2023 BAR REVIEW Handout No.

6
Legal & Judicial Ethics
LAST MINUTE

LEGAL ETHICS

1. What constitutes practice of law?

The “practice of law” means any activity, in or out of court, which requires the application of
law, legal procedure, knowledge, training and experience. Thus, to engage in the practice of
law is to perform acts which are usually performed by members of the legal profession
requiring the use of legal knowledge or skill, and embraces, among others: (a) the preparation
of pleadings and other papers incident to actions and special proceedings; (b) the
management of such actions and proceedings on behalf of clients before judges and courts;
and (c) advising clients, and all actions taken for them in matters connected with the law,
where the work done involves the determination by the trained legal mind of the legal effects
of facts and conditions. Zamora vs. Atty. Gallanosa, A.C. No. 10738, September 14, 2020

2. What is the proper evidentiary threshold to be applied in disciplinary cases against lawyers?

The evidentiary threshold to be applied in administrative cases against lawyers is substantial

evidence, and not preponderance of evidence or clear, convincing, and satisfactory proof.

In Reyes v. Nieva, the Court acknowledged that previous rulings appear to conflict as to which
quantum of proof should be applied in administrative cases against lawyers. Thus, to quell
any further confusion, the Court held that substantial evidence, i.e., that amount of relevant
evidence that a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion, is the
proper evidentiary threshold, being more in keeping with the purpose of such cases, thus:

Besides, the evidentiary threshold of substantial evidence — as opposed to preponderance

of evidence — is more in keeping with the primordial purpose of and essential considerations
attending this type of cases. As case law elucidates, "[d]isciplinary proceedings against
lawyers are sui generis. Neither purely civil nor purely criminal, they do not involve a trial of
an action or a suit, but is rather an investigation by the Court into the conduct of one of its
officers. Not being intended to inflict punishment, it is in no sense a criminal prosecution.
Accordingly, there is neither a plaintiff nor a prosecutor therein. It may be initiated by the
Court motu proprio. Public interest is its primary objective, and the real question for
determination is whether or not the attorney is still a fit person to be allowed the privileges
as such. Hence, in the exercise of its disciplinary powers, the Court merely calls upon a
member of the Bar to account for his actuations as an officer of the Court with the end in
view of preserving the purity of the legal profession and the proper and honest administration
of justice by purging the profession of members who by their misconduct have proved
themselves no longer worthy to be entrusted with the duties and responsibilities pertaining
to the office of an attorney. In such posture, there can thus be no occasion to speak of a

Legal Edge Bar Review 0942 – 949 91 76

legaledge8@gmail.com
0917 – 894 53 56
Page 1 of 18
 2023 BAR REVIEW Handout No. 6
Legal & Judicial Ethics
LAST MINUTE

complainant or a prosecutor." Namocatcat v. Amarga, A.C. No. 11230 (Notice), February 23,
2022

3. Expound “possession of good moral character” as a core qualification for members of the
bar.

One of the qualifications required of a candidate for admission to the bar is the possession of
good moral character, and, when one who has already been admitted to the bar clearly
shows, by a series of acts, that he does not follow such moral principles as should govern the
conduct of an upright person, and that, in his dealings with his clients and with the courts, he
disregards the rule of professional ethics required to be observed by every attorney, it is the
duty of the court, as guardian of the interests of society, as well as of the preservation of the
ideal standard of professional conduct, to make use of its powers to deprive him of his
professional attributes which he so unworthily abused. Domingo-Agaton vs. Atty. Cruz, A.C.
No. 11023, May 4, 2021

4. May a lawyer be disciplined as a member of the Bar for the misconduct in the discharge of
his duties as a government official?

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 said misconduct as a government official also constitutes a violation of his oath
as a lawyer, then he may be disciplined by this Court as a member of the Bar.

Further, a member of the Bar who assumes public office does not shed his professional
obligations. The Code of Professional Responsibility, promulgated on June 21, 1988, was not
meant to govern the conduct of private practitioners alone, but of all lawyers including those
in government service. This is clear from Canon 6 of said Code. Lawyers in government are
public servants who owe the utmost fidelity to the public service. Thus, they should be more
sensitive in the performance of their professional obligations, as their conduct is subject to
the ever-constant scrutiny of the public. Tablizo vs. Atty. Golangco, A.C. No. 10636, October
12, 2020

5. What violation, if any, is committed when a lawyer requires the payment of money prior
to the discharge of his duties as a government official?

