Submitted by:

Balneg, Jaybee
Jacobe, Leah
Pawaon, Lovely
JD-1A

Legal Profession in the ASEAN Region

JD 117 2 CASE EXAMINATIONS
Case No. 1
IBP Davao requested you to render free legal aid to BARANGAY TREASURER BUDOTS REVILLA in the
case for Malversation of Public Funds filed against him by the Ombudsman. However, Budots confessed to you
that he actually used the barangay funds. He loaned these to the barangay health workers who needed money to
make ends meet during the pandemic. Budots was then preventively suspended from his office, leaving him
with no source of income. Will you defend him? State your reason and cite your legal basis. Can a lawyer
decline to accept a losing case? Explain with legal basis. Cite one instance when you can refuse to represent
Budots Revilla in this case. Provide legal basis.

Yes, I will defend him.

According to the Code of Professional Responsibility of Lawyers, Rule 14 paragraphs 1 and 2, it states:
Rule 14.01 - A lawyer shall not decline to represent a person solely on account of the latter's race, sex. creed
or status of life, or because of his own opinion regarding the guilt of said person.
Rule 14.02 - A lawyer shall not decline, except for serious and sufficient cause, an appointment as counsel de
officio or as amicus curiae, or a request from the Integrated Bar of the Philippines or any of its chapters for
rendition of free legal aid
Thus, as a lawyer, I have the professional obligation to defend anyone seeking legal aid. Also, it is my duty as a
member of the IBP to provide free legal services to the underprivileged sectors of the society.
In cases when chances of winning are slim to none, lawyers have the obligation to objectively state the facts of
the case and the most probable outcome therein. Guided by the Code of Professional Responsibility, Rule 15
paragraph 5, it states:
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.
In the event that the lawyer becomes severely ill or incapacitated, he/she can decline to represent the client and
refer the client to other available and able legal counsels. The state of severe illness or incapacity can be
categorized as a “serious and sufficient cause” as an exemption stated in the Rule 14.02 that merits the lawyer
to decline a client. Additionally, under Rule 14 paragraph 3, it states:
Rule 14.03 - A lawyer may not refuse to accept representation of an indigent client unless:
(a) he is not in a position to carry out the work effectively or competently;
Therefore, in an event of sickness or incapacity, the lawyer may redirect indigent clients to other effective and
competent attorneys.
--------------------------------------------------------------------

