Canon 15

A LAWYER SHALL
OBSERVE CANDOR,
FAIRNESS AND LOYALTY
IN ALL HIS DEALINGS
AND TRANSACTIONS
WITH HIS CLIENT.
Rule 15.01 — A lawyer, in conferring with
a prospective client, shall ascertain as
soon as practicable whether the matter
would involve a conflict with another
client or his own interest, and if so, shall
forthwith inform the prospective client.
Rule 15.02 — A lawyer shall be bound by
the rule on privilege communication in
respect of matters disclosed to him by a
prospective
client.
Rule 15.05 — A lawyer, when advising
his client, shall give a candid and
honest opinion on the merits and
probable results of the client’s case,
neither overstating nor understating
the prospects of the case.
Rule 15.06 — A lawyer shall not state
or imply that he is able to influence
any public official, tribunal or
legislative body.
Rule 15.03 — A lawyer shall not
represent conflicting interest except
by written consent of all concerned
given after a full disclosure of the
facts.
Rule 15.04 — A lawyer may, with
the written consent of all concerned,
act as mediator, conciliator or
arbitrator in settling disputes.
Rule 15.07 — A lawyer shall impress
upon his client compliance with the
laws and the principles of fairness.
Rule 15.08 — A lawyer who is
engaged in another profession or
occupation concurrently with the
practice of law shall make clear to
his client whether he is acting as a
lawyer or in another capacity.
Case Digest on Canon 15
Robert Victor G. Seares, Jr.
vs. Atty. Saniata Liwliwa V.
GonzalesAlzate, Adm. Case
No. 9058, November 14, 2012
Facts
Respondent Atty. Gonzales-Azalte is the former
lawyer of
complainant Seares Jr. Seares Jr. ran for
position of Municipal Mayor of
Dolores, Abra in May 2007 and lost, then
respondent lawyer filed a protest
in the RTC on behalf of complainant but was
dismissed for being ―Fatally
Defective‖. Respondent lawyer again filed the
protest ibn the RTC and
was dismissed for being time barred and on
ground of forum shopping.
Complainant ran again for the same
position on May 2010 and won.
Later he learned that his opponents
retained Respondent lawyer as their
counsel and one Turqueza charged
complainant with abuse of authority,
oppression and grave misconduct and
Respondent lawyer represents
Turqueza as counsel.
Seares, Jr. asserts that Atty. Gonzales-
Alzate thereby violated Canon 15,
Canon 17 and Canon 18 of the Code of
Professional Responsibility for
negligently handling his election
protest, for prosecuting him, her former
client, and for uttering false and hurtful
allegations against him. Hence, he
prays that she should be disbarred.
Issue
WON Respondent lawyer violated
the Code of Professional
Responsibility.
Held
No. the Court DISMISSES the
administrative complaint against
Atty.
Saniata Liwliwa V. Gonzales-
Alzate for utter lack of merit. And
admonishes
Seares jr. for filing a malicious
complaint.
Ratio
The complaint against Atty. Gonzales-Alzate
is unfounded and devoid of substance.
We see no trace of professional negligence
or incompetence on the part of Atty.
Gonzales-Alzate in her handling of Seares,
Jr.‘s protest, especially because she even
filed in his behalf a
―Motion for Reconsideration,‖ a
―Comment on the Court‘s Dismissal of the
Protest Ad Cautelam‖ and a
―Motion to Withdraw Cash Deposit.‖.
 QUESTIONS ASKED MORE
THAN ONCE IN THE BAR
Q: Under the Code of
Professional
Responsibility, what is
the principal obligation
of a lawyer towards his
client (BAR 2004)
Answer
“A lawyer shall
observe candor,
fairness and loyalty in
all his dealings and
transactions with his
client.” (Canon 15,
Code of Professional
 Question
X
 was indicted for murder. As he had no
counsel on arraignment, the trial court
appointed Atty. A as his counsel de oficio.
When Atty. A asked X what was his stand, X
said he was guilty. X thereupon pleaded guilty.
Trial was thereafter conducted.
When the turn of the defense to present
evidence came, Atty. A manifested that he was
not presenting any and that he was submitting
the case for decision, praying that X’s plea be
considered mitigating. Did Atty. A’s assistance
or conduct approximate the competence and
deligence which the Code of Professional
Responsibility expected him? Explain. (BAR
2000)
 Answer
No, it is the duty of the defense counsel when his
client desires to enter a plea of guilty to fully
acquaint himself with the facts and surrounding
circumstances of the case, advise his client of his
constitutional rights and the full import of a plea
guilty, see to it that the prescribed procedure is
observed, present evidence, including possible
mitigating circumstances, so that the precise
degree of his client’s culpability is established
and the appropriate penalty is imposed, and thus
leave no room for doubt that there was a mistake
and misunderstanding as to the nature of the
charges to which his client has pleaded guilty.
Atty. A has fallen short of this required conduct.
Question
On the day of his arraignment,
your client confided in you that he
in fact killed the victim for which
he was being charged with murder.
You had been led to believe initially
that he was just being framed and
that another person had committed
the crime. How would you advise
your client to plead?
(BAR 1994)
 Answer
I would first inquire fully into
the circumstances under which
he killed the victim. If I find out
that he is guilty as charged, I
would advise him to plead
guilty, after explaining to him
his constitutional rights and the
import of plea of guilty.