Attempts to extort money from persons with applications or requests pending before his
office is violative of Rule 1.01 of the Code of Professional Responsibility, which prohibits

Legal Edge Bar Review 0942 – 949 91 76

legaledge8@gmail.com
0917 – 894 53 56
Page 2 of 18
 2023 BAR REVIEW Handout No. 6
Legal & Judicial Ethics
LAST MINUTE

members of the Bar from engaging or participating in any unlawful, dishonest, or deceitful
acts. Moreover, said acts constitute a breach of Rule 6.02 of the Code which bars lawyers in
government service from promoting their private interests. Promotion of private interests
includes soliciting gifts or anything of monetary value in any transaction requiring the
approval of his office or which may be affected by the functions of his office. Respondent’s
conduct in office falls short of the integrity and good moral character required from all
lawyers, specially from one occupying a high public office. For a lawyer in public office is
expected not only to refrain from any act or omission which might tend to lessen the trust
and confidence of the citizenry in government, he must also uphold the dignity of the legal
profession at all times and observe a high standard of honesty and fair dealing. Otherwise
said, a lawyer in government service is a keeper of the public faith and is burdened with high
degree of social responsibility, perhaps higher than her brethren in private practice. Atty.
Vitriolo vs. Atty. Dasig, A.C. No. 4984, April 1, 2003

6. May a lawyer, who had already been disbarred, be disbarred again? Is there double or
multiple disbarment in Philippine jurisdiction?

There is no double or multiple disbarment. Neither does our jurisdiction have a law
mandating a minimum 5-year requirement for readmission. Once a lawyer is disbarred, there
is no penalty that could be imposed regarding his privilege to practice law. At best, the Court
may only impose a fine or order the said lawyer to pay the monetary obligation to his or her
client. Nevertheless, there were instances when the Court gave the corresponding penalty
against a lawyer, who was previously disbarred, for the sole purpose of recording it in his or
her personal file in the Office of the Bar Confidant. Accordingly, in such cases, the purpose of
giving the penalty against the disbarred lawyer was only for purposes of recording. The Court
shall be fully informed by his personal record in the OBC that aside from his disbarment, he
also committed other infractions that would have merited the imposition of penalties were
it not for his disbarment. These factors shall be taken into consideration should the disbarred
lawyer subsequently file a petition to lift his disbarment. Judge Dumlao, Jr. vs. Atty.
Camacho, A.C. No. 10498, September 4, 2018

7. Miguel instituted a disbarment case against Atty. Ludovina. Atty. Ludovina filed a motion
for the suspension of the resolution of such case pending her filing of a civil complaint for
collection of sum of money against Miguel. Is such motion meritorious?

No. A disbarment case is sui generis for it is neither purely civil nor purely criminal but is
rather an investigation by the court into the conduct of its officers. The issue to be
determined is whether a member of the bar is still fit to continue to be an officer of the court
in the dispensation of justice.

Legal Edge Bar Review 0942 – 949 91 76

legaledge8@gmail.com
0917 – 894 53 56
Page 3 of 18
 2023 BAR REVIEW Handout No. 6
Legal & Judicial Ethics
LAST MINUTE

The resolution of disbarment case shall proceed as Atty. Ludovina’s administrative liability is
not dependent on the resolution of the civil case for sum of money. Conversely, findings of
the court in relation to the pending civil case does not necessarily result in administrative
exculpation. So long as the quantum of proof in administrative cases against lawyers, which
is substantial evidence, is met, then liability attaches.

Being based on a different quantum of proof, the dismissal of a criminal case on the ground
of insufficiency of evidence does not necessarily foreclose the finding of guilt in an
administrative proceeding. Spouses Cuna vs. Atty. Elona, A.C. No. 5314, June 23, 2020

8. Expound the rule prohibiting a lawyer from representing conflicting interests.

The prohibition against a lawyer representing conflicting interests is rooted in his duty to
protect the interest and confidence of his clients. A member of the bar vows in the Lawyer’s
Oath to conduct himself as a lawyer according to the best of his knowledge and discretion
with all good fidelity to the courts as well as to his client. To ensure the fidelity of a lawyer to
his clients, Canon 15.03 of the CPR prescribes that “[a] lawyer shall not represent conflicting
interests except by written consent of all concerned given after a full disclosure of the facts[;]”
while Canon 17 of the same Code mandates that “[a] lawyer owes fidelity to the cause of his
client and shall be mindful of the trust and confidence reposed in him.” Section 20(e) of Rule
138 of the Rules of Court likewise enjoins a lawyer “[t]o maintain inviolate the confidence,
and at every peril to himself, to preserve the secrets of his client.” Parungao vs. Atty.
Lacuanan, A.C. No. 12071, March 11, 2020

9. Does termination of attorney-client relationship extinguish the lawyer’s duty to protect the
interest and confidence of his client?

No. A lawyer’s duty to protect the interest and confidence of his client, together with the
corollary obligation not to represent interest in conflict or inconsistent with the same,
extends even beyond the end of his professional engagement with said client. The
termination of attorney-client relation provides no justification for a lawyer to represent an
interest adverse to or in conflict with that of the former client. The client’s confidence once
reposed should not be divested by mere expiration of professional employment. Even after
the severance of the relation, a lawyer should not do anything which will injuriously affect his
former client in any matter in which he previously represented him nor should he disclose or
use any of the client’s confidences acquired in the previous relation. In addition, “[t]he
protection given to the client is perpetual and does not cease with the termination of the
litigation, nor is it affected by the party’s ceasing to employ the attorney and retaining

