1
Legal Profession
UNIVERSITY of Makati SCHOOL OF LAW
MANDATORY CONTINUING LEGAL EDUCATION
FOR MEMBERS OF THE IBP (BAR MATTER 850)
PURPOSE:
EME
• Ensure that lawyers are abreast with law
and jurisprudence
• Maintain ethics of the profession
• Enhance standards of practice of law
Requirement – Every 3 years at least 36 hours
9H – substantive procedural laws &
jurisprudence
6H – legal ethics
5H – alternative dispute resolution
4H – trial and pre-trial skills
4H – Legal writing and oral advocacy
2H – international law and int’l
conventions
6H – Prescribed by MCLE
CATEGORIES OF CREDIT UNITS
1. Participatory
Ex. Seminar, Conferences,
Conventions, etc. or as Panelist,
Reactor, commentator, speaker,
moderator etc, Teaching in law
school.
2. Non-participatory
Ex. Author/Co-author of book,
editing al aw book, law journal
or legal newsletter
WHO ARE EXEMPTED?
1. Pres. VP, Secs, Usecs of Exec Depts.
2. Senators, Reps
3. CJ, A-Justices, (incumbent or retired);
incumbent members of JBC & incumbent
court lawyers covered by continuing
judicial education
SIR King Noe Badong, KR
4. The Chief State Counsel, Chief State
Prosecutor and Asec of the DOJ
5. SolGen and Asst SolGen
6. Gov’t Corporate Counsel, & his Deputy
and Assistant Corpo Counsel
7. Chairmen and Members of ConCom
8. Ombudsman, Overall Deputy Omb &
Deputy Omb and Special Prosec of Omb
9. Heads of Gov’t agency exercising quisi-
judicial functions
10. Incumbent deans, bar reviewers and
professors of law who have teaching
experience for at least ten (10) years in
accredited law schools
11. The Chancellor, Vice-Chancellor and
members of the Corps of Professors and
Professorial Lecturers of the Philippine
Judicial Academy; and
12. Governors and Mayors.
STANDARS FOR APPROVAL OF EDUCATIONAL
ACTIVITIES
a. Shall have significant intectual or
practical content
b. Related to legal subj and leg prof
c. Conducted by provider w/ adequate
professional experience
d. If more than 1 hour, must distribute
substantive written materials to
participants
e. If in-house educ activities, it must be
scheduled at a time and location to
be free from interruption like phone
calls and other distractions
WHAT CONSTITUTES NON-COMPLIANCE:
Failure to:
a. Complete educ requirement within
compliance period
b. Provide attestation of compliance
c. Provide satisfactory evidence of
compliance
d. Satisfy educ requirement of
compliance within prescribed period
2
Legal Profession
UNIVERSITY of Makati SCHOOL OF LAW
e. Provide fee within prescribed period
WHAT ARE THE CONSEQUENCES OF NON-
COMPLIANCE?
1. Will pay non-compliance fee
2. Will be listed as delinquent member of
IBP
3. Membership fee will accrue
HOW TO BE REINSTATED?
1. Must comply with MCLE
requirements
2. Pay non-compliance fee
Termination and listing is administrative in
nature and shall be made by the MCLE
committee
----xxx----
MANDATORY LEGAL AID SERVICE FOR
PRACTICING LAWYERS (BAR MATTER
2012)
Every practicing lawyer is required to render a
minimum of sixty (60) hours of free legal aid
services to indigent litigants in a year. Said 60 hours
shall be spread within a period of twelve (12)
months, with a minimum of five (5) hours of free
legal aid services each month. However, where it
is necessary for the practicing lawyer to render
legal aid service for more than five (5) hours in one
month, the excess hours may be credited to the
said lawyer for the succeeding periods.
PURPOSE:
This Rule seeks to enhance the duty of lawyers to
society as agents of social change and to the
courts as officers thereof by helping improve
access to justice by the less privileged members
of society and expedite the resolution of cases
involving them. Mandatory free legal service by
members of the bar and their active support
thereof will aid the efficient and effective
administration of justice especially in cases
involving indigent and pauper litigants.
SIR King Noe Badong, KR
SCOPE:
Lawyers who appear in behalf of parties in courts
of law and quasi-judicial agencies:
a. NLRC
b. Nat’l Conciliation and Mediation
Board
c. DOLE-Regional Offices
d. DAR-Adjudication Board
e. Commission for Indigenous Peoples.
WHO ARE EXEMPTED?
1. Gov’t employees and elective officials
2. Lawyers who by law are not allowed to
appear in court