Case No. 2
ATTY. RICO BWANCO was the legal counsel of Joggle Innovative Marketing. To become a member thereof,
Atty. Rico required prospective “investors” to issue blank, postdated checks to cover their monthly investment
of PhP5,000.00, for which they were assured a 400% return the following month. Before the maturity of the
checks, Atty. Rico would ask the member if it was funded. If the member answers in the negative, Atty. Rico
would then fill out the check in the amount of PhP50,000.00, representing the member’s monthly investment,
20% interest rate, attorneys fees, damages, and other charges, and then encash it. Atty. Rico would then file a
criminal case against the delinquent member for issuing a bouncing check in violation of B.P. Blg. 22. One of
Atty. Rico’s victims, Maris Bacal, complained Rico to the IBP. During the investigation, Atty. Rico raised the
following defenses: 1) he cannot possibly be charged since the Usury Law has been repealed and the Central
Bank allows the imposition of any rate of interest. Moreover, the filing of B.P. 22 cases was a legal remedy he
can avail of; and 2) the charges against him concern his personal conduct and has nothing to do with the
practice of his profession, thus, the IBP has no jurisdiction. How do you dispose of Atty. Rico’s arguments?
Rebut each one in sequence and provide legal basis.
1.)
By law, the BSP can effectively set interest rates. Under the Usury Law (Act No. 2655, as amended by P.D.
116), the Monetary Board can prescribe the maximum interest rates for loans made by banks, pawnshops,
finance companies and similar credit institutions, and to change such rates whenever warranted by
prevailing economic conditions. Moreover, the BSP charter (R.A. No. 7653) allows the Monetary Board to
take appropriate remedial measures whenever abnormal movements in monetary aggregates, in credit or in
prices endanger the stability of the Philippine economy.
Presidential Decree No. 116 or the Amending Further Certain Sections of Act Numbered Two Thousand
Six Hundred Fifty-Five, As Amended, Otherwise Known As "The Usury Law", Section 7 states that:
Section 7. Section five of the same Act is hereby amended to read as follows:
Sec. 5. In computing the interest on any obligation, promissory note or other instrument or contract,
compound interest shall not be reckoned, except by agreement: Provided, That whenever compound
interest is agreed upon, the effective rate of interest charged by the creditor shall not exceed the
equivalent of the maximum rate prescribed by the Monetary Board, or, in default thereof, whenever the
debt is judicially claimed, in which last case it shall draw six per centum per annum interest or such
rate as may be prescribed by the Monetary Board. No person or corporation shall require interest to be
paid in advance for a period of not more than one year: Provided, however, That whenever interest is
paid in advance, the effective rate of interest charged by the creditor shall not exceed the equivalent of
the maximum rate prescribed by the Monetary Board.
Atty. Bwanco also knew that the member’s check was not funded before he encashed it. He is liable for the
wrongful act done under B.P. 22 Section 2 and Section 1 paragraph 3, which state:
Section 2. Evidence of knowledge of insufficient funds. - The making, drawing and issuance of a check
payment of which is refused by the drawee because of insufficient funds in or credit with such bank, when
presented within ninety (90) days from the date of the check, shall be prima facie evidence of knowledge of such
insufficiency of funds or credit unless such maker or drawer pays the holder thereof the amount due thereon, or
makes arrangements for payment in full by the drawee of such check within (5) banking days after receiving
notice that such check has not been paid by the drawee.
Section 1 (3). Where the check is drawn by a corporation, company or entity, the person or persons who
actually signed the check in behalf of such drawer shall be liable under this Act.
Therefore, the accused cannot apply the Usury Law and B.P. 22 as defense.

2.)
Atty. Bwanco cannot just claim personal conduct as a defense because the fact that he was the legal counsel of
Joggle Innovative Marketing puts him in the practice of his profession. Atty. Bwanco violated Canon 1, Rule
1.01 of the Code of Professional Responsibility, which states that:
Rule 1.01 - A lawyer shall not engage in unlawful, dishonest, immoral or deceitful conduct.
A penalty of disbarment or suspension for gross misconduct can be applied in the given case. Section 27, Rule
138 of the Rules of Court provides that 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. Gross
misconduct has been defined as any inexcusable, shameful or flagrantly unlawful conduct on the part of the
person involved in the administration of justice, conduct that is prejudicial to the rights of the parties, or to the
right determination of the cause.
Membership in the legal profession is a privilege that is granted upon individuals who do not only study the
law, but are also known to possess good moral character. Lawyers must conduct themselves with high moral
standards at all times, whether they are dealing with their clients or the public at large, and a violation of such
conduct justifies the imposition of the appropriate penalty, including suspension and disbarment. Thus, Atty.
Bwanco’s misdemeanor, whether professional or non-professional, indicating unfitness for the profession
justifies disciplinary action.
--------------------------------------------------------------------

Case No. 3
ATTY. GERALD WANDERSON represented his wife, Bea Malonzo, in the Libel case that the latter filed
against Julia Claretto. During trial, Atty. Gerald was smitten by Julia, with whom he eventually begot twins in
2018. In 2019, Bea discovered Gerald’s affair; in fact, it became known not only by Gerald’s officemates, but
by the community, as pictures of his illicit relations with Julia were in several social networking sites. Since
then, Gerald never returned home. He abandoned Bea and the educational plan and support of their children
were subsequently cut off. Worse, Atty. Gerald became a co-counsel in the Libel case of Julia. In his defense,
Atty. Gerald denies having any extramarital affair, but admits having fathered Julia’s twins. In fact, it was only
in 2020 when, after he had already converted to Islam and divorced Bea, that he married Julia. As a matter of
fact, the Prosecutor dismissed the complaint for Adultery filed against him. Meanwhile, on his engagement as
co-counsel, he alleges that he only helped Julia in making her Judicial Affidavits, and no confidential
information was disclosed.
Can Atty. Gerald be disbarred even if the Adultery case against him was dismissed? Explain your reason and
provide legal basis.
Yes, he can be disbarred.
As per Code of Professional Responsibility - Chapter I. The Lawyer And Society, 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 lessening confidence
in the legal system.
Rule 1.03 - A lawyer shall not, for any corrupt motive or interest, encourage any suit or proceeding or delay any
man's cause.
Rule 1.04 - A lawyer shall encourage his clients to avoid, end or settle a controversy if it will admit of a fair
settlement.
Also, 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.
If Atty. Gerald did not commit immorality and abandoned his family, is there another ground to discipline him?
Cite legal basis.
Yes, there is another ground to discipline him on his engagement as co-counsel to Julia Claretto. As per Rule
12.08 - A lawyer shall avoid testifying in behalf of his client, except:
(a) on formal matters, such as the mailing, authentication or custody of an instrument, and the like; or
(b) on substantial matters, in cases where his testimony is essential to the ends of justice, in which event he
must, during his testimony, entrust the trial of the case to another counsel.

