1

Case Doctrines in Legal Ethics Part 1

prepared by R.G. Felizardo III

PRACTICE OF LAW

Director of Religious Affair v. Bayot, A.C. No. L-1117, March 20, 1944

● It is highly unethical for an attorney to advertise his talents or skill as a merchant

advertises his wares. Law is a profession and not a trade. The lawyer
degrades himself and his profession who stoops to and adopts the practices of
mercantilism by advertising his services or offering them to the public.

In the Matter of the Petition for Authority To Continue use of the Firm name
“Ozaeta, Romulo, etc., 92 SCRA 1, July 30, 1979

● Primary characteristics which distinguish the legal profession from

business are:

a. A duty of public service, of which the emolument is a byproduct, and in

which one may attain the highest eminence without making much money.

b. A relation as an “officer of court” to the administration of justice

involving thorough sincerity, integrity, and reliability.

c. A relation to clients in the highest degree fiduciary.

d. A relation to 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.

● The right to practice law is not a natural or constitutional right but is in the
nature of a privilege or franchise. It is limited to persons of good moral
character with special qualifications duly ascertained and certified. The right does
not only presuppose in its possessor integrity, legal standing, and attainment but
 2

also the exercise of a special privilege, highly personal and partaking of the
nature of a public trust.

Ledesma v. Climaco, G.R. No. L-23815, June 28, 1974

● XXX that membership in the bar is a privilege burdened with conditions.

XXX It makes even more manifest that law is indeed a profession dedicated to
the ideal of service and not a mere trade. It is understandable then why a high
degree of fidelity to duty is required of one so designated.

● A recent statement of the doctrine is found in People v. Daban: "There is need

anew in this disciplinary proceeding to lay stress on the fundamental postulate
that membership in the bar carries with it a responsibility to live up to its
exacting standard.

● The law is a profession, not a trade or a craft. Those enrolled in its ranks are
called upon to aid in the performance of one of the basic purposes of the
State, the administration of justice.

● Justice Sanchez in People v. Estebia reiterated such a view in these words: "It is
true that he is a court-appointed counsel. But we do say that as such counsel
de oficio, he has as high a duty to the accused as one employed and paid
by defendant himself. Because, as in the case of the latter, he must exercise
his best efforts and professional ability in behalf of the person assigned to his
care. He is to render effective assistance. The accused-defendant expects of
him due diligence, not mere perfunctory representation. For, indeed a lawyer
who is a vanguard in the bastion of justice is expected to have a bigger dose of
social conscience and a little less of self-interest."

Aguirre v. Rana, B. M. No. 1036, June 10, 2003

● The right to practice law is not a natural or constitutional right but is a

privilege. It is limited to persons of good moral character with special
qualifications duly ascertained and certified. The exercise of this privilege
presupposes possession of integrity, legal knowledge, educational attainment,
and even public trust since a lawyer is an officer of the court.
 3

● A bar candidate does not acquire the right to practice law simply by passing the
bar examinations. The practice of law is a privilege that can be withheld even
from one who has passed the bar examinations, if the person seeking admission
had practiced law without a license.

● It is the signing in the Roll of Attorneys that finally makes one a full-fledged
lawyer. XXX Passing the bar is not the only qualification to become an
attorney-at-law. Respondent should know that two essential requisites for
becoming a lawyer still had to be performed, namely: his lawyer’s oath to be
administered by this Court and his signature in the Roll of Attorneys.

Cayetano v. Monsod, 201 SCRA 210, G.R. No. 100113 September 3, 1991

● Practice of law means any activity, in or out of court, which requires the
application of law, legal procedure, knowledge, training and experience. “To
engage in the practice of law is to perform those acts which are characteristics of
the profession. Generally, to practice law is to give notice or render any kind
of service, which device or service requires the use in any degree of legal
knowledge or skill.”

● PADILLA, J., Dissenting Opinion:

To “practice” law, or any profession for that matter, means, to exercise or
pursue an employment or profession actively, habitually, repeatedly or
customarily. XXX a lawyer who is employed as a business executive or a
corporate manager, other than as head or attorney of a Legal Department of a
corporation or a governmental agency, cannot be said to be in the practice of law.

● GUTIERREZ, JR., J., Dissenting Opinion:

The Constitution uses the phrase “engaged in the practice of law for at least ten
years.” The deliberate choice of words shows that the practice envisioned is
active and regular, not isolated, occasional, accidental, intermittent,
incidental, seasonal, or extemporaneous. To be “engaged” in an activity for
ten years requires committed participation in something which is the result of
one’s decisive choice. It means that one is occupied and involved in the
enterprise; one is obliged or pledged to carry it out with intent and attention
during the ten-year period.
 4

Cruz v. Atty. Cabrera, 441 SCRA 211, Adm. Case No. 5737, October 25, 2004

● All lawyers should take heed that lawyers are licensed officers of the courts who
are empowered to appear, prosecute and defend; and upon whom peculiar
duties, responsibilities and liabilities are devolved by law as a consequence.
Membership in the bar imposes upon them certain obligations. Mandated
to maintain the dignity of the legal profession, they must conduct
themselves honorably and fairly. Though a lawyer’s language may be forceful
and emphatic, it should always be dignified and respectful, befitting the dignity of
the legal profession. The use of intemperate language and unkind ascriptions
has no place in the dignity of judicial forum.

● Nonetheless, we remind respondent that complainant is not precluded from

litigating personally his cases. A party’s right to conduct litigation personally is
recognized by Section 34 of Rule 138 of the Rules of Court.