Legal Edge Bar Review 0942 – 949 91 76

legaledge8@gmail.com
0917 – 894 53 56
Page 4 of 18
 2023 BAR REVIEW Handout No. 6
Legal & Judicial Ethics
LAST MINUTE

another, or by any other change of relation between them. It even survives the death of the
client.” Parungao vs. Atty. Lacuanan, A.C. No. 12071, March 11, 2020

10. Discuss the tests to determine whether conflict of interests exists.

Rule 15.03, Canon 5 of the Code of Professional Responsibility provides: “A lawyer shall not
represent conflicting interests except by written consent of all concerned given after a full
disclosure of the facts.” This prohibition is founded on principles or public policy and good
taste. ln the course of a lawyer-client relationship, the lawyer learns all the facts connected
with the client’s case, including the weak and strong points of the case. The nature of that
relationship is, therefore, one of trust and confidence of the highest degree. It behooves
lawyers not only to keep in violate the client’s confidence, but also to avoid the appearance
of treachery and double-dealing for only then can litigants be encouraged to entrust their
secrets to their lawyers, which is of paramount importance in the administration of justice.

In broad terms, lawyers are deemed to represent conflicting interests when, in behalf of one
client, it is their duty to contend for that which duty to another client requires them to
oppose. Developments in jurisprudence have particularized various tests to determine
whether a lawyer’s conduct lies within this proscription. One test is whether a lawyer is duty-
bound to fight for an issue or claim in behalf of one client and, at the same time, to oppose
that claim for the other client. Thus, if a lawyer’s argument for one client has to be opposed
by that same lawyer in arguing for the other client, there is a violation of the rule.

Another test of inconsistency of interests is whether the acceptance of a new relation would
prevent the full discharge of the lawyer’s duty of undivided fidelity and loyalty to the client
or invite suspicion of unfaithfulness or double-dealing in the performance of that duty. Still
another test is whether the lawyer would be called upon in the new relation to use against a
former client any confidential information acquired through their connection or previous
employment.

Of the three tests identified above, the third test - with references to “new relation,” “former
client,” and “previous employment” - specifically applies to a situation wherein the
professional engagement with the former client was already terminated when the lawyer
entered into a new engagement with the present client. It bears to stress that this test
explicitly requires the lawyer’s use against his former client of “confidential information
acquired through their connection or previous employment.”

A lawyer’s immutable duty to a former client does not cover transactions that occurred
beyond the lawyer’s employment with the client. The intent of the law is to impose upon the
lawyer the duty to protect the client’s interests only on matters that he previously handled

Legal Edge Bar Review 0942 – 949 91 76

legaledge8@gmail.com
0917 – 894 53 56
Page 5 of 18
 2023 BAR REVIEW Handout No. 6
Legal & Judicial Ethics
LAST MINUTE

for the former client and not for matters that arose after the lawyer-client relationship has
terminated.

Hence, for there to be conflicting interests when a former client is involved, the following
circumstances must concur: (a) the lawyer is called upon in his present engagement to make
use against a former client confidential information which was acquired through their
connection or previous employment, and (b) the present engagement involves transactions
that occurred during the lawyer’s employment with the former client and matters that the
lawyer previously handled for the said client.

In contrast, when the opposing parties are both the lawyer’s present clients, the prohibition
on conflicting interests is necessarily stricter and its extent broader, as reflected in the
following pronouncements of the Court in the Quiambao Case:

The proscription against representation of conflicting interests applies to a situation where

the opposing parties are present clients in the same action or in an unrelated action. It is of
no moment that the lawyer would not be called upon to contend for one client that which
the lawyer has to oppose for the other client, or that there would be no occasion to use the
confidential information acquired from one to the disadvantage of the other as the two
actions are wholly unrelated. It is enough that the opposing parties in one case, one of whom
would lose the suit, are present clients and the nature or conditions of the lawyer’s respective
retainers with each of them would affect the performance of the duty of undivided fidelity to
both clients.

It is settled that the mere relation of attorney and client does not raise a presumption of
confidentiality. Proof must be presented that the client intended the communication to be
confidential. Parungao vs. Atty. Lacuanan, A.C. No. 12071, March 11, 2020

11. May a Filipino lawyer be sanctioned in the Philippines as a result of a foreign judgment
imposing a disciplinary penalty against him?

Yes. When a foreign court renders a judgment imposing disciplinary penalty against a Filipino
lawyer admitted in its jurisdiction, such Filipino lawyer may be imposed a similar judgment in
the Philippines provided that the basis of the foreign court’s judgment includes grounds for
the imposition of disciplinary penalty in the Philippines.

