You are on page 1of 3

DLSU College of Law

Law______ G02
Friday, 11:20-12:20, A1209
Atty. Vyva Victoria M. Aguirre
vyvaaguirre@gmail.com, vvm_aguirre@yahoo.com

Course Title: Basic Legal Ethics
Course Description: This course covers the basics of legal ethics as well as judicial ethics and
the rules and procedures for the discipline of lawyers and judges.
Learning Outcomes: Knowledge of the norms of conduct expected of lawyers should lead to a
greater sense of responsibility among students who desire to enter the field of law towards society
in general and towards the profession in particular.
Objectives: At the end of the term, the student must have mastered the Attorneys Oath. The
Oath must not only be committed to rote memory but, most especially, to the conscience. The
student who aspires to become a lawyer must likewise endeavor to understand what to expect
from the judiciary to which he owes respect and allegiance for a better administration of justice in
the country.
Requirements/Breakdown of Grades: (No make-up for quizzes. Make-up for Final Exam only
for absence with valid reason, evidence of which must be presented.
Recitations/digests: 25%
Quizes: 25%
Finals: 50%

COURSE OUTLINE

I. Introduction: Four-fold duties of a lawyer
To society
To the legal profession
To the court
To the client
II. Legal Ethics
Allegiance to the Republic of the Philippines; Obedience to the Constitution, laws and
legal orders of duly constituted authorities.
Duty not to engage in falsehood nor consent to the doing of any falsehood.
Duty not to wittingly or willingly promote or sue any groundless, false or unlawful suit,
or delay anyones cause for money or malice.
Duty to conduct oneself as a lawyer according to the best of ones knowledge and
discretion.
Duty of fidelity to the courts as well as to the clients.
III. Discipline of Lawyers (see Rule 138)
Nature of disciplinary proceedings against lawyers: In re Almacen, G.R. No. L-27654.
February 18, 1970; Gatchalian Promotions Talents Pool, Inc. v. Naldoza, Adm. Case No.
4017, September 29, 1999; Gerona v. Datingaling, Adm. Case No. 4801, Feb 27, 2003.
Grounds for disciplinary action
o Rules of Court, Rule 138, sec.27
o Re Atty. Leon G. Maquera, Bar Matter No. 793, July 30, 2004; In re Tionko,
March 17, 1922
Nature and extent of sanction: In re Almacen, supra.
Procedure (see Rule 139-B)
2
o How instituted and who may file complaint: Atty. Navarro, for and in behalf of
Pan-Asia International Commodities, Inc. v. Atty. Meneses III, CBD Adm. Case
No. 313, January 30, 1998; Fernandez v. Novero, Jr., Adm. Case No. 5394, Dec
2, 2002; Bautista v. Gonzales, Adm. Matter No. 1625, Feb 12, 1990.
o Proceedings in the I BP: Investment and Management Services Corp. v. Roxas,
Adm. Case No. 1417, April 17, 1996; Dumadag v. Lumaya, Adm. Case No.
2614, June 29, 2000; Ingles v. Dela Serna, Adm. Case No .5763, Dec 31, 2002.
o RTC or Court of Appeals: see Rule 138, sec.27, 28, 29.
IV. Judicial Conduct: A.M. No. 03-05-01-SC, Adopting the New Code of J udicial Conduct for
the Philippine J udiciary of 2004 [see amendment of Canon 4, sec.9, OCA Cir. No. 103-6, July
28, 2006; see also proviso in New Code re suppletory character of the Canons of Judicial Ethics
and the 1989 Code of Judicial Conduct ]
[cf Rule 140, Rules of Court]
Impartiality, Independence and Integrity of the Judiciary (Canons 1-3)
o Talens-Dabon v. Arceo, A.M. No. RTJ-96-1336, July 25, 1996; Director of
Prisons v. Ang Cho Kio, GR No. L-30001, June 23, 1970; Pico v. Combong, Jr.,
A.M. No. RTJ-91-764, Nov 6, 1992; Office of the Court Administrator v.
Estacion, Jr., A.M. No. RTJ-87-104, August 23, 1995; Gutierrez v. Belan, A.M.
No. MTJ-95-1059, August 7, 1998