● Lawyers should not be held to too strict an account for words said in the heat of
the moment, because of chagrin at losing cases, and that the big way is for the
court to condone even contemptuous language.

Alawi v. Alauya, 268 SCRA 628, February 24, 1997

● The title of “attorney” is reserved to those who, having obtained the

necessary degree in the study of law and successfully taken the Bar
Examinations, have been admitted to the Integrated Bar of the Philippines and
remain members thereof in good standing; and it is they only who are
authorized to practice law in this jurisdiction.

In re: Garcia, August 15, 1961

● The aforementioned Treaty, concluded between the Republic of the Philippines

and the Spanish State could not have been intended to modify the laws and
regulations governing admission to the practice of law in the Philippines, for the
reason that the Executive Department may not encroach upon the
constitutional prerogative of the Supreme Court to promulgate rules for
admission to the practice of law in the Philippines, the power to repeal, alter
or supplement such rules being reserved only to the Congress of the Philippines.
(See Sec. 13, Art VIII, Phil. Constitution).
 5

In re: Cunanan, et al., 94 Phil. 534, March 18, 1954

● The public interest demands of legal profession adequate preparation and

efficiency, precisely more so as legal problem evolved by the times
become more difficult. An adequate legal preparation is one of the vital
requisites for the practice of law that should be developed constantly and
maintained firmly. To the legal profession is entrusted the protection of property,
life, honor and civil liberties. To approve officially of those inadequately prepared
individuals to dedicate themselves to such a delicate mission is to create a
serious social danger.

● In the judicial system from which ours has been evolved, the admission,
suspension, disbarment, and reinstatement of attorneys-at-law in the
practice of the profession and their supervision have been indisputably a judicial
function and responsibility.

● The Constitution has not conferred on Congress and this Tribunal equal
responsibilities governing the admission to the practice of law. The primary power
and responsibility which the Constitution recognizes, continue to reside in this
court. Congress may repeal, alter and supplement the rules promulgated by
this court, but the authority and responsibility over the admission, suspension,
disbarment and reinstatement of attorneys-at-law and their supervision remain
vested in the Supreme Court.

● These powers have existed together for centuries without diminution on each
part; the harmonious delimitation being found in that the legislature may and
should examine if the existing rules on the admission to the Bar respond to the
demands that public interest requires of a Bar endowed with high virtues, culture,
training and responsibility. The legislature may, by means of repeal, amendment
or supplemental rules, fill up any deficiency that it may find, and the judicial
power, which has the inherent responsibility for a good and efficient
administration of justice and the supervision of the practice of the legal
profession, should consider these reforms as the minimum standards for the
elevation of the profession, and see to it that with these reforms the lofty
objective that is desired in the exercise of its traditional duty of admitting,
suspending, disbarring and reinstating attorneys-at-law is realized.
 6

In re: Atty. Marcial Edillon, 84 SCRA 554, August 03, 1978

● An "Integrated Bar" is a State-organized Bar, to which every lawyer must

belong, as distinguished from bar associations organized by individual lawyers
themselves, membership in which is voluntary. Integration of the Bar is
essentially a process by which every member of the Bar is afforded an
opportunity to do his share in carrying out the objectives of the Bar as well
as be obliged to bear his portion of its responsibilities. Organized by or
under the direction of the State, an integrated Bar is an official national body of
which all lawyers are required to be members. They are, therefore, subject to
all the rules prescribed for the governance of the Bar, including the requirement
of payment of a reasonable annual fee for the effective discharge of the
purposes of the Bar, and adherence to a code of professional ethics or
professional responsibility breach of which constitutes sufficient reason for
investigation by the Bar and, upon proper cause appearing, a recommendation
for discipline or disbarment of the offending member.

● The practice of law is not a vested right but a privilege, a privilege moreover
clothed with public interest because a lawyer owes substantial duties not only
to his client, but also to his brethren in the profession, to the courts, and to the
nation, and takes part in one of the most important functions of the State — the
administration of justice — as an officer of the court. The practice of law being
clothed with public interest, the holder of this privilege must submit to a
degree of control for the common good, to the extent of the interest he has
created.

In re: Atty. Marcial Edillon, A.C. 1928, December 19, 1980

● The unanimous conclusion reached by the Court was that the integration of the
Philippine Bar raises no constitutional question and is therefore legally
unobjectionable, "and, within the context of contemporary conditions in the
Philippines, has become an imperative means to raise the standards of the
legal profession, improve the administration of justice, and enable the Bar
to discharge its public responsibility fully and effectively."

● It may likewise be said that as in the case of the inherent power to punish for
contempt and paraphrasing the dictum of Justice Malcolm in Villavicencio v.
 7

Lukban, the power to discipline, especially if amounting to disbarment, should

be exercised on the preservative and not on the vindictive principle.

● It has been pertinently observed that there is no irretrievable finality as far as

admission to the bar is concerned. So it is likewise as to loss of membership.
What must ever be borne in mind is that membership in the bar, to follow
Cardozo, is a privilege burdened with conditions. Failure to abide by any of
them entails the loss of such privilege if the gravity thereof warrant such drastic
move. Thereafter a sufficient time having elapsed and after actuations evidencing
that there was due contrition on the part of the transgressor, he may once again
be considered for the restoration of such a privilege.