This, however, is not automatic. Due process demands that a lawyer disciplined in a foreign
jurisdiction must be “given the opportunity to defend himself and to present testimonial and
documentary evidence on the matter in an investigation to be conducted in accordance with
Rule 139-B of the Revised Rules of Court. Said rule mandates that a respondent lawyer must

Legal Edge Bar Review 0942 – 949 91 76

legaledge8@gmail.com
0917 – 894 53 56
Page 6 of 18
 2023 BAR REVIEW Handout No. 6
Legal & Judicial Ethics
LAST MINUTE

in all cases be notified of the charges against him. It is only after reasonable notice and failure
on the part of the respondent lawyer to appear during the scheduled investigation that an
investigation may be conducted ex parte. In Re: Resolution dated 05 August 2008 in A.M.
No. 07-4-11-SC, Atty. Jaime V. Lopez, A.C. No. 7986, July 27, 2021

12. What are the clemency guidelines for the reinstatement to the Bar?

For the guidance of the Bench, the Bar, and the public, the new clemency guidelines for
reinstatement to the Bar are as follows:

1. A lawyer who has been disbarred cannot file a petition for judicial clemency within a
period of five (5) years from the effective date of his or her disbarment, unless for the
most compelling reasons based on extraordinary circumstances, a shorter period is
warranted. For petitions already filed at the time of this Resolution, the Court may
dispense with the five (5)-year minimum requirement and instead, in the interest of
fairness, proceed with a preliminary evaluation of the petition in order to determine its
prima facie merit.

2. Upon the lapse of the said five (5)-year period, or earlier if so permitted by the Court, a
disbarred lawyer becomes eligible to file a verified petition for judicial clemency. The
petition, together with its supporting evidence appended thereto, must show on its face
that the following criteria have been met:
a. The petitioner has fully complied with the terms and conditions of all prior
disciplinary orders, including orders for restitution, as well as the five (5)-year
period to file, unless he or she seeks an earlier filing for the most compelling
reasons based on extraordinary circumstances;
b. The petitioner recognizes the wrongfulness and seriousness of the misconduct for
which he or she was disbarred. For petitions already filed at the time of this
Resolution, it is required that the petitioner show that he or she genuinely
attempted in good faith to reconcile with the wronged private offended party in
the case for which he or she was disbarred (if any), or if such is not possible, the
petitioner must explain with sufficient reasons as to why such attempt at
reconciliation could not be made; and
c. Notwithstanding the conduct for which the disbarred lawyer was disciplined, the
disbarred lawyer has the requisite integrity and competence to practice law.

3. Upon the filing of the verified petition for clemency, together with its attachments, the
Court shall first conduct a preliminary evaluation and determine if the same has prima
facie merit based on the criteria above-stated.

Legal Edge Bar Review 0942 – 949 91 76

legaledge8@gmail.com
0917 – 894 53 56
Page 7 of 18
 2023 BAR REVIEW Handout No. 6
Legal & Judicial Ethics
LAST MINUTE

4. If the petition has prima facie merit based on the above-criteria, the Court shall refer the
petition to the OBC (or any other fact-finding body the Court so designates) in order to
verify the details and the authenticity of the statements made and the evidence attached
to the clemency petition. If the petition fails to show any prima facie merit, it should be
denied.

5. After its investigation, the OBC (or such other fact-finding body designated by the Court)
shall submit its fact-finding report to the Court, which shall ultimately resolve the
clemency petition based on the facts established in the said report. The threshold of
evidence to be applied is clear and convincing evidence since it is incumbent upon the
petitioner to hurdle the seriousness of his or her established past administrative
liability/ies, the gravity of which had warranted the supreme penalty of disbarment.

6. Unless otherwise resolved by the Court sitting En Banc, these guidelines and procedure
shall apply to pending petitions for judicial clemency, as well as to those filed after the
promulgation of this Resolution. Nuñez vs. Atty. Ricafort, A.C. No. 5054, March 2, 2021

13. What are the qualifications of a Notary Public?

Section 1, Rule III of the 2004 Rules on Notarial Practice provides: Section 1. Qualifications. -
A notarial commission may be issued by an Executive Judge to any qualified person who
submits a petition in accordance with these Rules. To be eligible for commissioning as notary
public, the petitioner: (i) must be a citizen of the Philippines; (ii) must be over twenty-one
(21) years of age; (iii) must be a resident in the Philippines for at least one (1) year and
maintains a regular place of work or business in the city or province where the commission is
to be issued; (iv) must be a member of the Philippine Bar in good standing with clearances
from the Office of the Bar Confidant of the Supreme Court and the Integrated Bar of the
Philippines; and (v) must not have been convicted in the first instance of any crime involving
moral turpitude. Cansino vs. Atty. Sederiosa, A.C. No. 8522, October 6, 2020

14. Discuss “competent evidence of identity” under the Notarial Rules.

The phrase “competent evidence of identity” under Section 12, Rule II of the Notarial Rules
refers to the identification of an individual based on: (a) at least one current identification
document issued by an official agency bearing the photograph and signature of the individual;
or (b) the oath or affirmation of one credible witness not privy to the instrument, document
or transaction who is personally known to the notary public and who personally knows the
individual, or of two credible witnesses neither of whom is privy to the instrument, document

Legal Edge Bar Review 0942 – 949 91 76

legaledge8@gmail.com
0917 – 894 53 56
Page 8 of 18
 2023 BAR REVIEW Handout No. 6
Legal & Judicial Ethics
LAST MINUTE

or transaction who each personally knows the individual and shows to the notary public
documentary identification.

