You are on page 1of 6

2004 BAR EXAMINATIONS QUESTIONS AND SUGGESTED ANSWERS LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS

I A. Under the Code of Professional Responsibility, what is the principal obligation of a lawyer towards: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. A. 1. According to Canon 7 of the Code of Professional Responsibility, a lawyer shall at all times uphold the integrity and dignity of the legal profession, and support the activities of the integrated bar 2. Canon 8 of the Code of Professional Responsibility provides that a lawyer shall conduct himself with courtesy, fairness and candor towards his professional colleagues, and shall avoid harassing tactics against opposing counsel. 3. A lawyer shall participate in the improvement of the legal system by initiating or supporting efforts in law reform and in the administration of justice as provided for in Canon 4 of the Code of Professional Responsibility. 4. Canon 4 of the Code of Professional Responsibility provides that a lawyer shall participate in the improvement of the legal system by initiating or supporting efforts in law reform and in the administration of justice. 5. In Canon 15 of the Code of Professional Responsibility, it was said that a lawyer shall observe candor , fairness and loyalty in all his dealings and transactions with his client. The Legal professional and the integrated Bar? His Professional Colleagues The Development of the Legal System The Administration of Justice His client?

B. In the course of a judicial proceeding, a conflict of opinions as to a particular legal course of action to be taken arose between AB and CD, two lawyers hired Mr. XX, a party-litigant, to act jointly as his counsel. How should such problem be resolved, and whose opinion was not followed, do when she honestly believes that the opinion of CD, the other counsel, is not as legally and factually well grounded as her opinion is? B 1. As provided in Canon 7, Canons of professional Ethics, when lawyers jointly associated in a cause cannot agree as to any matter vital to the interest of the client, the conflict of the opinion should be frankly stated to him for his final determination. His decision should be accepted unless the nature of the difference makes it impracticable for the lawyer whose judgment has been effectively. In this event, it is his duty to ask the client to relive him.

II On the eve of the initial hearing for the reception of evidence for the defense, the defendant and his counsel had a conference where the client directed the lawyer to present as principal defense witnesses two persons whose testimonies were personally known to the lawyer to have been perjured. The lawyer informed his client that he refused to go along with unwarranted court of action proposed by the defendant. But the client insited on his directive or else he would not pay the agreed attorneys fees. When the case was called for hearing the next morning the lawyer forthwith moved in open court that he be relieved as counsel for the defendant. Both the defendant and the plaintiffs counsel objected to the motion. A. Under the given facts, is the defense lawyer legally justified in seeking withdrawal from the case? A YES, he is justified. Under Rule 22.01 of the Code of Professional Responsibility, a lawyer may withdraw his services if the client insists that the lawyer pursue conduct violative of these canons and rules. The insistence of the client that the lawyer present witnesses whom he personally knows to have been perjured, will expose him to criminal and civil liability and violate his duty of candor, fairness and good faith to the court. B. Was the motion for relief as counsel made by the defense lawyer in full accord with the procedural requirements for a lawyers withdrawal from a court case? B NO, his actuation is not in accord with the procedural requirements for the lawyers withdrawal from a court case. Whether or not a lawyer has a valid cause to withdraw from a case, he cannot just do so and leave the client in the cold unprotected. He must serve a copy of his petition upon the client and the adverse party. He should, moreover, present, his petition well in advance of the trial of the action to enable the client to secure the services of another lawyer.

III Upon opening session of his court, the Presiding Judge noticed the presence of television cameras set up at strategic places of television cameras set up at strategic places in his courtroom and the posting of media practitioners all over his sala with their video cameras. The Judge forthwith issued an order directing the exclusion from the courtroom of all television paraphernalia and further instructing the reporters inside the hall not to operate their video cams during the proceedings. The defense lawyers objected to the Courts order, claiming that it was violative of their clients constitutional right to public trial.

A. Issuing the questioned order, did the Judge act in violation of the rights of the accused to a public trial? Dicuss Briefly. The judge did not violate the right of the accused to a public trial. A trial is public trial. A trial is public is public when anyone interested in observing the manner a judge conducts the proceedings in his court room may do so. There is no ban on attendance. In the question given the judge did not bar attendance, only the use of television paraphernalia and video cams. B. Did the Judge act in derogation of press freedom when he directed the exclusion of the television paraphernalia from the courtroom and when he prohibited the news reporters in the court roon from operating their video cams during the proceedings? Reason Briefly. No. Press freedom was never transgressed. The serious risks posed to the fair administration of justice posed to the fair administration of justice by live TV and radio broadcast, especially when emotions are running high of the issues stirred by the case, should be taken into consideration before addressing the issue of press freedom. The right of the accused to a fair trial, not by trial by publicity takes precedence over press freedom as invoked by the TV reporters in the case.