3. Supervising lawyers of students in legal
aids & Lawyers of NGOs & People’s Orgs
like FLAG.
4. Lawyers not covered under
subparagraphs (1) to (3) including those
who are employed in the private sector
but do not appear for and in behalf of
parties in courts of law and quasi-judicial
agencies
WHO ARE PAUPER LITIGANTS?
Pauper litigants was found in Rule 3, Section 22
which provided that:
Section 22. Pauper litigant.—Any court
may authorize a litigant to prosecute his
action or defense as a pauper upon a
proper showing that he has no means to
that effect by affidavits, certificate of the
corresponding provincial, city or municipal
treasurer, or otherwise. Such authority[,]
once given[,] shall include an exemption
from payment of legal fees and from filing
appeal bond, printed record and printed
brief. The legal fees shall be a lien to any
judgment rendered in the case [favorable]
to the pauper, unless the court otherwise
provides.
3
Legal Profession
UNIVERSITY of Makati SCHOOL OF LAW
PENALTIES:
1. Will be declared member “not in good
standing”
2. Cannot practice for 3 months
ON MATTERS FOR MCLE
SECTION 8. Credit for Mandatory Continuing
Legal Education (MCLE). - A lawyer who renders
mandatory legal aid service for the required
number of hours in a year for the three year-
period covered by a compliance period under the
Rules on MCLE shall be credited the following:
two (2) credit units for legal ethics, two (2)
credit units for trial and pretrial skills, two (2)
credit units for alternative dispute resolution,
four (4) credit units for legal writing and oral
advocacy, four (4) credit units for substantive
and procedural laws and jurisprudence and six
(6) credit units for such subjects as may be
prescribed by the MCLE Committee under
Section 2(9), Rule 2 of the Rules on MCLE.
A lawyer who renders mandatory legal aid
service for the required number of hours in a
year for at least two consecutive years within the
three year-period covered by a compliance
period under the Rules on MCLE shall be credited
the following: one (1) credit unit for legal ethics,
one (1) credit unit for trial and pretrial skills,
one (1) credit unit for alternative dispute
resolution, two (2) credit units for legal writing
and oral advocacy, two (2) credit units for
substantive and procedural laws and
jurisprudence and three (3) credit units for such
subjects as may be prescribed by the MCLE
Committee under Section 2(g), Rule 2 of the
Rules on MCLE
---xxx---
SIR King Noe Badong, KR
REPUBLIC ACT NO. 7662
AN ACT PROVIDING FOR REFORMS IN THE
LEGAL EDUCATION, CREATING FOR THE
PURPOSE, A LEGAL EDUCATION BOARD AND
FOR OTHER PURPOSES.
Section 1. Title. - This Act shall be known as the "Legal
Education Reform Act of 1993."
Section 2. Declaration of Policies. - It is hereby declared the
policy of the State to uplift the standards of legal education
in order to prepare law students for advocacy, counselling,
problem-solving, and decision-making, to infuse in them the
ethics of the legal profession; to impress on them the
importance, nobility and dignity of the legal profession as
an equal and indispensable partner of the Bench in the
administration of justice and to develop social competence.
Towards this end, the State shall undertake appropriate
reforms in the legal education system, require proper
selection of law students, maintain quality among law
schools, and require legal apprenticeship and continuing
legal education.
GENERAL AND SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE OF LEGAL EDUCATION
Leg Ed in Phil is geared to:
1. to prepare students for the practice of law;
2. to increase awareness among members of
the legal profession of the needs of the poor,
deprived and oppressed sectors of society;
3. to train persons for leadership;
4. to contribute towards the promotion and
advancement of justice and the
improvement of its administration, the legal
system and legal institutions in the light of
the historical and contemporary
development of law in the Philippines and in
other countries.
Specific Objectives:
1. to impart among law students a broad knowledge
of law and its various fields and of legal institution
2. to enhance their legal research abilities to enable
them to analyze, articulate and apply the law