--------------------------------------------------------------------

Case No. 4
ATTY. NORMAN BLACK represented his son, Aaron Black, in the latter’s Murder case pending before Judge
Yeng Guiao of RTC, Ozamiz City. To facilitate Aaron's temporary release, Atty. Norman submitted to Judge
Yeng a bail bond in the amount of PhP200,000.00, accompanied by an order of release purportedly signed by
Judge Tim Cone of RTC, Cagayan de Oro City. Judge Yeng approved the order of release after he saw the
signature of Judge Tim; however, it was not long after when Atty. Chot Reyes, Clerk of Court of Judge Tim,
informed Judge Yeng that the bail bond was actually inexistent and that their Branch never processed it. In his
defense, Atty. Norman asserted that he processed the bail bond through Alpha Bola Insurance & Surety
Company, where he obtained a copy of the signed order of release. It was Judge Yeng who was in the best
position to inquire whether the bail bond and the release order were authentic. As it was, however, Judge Yeng
never mentioned any irregularity about these documents nor inquired about their authenticity. Is there a ground
to discipline Atty. Norman? Provide legal basis.

Yes. Under the IBP Code of Professional Responsibility, Section 10 paragraph 1, it states that:
Rule 10.01 - A lawyer shall not do any falsehood, nor consent to the doing of any in Court; nor shall he
mislead, or allow the Court to be misled by any artifice.
In this case, Atty. Norman Black violated this provision in the Code of Professional Responsibility when he
falsified the bail bond and the release order allegedly signed by Judge Tim Cone of RTC Cagayan De Oro. This
act has misled Judge Yeng Guiao into issuing the release order.
The defense that he processed the bail bond through Alpha Bola Insurance & Surety Company, where he
obtained a copy of the signed order of release is also misleading because under the amended Rules of Court,
Section 6 and 7, it states:
Section 6. Personal service. — Service of the papers may be made by delivering personally a copy to the party
or his counsel, or by leaving it in his office with his clerk or with a person having charge thereof. If no person
is found in his office, or his office is not known, or he has no office, then by leaving the copy, between the hours
of eight in the morning and six in the evening, at the party's or counsel's residence, if known, with a person of
sufficient age and discretion then residing therein. (4a)
Section 7. Service by mail. — Service by registered mail shall be made by depositing the copy in the post office
in a sealed envelope, plainly addressed to the party or his counsel at his office, if known, otherwise at his
residence, if known, with postage fully prepaid, and with instructions to the postmaster to return the mail to the
sender after ten (10) days if undelivered. If no registry service is available in the locality of either the senders
or the addressee, service may be done by ordinary mail. (5a; Bar Matter No. 803, 17 February 1998)
In this case, Alpha Bola Insurance & Surety Company has no way of obtaining the Release Order from the RTC
Cagayan De Oro since all legal papers from the court shall be PERSONALLY OR BY MAIL delivered to the
concerned party – Aaron Black, his counsel - Atty. Norman Black or in his office or residence. Also, it would
be illogical that the concerned parties will hold office or live in the Alpha Bola Insurance & Surety company
premises.