Through this Court’s Resolution dated 19 February 2008 in A.M. No. 02-8-13-SC, the Notarial
Rules were amended to include an extensive catalog of identification documents which met
the criteria set forth in Section 12(a), Rule II, such as but not limited to: passport, driver’s
license, Professional Regulation Commission (PRC) ID, National Bureau of Investigation (NBI)
clearance, police clearance, postal ID, voter’s ID, Barangay certification, Government Service
and Insurance System (GSIS) e-card, Social Security System (SSS) card, Philhealth card, senior
citizen card, Overseas Workers Welfare Administration (OWWA) ID, OFW ID, seaman’s book,
alien certificate of registration/immigrant certificate of registration, government office ID,
certification from the National Council for the Welfare of Disable Persons (NCWDP), and
Department of Social Welfare and Development (DSWD) certification.

The rationale underlying the aforestated rules is to enable the notary public to verify the
genuineness of the signature of the acknowledging party and to ascertain that the document
is the party’s free and voluntary act and deed.

A community tax certificate or cedula is no longer considered as a valid and competent

evidence of identity not only because it is not included in the list of competent evidence of
identity under the Notarial Rules; but more so, it does not bear the photograph and signature
of the persons appearing before notaries public, which the Notarial Rules deem as the more
appropriate and competent means by which notaries public can ascertain the person’s
identity. Indeed, reliance on community tax certificates alone is already a punishable
indiscretion by a notary public. Fortunato C. Dionisio, Jr. and Franklin C. Dionisio vs. Attys.
Miguel G. Padernal and Delfin R. Agcaoili, Jr., A.C. No. 12673 [Formerly CBD Case No. 13-
3900], March 15, 2022

15. May the principle of rep isa loquitur find application in an administrative case for an alleged
violation of the Notarial Rules?

Yes. In a case where a Certification from the issued by the Office of the Clerk of Court of the
Regional Trial Court was submitted in evidence, attesting that a different document was
notarized, and the lawyer himself admitted to the indiscretion, the Court held that “the
principle of res ipsa loquitur finds application, making the [erring lawyer] administratively
liable.” Bernaldo E. Valdez vs. Atty. Winston B. Hipe, A.C. No. 12443, March 14, 2022

Legal Edge Bar Review 0942 – 949 91 76

legaledge8@gmail.com
0917 – 894 53 56
Page 9 of 18
 2023 BAR REVIEW Handout No. 6
Legal & Judicial Ethics
LAST MINUTE

16. Differentiate jurat and acknowledgment.

An acknowledgment is the act of one who has executed a deed in going before some
competent officer or court and declaring it to be his act or deed; while a jurat is that part of
an affidavit where the officer certifies that the same was sworn before him.

A jurat is that part of an affidavit in which the officer certifies that the instrument was sworn
to before him. It is not a part of a pleading but merely evidences the fact that the affidavit
was properly made. To subscribe literally means to write underneath, as one’s name; to sign
at the end of a document. To swear means to put on oath; to declare on oath the truth of a
pleading, etc. Accordingly, in a jurat, the affiant must sign the document in the presence of
and take his oath before a notary public or any other person authorized to administer oaths.

The acknowledgment, on the other hand, shall be made before a notary public or an officer
duly authorized by law of the country to take acknowledgments of instruments or documents
in the place where the act is done. The notary public or the officer taking the acknowledgment
shall certify that the person acknowledging the instrument or document is known to him and
that he is the same person who executed it, and acknowledged that the same is his free act
and deed. The certificate shall be made under his official seal, if he is by law required to keep
a seal, and if not, his certificate shall so state. The party acknowledging must likewise appear
before the notary public or any other person authorized to take acknowledgments of
instruments or documents. Tigno vs. Spouses Aquino, G.R. No. 129416, November 25, 2004;
Gamido vs. New Bilibid Prisons (NBP) Officials, G.R. No. 114829, March 1, 1995

JUDICIAL ETHICS

17. How is an administrative case instituted against judges of regular and special courts, and
justices of the Court of Appeals and Sandiganbayan?

Under the Rules of Court, administrative complaints against judges of regular courts and
special courts as well as justices of the CA and the Sandiganbayan may be instituted: (1) by
the Supreme Court motu proprio; (2) upon a verified complaint, supported by affidavits of
persons who have personal knowledge of the facts alleged therein or by documents which
may substantiate said allegations; or (3) upon an anonymous complaint, supported by public
records of indubitable integrity. Re: Anonymous Letter-Complaint (with Attached Pictures)
Against Associate Justice Normandie B. Pizarro, Court of Appeals, 858 SCRA 313, A.M. No.
17-11-06-CA, March 13, 2018

Legal Edge Bar Review 0942 – 949 91 76

legaledge8@gmail.com
0917 – 894 53 56
Page 10 of 18
 2023 BAR REVIEW Handout No. 6
Legal & Judicial Ethics
LAST MINUTE

18. An anonymous complaint was filed against a justice. The accusations were, however, not
supported by any evidence or by any public record of indubitable integrity. Should the case
prosper?