IV Primo, Segundo and Tercero are co-accused in information charging them with the crim of homicide. They are respectively represented by Attys. Juan Uno, Jose Dos and Pablo Tres. During the pre-trial conference, Attys. Uno and Dos manifested to the court that their clients are invoking alibi as their defense. Atty. Tres made it known that Primo and Segundo actually perpetrated the commission of the offense charged in the information. In one hearing during the presentation of the prosecutions evidence in chief, Atty. Uno failed to appear in court. When queried by the judge if accused Primo is willing to proceed with the hearing despite his counsels absence Primo gave his consent provided Attys. Dos and Tres would be designated as his joint counsel de oficio for that particular hearing. Thereupon, the court directed Attys. Dos and Tres to act as counsel de oficio of the accused Atty. Dos Accepted the designation but Atty.Tres Refused. A. Is there any impediment to Atty. Dos acting as counsel de officio for accused primo? Reason. There is no impediment to Atty. Dos acting as counsel de oficio for accused Primo. There is no conflict of interest involved between Primo and his client Segundo, considering that both are invoking alibi as their defense. B. May Atty. Tres legally refuse his designation as counsel de oficio of accused Primo? Reason. Atty. Tres may legally refused his designation as counsel de oficio for Primo. Since the defense of his client Tercero is that Primo and Segundo actually perpetrated the commission of the offense for which they are all charged. There is a conflict of interest between Tercero and Primo. There is a conflicting interest if there is inconsistency owht the interest of two or more opposing parties. The tests is wether or not in behalf of one client it is the lawyers duty to fight for an issue or claim but it is his duty to oppose it for the clients.

V A. Atty. DDs services were engaged by Mr. BB as defense counsel in a lawsuit. In the course of the proceedings, Atty. DD discovered that Mr. BB was an agnostic and a homosexual. By reason thereof, atty. DD filed a motion to withdraw as counsel without Mr. BBs express consent. Is Atty. DDs motion legally tenable? Reason Briefly. B. Assume that your friend and colleague, Judge Peter X. Mahinay a Regional Trial Court judge stationed at KL City, would seek your advice regarding his intention to ask permission of the Supreme Court to act as counsel for an thus represent his wife in the trial of a civil case.

What would be your advise to him? Discuss briefly.

VI A. Upon learning from news paper reports that bar candidate vic Pugote passed the bar examinations, Miss Adorable immediately lodged a complaint with the Supreme Court, praying that Vic Pugote be disallowed from taking the oath because he was maintaining an illicit relationship with several women other than his lawfully wedded spouse. However, from unexplained reasons, he succeeded to take his oath as lawyer. Later, when confronted with Miss Adorables complaint formally. Pugote moved for its dismissal on the ground that it is already moot and academic. Should Miss Adorables complaint be dismissed or not? Explain briefly. B. Alleging that Atty. Malibu seduced her when she was only sixteen (16) years old, which resulted in her Atty. Malibu seduced her when she was only sixteen years old, which resulted in her pregnancy and the birth of a baby girl. Miss Magayon filed a complaint for his disbarment seven years after the alleged seduction was committed. Atty. Malibu contended that considering the period of delay, the complaint filed against him can no longer be filed and prosecuted because it has already prescribed Is Atty. Malibus contention Tenable or not? Reason.

VII A. A disbarment complaint against a lawyer was referred by the Supreme Court to a Judge of the Regional Trial Court for investigation, report and recommendation. On the date set for the hearing of the complaint, the Judge had the case called for trial in open court and proceeded to receive evidence for the complainant. What would you have done if you were the counsel for the lawyer? Why? Reason Briefly. B. Atty. Jarazo filed a civil suit for damages against his business associates. After due trial, Judge Dejado rendered judgment dismissing Atty. Jarazos complaint. Atty. Jarazo did not appeal from the decision rendered thereby rendering such as final and exeutory. Thereafter, Atty. Jarazo lodged a criminal complaint against Judge Dejado accusing him of rendering manifestly unjust judgment before the Office of the Ombudsman. Will Atty. Jarazos complaint prosper? Why or why not? Reasons.

VIII A. Judge aficionado was among the several thousands of spectators watching a basketball game in Rizal Memorial Stadium Coliseum who saw the stabbing of the referee by player Baracco in the course of the game. The criminal case correspondingly filed against Barraco for the stabbing of Maykiling was raffled to the Regional Trial Court branch presided by Judge Aficionado. Should Judge Afficionado sit and try the case against Baracco? Explain.

NO. He should not preside over the case. Rule 3.12 of the Code of the Judicial Conduct provides that a judge should not take part in any proceedings where the judge had personal knowledge of the facts concerned. B. Atty. Walaasunto has been a member of the Philippine Bar for twenty Years but has never plied his profession as a lawyer. His sole means of livelihood is selling and buying real estate. In one of his transactions as a real estate broker, he issued a bouncing check. So he was criminal prosecuted and convicted for violating BP 22. In the disbarment proceedings, he contended that his conviction was not a valid ground for disciplinary action against a member of the Bar. He further argued that his act in issuing the check was done in relation to the exercise of the profession of a lawyer. Are the contentions of Atty. Walaasunto meritorious or not? Reasons. NO. His contentions are not meritorious. In the first place the ground for disbarment is the conviction for a crime involving moral turpitude. In this scenario, Atty. Walaasunto has been charged and convicted of violation of the bouncing checks law, and such is a crime involving moral turpitude. Also, Rule 7.03 of the Code of Professional Responsibility provides that a lawyer shall not engage in conduct that adversely reflects on his fitness to practice law, nor shall he, whether in public or private life, behave in a scandalous manner to the discredit of the legal profession. Additionally, rule 1.01 provides that a lawyer s hall not engage in any unlawful, deceitful, dishonest, immoral conduct.

You might also like