effectively, as well as to allowthem to have a
holistic approach to legal problems and issues;
3. to prepare law students for advocacy,
counselling, problem-solving and decision-
making, and to develop their ability to deal with
recognized legal problems of the present and the
future;
4. to develop competence in any field of law as is
necessary for gainful employment or sufficient as
4
Legal Profession
UNIVERSITY of Makati SCHOOL OF LAW
a foundation for future training beyond the basic
professional degree, and to develop in them the
desire and capacity for continuing study and self-
improvement;
5. to inculcate in them the ethics and
responsibilities of the legal profession; and
6. to produce lawyers who conscientiously pursue
the lofty goals of their profession and to fully
adhere to its ethical norms.
MEMBERS OF THE LEGAL EDUCATION BOARD
1. Chairman, who shall preferably be a former
justice of the Supreme Court or Court of Appeals
2. a representative of the Integrated Bar of the
Philippines (IBP)
3. a representative of the Philippine Association of
Law Schools (PALS)
4. a representative from the ranks of active law
practitioners;
5. a representative from the law students' sector.
6. The Secretary of the Department of Education,
Culture and Sports, or his representative, shall be
an ex officio member of the Board.
POWERS AND FUNCTIONS OF THE LEB
1. to administer the legal education system in the
country in a manner consistent with the
provisions of this Act;
2. to supervise the law schools in the country,
consistent with its powers and functions as herein
enumerated;
3. to set the standards of accreditation for law
schools taking into account, among others, the
size of enrollment, the qualifications of the
members of the faculty, the library and other
facilities, without encroaching upon the academic
freedom of institutions of higher learning;
4. to accredit law schools that meet the standards of
accreditation;
5. to prescribe minimum standards for law
admission and minimum qualifications and
compensation of faculty members;
6. to prescribe the basic curricula for the course of
study aligned to the requirements for admission
to the Bar, law practice and social consciousness,
and such other courses of study as may be
prescribed by the law schools and colleges under
the different levels of accreditation status;
7. to establish a law practice internship as a
requirement for taking the Bar which a law
student shall undergo with any duly accredited
private or public law office or firm or legal
assistance group anytime during the law course
for a specific period that the Board may decide,
SIR King Noe Badong, KR
but not to exceed a total of twelve (12) months.
For this purpose, the Board shall prescribe the
necessary guidelines for such accreditation and
the specifications of such internship which shall
include the actual work of a new member of the
Bar.
8. to adopt a system of continuing legal education.
For this purpose, the Board may provide for the
mandatory attendance of practicing lawyers in
such courses and for such duration as the Board
may deem necessary; and
9. to perform such other functions and prescribe
such rules and regulations necessary for the
attainment of the policies and objectives of this
Act.
Section 8. Accreditation of Law Schools. - Educational
institutions may not operate a law school unless accredited
by the Board. Accreditation of law schools may be granted
only to educational institutions recognized by the
Government.
Section 9. Withdrawal or Downgrading of Accreditation. -
The Board may withdraw or downgrade the accreditation
status of a law school if it fails to maintain the standards set
for its accreditation status.
Section 10. Effectivity of Withdrawal or Downgrading of
Accreditation. - The withdrawal or downgrading of
accreditation status shall be effetive after the lapse ofthe
semester or trimester following the receipt by the school of
the notice of withdrawal or downgrading unless, in the
meantime, the school meets and/or upgrades the standards
or corrects the deficiencies upon which the withdrawal or
downgrading of the accreditation status is based.
---xxx---
DUTIES AND PRIVILEGES OF A LAWYER
Section 20, Rule 138