No. Inasmuch as the Court would want to cleanse the Judiciary of its erring and undesirable
members and personnel, such policy could only be implemented with the strict observance
of due process, such that substantial evidence is required to prove the charges against a
member of the Judiciary.

The Court is duty-bound to protect its ranks or any member or personnel of the Judiciary from
baseless or unreasonable charges. Re: Anonymous Letter-Complaint (with Attached
Pictures) Against Associate Justice Normandie B. Pizarro, Court of Appeals, 858 SCRA 313,
A.M. No. 17-11-06-CA, March 13, 2018

19. May a respondent judge be both held criminally and administratively liable for the same
act or omission?

Yes. An administrative case is independent from the criminal action, although both arose
from the same act or omission. As a rule, exoneration in the administrative case is not a bar
to a criminal prosecution for the same or similar acts which were the subject of the
administrative complaint or vice versa.

While the resolution of the criminal cases against respondent is independent from that of the
administrative complaint against him, the findings of guilt on the criminal cases, however,
may be considered as substantial evidence by itself from which his administrative liability may
arise. Further, the factual findings of the trial court, especially on the assessment or
appreciation of the testimonies of witnesses, are accorded great weight and respect. Office
of the Court Administrator vs. Amor, 961 SCRA 280, A.M. No. RTJ-00-1535, November 10,
2020

20. May an alleged violation of the sub judice rule be dealt with through an administrative
case?

Yes. Actions in violation of the sub judice rule may be dealt with not only through contempt
proceedings but also through administrative actions. This is because a lawyer’s speech is
subject to greater regulation for two significant reasons: one, because of the lawyer’s
relationship to the judicial process; and two, the significant dangers that a lawyer’s speech
poses to the trial process.

Legal Edge Bar Review 0942 – 949 91 76

legaledge8@gmail.com
0917 – 894 53 56
Page 11 of 18
 2023 BAR REVIEW Handout No. 6
Legal & Judicial Ethics
LAST MINUTE

The Court has the plenary power to discipline erring lawyers through this kind of proceeding,
aimed to purge the law profession of unworthy members of the Bar and to preserve the
nobility and honor of the legal profession. Re: Show Cause Order in the Decision Dated May
11, 2018 in G.R. No. 237428 (Republic of the Philippines, represented by Solicitor General
Jose C. Calida vs. Maria Lourdes P. A. Sereno), 872 SCRA 1, A.M. No. 18-06-01-SC, July 17,
2018

21. What are the guidelines in resolving requests for judicial clemency by disrobed judges?

In the exercise of its constitutional power of administrative supervision over all courts and all
personnel thereof, laid down the following guidelines in resolving requests for judicial
clemency:

1. There must be proof of remorse and reformation. These shall include but should not
be limited to certifications or testimonials of the officer(s) or chapter(s) of the
Integrated Bar of the Philippines, judges or judges’ associations and prominent
members of the community with proven integrity and probity. A subsequent finding
of guilt in an administrative case for the same or similar misconduct will give rise to a
strong presumption of non-reformation.

2. Sufficient time must have lapsed from the imposition of the penalty to ensure a period
of reformation.

3. The age of the person asking for clemency must show that he still has productive years
ahead of him that can be put to good use by giving him a chance to redeem himself.

4. There must be a showing of promise (such as intellectual aptitude, learning or legal

acumen or contribution to legal scholarship and the development of the legal system
or administrative and other relevant skills), as well as potential for public service.

5. There must be other relevant factors and circumstances that may justify clemency.

As a uniform standard, the Court ruled that, unless for extraordinary reasons, there must be
a five (5)-year minimum period before dismissal or disbarment can be the subject of any kind
of clemency. In Re: Anonymous Letter dated August 12, 2010, Complaining against Judge
Ofelia T. Pinto, Regional Trial Court, Branch 60, Angeles City, Pampanga, A.M. No. RTJ-11-
2289, February 15, 2022

Legal Edge Bar Review 0942 – 949 91 76

legaledge8@gmail.com
0917 – 894 53 56
Page 12 of 18
 2023 BAR REVIEW Handout No. 6
Legal & Judicial Ethics
LAST MINUTE

PRACTICAL EXERCISES

22. Demand Letter

19 August 2023
LUFFY D. MONKEY
Thousand Sunny Avenue,
Bonuan Binloc, Dagupan City 2400

Demand Letter

Dear Mr. Monkey:

We write on behalf of our client, Cross Guild Lending Company, in connection with your
unpaid loan obligation under Promissory Note No. 1A2B3C, which you executed on 5 May 2022.
The promissory note and your latest statement of account are attached hereto for your ready
reference.

As of writing, you have incurred an outstanding obligation of One hundred twenty-one

thousand pesos (₱121,000.00), inclusive of interest and surcharges. Yet, despite repeated verbal
and written demands, you have failed and continuously fail to pay your debt.

