CANON 15- A LAWYER SHALL

OBSERVE
• CANDOR ) IN ALL HIS DEALINGS/TRANSACTIONS
• FAIRNESS ) W/ HIS CLIENT
• and LOYALTY )

RULES:
1. – ASCERTAIN AS SOON AS PRACTICABLE
– PROSPECTIVE CLIENT
– CONFLICT W/ ANOTHER CLIENT ) OR LAWYER’S OWN INTEREST)
– FORTWITH INFORM PROSPECTIVE CLIENT
2. – BOUND BY RULE
– PRIVILEGED COMMUNICATION
– MATTERS DISCLOSED TO HIM BY PROSPECTIVE CLIENT
3. – SHALL NOT REPRESENT CONFLICTING INTERESTS
– EXCEPT BY WRITTEN CONSENT OF ALL CONCERNED
4. – LAWYER MAY ACT AS
• MEDIATOR )
• CONCILIATOR )
• OR- ARBITRATOR )
– WITH WRITTEN CONSENT OF ALL CONCERNED
5. – GIVE CANDID AND HONEST OPINION
– MERITS AND PROBABLE RESULTS OF CLIENT’S CASE
– NEITHER OVERSTATING NOR UNDERSTATING THE
PROSPECTS OF THE CASE
6. – SHALL NOT STATE OR IMPLY
– HE IS ABLE TO INFLUENCE
• ANY PUBLIC OFFICIAL
• TRIBUNAL
• OR LEGISLATIVE BODY
7. – IMPRESS UPON CLIENT
• COMPLIANCE WITH THE LAWS )
• AND PRINCIPLES ) OF FAIRNESS
8. – SHALL MAKE CLEAR TO CLIENT WHETHER HE IS
• ACTING AS A LAWYER )
• OR IN ANOTHER CAPACITY )
 FACTS:
 Josefina M. Anion previously engaged the legal services of Atty.
Sabitsana, Jr. in the preparation and execution in her favor of a Deed
of Sale over a parcel of land owned by her late common-law husband,
Brigido Caneja, Jr.
 Atty. Sabitsana allegedly violated her confidence when he
subsequently filed a civil case against her for the annulment of the
Deed of Sale in behalf of Zenaida L. Caete, the legal wife of Brigido
Caneja, Jr.
 The complainant accused Atty. Sabitsana of using confidential
information he obtained from her in filing the civil case.

 ISSUE:
 Whether Atty. Sabitsana is guilty of misconduct for representing
conflicting interests.

 ANION VS. ATTY. SABITSANA,

 HELD:
The relationship between a lawyer and his/her client should ideally
be imbued with the highest level of trust and confidence. Part of the
JR. (2012).
lawyer’s duty in this regard is to avoid representing conflicting
interests, a matter covered by Rule 15.03, Canon 15 of the Code of
Professional Responsibility.
 Atty. Clemencio C. Sabitsana, Jr. is found GUILTYof misconduct for
representing conflicting interests. He is hereby SUSPENDED for one
(1) year from the practice of law.
LIM-SANTIAGO VS. SAGUCIO
(1997)
FACTS:
• Respondent Atty. Carlos B. Sagucio was the former Personnel Manager and
retained counsel of Taggat Industries, Inc. until his appointment as Assistant
Provincial Prosecutor of Tuguegarao, Cagayan in 1992.
• In July 1997, 21 employees of the corporation filed a criminal complaint
against Lim-Santiago who took over the management of the corporation from
his father, Alfonso Lim, former President of Taggat Industries, Inc. upon his
death.
• Respondent, as prosecutor was assigned to investigate the case. Thereafter,
he filed 651 informations against complaint for violation of Article 188 in
relation to Article 116 of the Labor Code of the Philippines.
• Lim-Santiago charged respondent with disbarment for violation of Rule 15.03
of Code of Professional Responsibility for allegedly representing conflicting
interests.
ISSUE: Is the respondent guilty of representing conflicting
interests?
HELD: There is no conflict of interests when respondent handled
the preliminary investigation of the criminal complaint filed by
Taggat employees in 1997. The issue in the criminal complaint
pertains to non-payment of wages that occurred from 1 April
1996 to 15 July 1997. Clearly, respondent was no longer
Mejia vs Reyes (1962)
FACTS:
• Francisco S. Reyes, a practicing lawyer, was appointed bank attorney and
notary public for the Baguio Branch of the Philippine National Bank.
• During his stint as such officer he accepted to handle the case of Mejia and
Abrera against the PNB and the DBP for the cancellation of a mortgage on a
parcel of land situated in Baguio City.
• Jose G. Mejia and Emilia N. Abrera alleged that they had desired to take an
appeal from the judgment rendered by the CFI of Baguio City but did not,
upon the respondent’s advice;
• that thereafter for the first time they learned that the respondent was
counsel and notary public of the Baguio Branch of the PNB;
• that his representing them against the PNB, in whose Baguio Branch he was
bank attorney and notary public, without revealing to them such connection
with the Bank, constitutes malpractice; and pray this Court to disbar him.
ISSUE: Whether or not Atty. Reyes is guilty of malpractice and
should be disbarred.
HELD: YES. But the malpractice committed is not so serious.
Respondent was just admonished and warned not to repeat it.