1. To maintain allegiance to the Republic of the
Philippines and to support the Constitution and
obey the laws of the Philippines.
2. To observe and maintain the respect due to the
courts of justice and judicial officers;
3. 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.
4. 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;
5
Legal Profession
UNIVERSITY of Makati SCHOOL OF LAW
5. 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;
6. 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;
7. 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;
8. Never to reject, for any consideration personal
to himself, the cause of the defenseless or
oppressed;
9. 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.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
I submit that we have to STUDY/FAMILIARIZE CODE OF
PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY page 66-77 (KNB)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
IMPORTANT CANON/S AND RULES: (MEMORIZE THESE)
CANON 1 - A LAWYER SHALL UPHOLD THE CONSTITUTION OBEY THE LAWS
OF THE LAND AND PROMOTE RESPECT FOR LAW OF AND LEGAL PROCESSES.
Rule 1.01 - A lawyer shall not engage in unlawful, dishonest, immoral or
deceitful conduct.
Rule 1.02 - A lawyer shall not counsel or abet activities aimed at defiance of
the law or at decreasing confidence in the legal systems.
Rule 15.07- A lawyer shall impress upon his client compliance with the laws
and the principles of fairness.
Canon 17 - a lawyer owes fidelity to the cause of his client and he shall be
mindful of the trust and confidence reposed in him.
Section 27, Rule 138 of ROC - Disbarment or suspension of attorneys by
Supreme Court, grounds therefor. A member of the bar may be disbarred or
suspended from his office as attorney by the Supreme Court for any deceit,
malpractice, or other gross misconduct in such office, grossly immoral
conduct, or by reason of his conviction of a crime involving moral turpitude,
or for any violation of the oath which he is required to take before admission
to practice, or for a willful disobedience appearing as an attorney for a party
to a case without authority so to do
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.
Rule 7.03 - A lawyer shall not engage in conduct that adversely
reflects on his fitness to practice law, nor shall he, whether in public
or private life, behave in a scandalous manner to the discredit of
the legal profession.
SIR King Noe Badong, KR
CASES
WILLEM KUPPERS VS. ATTY JOHNSON B. HONTANOSAS
Ponente: Justice Tinga
Facts:
Petitioner filed an administrative case against Atty.
Hontanosas through a letter complaint filed to the Court
Administrator which was referred to the Bar Confidant (BC).
Complainant was told by the Acting BC that in order for the court
to take cognizance of the case, a verified complaint must be
submitted in 19 copies and thus Kuppers was ordered to file an
additional 13 copies. Kuppers complied.
Allegations:
a. that he prepared and notarized contracts that are both invalid
and illegal as these contracts violated the limitations on aliens
leasing private lands
b. served conflicting interests since he performed legal services for
adverse parties;
c. refused to furnish copies of the contracts he notarized to the
parties thereof;
d. notarized documents without keeping copies thereof and
e. failed to properly discharge his duty to his client Karl Novak,
particularly when respondent allegedly refused to accept his
dismissal as counsel for Novak, failed to turn over Novak's
documents thereafter, handled legal matters without adequate
preparation, betrayed Novak's trust and refused to see Novak
with a translator of Novak's choice.
The assailed lease contract, where it is also alleged that Respondent was
acting as counsel for both parties which signifies conflict of interest, was
between spouses Busse and Hochstrasser which provides that the latter
would lease the spouses’ property in Cebu for 50 years renewable for
another 50 years. Another lease was executed by respondent for 49 years
renewable for another 49 years. And, lastly, two deeds of sale between
Spouses Busse to Melchior (Filipina) and Novak (German)
Atty Hontanosas, in his reply, answered that Kuppers should be the one