In view thereof, final demand is hereby made upon you to pay your debt of One hundred
twenty-one thousand pesos (₱121,000.00) within seven (7) calendar days from your receipt
hereof. You may contact us or our client for the settlement of your loan obligation. Otherwise,
we will be constrained to institute the appropriate legal action against you to protect the rights
and interests of our client.

We trust that you will give this matter your preferential attention to avoid the
inconvenience of litigation.

For the firm,

DRACULE MIHAWK
Senior Partner

Legal Edge Bar Review 0942 – 949 91 76

legaledge8@gmail.com
0917 – 894 53 56
Page 13 of 18
 2023 BAR REVIEW Handout No. 6
Legal & Judicial Ethics
LAST MINUTE

23. Notarial Certificate: Jurat

Republic of the Philippines )

Municipality of Sabtang, Batanes ) S.S.

SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO BEFORE ME this 3rd day of February 2023 in Sabtang, Batanes by
MARSHALL D. TEACH, who exhibited to me his Professional Regulations Commission
Identification Card No. 987654321, valid until 3 August 2024, as competent evidence of his
identity.

JESUS BURGESS
Notary Public for the Province of Batanes
Commission No. 8-7000-JBDLVRY
Valid until 31 December 2025
Burgess Law Office, Strong-strong Road, Savidug, Sabtang, Batanes
Roll No. 1000005/IBP O.R. No. 1000000 (2023-Pasig City)
PTR No. 2222222, 5 January 2023-Batanes
MCLE Compliance No. VII-3333333
Doc. No. 10;
Page No. 2;
Book No. 1;
Series of 2023.

24. Notarial Certificate: Acknowledgement

Republic of the Philippines )

Mabalacat City, Pampanga ) S.S.

ACKNOWLEDGMENT

BEFORE ME, a Notary Public for and in Mabalacat City, Pampanga, this 10th day of March 2023,
personally appeared the following persons and exhibited their respective identification cards as
competent evidence of their identities:

Place of Issue and

Name ID Card and No.
Expiration Date
EDWARD NEWGATE Driver’s license No. C3-POR2D2 LTO Mabalacat – 6 Apr 2026
MARCO PHOENIX PRC No. 876543219 PRC CFEZ – 5 Oct 2023
ACE D. PORTGAS Passport No. P0000A DFA Angeles – 1 Jan 2029
DIAMOND JOZU Driver’s license No. L3-37BB9E LTO Angeles – 11 Nov 2026

Legal Edge Bar Review 0942 – 949 91 76

legaledge8@gmail.com
0917 – 894 53 56
Page 14 of 18
 2023 BAR REVIEW Handout No. 6
Legal & Judicial Ethics
LAST MINUTE

known to me to be the same persons who executed the foregoing USUFRUCT AGREEMENT for
the purposes stated therein and acknowledged to me that the same is their own free and
voluntary act and deed.

The subject agreement consists of only four (4) pages, including this page on which the
acknowledgment is written, and signed by the parties and their witnesses on every page thereof.

WITNESS MY HAND AND NOTARIAL SEAL on the date and place written above.

SANJI VINSMOKE
Notary Public for Mabalacat City, Clark Freeport and
Special Economic Zone, Magalang, and
Porac, Pampanga and Angeles City
Commission No. ANG-1000000
Valid until 31 December 2024
Vinsmoke & Associates, Baratie Ave.,
Bundagul, Mabalacat City, Pampanga
Roll No. 1000001/IBP Lifetime No. 1111111
PTR No. 2222223, 7 January 2023-Angeles City
MCLE Compliance No. VII-3333334
Doc. No. 14;
Page No. 3;
Book No. 1;
Series of 2023.

25. Motion to Dismiss

Republic of the Philippines

10th Judicial Region
MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURT IN CITIES
Branch 999
Butuan City

TASH IGI, Civil Case No. M-BUT-23-9999999999

Plaintiff,
Collection of Sum of Money with Damages
- vs -

RYUMA SHIMOTSUKI,
Defendant.
x-----------------------x

Legal Edge Bar Review 0942 – 949 91 76

legaledge8@gmail.com
0917 – 894 53 56
Page 15 of 18
 2023 BAR REVIEW Handout No. 6
Legal & Judicial Ethics
LAST MINUTE

MOTION TO DISMISS

The defendant, through counsel, respectfully moves that the complaint be dismissed on the
ground that the Honorable Court has no jurisdiction over the subject matter of the claim; and in support
thereof, respectfully avers the following:

1. In paragraph 6 and the prayer of the Complaint, the plaintiff stated that the action is for the
recovery of a sum of money.

2. She further asserted in paragraph 8 that the alleged loan has a “principal amount of Two
million thirty thousand pesos (₱2,030,000.00).”

