-12871, July 25,
1959)
 Thank you
very much!

Happy New Year

2019!

VIVA LAAC!
Take a step closer, take a step higher, take a
step closer to your dream!! with LICEO DE (LEX ALUMNI
CAGAYAN UNIVERSITY.....
AD CAUSA)!