Bongalonta v. Atty. Castillo & Atty. Martija, CBD Case No. 176, January 20,
1995

● The practice of law is not a right but a privilege bestowed by the State on those
who show that they possess, and continue to possess, the qualifications required
by law for the conferment of such privilege. One of these requirements is the
observance of honesty and candor. Courts are entitled to expect only
complete candor and honesty from the lawyers appearing and pleading before
them. A lawyer, on the other hand, has the fundamental duty to satisfy that
expectation. for this reason, he is required to swear to do no falsehood, nor
consent to the doing of any in court.

In re: David, 93 Phil., 461, June 13, 1953

● A suspended lawyer who practices the profession during the period of

suspension must be completely disqualified from practicing the profession in the
Philippines with a consequent cancellation of the certificate issued in favor of
such attorney.

● The fact that the lawyer had not put in the motion asking for execution that he
was acting as an attorney but as an agent and employee of the plaintiff does not
alter the nature of his services which are certainly professional attorney services.
Hiding that he was acting as a lawyer and pretending that he was only an agent
aggravates his situation.
 8

Laput and Salas v. Bernabe, 55 Phil. 621, February 12, 1931

● The municipal court of the City of Manila may be considered a court of a justice
of the peace for the purposes of [Rule 138] section 34 of the Code of Civil
Procedure permitting a party to conduct his litigation in person, or with the aid of
an agent on friend appointed by him for that purpose. That is, it may, at least, for
civil cases and for criminal cases with civil aspects.

Paar v. Borromeo, 79 Phil. 344, October 10, 1947

● Under [Rule 116, Sec. 7] sections 3 and 4 of Rule 112 and sections 29 and 31 of
Rule 127, in Manila where there are many members of the bar, defendants in the
People's Court may be assisted only by such members.

People v. Villanueva, 14 SCRA 109, May 27, 1965

● [Private] Practice is more than an isolated appearance, for it consists in

frequent or customary actions, a succession of acts of the same kind. The
practice of law by attorneys employed in the government, to fall within the
prohibition of statute, has been interpreted as customarily or habitually holding
one’s self out to the public, as a lawyer and demanding payment for such
services. The appearance as counsel on one occasion is not conclusive as
determinative of engagement in the private practice of law. The word private
practice of law implies that one must have presented himself to be in the
active and continued practice of the legal profession and that his
professional services are available to the public for compensation, as a
source of his livelihood, or in consideration of his said services.

● The isolated appearance as a private prosecutor, previously authorized by his

superior, of an assistant city attorney in a criminal case for malicious mischief
before a justice of the peace court where the offended party is his relative, does
not violate Section 32, Rule 127, now Sec. 35, Rule 138, Revised Rules of Court,
which bars certain attorneys from practicing.

Ulep v. Legal Clinic, Inc., 223 SCRA 378, June 17, 1993
 9

● In the practice of his profession, a licensed attorney at law generally engages in

three principal types of professional activity:

a. legal advice and instructions to clients to inform them of their rights

and obligations;

b. preparation for clients of documents requiring knowledge of legal

principles not possessed by ordinary layman; and

c. appearance for clients before public tribunals which possess power

and authority to determine rights of life, liberty, and property according to
law, in order to assist in proper interpretation and enforcement of law.

Hilado v. David, 84 Phil. 569, September 21, 1949

● In order to constitute the relation (of attorney and client) a professional one and
not merely one of principal and agent, the attorneys must be employed either to
give advice upon a legal point, to prosecute or defend an action in court of
justice, or to prepare and draft, in legal form such papers as deeds, bills,
contracts and the like.

● Formality is not an essential element of the employment of an attorney. The

contract may be express or implied and it is sufficient that the advice and
assistance of the attorney is sought and received, in matters pertinent to his
profession. An acceptance of the relation is implied on the part of the attorney
from his acting in behalf of his client in pursuance of a request by the latter.

● To constitute professional employment it is not essential that the client should

have employed the attorney professionally on any previous occasion. . . . It
is not necessary that any retainer should have been paid, promised, or
charged for; neither is it material that the attorney consulted did not
afterward undertake the case about which the consultation was had. If a
person, in respect to his business affairs or troubles of any kind, consults with
his attorney in his professional capacity with the view to obtaining
professional advice or assistance, and the attorney voluntarily permits or
acquiesces in such consultation, then the professional employment must be
regarded as established…
 10

● There is no law or provision in the Rules of Court prohibiting attorneys in express

terms from acting on behalf of both parties to a controversy whose interests are
opposed to each other, but such prohibition is necessarily implied in the
injunctions as provided [Rule 138, Sec. 20 (e)] section 19 (e) of Rule 127.

● The doctrine that the mere relation of attorney and client ought to preclude
[prevent] the attorney from accepting the opposite party's retainer in the
same litigation regardless of what information was received by him from his first
client.

● Information so received is sacred to the employment to which it pertains, and to

permit it to be used in the interest of another, or, worse still, in the interest of the
adverse party, is to strike at the element of confidence which lies at the basis of,
and affords the essential security in, the relation of attorney and client.

● The relation of attorney and client is founded on principles of public policy, on

good taste. The question is not necessarily one of the rights of the parties, but as
to whether the attorney has adhered to proper professional standard. With
these thoughts in mind, it behooves attorneys, like Ceasar's wife1, not only to
keep inviolate the client's confidence, but also to avoid the appearance of
treachery and double-dealing. Only thus can litigants be encouraged to entrust
their secrets to their attorneys which is of paramount importance in the
administration of justice

● A retaining fee is a preliminary fee given to an attorney or counsel to insure and

secure his future services, and induce him to act for the client. It is intended to
remunerate counsel for being deprived, by being retained by one party, of
the opportunity of rendering services to the other and of receiving pay from
him, and the payment of such fee, in the absence of an express understanding to
the contrary, is neither made nor received in payment of the services
contemplated; its payment has no relation to the obligation of the client to pay his
attorney for the services which he has retained him to perform.