3. Sec. 33 of B.P. Blg. 129, as amended by R.A. No. 11576, provides:

“Section 33. Jurisdiction of the Metropolitan Trial Courts, Municipal Trial Courts in Cities,
Municipal Trial Courts, and Municipal Circuit Trial Courts in Civil Cases. – Metropolitan
Trial Courts, Municipal Trial Courts in Cities, Municipal Trial Courts, and Municipal Circuit
Trial Courts shall exercise:

“(1) Exclusive original jurisdiction over civil actions and probate proceedings,
testate and intestate, including the grant of provisional remedies in proper cases,
where the value of the personal property, estate, or amount of the demand does
not exceed Two million pesos (P2,000,000.00), exclusive of interest, damages of
whatever kind, attorney’s fees, litigation expenses, and costs, the amount of which
must be specifically alleged: xxx” (Underscoring supplied)

4. Meanwhile, Sec. 19 of the law states:

“Section 19. Jurisdiction of the Regional Trial Courts in Civil Cases. – Regional Trial Courts shall
exercise exclusive original jurisdiction:
xxx xxx xxx
(8) In all other cases in which the demand, exclusive of interest, damages of
whatever kind, attorney’s fees, litigation expenses and costs or the value of the
property in controversy exceeds Two million pesos (P2,000,000.00).” (Underscoring
supplied)

5. Thus, it is the Honorable Regional Trial Court that has exclusive jurisdiction of the instant case
considering that the principal amount of Two million thirty thousand pesos (₱2,030,000.00),
which the plaintiff seeks to recover in his Complaint, is more than the jurisdictional amount
of this Honorable Court.

6. Since the Honorable Court has no jurisdiction over the subject matter of the claim, the case
should be dismissed.

Legal Edge Bar Review 0942 – 949 91 76

legaledge8@gmail.com
0917 – 894 53 56
Page 16 of 18
 2023 BAR REVIEW Handout No. 6
Legal & Judicial Ethics
LAST MINUTE

PRAYER

WHEREFORE, the defendant respectfully prays that the instant Complaint BE DISMISSED with
cost against the plaintiff.

Other reliefs, just and equitable, are likewise prayed for.

Respectfully submitted. Tinoc, Ifugao for Butuan City, 13 March 2023.

RORONOA ZORO
Counsel for the Defendant
RORONOA ZORO LAW
2F Wado Ichimonji Tower, Kitetsu III Highway cor.
Enma Ave., Wangwang, Tinoc, Ifugao 3609
Roll No. 1000003, IBP Lifetime No. 1111113
PTR No. 2222223, 4 January 2023, Tinoc, Ifugao
MCLE Compliance No. VII-3333336, 10 August 2022
(74) 9999-9999, 3swordstyle@yahoo.com
Copy furnished:

ATTY. PRINCESS PERONA

Counsel for the Plaintiff
MORIA LAW FIRM
7F Thriller Bark Bldg., Bagay
Tuguegarao City, Cagayan 3500
(78) 9999-9999, gmshadows@gmail.com

26. Motion to Declare in Default

Republic of the Philippines

12th Judicial Region
REGIONAL TRIAL COURT
Branch 999
Tacurong City, Sultan Kudarat

VIVI NEFERTARI, Civil Case No. R-TAC-22-9999999999

Plaintiff, Specific Performance with Damages
- vs -
SIRCRO CODILE,
Defendant.

x-----------------------x

Legal Edge Bar Review 0942 – 949 91 76

legaledge8@gmail.com
0917 – 894 53 56
Page 17 of 18
 2023 BAR REVIEW Handout No. 6
Legal & Judicial Ethics
LAST MINUTE

MOTION TO DECLARE DEFENDANT IN DEFAULT

The plaintiff, through counsel, unto this Honorable Court, most respectfully states:

1. Per the records of the Honorable Court, the defendant was served with a copy of the
summons and the Complaint, together with its attachments, on 10 September 2022.

2. Upon checking with the Honorable Court yesterday, 4 November 2022, it appears that
no responsive pleading has been filed by the defendant within the reglementary
period.

3. Considering the foregoing, it is respectfully prayed that the defendant be declared in

default in accordance with the rules.

PRAYER

WHEREFORE, the plaintiff respectfully prays that this Honorable Court declares the
defendant IN DEFAULT and allows the plaintiff to present evidence ex-parte.

Other reliefs, just and equitable, are likewise prayed for.

Respectfully submitted.

Cotabato City for Tacurong City, Sultan Kudarat, 5 November 2022.

SOUL KING BROOK

Counsel for the Plaintiff
SKB LAW OFFICE
Rumbar St., Laboon-Crocus Village
Bagua Mother, Cotabato City 9600
Roll No. 1000004, IBP Lifetime No. 1111114
PTR No. 2222224, 4 January 2023, Tinoc, Ifugao
MCLE Compliance No. VII-3333337, 10 August 2022
(64) 9999-9999, yomiyomi@skblaw.com
Copy furnished:
SIRCRO CODILE
Defendant
Unit 0, GF Baroque Works Tower, Rain Dinners,
Balete, Batangas City, Batangas 4200
(43) 9999-9999, sircrocodile@gmail.com

Legal Edge Bar Review 0942 – 949 91 76

legaledge8@gmail.com
0917 – 894 53 56
Page 18 of 18