penalized for meddling with the affairs of his clients and making a mockery
of the legal system. On the other hand, Complainant stated that respondent
is like Pontius Pilatus (Digestor’s note: “Naghuhugas kamay”)
A. IBP Commissioners Findings/Recommendations
1. Indeed, the lease contracts violated PD No. 471 since the
lease of private lands by aliens cannot exceed 25 years
2. Failed to prove other charges.
3. Recommends to suspend from practice of law for two (2)
months
B. IBP Board of Governor’s Decision
1. Disregarded the recommendation of commissioner in (A)
2. Dismissed suspension since “respondent did not really
perform an illegal act”
3. Dismissed the complaint out of compassion.
HELD:
The Supreme Court Rejected the decision of the IBP-BOG. Although there is
lack of proof in other allegations, the court held, that administrative cases
against lawyers are sui generes and as such the complainant in the case need
not to be the aggrieved party. The defense of respondent that the contracts
are valid under RA 7652 is without merit since it must be established that the
foreigner are foreign investors and even so, the allowable period is only 50
years renewable for another 25 years.
6
Legal Profession
UNIVERSITY of Makati SCHOOL OF LAW SIR King Noe Badong, KR
Violations: A. IBP Commissioner’s findings &
recommendations.
1. Attorney’s oath: “obey the laws of the Philippines.
1. Allegation was proven.
2. CANON 1 - A LAWYER SHALL UPHOLD THE CONSTITUTION, OBEY THE LAWS
OF THE LAND AND PROMOTE RESPECT FOR LAW OF AND LEGAL 2. Ruled that respondent shall be suspended
PROCESSES. for three months in view of analogous cases.
3. Rule 1.01 - A lawyer shall not engage in unlawful, dishonest, immoral or B. IBP Board of Governors – ADOPTED SUCH
deceitful conduct.
4. Rule 1.02 - A lawyer shall not counsel or abet activities aimed at defiance RECOMMENDATION
of the law or at decreasing confidence in the legal systems. C. Supreme Court:
5. CANON 15 - a lawyer shall observe candor, fairness and loyalty in all his Violations:
dealings and transactions with his clients.
6. Rule 15.07- A lawyer shall impress upon his client compliance with the laws 1. CANON 1 - A lawyer shall uphold the constitution,
and the principles of hairness. obey the laws of the land and promote respect for
7. Canon 17 - a lawyer owes fidelity to the cause of his client and he shall be law and for legal processes.
mindful of the trust and confidence reposed in him. 2. Rule 1.01 - A lawyer shall not engage in unlawful,
8. Section 27, Rule 138 of ROC - Disbarment or suspension of attorneys by dishonest, immoral or deceitful conduct.
Supreme Court, grounds therefor. A member of the bar may be disbarred 3. Rule 1.02 - A lawyer shall not counsel or abet
or suspended from his office as attorney by the Supreme Court for any activities aimed at defiance of the law or at lessening
deceit, malpractice, or other gross misconduct in such office, grossly confidence in the legal system.
immoral conduct, or by reason of his conviction of a crime involving moral 4. CANON 7 - A lawyer shall at all times uphold the
turpitude, or for any violation of the oath which he is required to take integrity and dignity of the legal profession, and
before admission to practice, or for a willful disobedience appearing as an support the activities of the Integrated Bar.
attorney for a party to a case without authority so to do
5. Rule 7.03 - A lawyer shall not engage in conduct that
adversely reflects on his fitness to practice law, nor
The supreme penalty of disbarment is meted out only in clear cases of misconduct
should he, whether in public or private life, behave
that seriously affect the standing and character of the lawyer as an officer of the
in a scandalous manner to the discredit of the legal
court. While we will not hesitate to remove an erring attorney from the esteemed
profession.
brotherhood of lawyers, where the evidence calls for it, we will also not disbar him
where a lesser penalty will suffice to accomplish the desired end.
Moreover, respondent knew that reconstitution of land
The Court ultimately did not accept the recommendation of the IBP-BOG and as to the
will not exceed 20k php.
recommendation of the Investigating commissioner (2 months) was to light.