● The courts have summary jurisdiction to protect the rights of the parties
and the public from any conduct of attorneys prejudicial to the
administration of justice. The summary jurisdiction of the courts over attorneys
is not confined to requiring them to pay over money collected by them but
embraces authority to compel them to do whatever specific acts may be
incumbent upon them in their capacity of attorneys to perform. The courts, from

1
People associated with public figures must not be suspected of being a part of any wrongdoing.
 11

the general principles of equity and policy, will always look into the dealings
between attorneys and clients and guard the latter from any undue
consequences resulting from a situation in which they may stand unequal. The
courts act on the same principle whether the undertaking is to appear, or, for that
matter, not to appear, to answer declaration.

● Attorneys are officers of the court where they practice, forming a part of the
machinery of the law for the administration of justice and as such subject to the
disciplinary authority of the court and to its orders and directions with respect to
their relations to the court as well as to their clients.

In re: Dacanay, 540 SCRA 424, December 17, 2007

● The practice of law is a privilege burdened with conditions. It is so delicately

affected with public interest that it is both a power and a duty of the State
(through this Court) to control and regulate it in order to protect and
promote the public welfare.

● Admission to the bar requires certain qualifications. The Rules of Court mandates
that an applicant for admission to the bar be [1] a citizen of the Philippines,
at least [2] twenty-one years of age, of [3] good moral character and a [4]
resident of the Philippines. He must also produce before this Court [5]
satisfactory evidence of good moral character and that no charges against
him, involving moral turpitude, have been filed or are pending in any court in the
Philippines.

● Moreover, admission to the bar involves various phases such as furnishing

satisfactory [1] proof of educational, moral, and other qualifications; [2]
passing the bar examinations; [3] taking the lawyer’s oath and [4] signing the
roll of attorneys and [5] receiving from the clerk of court of this Court a
certificate of the license to practice.

● The Constitution provides that the practice of all professions in the Philippines
shall be limited to Filipino citizens save in cases prescribed by law. Since Filipino
citizenship is a requirement for admission to the bar, the loss thereof terminates
membership in the Philippine bar and, consequently, the privilege to engage in
the practice of law. In other words, the loss of Filipino citizenship ipso jure
terminates the privilege to practice law in the Philippines. The practice of law
is a privilege denied to foreigners. The exception is when Filipino citizenship is
lost by reason of naturalization as a citizen of another country but subsequently
 12

reacquired pursuant to RA 9225. This is because “all Philippine citizens who

become citizens of another country shall be deemed not to have lost their
Philippine citizenship under the conditions of [RA 9225].” Therefore, a Filipino
lawyer who becomes a citizen of another country is deemed never to have lost
his Philippine citizenship if he reacquires it in accordance with RA 9225. Although
he is also deemed never to have terminated his membership in the Philippine
bar, no automatic right to resume law practice accrues.

● Under RA 9225, if a person intends to practice the legal profession in the

Philippines and he reacquires his Filipino citizenship pursuant to its provisions
“(he) shall apply with the proper authority for a license or permit to engage in
such practice.” Stated otherwise, before a lawyer who reacquires Filipino
citizenship pursuant to RA 9225 can resume his law practice, he must first
secure from this Court the authority to do so, conditioned on:

a. the updating and payment in full of the annual membership dues in the
IBP;

b. the payment of professional tax;

c. the completion of at least 36 credit hours of mandatory continuing

legal education; this is especially significant to refresh the
applicant/petitioner’s knowledge of Philippine laws and update him on
legal developments; and

d. the retaking of the lawyer’s oath which will not only remind him of his
duties and responsibilities as a lawyer and as an officer of the Court but
also renew his pledge to maintain allegiance to the Republic of the
Philippines.
 13

CANON 1

Marcelo v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 104109, March 15, 1995

● All lawyers are expected to recognize the authority of the Supreme Court
and to obey its lawful processes and orders if he has not taken this to heart
he is unfit to engage in the practice of law. His failure to live up to the duties and
responsibilities of the legal profession is sufficient grounds for suspension.

In re: Meling, B. M. No. 1154, June 8, 2004

● It has been held that good moral character is what a person really is, as
distinguished from good reputation or from the opinion generally entertained of
him, the estimate in which he is held by the public in the place where he is
known. Moral character is not a subjective term but one which corresponds to
objective reality. The standard of personal and professional integrity is not
satisfied by such conduct as it merely enables a person to escape the penalty of
criminal law. Good moral character includes at least common honesty.

● The requirement of good moral character is not only a condition precedent to

admission to the practice of law, but its continued possession is also essential
for remaining in the practice of law.

Arnobit v. Atty. Arnobit, A.C. No. 1481, October 17, 2008

● Good moral character is more than just the absence of bad character. Such
character expresses itself in the will to do the unpleasant thing if it is right
and the resolve not to do the pleasant thing if it is wrong. This must be so
because "vast interests are committed to his care; he is the recipient of
unbounded trust and confidence; he deals with his client’s property, reputation,
his life, his all."

● 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 lead lives in
accordance with the highest moral standards of the community.
 14

Advincula v. Atty. Macabata, A.C. No. 7204, March 7, 2007

● The requirement of good moral character has four ostensible [apparent]

purposes, namely: (1) to protect the public; (2) to protect the public image of
lawyers; (3) to protect prospective clients; and (4) to protect errant lawyers from
themselves.