The defense that it was the duty of the Court, specifically Judge Yeng, to scrutinize the authenticity of the
documents is beyond his jurisdiction as legal counsel to question the Judge’s capacity to examine documents
and his manner of discretion in deciding on the qualification of the sureties. It is for the Supreme Court to
conduct investigations on Judges’ negligence and errors in conducting their practice of jurisprudence upon
proper petition process under Rule 140 of Philippine Supreme Court Circulars and based on the canons
under the Code of Judicial Conduct.

The fact of the matter is that there is sufficient proof of fraud or falsification of documents when the Clerk of
Court, Atty. Chot Reyes, attested that the bond was inexistent and has no records of filing bail in their court. In
Section 12 of the Rules of Court, it states:
Section 12. Proof of filing. — The filing of a pleading or paper shall be proved by its existence in the record of
the case. If it is not in the record, but is claimed to have been filed personally, the filing shall be proved by the
written or stamped acknowledgment of its filing by the clerk of court on a copy of the same; if filed by
registered mail, by the registry receipt and by the affidavit of the person who did the mailing, containing a full
statement of the date and place of depositing the mail in the post office in a sealed envelope addressed to the
court, with postage fully prepaid, and with instructions to the postmaster to return the mail to the sender after
ten (10) days if not delivered. (n)

Atty. Norman Black did not provide the proof of filing or other pertinent bail documents to substantiate its
existence in the record of the case.
Therefore, the Court in this case can file a complaint against Atty. Norman Black’s conduct in his practice of
law and would be subjected to the Rule 139-B of the Rules of Court on the Disbarment and Discipline of
Attorneys.

--------------------------------------------------------------------

Case No. 5
ATTY. PINA K. MAGALING is a legal practitioner well-loved by her clients, who has built a reputation of
winning all her cases on land disputes. To win cases, Atty. Magaling would file harassment cases against bank
lawyers and the Register of Deeds, and interpose numerous appeals and petitions from court issuances; then, she
would employ dilatory tactics to stop the execution of a final and executory decision, and prevent the
enforcement of a writ of possession; and, if the decision is adverse to her, she will advertise in newspapers and
challenge the judge to a public and televised debate. As defense, Atty. Magaling asserts that in all those cases,
she was only protecting and defending his clients’ proprietary rights. Further, she can challenge judges to
debates as this was her right as an officer of the court and her duty to correct grave errors and abuses of
discretion.
Atty. Magaling violated what provisions of the Code of Professional Responsibility? Explain your answer.
Atty. Magaling Violated Canon 4 - A Lawyer Shall Participate In The Development Of The Legal System By
Initiating Or Supporting Efforts In Law Reform And In The Improvement Of The Administration Of Justice.
Also, Canon 8 - A Lawyer Shall Conduct Himself With Courtesy, Fairness And Candor Towards His
Professional Colleagues, And Shall Avoid Harassing Tactics Against Opposing Counsel. Moreover, Rule 8.01 -
A Lawyer Shall Not, In His Professional Dealings, Use Language Which Is Abusive, Offensive Or Otherwise
Improper and Rule 8.02 - A Lawyer Shall Not, Directly Or Indirectly, Encroach Upon The Professional
Employment Of Another Lawyer, However, It Is The Right Of Any Lawyer, Without Fear Or Favor, To Give
Proper Advice And Assistance To Those Seeking Relief Against Unfaithful Or Neglectful Counsel.
Do the transgressions of the Atty. Magaling justify her disbarment?
Yes, for not adhering to the Philippines Lawyer's Oath., which reads, to wit;
I, do solemnly swear that I will maintain allegiance to the Republic of the Philippines, I will support the
Constitution and obey the laws as well as the legal orders of the duly constituted authorities therein; I will do no
falsehood, nor consent to the doing of any in court; I will not wittingly or willingly promote or sue any
groundless, false or unlawful suit, or give aid nor consent to the same; I will delay no man for money or malice,
and will conduct myself as a lawyer according to the best of my knowledge and discretion, with all good fidelity
as well to the courts as to my clients; and I impose upon myself these voluntary obligations without any mental
reservation or purpose of evasion. So help me God.