ATYY HONTANOSAS WAS SUSPENDED FOR 6 MONTHS WITH WARNING HELD:

SPS. AMADOR & ROSITA TEJADA vs. ATTY. ANTONIUTTI PALANA
Ponente: Justice Velasco
Facts:
Spouses Tejada filed a Complaint Affidavit before the
IBP to initiate disbarment proceedings against respondent for his
refusal to settle loan obligation to the complainants in violation of
his sworn duty as a lawyer to do justice to every man and Rule 7.03
of Canon 7 of the Code of Professional Responsibility.
Allegations:
1. That respondent took advantage of his legal
knowledge stating that he has a parcel of land and
barrowed 100k php for the reconstitution of said
land.
2. That he induced by sweet promises the spouses
that he will pay and that they will earn/receive 70k
php totaling to 170,000php all in all and that he
shall pay within three months. Evidence of this
agreement (xerox copy) was presented.
3. That after receiving the 100k, he evaded that
spouses and did not pay his loan obligations.
Respondent, despite due notice, failed to appear in the hearing and
thus IBP declared that Atty. Hontanosas, waived his right to submit
evidence and participate in the proceedings.
It is clear that he employed deceit in convincing
complainants to part with their hard-earned money and
the latter could not have been easily swayed to lend the
money were it not for his misrepresentations and failed
promises as a member of the bar.
Membership in the bar is a privilege burdened with
conditions. A high sense of morality, honesty, and fair
dealing is expected and required of a member of the bar
ATTY. ATONIUTTI PALANA WAS SUSPENDED FOR 6
MONTHS; ORDERED TO PAY SPOUSES.
WALTER WILKIE VS. ATTY SINAMAR E. LIMOS
Ponente: Justice De Castro
Facts:
Complainant filed an administrative case against Atty
Limos on the grounds of deceitful and dishonest conduct. The case
was filed with the IBP La Union which was then forwarded to the
National Office.
Allegations:
1. Complainant hired respondent with regard to his
intention to adopt his wife’s nephew.
2. That notwithstanding their Lawyer client relationship,
Atty Limos barrowed 250k php. Loan stipulation states
that the interest is 24% per annum (60k) totaling to
310kphp.
3. That when the checks are being withdrawn, it was
returned due to insufficient funds
4. That despite the demands, respondent failed to pay
7
Legal Profession
UNIVERSITY of Makati SCHOOL OF LAW
Committee on Bar Discipline gave respondent 15 days to
answer the complaint but the latter filed a Manifestation and
motion requesting for a copy of the complaint and moved for
the re-scheduling of the mandatory hearing. On the schedule
hearing, however, respondent failed to appear and failed to
file and answer.
A. IBP Commissioner’s Findings/Recommendation
1. Allegations were proven.
2. Atty Limos Violated BP 22 which is considered a
crime involving moral turpitude as this mischief
creates not only a wrong to the payee or holder,
but also an injury to the public. The Court has
stressed that the nature of the office of an
attorney at law requires that she shall be a person
of good moral character. This qualification is not
only a condition precedent to the practice of law;
its continued possession is also essential for
remaining in the practice of law.
3. Suspended for 2 years
B. IBP Board of Governors:
1. Adopted and Approved with modification the
recommendation in A. with modification
2. REPRIMANDED with STERN WARNING that a
repetition of a similar conduct will be dealt with
more severity
Respondent’s DEFENSE
The respondent explained her failure to attend the hearing.
According to her, she was physically unfit and she was made to
believe that the administrative complaint will be withdrawn in view
of the Affidavit of Desistance executed by complainant. And that
the loan was an accommodation for Hilario Inocencio (another
client) who did not pay her and who later died leaving respondent
with any recourse. MTC in La Union dismissed the criminal case for
violation of BP 22 against respondent.
SIR King Noe Badong, KR
Violations:
1. CANON 1 (see above)
2. C1, Rule 1.01 (see above)
3. Sec 27, Rule 138
On a final note, we reiterate that membership in the legal
profession is a privilege demanding a high degree of good moral
character, not only as a condition precedent to admission, but also
as a continuing requirement for the practice of law. Sadly, herein
respondent fell short of the exacting standards expected of her as a
vanguard of the legal profession.
ATTY. LIMOS WAS SUSPENDED FOR THREE MONTHS
MAJORIE SAMANIEGO VS. ATTY ANDREW FERRER
Ponente: Justice Quisumbing
Facts:
Majorie filed a complaint with IBP against respondent
for immorality, abandonment, and willful refusal to give support
to their daughter.
Complainant herein was referred to Atty. Ferrer as potential client
and the latter agreed to take her case. Their Lawyer-client
relationship became intimate as Atty Ferrer courted the
complainant and that the latter fell for their temptations. They
lived togethers as husband and wife and eventually had a daughter.
Their affair ended in 2000 (after 3 years of relationship) when Atty
Ferrer failed to give support to their daughter.
IBP Commissioner and Board of Governors – 6 months suspension
Respondent’s Defense