Geeslin v. Navarro, 185 SCRA 230, May 09, 1990

● In a number of cases, we have repeatedly explained and stressed that the

purpose of disbarment is not meant as a punishment to deprive an attorney
of a means of livelihood but is rather intended to protect the courts and the
public from the misconduct of the officers of the court and to ensure the
proper administration of justice by requiring that those who exercise this
important function shall be competent, honorable and trustworthy men in whom
courts and clients may repose confidence. Its objectives are to compel the
lawyer to deal fairly and honestly with his client and to remove from the
profession a person whose misconduct has proven him unfit for the duties
and responsibilities belonging to the office of an attorney.

● As a rule, an attorney enjoys the legal presumption that he is innocent of

the charges until the contrary is proved, and that, as an officer of the court, he
has performed his duty in accordance with his oath. Therefore, in disbarment
proceedings, the burden of proof rests upon the complainant, and for the court to
exercise its disciplinary powers, the case against the respondent must be
established by clear, convincing, and satisfactory proof.

● Despite the suspension of respondent Navarro from the practice of law, he

continues to do so in clear violation and open defiance of the original
resolution of suspension and the aforestated resolutions reiterating and
maintaining the same.

● Such acts of the respondent are evidential of flouting resistance to lawful

orders of constituted authority and illustrate his incorrigible despiciency2 for an
attorney’s duty to society. Verily, respondent has proven himself unworthy of the

2
looking down upon: contempt
 15

trust and confidence reposed in him by law and by this Court, through his
deliberate rejection of his oath as an officer of the court.

People v. Tuanda, 181 SCRA 692, January 30, 1990

● We should add that the crimes of which the respondent was convicted also
import deceit and violation of her attorney’s oath and the Code of
Professional Responsibility under both of which she was bound to “obey the laws
of the land.” Conviction of a crime involving moral turpitude might not (as in the
instant case, violation B.P. Blg. 22 does not) relate to the exercise of the
profession of a lawyer; however, it certainly relates to and affects the good moral
character of a person convicted of such offense. In Melendrez v. Decena, this
Court 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 an admission to the practice of law; its continued
possession is also essential for remaining in the practice of law.”

● The Court of Appeals correctly ruled that “the offense [of] which she is found
guilty involved moral turpitude.” We should add that violation of B.P. Blg. 22 is
a serious criminal offense which deleteriously affects public interest and
public order. In Lozano v. Martinez, the Court explained the nature of the
offense of violation of B.P. Blg. 22 in the following terms: “x x x x x x x x x The
gravamen of the offense punished by B.P. Blg. 22 is the act of making and
issuing a worthless check or a check that is dishonored upon its presentation for
payment. x x x x x x x x x The effects of the issuance of a worthless check
transcends the private interests of the parties directly involved in the
transaction and touches the interests of the community at large. The mischief
it creates is not only a wrong to the payee or holder, but also an injury to the
public.

In re: Atty. Quiambao, 102 Phil. 940, January 31, 1958

● Respondent Atty. Quiambao engineered the whole scheme to induce, through his
brother, Manuel Quiambao, Pedro Peralta to purchase a parcel of land knowing
fully well that it is not for sale because the Yek Tong Lin Fire Marine Insurance
Company was just a mortgagee and not in a position to sell it. In that way he
succeeded in taking from Peralta the sum of P12,000 which he appropriated for
his own use and benefit; he fraudulently and maliciously induced Peralta to
 16

sign a document, thereby relieving him from the obligation of paying the said
sum to Peralta, and at the same time caused the latter to execute another
document where Peralta undertook to collect from Manuel Quiambao the whole
sum of P12,000. HELD: that by his acts the respondent has shown that he is
unworthy to continue as a member of the bar. He is, therefore, disbarred from
the practice of law.

In re: Basa, 41 Phil. 275, December 07, 1920

● "Moral turpitude" includes everything which is done contrary to justice, honesty,

modesty, or good morals.

● The crime of abduction with consent, as punished by article 446 of the Penal
Code, involves moral turpitude.

N.B.: In Re Basa (1920) is the first time that the Court in this jurisdiction tried to define
“moral turpitude.” For lack of doctrinal precedence, Basa was not disbarred but only
suspended. However, since then attorneys accused of committing crimes involving
moral turpitude have been generally disbarred.

In re: Al C. Argosino, 246 SCRA 14, July 13, 1995 (Permission to take the
Bar)

● It has also been stressed that the requirement of good moral character is, in fact,
of greater importance so far as the general public and the proper administration
of justice are concerned than the possession of legal learning.

● All aspects of moral character and behavior may be inquired into in respect of
those seeking admission to the Bar. The scope of such inquiry is, indeed, said to
be properly broader than the inquiry into the moral character of a lawyer in
proceedings for disbarment.

● The requirement of good moral character to be satisfied by those who would

seek admission to the bar must of necessity be more stringent than the norm
of conduct expected from members of the general public. There is a very
real need to prevent a general perception that entry into the legal profession is
open to individuals with inadequate moral qualifications. The growth of such a
perception would signal the progressive destruction of our people’s confidence in
 17

their courts of law and in our legal system as we know it.

● Participation in the prolonged mindless physical beatings inflicted upon Raul

Camaligan constituted an evident rejection of that moral duty and was totally
irresponsible behavior, which makes it impossible a finding that the participant
was possessed of good moral character.

● Good moral character is a requirement possession of which must be

demonstrated at the time of application for permission to take the bar
examinations and more importantly at the time of application for admission
to the bar and to take the attorney’s oath of office.