o Disqualifications, I nhibition: see also Rule 3.12, 1989 Code of Judicial
Conduct; Albos v. Alaba, A.M. No. MTJ-91517, March 11, 1994; Parayno v.
Meneses, G.R. 112684, April 26, 1994; People v. Sesbreo, G.R. 121764, Sep 9,
1999; Maliwat v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 107041, May 15, 1996; Villaluz v.
Mijares, A.M. No. RTJ-98-1402, April 3, 1998; Commissioner of Internal
Revenue v. Court of Appeals, G.R. 119322, Feb 6, 1997
Propriety and Equality (Canons 4-5)
o Javier v. De Guzman, A.M. No. RTJ-89-380, Dec 19, 1990; Dawa, et al. v. De
Asa, A.M. No. MTJ-98-1144, July 22, 1998; Balayon, Jr. v. Ocampo, A.M. No.
MTJ-91-619, Jan 29, 1993; Alfonso v. Juanson, A.M. No. RTJ 92-904, Dec 7,
1993; Co v. Calimag, A.M. No. RTJ-99-1493, June 20, 2000; Re Badoy, Jr.,
A.M. No. 01-12-01-SC, A.M. No. SB-02-10-J, Jan 16, 2003; Ramos v. Barot,
A.M. No. MTJ-00-1338, Jan 21,, 2004; Maquiran v. Grageda, A.M. No. RTJ-04-
1888, Feb 11, 2005
o Makalintal v. Teh, A.M. No. RTJ-97-1375, Oct 16, 1997; Yulo-Tuvilla v. Balgos,
A.M. No. MTJ-98-1149, March 31, 1998; Gacayan v. Pamintuan, A.M. No.
RTJ-99-1483, Sep 17, 1999; Padilla v. Zantua, Jr., A.M. No. MTJ-93-888, Oct
24, 1994; Office of the Court Administrator v. De Guzman, Jr., A.M.No. RTJ-93-
1021, January 31, 1997
o Vistan v. Nicolas,A.M. No. MTJ-87-79, Sep 13, 1991; Ruiz v. Bringas, A.M. No.
MTJ-00-1266, April 6, 2000; Re Badoy, Jr., supra.
Competence and Diligence (Canon 6)
o Gross ignorance of the law: De la Cruz v. Concepcion, A.M. No. RTJ-93-1062,
August 25, 1994; Ualat v. Ramos, A.M. No. MTJ-91-567, Dec 6, 1996
o Errors of judgment: Callar v. Salvador, A.M. No. RTJ-97-1369, Feb 17, 1997;
State Prosecutors v. Muro, A.M. No. RTJ-92-876, Dec 1, 1995; Del Rosario v.
Cedillo, A.M. No. MTJ-04-1557, Oct 21, 2004
o Knowingly rendering unjust judgment: De la Cruz v. Concepcion, supra.
o Failure to obey existing law; Inexcusable negligence: People v. Gacott, Jr., G.R.
No. 116049, March 20, 1995; People v. Veneracion, G.R. Nos. 119987-88, Oct
12, 1995
3
o Prompt disposition of cases: Rodriguez v. Barro, A.M. No. 1587-CTJ, Aug 23,
1978; Yu-Asensi v. Villanueva, A.M. No. MTJ-001245, Jan 19, 2000
o Mandatory 90-day period for deciding cases in lower courts [see Const., Art.
VIII, sec.15(1)]: Moya v. Tensuan, A.M. No. 2507-CFI, August 10, 1981;
Salvador v. Salamanca, A.M. No. R-177-MTJ, Sep 24, 1986; Query of Judge
Danilo M. Tenerife, A.M. No. 94-5-42-MTC, March 20, 1996; Re: Report on the
Judicial Audit Conducted in the Regional Trial Court, Branch 144, Makati City,
A.M. No. 03-11-628-RTC, Nov 25, 2004
o Administrative responsibilities: Tan v. Madayag, A.M. No. RTJ-93-995, March
11, 1994; Request of Judge Cartagena, A.M. No. 95-9-98-MCTC, Dec 4, 1997.
V. Discipline of Judges
[Rules of Court, Rule 140; Resolution A.M. No. 02-9-02-SC, September 17, 2002]
Imbang v. Del Rosario, A.M. No. 03-1515-MTJ, Nov 19, 2004; Office of the Court
Administrator v. Fuentes, A.M. No. RTJ-94-1270, August 23, 1995; Gallo v. Cordero,
A.M. No. MTJ-95-1035. June 21, 1995; Office of the Court Administrator v. Sumilang,
A.M. No. MTJ-94-989. April 18, 1997; Heck v. Santos, A.M. No. RTJ-01-1657, Feb 23,
2004
Bartolome v. de Borja, A.M. No. 1096-CFI. May 31, 1976; Salcedo v. Inting, A.M. No.
1810-CTJ. June 29, 1979
Icasiano v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. 95642, May 28, 1992; Maceda v. Vasquez, G.R. No.
102781, April 22, 1993


References
Primary Sources: Constitution. Rules of Court. Code of Professional Responsibility. New Code of
Judicial Conduct for the Philippine Judiciary of 2004
Secondary Sources:
Agpalo, Ruben E.. Legal and Judicial Ethics. Manila: Rex Book Store, 2009.
Treatises, cases, law journal articles as may be assigned.

You might also like