HELD: 1. Did not deny the allegations

Failure to pay just debts and issuance of worthless checks
constitute gross misconduct.
Lawyers are expected to maintain not only legal proficiency
but also a high standard of morality, honesty, integrity and
fair dealing so that the people's faith and confidence in the
judicial system is ensured. They must at all times faithfully
perform their duties to society, to the bar, the courts and to
their clients, which include prompt payment of financial
obligations. (Barrientos v. Libiran-Meteoro)
Moreover, respondent did not disclose the Affidavit of
Desistance (AOD) in her Manifestation. It was only
mentioned in her subsequent letter dated Dec. 14, 2006.
2. He manifested his willingness to suppPraort their
daughter
3. He reasoned that it is unconscionable to leave his wife
and 10 children
4. Begs the court the court for compassion
5. Punishment will cause extreme hardship to his family
HELD:
The court held that the charge of abandonment cannot prosper
since respondent did not abandon them, he only returned to his
family. However, having admitted that he extra-marital affair, such
immoral conduct is subject to disciplinary action. And though,
complainant may be in pari delicto with respondent, this
investigation is about the latter as to his fitness to continue as
member of the Bar.

As to the withdrawal, dismissal of criminal case (AOD) Violations:

No investigation shall be interrupted or 1. Rule 1.101

terminated by reason of the desistance, settlement, 2. Canon 7
compromise, restitution, withdrawal of the 3. Rule 7.03 Canon 7
charges, or failure of the complainant to prosecute
ATTY ANDREW FERRER WAS SUSPENDED FOR 6 MONTHS
the same. (Sec 5, Rule 139-B Rules of Court)
8
Legal Profession
UNIVERSITY of Makati SCHOOL OF LAW SIR King Noe Badong, KR
the court is not only required to refrain from adulterous
relationships or keeping a mistress but must also so behave himself
REBECCA ARNOBIT VS. ATTY PONCIANO ARNOBIT as to avoid scandalizing the public by creating the impression that
he is flouting those moral standards.
Ponente: PER CURIAM

Facts:
Complainant filed an affidavit-complaint praying that
the Court exercise its disciplinary power against her husband on the
grounds of immorality and abandonment.
Allegations:
1. Rebecca alleged that she was continuously supporting
him in law school until his eventual passing of the bar.
2. That they go married on Aug. 20, 1942 and that they
sired twelve (12) children.
3. In 1968 Atty Arnobit left the family home and cohabited
with Benita Navarro with whom he sired four (4)
children
To reiterate, possession of good moral character is not only
a condition precedent to the practice of law, but a
continuing qualification for all members of the bar.
Undoubtedly, respondent's act of leaving his wife and 12 children
to cohabit and have children with another woman constitutes
grossly immoral conduct. And to add insult to injury, there seems
to be little attempt on the part of respondent to be discreet about
his liaison with the other woman.
ATTY PONCIANO P. ARNOBIT IS DISBARRED
---xxx---

Respondent’s Defense:
“A river cuts through a rock not
1.
2.
In his answer he denied having cohabited with Benita.
Reason for separation was because of his complaining
because of its power but its
wife and that she was "always traveling all over the persistence”
country, ostensibly for business purposes, without his
knowledge and consent, x x x thereby neglecting her
obligations toward her family.”

Hearings were conducted before the OSG and the IBP where
Rebeca presented her sister who identified a letter written by Atty
LEGAL PROFESSION REVIEWER
Arnobit asking for forgiveness; and Melecio Navarro who testified KING NOE A. BADONG 2018
about how respondent took his wife as mistress knowing fully well Leading, Learning, and Serving for Life
of their lawful marriage.
Fraternal Brother – Knights of Rizal
Affidavits of NBI Agents were presented to show the existence of a Non Omnis Moriar!
prima facie case of adultery. Birth and baptismal certificates of the
4 subsequent children were submitted to prove such allegations.

Despite due notice, Atty Arnobit failed to appeared cause

postponement and delay. He also did not comply with the
Commission’s directives to send his affidavits and doc exhibits
through mail in lieu of his absence.

IBP Commissioner and Board of Governor’s Decision – 3 months

SUSPENSION

HELD:

The Court held that aside from the proven abandonment, Atty
Arnobit violated other canons and rules in the Code of Professional
Responsibility

Violations:

1. Rule 1.01
2. Canon 7
3. Canon 7.03

As officers of the court, lawyers must not only in fact be of good

moral character but must also be seen to be of good moral
character and leading lives in accordance with the highest moral
standards of the community.A member of the bar and an officer of