In re: Al C. Argosino, B.M. No. 712, March 19, 1997 (Permission to take
Lawyer’s Oath)

● It is the sworn duty of this Court not only to "weed out" lawyers who have
become a disgrace to the noble profession of the law but, also of equal
importance, to prevent "misfits" from taking the lawyer's oath, thereby further
tarnishing the public image of lawyers which in recent years has undoubtedly
become less than irreproachable.

● The lawyer's oath is NOT a mere ceremony or formality for practicing law. Every
lawyer should at ALL TIMES weigh his actions according to the sworn promises
he makes when taking the lawyer's oath. If all lawyers conducted themselves
strictly according to the lawyer's oath and the Code of Professional
Responsibility, the administration of justice will undoubtedly be faster, fairer and
easier for everyone concerned.

Castañeda v. Ago, 65 SCRA 505, July 30, 1975

● It is the duty of a counsel to advise his client, ordinarily a layman to the intricaries
and vagaries of the law, on the merit or lack of merit of his case. If he finds that
his client’s cause is defenseless, then it is his bounden duty to advise the
latter to acquiesce and submit, rather than traverse the incontrovertible. A
lawyer must resist the whims and caprices of his client, and temper his client’s
propensity to litigate. A lawyer’s oath to uphold the cause of justice is superior
to his duty to his client; its primacy is indisputable.
 18

● Forgetting his sacred mission as a sworn public servant and his exalted position
as an officer of the court, counsel has allowed himself to become an instigator
of controversy and a predator of conflict instead of a mediator for concord
and a conciliator for compromise, a virtuoso of technicality in the conduct of
litigation instead of a true exponent of the primacy of truth and moral justice.

Obusan v. Obusan, Jr., 128 SCRA 485, April 02, 1984

● Respondent was not able to overcome the evidence of his wife that he was guilty
of grossly immoral conduct. Abandoning one’s wife and resuming carnal relations
with a former paramour, a married woman, falls within “that 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” (7 C.J.S. 959;
Arciga vs. Maniwang, Adm. Case No. 1608, August 14, 1981, 106 SCRA 591).
Thus, a lawyer was disbarred when he abandoned his lawful wife and cohabited
with another woman who had borne him a child. He failed to maintain the
highest degree of morality expected and required of a member of the bar
(Toledo vs. Toledo, 117 Phil. 768). x x x respondent is disbarred. His name is
stricken off the Roll of Attorneys.
 19

CANON 2

Director of Religious Affairs v. Bayot, 74 Phil 579, March 20, 1944

● "The most worth and effective advertisement possible, even for a young lawyer, .
. . is the establishment of a well-merited reputation for professional
capacity and fidelity to trust. This cannot be forced but must be the outcome of
character and conduct." (Canon 27, Code of Ethics.)

Ulep v. Legal Clinic, Inc., 223 SCRA 378, June 17, 1993

● The Code of Professional Responsibility provides that a lawyer in making known

his legal services shall use only true, honest, fair, dignified and objective
information or statement of facts. He is not supposed to 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. Nor shall he
pay or give something of value to representatives of the mass media in
anticipation of, or in return for, publicity to attract legal business. Prior to
the adoption of the Code of Professional Responsibility, the Canons of
Professional Ethics had also warned that lawyers should not 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 or is engaged or concerning the
manner of their conduct, the magnitude of the interest involved, the importance of
the lawyer’s position, and all other like self-laudation.

● Not all types of advertising or solicitation are prohibited. The canons of the
profession enumerate exceptions to the rule against advertising or solicitation
and define the extent to which they may be undertaken. The exceptions are of
two broad categories, namely, those which are expressly allowed and those
which are necessarily implied from the restrictions.

● The first of such exceptions is the publication in reputable law lists, in a

manner consistent with the standards of conduct imposed by the canons, of brief
biographical and informative data.
 20

● The use of an ordinary simple professional card is also permitted. The card
may contain only a statement of his name, the name of the law firm which he is
connected with, his address, telephone number, and special branch of law
practiced. The publication of a simple announcement of the opening of a law firm
or of changes in the partnership, associates, firm name, or office address, being
for the convenience of the profession, is not objectionable.

● When a person participates in a trial and advertises himself as a lawyer, he is

in the practice of law. One who confers with clients, advises them as to their
legal rights, and then takes the business to an attorney and asks the latter to look
after the case in court, is also practicing law. Giving advice for compensation
regarding the legal status and rights of another and the conduct with respect
thereto constitutes a practice of law. One who renders an opinion as to the
proper interpretation of a statute, and receives payment for it, is, to that extent,
practicing law.
 21

CANON 3

In re: Tagorda, 53 Phil. 37, March 23, 1929

● [Solicitation] is destructive of the honor of a great profession. It lowers the

standards of that profession. It works against the confidence of the community in
the integrity of the members of the bar. It results in needless litigation and in
incenting to strife otherwise peacefully inclined citizens. XXXX The solicitation
of employment by an attorney is a ground for disbarment or suspension.
That should be distinctly understood.

● Common barratry consisting of frequently stirring up suits and quarrels between

individuals was a crime at the common law, and one of the penalties for this
offense when committed by an attorney was disbarment. XXXX The law is a
profession and not a business. The lawyer may not seek or obtain
employment by himself or through others for to do so would be unprofessional.

N.B.: "Ambulance chasing," or the solicitation of almost any kind of business by an

attorney, personally or through an agent, in order to gain employment, is proscribed.
(Palencia v. Atty. Linsangan, et al, A.C. No. 10557, July 10, 2008)

N.B.: A champertous contract is defined as a contract between a stranger and a party

to a lawsuit, whereby the stranger pursues the party’s claim in consideration of receiving
part or any of the proceeds recovered under the judgment; a bargain by a stranger with
a party to a suit, by which such third person undertakes to carry on the litigation at his
own cost and risk, in consideration of receiving, if successful, a part of the proceeds or
subject sought to be recovered. (Blacks Dictionary; Schnabel v. Taft Broadcasting Co.,
Inc. Mo. App. 525 S.W. 2d 819, 823). An Agreement whereby the attorney agrees to
pay expenses of proceedings to enforce the client’s rights is champertous. [JBP
Holding Corporation v. U.S. 166 F. Supp. 324 (1958)]. Such agreements are against
public policy especially where as in this case, the attorney has agreed to carry on the
action at its own expense in consideration of some bargain to have part of the
thing in dispute. [See Sampliner v. Motion Pictures Patents Co., et al., 225 F. 242
(1918). The execution of these contracts violates the fiduciary relationship between
the lawyer and his client, for which the former must incur an administrative sanction.
(Nocom v. Camarino, et al, G.R. No. 182984, February 10, 2009)
 22

Pangan v. Ramos, 93 SCRA 87, September 07, 1979

● The attorney’s roll or register is the official record containing the names
and signatures of those who are authorized to practice law. A lawyer is not
authorized to use a name other than the one inscribed in the Roll of Attorneys in
his practice of law.

● The official oath obliges the attorney solemnly to swear that he “will do no
falsehood”. As an officer in the temple of justice, an attorney has irrefragable3
obligations of “truthfulness, candor and frankness”. Indeed, candor and
frankness should characterize the conduct of the lawyer at every stage. This has
to be so because the court has the right to rely upon him in ascertaining the truth.

● The duty of an attorney to the courts to employ, for the purpose of maintaining
the causes confided to him, such means as are consistent with truth and honor,
cannot be overemphasized. These injunctions circumscribe the general duty of
entire devotion of the attorney to the client. As stated in a case, his “high vocation
is to correctly inform the court upon the law and the facts of the case, and to aid it
in doing justice and arriving at correct conclusions. He violates his oath of
office when he resorts to deception, or permits his client to do so.”

● In using the name of “Pedro D.D. Ramos” before the courts instead of the name
by which he was authorized to practice law—Dionisio D. Ramos—respondent in
effect resorted to deception. He demonstrated lack of candor in dealing
with the courts, The circumstance that this is his first aberration in this regard
precludes Us from imposing a more severe penalty. x x x In view of the foregoing,
respondent Dionisio D. Ramos is severely REPRIMANDED and warned that a
repetition of the same overt act may warrant his suspension or disbarment from
the practice of law.

B.R. Sebastian Enterprises, Inc. v. CA, 206 SCRA 28, February 07, 1992

● With Baizas’ death, the responsibility of Atty. Alberto and his Associates to the
petitioner as counsel remained until withdrawal by the former of their appearance
3
not able to be refuted or disproved; indisputable.
 23

in the manner provided by the Rules of Court. This is so because it was the law
firm which handled the case for petitioner before both the trial and appellate
courts. XXXX the death of [Atty. Crispin Baizas] did not extinguish the
lawyer-client relationship between said firm and petitioner.

● The rule is settled that negligence of counsel binds the client.

Antonio v. Court of Appeals, 153 SCRA 592, August 31, 1987

● The negligence attributed by the petitioners to their then counsel, Atty. Funelas,
is not excusable. Clear and as it can be seen from the pleadings filed that the
petitioners' counsel of record is the law office of Funelas Perez and Associates
and not Atty. Funelas alone. Atty. Funelas signed the documents in his capacity
as the representative of the said law firm. The respondent Court of Appeals
made this same observation in its questioned resolution.

● lt is safe to presume that a law firm which registered and represented itself as
such, with at least two named partners, is composed of at least two lawyers. And
if it is true that this law office was earlier dissolved, the winding up process is
presumed to have been performed in a regular manner, with all the
obligations properly accounted for. Very concrete evidence must be presented in
order that these presumptions may be rebutted.

● Recently, this Court laid down a ruling that is applicable to this case. It reads:
"When a party appears by an attorney in an action or proceeding in court, all
notices required to be given therein must be given to the attorney and not
to the client. Hence, a notice given to the client and not to his attorney is not a
notice in law. "The rule in this jurisdiction is that the client is bound by the
negligence or failings of counsel. It is the duty of an attorney to himself and to
his clients to invariably adopt a system whereby he can be sure of
receiving promptly all judicial notices during his absence from his address
of record. The attorney must so arrange matters that communications sent by
mail, addressed to his office or residence, may reach him promptly. x x x."
 24

CANON 5

In re: Integration of the Bar of the Philippines, 49 SCRA 22, January 09,
1973

● Integration of the Philippine Bar means the official unification of the entire
lawyer population of the Philippines. This requires membership and financial
support (in reasonable amount) of every attorney as conditions sine qua non to
the practice of law and the retention of his name in the Roll of Attorneys of the
Supreme Court. XXXX Bar integration, therefore, signifies the setting up by
Government authority of a national organization of the legal profession based
on the recognition of the lawyer as an officer of the court.

● Republic Act 6397 neither confers a new power nor restricts the Court's inherent
power, but is a mere legislative declaration that the integration of the Bar will
promote public interest or, more specifically, will "raise the standards of the
legal profession, improve the administration of justice, and enable the Bar to
discharge its public responsibility more effectively."

● Assuming that Bar integration does compel a lawyer to be a member of the

Integrated Bar, such compulsion is justified as an exercise of the police power
of the State. The legal profession has long been regarded as a proper subject of
legislative regulation and control. Moreover, the inherent power of the Supreme
Court to regulate the Bar includes the authority to integrate the Bar.

● A membership fee in the Integrated Bar is an exaction for regulation, while the
purpose of a tax is revenue. If the Court has inherent power to regulate the Bar, it
follows that as an incident to regulation, it may impose a membership fee for that
purpose. It would not be possible to push through an Integrated Bar program
without means to defray the concomitant expenses. The doctrine of implied
powers necessarily includes the power to impose such an exaction.

● A lawyer is free, as he has always been, to voice his views on any subject in any
manner he wishes, even though such views be opposed to positions taken by the
Unified Bar. XXXX The right of private judgment has never yet been exalted
above the powers and the compulsion of the agencies of Government.
 25

● [The] requirement to pay dues is a valid exercise of regulatory power by the

Court, because it will apply equally to all lawyers, young and old, at the time Bar
integration takes effect, and because it is a new regulation in exchange for new
benefits, it is not retroactive, it is not unequal, it is not unfair.

● [The] integration of the Philippine Bar is "perfectly constitutional and legally

unobjectionable," within the context of contemporary conditions in the
Philippines, and has become an imperative means to raise the standards of the
legal profession, improve the administration of justice, and enable the Bar to
discharge its public responsibility fully and effectively.

De Roy v. Court of Appeals, 157 SCRA 757, January 29, 1988

● Contrary to petitioners' view, there is no law requiring the publication of Supreme

Court decisions in the Official Gazette before they can be binding and as a
condition to their becoming effective. It is the bounden duty of counsel as
lawyer in active law practice to keep abreast of decisions of the Supreme
Court particularly where issues have been clarified, consistently reiterated,
and published in the advance reports of Supreme Court decisions (G. R. s)
and in such publications as the Supreme Court Reports Annotated (SCRA) and
law journals.
 26

CANON 6

Far Eastern Shipping Company v. CA, 297 SCRA 30, October 01, 1998

● It is disturbing to note that counsel for FESC, the law firm of Del Rosario and Del
Rosario, displays an unprofessional tendency of taking the Rules for
granted, in this instance exemplified by its pro forma compliance therewith
but apparently without full comprehension of and with less than faithful
commitment to its undertakings to this Court in the interest of just, speedy and
orderly administration of court proceedings.

● As between the lawyer and the courts, a lawyer owes candor, fairness and good
faith to the court. He is an officer of the court exercising a privilege which is
indispensable in the administration of justice. Candidness, especially towards the
courts, is essential for the expeditious administration of justice. Courts are
entitled to expect only complete honesty from lawyers appearing and pleading
before them. Candor in all dealings is the very essence of honorable membership
in the legal profession. More specifically, a lawyer is obliged to observe the
rules of procedure and not to misuse them to defeat the ends of justice. It
behooves a lawyer, therefore, to exert every effort and consider it his duty to
assist in the speedy and efficient administration of justice. Being an officer of the
court, a lawyer has a responsibility in the proper administration of justice. Like the
court itself, he is an instrument to advance its ends—the speedy, efficient,
impartial, correct and inexpensive adjudication of cases and the prompt
satisfaction of final judgments. A lawyer should not only help attain these
objectives but should likewise avoid any unethical or improper practices that
impede, obstruct or prevent their realization, charged as he is with the primary
task of assisting in the speedy and efficient administration of justice.

● The undeniably dilatory disinclination of the Office of the Solicitor General to

seasonably file required pleadings constitutes a deplorable disservice to the
tax-paying public and can only be categorized as censurable inefficiency
on the part of the government law office.

Gonzales-Austria v. Abaya, 176 SCRA 634, August 23, 1989

● “x x x her explanation that she is the one preparing decisions and orders in
Branch 52 with the knowledge and consent of Judge Abaya during the time that
 27

the latter was acting as Presiding Judge of said branch and that she was directed
to promulgate the probation order in favor of Leonardo Cruz only to discover that
the judge overlooked to sign the order, even if true, is not a valid justification for
her to simulate the signature of Judge Abaya in the probation order. This is
patently illegal. As a lawyer and branch clerk of court, she ought to know
that under no circumstances is her act of signing the name of the judge
permissible. She could have probably released the order with the statement that
it is ‘upon orders of the judge’ or ‘by authority of the Judge’ but she could not
under any circumstance make it appear as she did in this case that the Judge
signed the order when in fact he did not.”

● Generally speaking, a lawyer who holds a government office may not be

disciplined as a member of the bar for misconduct in the discharge of his duties
as a government official. However, if that misconduct as a government official
is of such a character as to affect his qualification as a lawyer or to show
moral delinquency, then he may be disciplined as a member of the bar on
such grounds.

● The office of a judge exists for one solemn end—to promote justice by
administering it fairly and impartially. In regarding justice as a commodity to
be sold at a price, Judge Abaya betrayed the very essence of magistracy. In
complicity with Annabelle Cardenas, he likewise abused the trust and confidence
of the people, shortchanging them of services undoubtedly vital to the speedy
administration of justice.

● The judge is the visible representation of the law and of justice. From him,
the people draw their will and awareness to obey the law. For him then to
transgress the highest ideals of justice and public service for personal gain is
indeed a demoralizing example constituting a valid cause for disenchantment
and loss of confidence in the judiciary as well as in the civil service system.